83504453.

doc

DDW 2011

1 1NC- SPS- SS-SS

1NC- SPS- SS-SS.............................................................................................................................................1 Space Weaponization.....................................................................................................................................1 SKFTA............................................................................................................................................................3 Counterplan...................................................................................................................................................7 Aerospace Frontline.....................................................................................................................................10 Forward Deployment Frontline.....................................................................................................................12 Space Leadership Frontline..........................................................................................................................13 Warming Frontline.......................................................................................................................................16 Peak Oil Frontline.........................................................................................................................................21

Space Weaponization
Parity now- asats Blazejewski 08 (Kenneth Blazejewski, private practice in New York City, focusing primarily on international corporate and financial transactions, JD from NYU Law, 2008. Space Weaponization and US China Relations,
http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2008/Spring/blazejewski.pdf) On this account, Chinas primary concern with US space weaponiza- tion is its contribution to a US multilayered missile defense shield. In- deed, Chinas campaign for PAROS negotiation at the CD seems to inten- sify after each new development in United States BMD plans.20 Although China could respond to a BMD shield with effective countermeasures,21 future technological developments may permit the BMD system to viti- ate Chinas nuclear deterrent.22 In the case of a conflict over Taiwan, for example, a US space-based BMD system could prove very valuable to the United States. According to this view, if the United States decides to advance with such a BMD program, China will respond so as to main- tain its nuclear deterrence. It will modernize its ICBM fleet (a program it has already initiated), develop further countermeasures to circumvent the BMD shield, and develop the means to launch multiple ASAT attacks. Ultimately, an arms race could ensue. This, however, would not be Chinas chosen outcome. Its development of space weapons is merely a counter- strategy to what it views as likely US space weaponization.23 China would much prefer that the United States negotiate a PAROS agreement not to build the BMD shield.24 If this were the case, Chinas January ASAT test would appear to be an attempt to get the United States to the negotiating table. By launching the ASAT, China sought to put the United States on notice that any attempt to weaponize outer space would lead to this mutu- ally undesirable path.

SPS removes the final barrier to weaponization - causes breakout Kim Ramos, Major in the USAF, Thesis, April 2000, Solar Power Constellations: Implications for the United States Air Force
Force Application United States Space Command developed four operational concepts to guide their vision. One of those operational concepts is global engagement. The USSPACECOM Long Range Plan defines global engagement as an integrated focused surveillance and missile defense with a potential ability to apply force from space.27 This application of force from space involves holding at risk earth targets with force from space.28 New World Vistas identifies several force application technologies. One of the technological issues associated with developing these space force application technologies is that they all require large amounts of power generation. A solar power satellite can supply the required power. Two technologies in particular would benefit from integration with a solar power satellite, directed energy weapons, such as lasers, and jamming devices. The space-based lasers currently under study accomplish ground moving target indication, and air moving target indication, which would be part of missile defense.29 The main difficulty with the laser is designing a power plant, which can produce the required energy in space without the enormous solar arrays required. By using a solar power satellite to beam power to the laser, this eliminates the problem. Another project, which would benefit from integration with a solar power satellite, is a device, which would beam RF power to a particular geographic location to blind or disable any unprotected ground communications, radar, optical, and infrared sensors.30 As with the laser and other directed energy applications, the limiting factor right now is generating enough power in space to energize the RF beam.

And action now is key- Obama working towards ban

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
Zhang 11 (Baohui, March/April, The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship, Asian Survey, Pg 328-31,
Vol. 51, No. 2, http://www.jstor.org/action/showArticleInfo?doi=10.1525%2FAS.2011.51.2.311) Important changes in U.S. strategic posture, missile defense, and the Taiwan Strait situation may now allow Washington and Beijing to extricate themselves from their space security dilemma, paving the way for arms control. In fact, these changes have already led to rising optimism among Chinese security experts with regard to the possibility of arms control in outer space. Zhao Kejin, a space security expert at Qinghua University, argues that there is no need for China to engage the U.S. in a space arms race. Instead, Facing the possibility of emerging anarchy in outer space, China and the U.S. can work together to push for arms control negotiations, with the aim of establishing effective mechanisms for the monitoring and management of outer space. 50 This upbeat mood among Chinese experts represents a big change from the pessimism of the Bush era. The challenge for China and the U.S. is to seize the opportunity and forge a realistic approach to space arms control. In this regard, China and the U.S. could pursue a two-stage strategy. The first stage would have to focus on reducing strategic misunderstandings and thus the vicious effects of the security dilemma. If so, the root cause of the action/counteraction spiral that defines a classic arms race will lose its hold on the two countries. Recent and important changes in the strategic landscape have improved the chances of achieving such a goal. Once the vicious circle of action and counteraction has been minimized, China and the U.S. could move on to the second stage, which is to pursue multilateral agreements banning weapons in space. Until recently, because of the Bush administrations steadfast opposition to any legally binding treaty that would limit the U.S.s military use of space, a multilateral approach to arms control seemed beyond reach. Now, however, the Obama administrations willingness to take a leadership role in constructing a global treaty offers the hope of success. In the context of the changing strategic landscape between China and the U.S., specific measures could be taken to reduce their mutual concerns. One important measure, often overlooked in the space relationship, is for top civilian leaders to exercise greater oversight over military space programs. Often, statements and actions by the military have driven the fears of the other side. If the U.S. and China intend to build a new partnership in world affairs, civilian leaders must recognize that unscrutinized actions by their own militaries can invite mutual mistrust, which in turn hinders broader political and security cooperation. On the U.S. side, the Obama government needs to take a much closer look at the U.S. Air Force (especially its Space Command) and the Missile Defense Agency. These two institutions periodically try out new space projects that China and Russia perceive as threatening to their national security. For example, in October 2005 the U.S. Air Force conducted a maneuverability experiment with its XSS-11 microsatellite. According to internal Air Force studies, the XSS program was intended as a precursor to an anti-satellite program. Theresa Hitchens, a longtime watcher of the U.S. military space program, suggests that both Congress and the White House should exercise much tighter control over military space programs. She noted during an interview that the U.S. militarys move toward space warfare is a strategic issue with a lot of potential fallout. Thus, the military cannot make that decision on its own. As Hitchens said, Congress hasnt asked about this. Congress hasnt debated this. There hasnt been a change of White House policy and therefore there has been no public debate. And I think it is a serious mistake. This is something that ought to be debated at the national level with congressional and public input. Its a bigger deal than just a military decision. 51 Chinas civilian leadership must also rein in the military space program. Indeed, after the 2007 ASAT test, some U.S. experts questioned whether the Chinese civilian leadership fully grasped the issue. Just as many U.S. projects have caused concern in China and Russia, the Chinese leadership must recognize that its own military space projects may be worrying U.S. decision makers. Thus, Chinas political leadership needs to understand that restraining its military space program will be vital for forging security cooperation with the U.S.

Weaponization inevitably leads to miscalculations extinction Mitchell Gordon R., Associate Professor of Communications @ the University of Pittsburgh, ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence, No. 6 2001
A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of 'peace through strength' deterrence, but this rationale glosses over the tendency that ' the presence of space weaponswill result in the increased likelihood of their use'.33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnaby: when it comes to arming the heavens, 'anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in-hand'.34 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent 'dual capability' of spaceborne weapon components. As Marc Vidricaire, Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament, explains: 'If you want to intercept something in space, you could use the same capability to target something on land'. 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight, such interceptors can also be used as orbiting 'Death Stars', capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earth's atmosphere. The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense 'use or lose' pressure into strategic calculations, with the spectre of split-second attacks

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated 'hair trigger' devices. In theory, this automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms. However, by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war, military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict. Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed 'complexly interactive, tightly coupled' industrial systems such as space weapons, which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each other's flawless performance. According to Perrow, this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail. As Perrow explains, '[t]he odd term "normal accident" is meant to signal that, given the system characteristics, multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable'.36 Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable, given the susceptibility of such systems to 'normal accidents'. It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war. According to retired Lt. Col. Robert M. Bowman, 'even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size!'. 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace, defence analyst David Langford sees one of the most destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived: 'One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people'.38 Given this unique potential for destruction, it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force, including use of nuclear, biological, and/or chemical weapons. An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen.

SKFTA
Going to pass- predictive uniqueness evidence this will be replaced for the debate with a more updated uniqueness card- sorry! Froomkin 7/25, [Dan Froomkin, Huffington Post, 7/25/11, Free Trade Deals: Lobbying Fever Foreshadows Winners, Losers,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/25/free-trade-agreements-lobbying_n_906623.html|AF] The most reliable and active opposition to trade agreements typically comes the AFL-CIO and other American labor unions. But as HuffPost's Zach Carter noted recently, the collective union reaction has been strangely muted this time around. Individual unions have focused on Colombia's labor record and one -- the United Auto Workers -- is actively supporting the Korean pact based on promises that American auto companies will get expanded access to the Korean auto market. So the only real leverage that the agreements' opponents have left is the American voter. Free trade agreements -and the seemingly inevitable job losses -- are hugely unpopular with the public, and running against them has proven to be a wildly successful tactic in both parties. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last fall found that only 18 percent of Americans think free-trade agreements create jobs, compared to 69 percent who said they cost jobs. Only 17 percent said such agreements had helped the U.S., while 53 percent said they had hurt. Senators may be more immune than representatives to that kind of polling, especially when pro-trade agreement lobbyists are hounding them. "In the House, you have to face the voters every two years," noted Lori Wallach, Director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group. "Therefore the liability of voting in favor of a job-offshoring, unsafe-import-flooding, 'Buy America'-killing, food-safety-undermining, drug-price-rising, foreign-corporate-treasury-raiding, financialderegulating trade agreement is more likely to kick your butt." Wallach said that because trade agreements are not historically popular with Democrats (though in this case, they are being strongly backed by President Obama) their supporters need to make sure they have the Republican vote in the House all locked up. That includes the huge Republican freshman class -- "except half of them ran against more NAFTAs, against offshoring and against multinationals," Wallach said. A November 2010 report from Public Citizen concluded that a record 75 Republican congressional candidates campaigned against free trade agreements, 44 of whom won. But the pro-trade agreement groups have risen to the challenge, Wallach said. "They have been going in and, one by one, flipping the people who campaigned against it," she said. By March, 67 of the 87 Republican freshmen had signed onto a letter to Obama declaring their support for all three agreements and a strong belief "that expanding trade will increase economic growth and create jobs here in the U.S." Among the signatories: Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), who had campaigned on a pledge to renegotiate existing trade agreements to "give our manufacturers a fighting chance to compete in a global market." "All the signs are that the Tea Party-aligned freshmen Republicans are going to vote pretty much the way Republicans have been voting on trade for years," said Daniel Griswold, a trade policy expert at the libertarian Cato Institute. "The Republican Party has its tradeskeptical Pat Buchanan wing, but they're very much in the minority." With so many powerful forces aligned behind the

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
trade agreements, their eventual passage is widely considered a foregone conclusion. The main reason they haven't yet passed is that Obama is insisting on the simultaneous passage of a measure providing assistance and job training to displaced U.S. workers.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
SPS tanks political capital David 08, [David Leonard, Pentagon, 5/15/08, Space Based Solar Power- Harvesting Energy from Space,
http://www.azocleantech.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=69|AF] Overall, pushing forward on SBSP "is a complex problem and one that lends itself to a wide variety of competing solutions," said John Mankins, President of Artemis Innovation Management Solutions, LLC, in Ashburn, Virginia. "There's a whole range of science and technology challenges to be pursued. New knowledge and new systems concepts are needed in order to enable space based solar power. But there does not appear, at least at present, that there are any fundamental physical barriers," Mankins explained. 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.

Polcap is key Wall Street Journal 10, [Wall Street Journal, 12/6/10, A Korea-US Trade Deal, At last: the korea pact is a step forward, but
now the president has to sell it, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704767804576000542290721476.html|AF] What a long, strange trip it's been for the South Korea-U.S. free trade agreement. The two sides announced this weekend that they've reached a deal on revisions to the draft that was signed in 2007 but never ratified. It comes not a moment too soon, given the boost this will give to a U.S. economy stumbling its way to recovery and with tensions rising on the Korean peninsula.The saga is also a lesson to future U.S. Presidents on the importance of trade leadership. Having campaigned against the pact in 2008, President Obama rediscovered its benefits once in office. Yet by then he was forced to re-open negotiations to justify his earlier opposition. The result is a deal that is slightly better than the excellent 2007 text in some ways, but slightly worse in others. And this after a delay that has cost the U.S. global credibility on economic issues, not to mention the cost to U.S. growth. The good news is that the 2007 agreement stays mostly in place. South Korea still offers significant opening of its sheltered economy to American manufactured goods, agriculture and services. Within five years of ratification the deal will eliminate tariffs on 95% of the countries' trade in goods, and it also clears the way for greater trade in services by, for instance, opening Korea's banking industry. Meanwhile, some of the changes to that 2007 text are helpful. The trade in cars was the main sticking point, especially as Detroit worried about Korea's longstanding use of technical barriers like onerous safety standards to limit imports. Negotiators have added a provision that ensures new environmental standards proposed by Seoul over the past three years won't become de facto trade barriers. Yet some of the new auto provisions are worse than what Detroit had before. Conspicuously, Korea's current 8% tariff on imported U.S. carswhich would have been eliminated immediately upon ratification under the 2007 dealnow will be cut in half immediately but eliminated only after five years. Compare that to the European Union's agreement with Korea, which is signed and due to take effect next July. That deal gradually phases out Korea's 8% car tariff over four years. That means that over the next few years Detroit will miss what would have been the advantage of zero tariffs compared to rates of 2% to 6% on EU cars, and toward the end of the five-year period tariffs on EU cars will be lower than on American cars. The biggest mistake Mr. Obama and Democrats made was allowing one vocal lobbyDetroit and its unionsto hijack debate on a comprehensive deal covering almost all trade. Consider the main "victory" for Detroit: Korea has agreed to let America phase out its 25% tariff on pickup trucks more slowly. That will come at a stiff price to American buyers of those trucks, including many small businesses that delayed purchases during the recession. Some farmers have also become collateral damage. Seoul couldn't walk away from re-opened talks empty-handed, and one concession it extracted is a twoyear delay, to 2016, in eliminating tariffs on some U.S. pork. American pork producers are excited about any deal, but they still would have been better off under the 2007 text. Chilean pork already enjoys lower tariffs thanks to the Chile-Korea FTA and has been gaining market share. The new tariff-elimination date also falls only six months before Korea's tariffs on EU pork will end under that deal, leaving Americans far less than the two-and-a-half years they would have had under the earlier text to get a marketing jump on their competitors. These caveats should not deter Congress from ratifying what is still an excellent deal. Mr. Obama has asked GOP House Speaker-designate John Boehner to assist in getting the pact approved, and we're told Mr. Boehner has suggested grouping this deal together with pending agreements with Colombia

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
and Panama in a single House vote. This would make it easier for pro-trade forces in Congress to concentrate their political capital. Mr. Boehner will bring a majority or more of his GOP Members along, butMr. Obama will have to spend his own political capital to rebuild American public support for free trade and gain Democratic support. The President would have made more progress toward his goal of doubling American exports if he had supported this deal in 2008 and pressed it through Congress in 2009. The failure in leadership was to side with the United Auto Workers and other unions against the national interest. Those who think they'll lose from trade always have the strongest motivation to lobby, while the consumers and businesses that benefit (such as American pickup truck buyers) are harder to organize. Every American President since Hoover in the 1920s has taken the broad view, speaking up for the many trade beneficiaries. U.S. public support for freer trade has eroded amid the recession and the lack of Presidential leadership. It is crucial for U.S. competitiveness in particular, and the world economy more broadly, that Mr. Obama and his allies make a strong and unapologetic case that trade is in the best interests of American businesses and workers.

SKFTA key to US Free-trade leadership and open up trade globally CSM 10, No author given, Christian Science Monitor, South Korea trade pact: US beachhead for pacts with Japan, China
December 14th 2010 http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2010/1206/South-Korea-trade-pact-US-beachheadfor-pacts-with-Japan-China But even more, ratifying a deal with South Korea Americas seventh-largest trading partner could also help create the possibility for free-trade pacts with Asias two economic giants, Japan and China. Americas trade history is full of attempts to roll back Asias twin problems in economics: an approach to business that curbs competition and a command economy in which governments favor domestic industries and set up nontariff trade barriers. US lawmakers would also be wise to act soon on the Korea pact as Seoul is racing to firm up trade deals with Europe, India, Australia, and other nations. Also, the recent attacks by North Korea that killed South Korean civilians serve as one more reason to reinforce the two nations military alliance by pushing more trade cooperation. (The US is only 10 percent of the Souths export market.) For Obama, winning approval of this pact in Congress will bolster his leadership in achieving other successes on the economy. And with the recent global recession triggering a resurgence of protectionism in many countries, the US must again assume the mantle of leadership and keep trying to open foreign markets. Far more American jobs have been created over time than lost because the US remained open to the world. Trade forces companies to be more efficient, creative, and nimble the very qualities that have kept the US as the worlds biggest economy, and can continue to do so.

Effective free trade prevents nuclear war Copley News Service 99 (Copley News Service, 12/13/99, copleynews.org)
For decades, many children in America and other countries went to bed fearing annihilation by nuclear war. The specter of nuclear winter freezing the life out of planet Earth seemed very real. Activists protesting the World Trade Organization's meeting in Seattle apparently have forgotten that threat. The truth is that nations join together in groups like the WTO not just to further their own prosperity, but also to forestall conflict with other nations. In a way, our planet has traded in the threat of a worldwide nuclear war for the benefit of cooperative global economics. Some Seattle protesters clearly fancy themselves to be in the mold of nuclear disarmament or anti-Vietnam War protesters of decades past. But they're not. They're special-interest activists, whether the cause is environmental, labor or paranoia about global government. Actually, most of the demonstrators in Seattle are very much unlike yesterday's peace activists, such as Beatle John Lennon or philosopher Bertrand Russell, the father of the nuclear disarmament movement, both of whom urged people and nations to work together rather than strive against each other. These and other war protesters would probably approve of 135 WTO nations sitting down peacefully to discuss economic issues that in the past might have been settled by bullets and bombs. As long as nations are trading peacefully, and their economies are built on exports to other countries, they have a major disincentive to wage war. That's why bringing China, a budding superpower, into the WTO is so important. As exports to the United States and the rest of the world feed Chinese prosperity, and that prosperity increases demand for the goods we produce, the threat of hostility diminishes. Many anti-trade protesters in Seattle claim that only multinational corporations benefit from global trade, and that it's the everyday wage earners who get hurt. That's just plain wrong. First of all, it's not the military-industrial complex benefiting. It's U.S. companies that make high-tech goods. And those companies provide a growing number of jobs for Americans. In San Diego, many people have good jobs at Qualcomm, Solar Turbines and other companies for whom overseas markets are essential. In Seattle, many of the 100,000 people who work at Boeing would lose their livelihoods without world trade. Foreign trade today accounts for 30 percent of our gross domestic product. That's a lot of jobs for everyday workers. Growing global prosperity has helped counter the specter of nuclear winter. Nations of

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
the world are learning to live and work together, like the singers of anti-war songs once imagined. Those who care about world peace shouldn't be protesting world trade. They should be celebrating it.

Counterplan
The United States federal government should lift the cap on H-1B visas, give companies incentives to dump large quantities of iron into high nutrient no chlorophyll regions of the ocean, provide Fischer-Tropsch fuels for the Department of Defense, amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to make algae-derived fuels eligible for all tax credits, subsidies, and price supports, and harden current satellites by using nanotechnology. H1Bs solve aerospace workforce crisis AIAA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2003, Informational Paper, Recruiting, Retaining, and Developing a
World-Class Aerospace Workforce If talented young engineers are not recruited, retained, and developed to replace the workforce generation that is near retirement, then the U.S. stands to lose the valuable economic and critical national security benefits of the domestic aerospace industry. As shown in Figure 22, large percentages of engineers are working outside the science and engineering professions. Engineering students burdened with college loans are seeking greener pastures. As shown in Figure 33, aerospace engineering salaries are low compared to other industries. If the U.S. is to retain its edge in this industry, salaries need to rise and incentives given for entering the industry. Further, since 1980, the number of nonacademic science and engineering jobs has grown at more than four times the rate of the U.S. labor force as a whole2. With a growing number of science and engineering jobs anticipated, the supply of visas set aside under law for highly qualified foreign workers, 65,000 a year4 is not enough. A decline in student, exchange, and temporary high-skilled worker visas issued since 2001 interrupted a long-term trend of growth. The number of student visas and of temporary high-skilled worker visas issued have both declined by more than 25% since FY 2001. These declines were due both to fewer applications and to an increase in the proportion of visa applications rejected2.To add to the supply pressures of science and engineering workers in our economy, there is increased recruitment of high-skilled labor, including scientists and engineers, by many national governments and private firms. For example, in 1999, 241,000 individuals entered Japan with temporary high-skill work visas, a 75 percent increase over 1992.

Algae solves warming Pyle 08 (Statement of Jason Pyle Chief Executive Officer, Sapphire Energy, Renewable Fuels And Food Prices, CQ Congressional
Testimony, 6/12/08, pg nexis) First, let me thank the Committee for its leadership on alternative, renewable fuels. Your keen focus and vision have resulted in the first ever Renewable Fuel Standard. Although there will inevitably be elements of RFS that will improve over time, you've guided the country along on the right path. Second, within the RFS debate, I want to thank this Committee for its vision and support for technology neutrality in RFS legislation, even though that vision did not survive final passage. As you predicted by supporting a technology neutral position, we are now seeing the evolution of an entirely new generation of renewable fuels. These fuels transcend the use of food as fuel feedstock. The current dilemma that pits fuel against food is just the first of many consequences of a technology-specific RFS. Without a technology-neutral RFS, this nation will not meet its goals of providing 32 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022. Although last year's Energy Independence and Security Act has yet to foster such solutions, this Committee should be applauded for anticipating an ever-expanding universe of alternative and renewable fuels. That's why I am here. I'm Jason Pyle, Chief Executive Officer of Sapphire Energy. Sapphire is one of several of this nation's best technology companies working to produce the next generation of renewable fuels. At Sapphire, we focus on the production of current fuel products, such as gasoline, diesel and aircraft fuel, from completely renewable sources, such as photosynthetic microorganisms, or algae. Our mission is to produce fuels for today's oil and gasoline infrastructure, and two weeks ago we announced that Sapphire had produced the first ever renewable, ASTM-compliant, 91 octane gasoline from microorganisms. Please refer to the attached two

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
documents for more background on Sapphire Energy. The Problem One of the many reasons we have cheap food is the availability of cheap energy. We cannot expect to turn large amounts of food back into energy in an economic manner. In today's debate between food and fuel, we should not have to make a choice. Both are critical to the economy, the environment and the world at large; we should not match one against the other. But when price and demand rise for one, both suffer. Instead of a Pyrrhic choice between food and fuel, I offer the opportunity to transcend the debate and produce ample supplies of both, leading this nation toward energy independence. Instead of a dispute between two basic necessities, we need a dialogue that supports truly sustainable alternative fuel sources. Over the past year we have all seen prices and demand rise for commodities such as corn, sugar and vegetable oil. The entire world now feels the pressure. Daily we are faced with reports of people who struggle to afford essentials. A host of factors has contributed to price increases for food and fuel: weather, heightened demand, a weaker dollar, decreasing supplies. Just like energy, food is linked in a global market. Once we begin fueling our cars with food crops, we witness international repercussions. Riots occurred in Mexico earlier this year over expensive corn flour. This price increase has been attributed to U.S. demand for corn-based ethanol products, leaving less maize available for export. Protests over similar issues have occurred around the world, contributing to inflation and political instability. Even at an increased rate of production, current domestic biofuel processes will meet part, but not all, of U.S. demand. If the entire annual domestic soybean crop of 3 billion bushels were converted to biodiesel at the current efficiency of 1.4 gallons per bushel, it would provide about 6.5% of U.S. diesel fuel production. Though certainly a valuable asset to our fuel supply, it is clear that a spectrum of additional and diverse biofuels sources will be necessary to fulfill demand. Congress first adopted the Renewable Fuels Standard in 2005, but wisely recognized that neither biodiesel nor ethanol would be the final solution. It created the program as a bridge to a new generation of fuels, and established a system of incentives to create a marketplace for new technologies. Congress should consider whether the incentives are neutral and fair. Ask whether these mechanisms will lead to the support and development of fuels that will give America true energy independence. Congress should ensure that the next round of incentives can be applied to advanced technologies such as Sapphire's. American innovation is the heart of our people and our economy; I urge you to support this with additional legislation that promotes a technology-neutral RFS. The Solution Food for fuel concerns are real, but can be managed. Industries such as ethanol from corn and biodiesel from vegetable oil can continue to play an important role in the energy mix. However, if we intend to practically and economically reach the goals of the RFS, we must be ready to rapidly embrace new fuel technologies. We must call on American ingenuity and entrepreneurialism for the solutions. When Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it put the country on a path toward an energy future independent of imported resources. As Americans, we must support this vision. We should strive to maximize production, create fuel-efficient cars, reduce the amount of driving we do and, finally, develop alternatives to fossil fuels. All these efforts deserve increased support. But without a truly new source of fuel, the system will remain in turmoil, prices will soar and the conflict between food and fuel will persist. Senators, my colleagues and I at Sapphire Energy have been thinking about this for a long time. We knew that an energy source based on agriculture would serve this country best as a stepping stone to a green energy future. We knew that energy requiring vast amounts of fresh water resources was not a viable option. And, finally, if we wanted to make a difference quickly, we knew we needed a fuel that could be transported and refined just like petroleum. Two years ago we asked ourselves, "In a perfect world, how should the next generation of fuel be produced and distributed?" These were our founding principles: 1.Fuel production must not use farmland. Period. 2.Fuel production must be carbon neutral. 3.Fuel production and delivery must use the existing petroleum infrastructure. 4.Fuel production must scale domestically to reach tens of billions of gallons per year. 5.The next generation of fuels must be compatible with today's vehicles. That sounded like a tall order. But Americans have dreamed big and delivered in the past - atomic energy, highways and railroads that crisscross our nation, a man on the moon, mapping the human genome. Now, a similar ingenuity has developed a completely renewable and homegrown source of gasoline. I offer that we do not have to sacrifice food production for fuel production. We do not have to choose between powering our industries and feeding the hungry. The Sapphire processes and technologies are so revolutionary that the company is at the forefront of an entirely new industrial category called "Green Crude Production". Products and processes in this category differ significantly from other biofuels because they are made solely from photosynthetic microorganisms, sunlight and CO2; do not result in biodiesel or ethanol; enhance and replace petroleum-based products; are carbon neutral and renewable; and don't require any food crop or agricultural land. The Sapphire process produces a replica of light sweet crude, green crude that can be used in traditional refining to make real gasoline, diesel, and aircraft fuel. Our feedstocks produce 10 to 100 times more energy per acre than cropland biofuels. A side benefit of our process is that the microorganisms consume pollutants and convert them to fuel. Using the Sapphire process, we have dramatically altered the domestic energy and petrochemical landscape and avoided the food versus fuel debate. Please allow me to reiterate, the Sapphire process does not create ethanol; it does not produce biodiesel; it does not use crops or valuable farmland. Sapphire fuel is the fuel we use today, the kind that is in your car or truck or airplane right now. It's gasoline, diesel and aircraft fuel. Senators, this is a solution. This is a truly renewable, truly sustainable, alternative fuel- "Sapphire's green crude oil". This fuel, Sapphire fuel, is the world's first truly renewable petrochemical product, produced by converting sunlight and CO2 into a renewable, carbon-neutral

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
alternative to conventional fossil fuels, without the drawbacks of current biofuels. This fuel is compatible with the current energy infrastructure- cars, refineries, and pipelines. Sapphire's scalable production facilities will produce this fuel economically because production will be modular, transportable, fueled by sunlight, and not constrained by arable land, crops, or other natural resources. Sapphire has turned sunlight into gasoline.

Iron fertilization solves global warming and stimulates phytoplankton reproduction Marine Technology Reporter 09 (1/29/09, Natural Iron Fertilization and Geo-engineering, pg online @
http://www.seadiscovery.com/mt/mtStories.aspx?ShowStrory=1027782126) The efficacy of geo-engineering the oceans through iron fertilization so as to mitigate the effects of climate change is evaluated by results published this week in the prestigious scientific journal Nature. The research was conducted by an international team led by Professor Raymond Pollard of the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton. Large oceanic regions are high in nutrients, and yet have relatively low biological productivity. This is because such high-nutrient lowchlorophyll (HNLC) regions are deficient in iron, which is needed to support the growth of phytoplankton - the freefloating, microscopic plant-like organisms that dominate new production in the worlds oceans. Phytoplankton use sunlight to make their food through the process of photosynthesis, and sit at the base of the marine food chain. Through photosynthesis, they also draw large amounts of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide down out of the atmosphere, thereby influencing climate. A proportion of this carbon sinks down out of the surface layer and is sequestered (locked away) by the deep ocean and bottom sediments. Artificial augmentation of this so-called biological carbon pump through ocean geo-engineering has been proposed as a potential way of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, thereby ameliorating global warming. One possible way to do this is through iron fertilization, where iron is artificially added to the oceans so as to induce greatly increased phytoplankton population growth. Experiments in the Southern Ocean, a large and important HNLC region, have shown that the addition of iron allows phytoplankton to exploit other available nutrients, leading to the development of large algal blooms. Although these algal blooms take up increased amounts of carbon, much of it is released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Exactly how much carbon is exported from the surface layer, and how long it remains out of circulation, is unknown. For iron fertilization to be useful in the battle against global warming, the oceans and bottom sediments would need to hold on to the sequestered carbon for many decades, effectively stopping it from returning to the atmosphere, at least until carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of hydrocarbons (oil, coal and gas) are reduced sufficiently to halt or reverse the seemingly relentless increase in the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide. As part of the CROZEX experiment, Pollard and his team focused on the seas around the Crozet Islands and Plateau (hereafter Crozet) at the northern boundary of the Southern Ocean, about 1,400 miles (2,200 km) southeast of South Africa. The seas around Crozet are naturally supplied with iron from the islands, which have a volcanic origin, and the surrounding plateau. Ocean currents flow northward past Crozet, so that iron is not carried south of Crozet and HNLC conditions prevail. But north of Crozet, the iron accumulates over the dark winter, and each spring, once there is enough light, an enormous phytoplankton bloom develops. This annual bloom contains billions of individual phytoplankton, and covers 120,000 square kilometres (the size of Ireland). The researchers observed significant differences in the magnitude, timing, duration and community structure of plankton blooms north and south of Crozet. South of Crozet, in the region deficient in iron, phytoplankton peaked in early December and the bloom was short-lived. But north of Crozet, phytoplankton peaked in October, and the bloom lasted for many weeks. They show that natural iron fertilization enhanced phytoplankton growth and productivity and the amount of carbon exported from the surface layer (100 metres) by 2-3 fold.

Fischer-Tropsch solves forward deployment and peak oil Bartis & Van Bibber 11 James T. Bartis [Ph.D. in chemical physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Sc.B. in
chemistry, Brown University] Lawrence Van Bibber [RAND senior policy researcher] 2011 Alternative Fuels for Military Applications RAND Corp Considering economics, technical readiness, greenhouse gas emissions, and gen- eral environmental concerns, FT fuels derived from a mixture of coal and biomass represent the most promising approach to producing amounts of alternative fuels that can meet military, as well as appreciable levels of civilian, needs by 2030. But whether this technology will reach its potential depends crucially on gaining early produc- tion experienceincluding production with carbon capture and sequestrationin the United States. At present, no agency of the U.S. government has announced plans to promote early commercial use of FT fuels derived from a mixture of coal and biomass.

Hardening key to space leadership

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
Rebecca Johnson 07, senior advisor to the United Nations' United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and PhD and The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, Space without Weapons, The Acronym Institute provides reporting, analysis and strategic thinking on a range of issues relevant to peace and security, with special emphasis on treaties and multilateral initiatives, 10/8, http://www.acronym.org.uk/space/congo.htm,
Instead of turning to the sledgehammer of space weaponisation to deal with the potential vulnerabilities of space assets, a more sensible approach (and one consistent with the United Nations Charter) would combine arms control efforts with the technical hardening and shielding of as many satellites as possible, plus space situation awareness, redundancy and other 'passive' defence means. Progress in nuclear disarmament, strengthening the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), negotiating a nuclear weapons convention, further efforts to restrict missile proliferation, building on the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (HCoC) would also contribute to security and reduce the chances of space becoming a battleground - which would be in nobody's interests. [1] Former commander-in-chief of SPACECOM, General Joseph W. Ashy (CINCSPACE), quoted in 'USSC Prepares for Future Combat Missions in Space', William B. Scott, Aviation Week & Space Technology, August 5, 1996. [2] Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organisation, Washington D.C. (Public Law 106-65), January 11, 2001, pp 7-10. This Commission is usually referred to as the Rumsfeld Commission on Space, after its Chair Donald Rumsfeld became the Bush administration's first Defense Secretary. [3] Ibid. p 16. [4] Lt. Col. Peter L. Hays, United States Military Space: Into the Twenty-First Century, INSS Occasional Paper 42, (Colorado, Institute for National Security Studies, September 2002). [5] To this must be added the objectives of power projection and military control: "As space systems become lucrative military targets, there will be a critical need to control the space medium to ensure US dominance on future battlefields... to ensure space superiority."

Aerospace Frontline
No aerospace shortage enrollment, retention, and recession Tim McAward, Vice President and Product Leader of Kelly Engineering Resources (KER), September 1, 2010, Aerospace
Engineering Onlinee, The future of engineering is here, http://www.sae.org/mags/aem/8789 Yet, even though 49% of all American engineers are employed by organizations that specialize in one of these four disciplines, more engineering students have either enrolled in the following five programs, or have attained degrees in one of these niche disciplines, than in the Big Four occupational specialties, in the last five years: Aerospace: 30% increase in the number of graduates Biomedical: 50% increase in the number of graduates Chemical: 50% increase in undergraduate enrollment Environmental: 100% increase in undergraduate enrollment Petroleum: 100% increase in undergraduate enrollment and in the number of students graduating. In the meantime, although the manufacturing sector continues to employ the largest percentage of American engineers, many service-based industries, including professional, scientific, and technical, have begun to hire an increasing number of engineers as well. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook for 2010, about 30% of all engineering professionals currently work in one of these industries. If engineers are not employed within the manufacturing sector or in service-based industries, they generally work for federal, state, or local governments, within a variety of capacities, including the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Transportation, or U.S. Department of Energy; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); or highway and public works departments. U.S. engineers approach retirement as college enrollment rates increase U.S. engineers approach retirement as college enrollment rates increase Many U.S. engineers are approaching the traditional retirement age of 55 or older. As a result, some well-experienced engineers are no longer working full-time, thus creating a nationwide engineering talent shortage that will lead many organizations to generate more flexible work options for their employees to retain them for longer durations of time. During the coming years, the future U.S. engineering workforce will be increasingly comprised of multiple generations of workers, including Baby Boomers and Generation X and Y employees. As engineers continue to retire and organizations search for future top talent, recent engineering graduates and current students should certainly maintain positive attitudes as they will likely find highpaying, meaningful positions, even in the midst of the ongoing national economic recession. Meanwhile, according to the American Society for Engineering Education, undergraduate engineering program enrollment rates essentially increased by 7% between the years of 2000 and 2005. Such an increase had originally led some organizations to believe that an engineering youth movement had begun. However, although a large number of students had enrolled into programs, enrollment increases did not translate into a higher number of graduates from 2005 to 2009. Nevertheless, the recent economic recession has truly created a spike in undergraduate engineering enrollment. In fall 2009, more than 427,000

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

10

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
students enrolled for collegiate engineering classes, a 6% increase over a one year period and a 16% increase since 2005. As the recession forced many unemployed workers to upgrade their current skills and to pursue new career opportunities, it appears a high number of individuals will begin their new careers within the next couple yearsa sign that the current engineering labor shortage may slowly start to decrease throughout the upcoming decade.

Case cant overcome structural factors plaguing the aerospace industry Charles River Associates, leading global consulting firm that offers economic, financial, and business management expertise to major law firms, industries, accounting firms, and governments around the world, October 2009, Innovation in Aerospace and
Defense, http://www.aviationweek.com/media/pdf/innovate_2009/criver_whitepaper_2009_final.pdf The U.S. post-secondary education system remains the finest in the world. Science and engineering programs have greatly expanded over time and continue to attract students, at all levels, from every other country in the world. In fact, in science and engineering in particular, there are disproportionate numbers of foreign students enrolled in U.S. degree programs, and by and large U.S. students are not seeking education in these areas outside the U.S. So, it would seem that the quality of our educational system is not a problem. But, is it producing enough talented workers to supply the needs of the aerospace and defense industry? At present, the absolute number of engineers is not the problem. Recent, significant job cuts have meant that, if anything, there are likely more engineers being trained in the U.S. than there are jobs available. Indeed, the trends in the number of graduates reflect the trends in manufacturing industries in general and trends in the aerospace industry in particular. These industries have become increasingly automated, both in design and manufacturing. This has meant that fewer workers are required to produce a given level of output. These industries have also become increasingly globalized, which has meant that fewer workers are required in the U.S. as more and more design and production capacity has moved overseas.

The industry is adapting to less workers and innovating now Charles River Associates, leading global consulting firm that offers economic, financial, and business management expertise to major law firms, industries, accounting firms, and governments around the world, October 2009, Innovation in Aerospace and
Defense, http://www.aviationweek.com/media/pdf/innovate_2009/criver_whitepaper_2009_final.pdf As depicted in the illustration that appears as an Appendix to this paper, the aerospace and defense industry has long been a source of great innovation and continues today to produce cutting edge technologies that push the envelope of human achievement. However, at present, the indicators of innovation in aerospace and defense are mixed. Some, such as high profile program failures and an aging workforce, would suggest a looming crisis of innovation in the industry. Still others, concerning how innovators secure the necessary financial and human resources and then organize those resources for optimum results, underscore that the rules of the innovation game in aerospace and defense are changing. Together, these indicators are upsetting conventional attitudes toward innovation, and the natural friction and travail associated with the process of adapting to change are stoking anxieties. But upon closer examination one finds that there are at least as many encouraging indicators of risk-taking, innovative achievement, and successful adaptation to cast doubt on the reflexive conclusion that aerospace and defense today is experiencing a crisis in its propensity to innovate. The state of innovation in aerospace and defense is not in crisis; it is being transformed To explore the changing nature of innovation from the 20th to 21st centuries, from the ColdWar to a post-9/11 world, Charles River Associates undertook a comprehensive study to assess the state of innovation in the aerospace and defense industry today. The study analyzed the trends and identified changes that are fostering the innovations that will become the 21st century icons of progress. This White Paper is the culmination of that study. It draws on expertise from both academia and industry and includes the findings from recent interviews conducted with top executives at more than a dozen top tier firms.

Air power fails Loren B Thompson, is Chief Operating Officer of the non-profit Lexington Institute and Chief Executive Officer of Source Associates, 2008, http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/97942/decaying-us-air-power-reflects-largerproblems.htm, Decaying Air Power Reflects Larger Problems During the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, the Air Force simplified the discussion of its mission capabilities by dividing them into three categories -- global strike, global mobility, and global awareness. If we look at each of these areas, we see that age-related decay has now become generalized across the entire force. With regard to strike capabilities, Rebecca has already noted that we have very few stealthy fighters in the force today, and the plan of record is to terminate the most capable nextgeneration fighter at less than half the stated requirement. While the service will soon begin receiving a sizable number of F-35

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

11

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
Joint Strike Fighters to replace aging F-16s, the F-35 was designed to operate in tandem with the more capable F-22, so the fact that we may purchase less than half of the F-22s required does not bode well for the tactical air fleet. The F-15 that the F-22 is supposed to replace has grown so aged that it trains on flight restriction due to metal fatigue, and has literally begun falling out of the sky. These problems are made worse by the inability of the service to afford a next-generation escort jammer, since electronic warfare is our main alternative to stealth in protecting penetrating airframes. The situation in the long-range bomber force is even worse, with less than 200 airframes remaining to cover the world. Only 10% of the heavy bomber force is fully stealthy, and yet many observers doubt the service will be able to afford the recently announced next-generation bomber that is supposed to debut in ten years.

Forward Deployment Frontline

Were flexible enough now three wars at once prove were fully capable of intervention. Libya and Iraq prove were not afraid of oil producers. SBSP fails at providing energy on demand for the military multiple warrants Johnston et. al 09 (Neil Johnson, High-energy Space Environment Branch Space Science Division, Naval Research Laboratory,
10/23/09, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA513123) Direct SBSP power delivery to daily patrols, either individuals or vehicles, seems problematic at best. In considering this, note that at microwave frequencies of 1.5 to 15 GHz, safe power densities for continuous exposure are between 1 and 10 mW /cm2, or about 1 to 10 W per sq ft., respectively (IEEE C95.1-1999). The FCC (Bulletin 65) limits this exposure more, to a constant 1 mW /cm2 (about 1 W per sq ft) above 1.5 GHz. Category Peacetime OPTEMPO* Wartime OPTEMPO Combat vehicles 30 162 Combat aircraft 140 307 Tactical vehicles 44 173 Generators 26 357 Non-tactical 51 51 TOTAL 291 1050 6 Johnson et al. Examples of end-user consumption include the following: Radio transmitters: Considerable power needs to be available, for example, to operate a radio tens to hundreds of Watts while transmitting. Vehicle operation: A typical car only requires tens of horsepower to travel at reasonable speeds on a highway (much more when accelerating or traversing rough terrain). 1 HP is approximately 750 W, so even a 10 or 20 HP requirement becomes a requirement for 7.5 to 15 kW of power, even before considering the conversion efficiency between electrical and mechanical energy. The preferred application of power to these problems would require the ability to directly beam energy to each recipient rather than blanketing the area for several reasons: Only the people/vehicles need the power a tremendous fraction of power is wasted if it is transmitted everywhere. Transmitting power everywhere is like providing a natural resource ones enemies can also use it (for free!), greatly reducing the advantage one gains by developing and implementing the system (at great cost). At radio frequency (RF) frequencies, it is (probably impossible, but optimistically speaking) extraordinarily difficult to directly point beams small enough to solve the efficiency problem from space. Extraordinarily large antenna apertures would likely be required at microwave frequencies. Perhaps even more difficult would be how to tell the power source exactly where to point the beams (potentially several thousand of them, all to a delivered accuracy of 1 m or less). To further compound the problem, if the beam pointing challenges were solved, power density issues would need to be resolved that is, if there was enough power in the beam to do any good, it would likely pose a safety hazard to the people in or near the beam. Based on these statements, direct delivery of energy using microwave power to a final application to small, mobile units is not practically feasible with near-term foreseeable technology.

Communication turn: Plan causes breakdown in military communication Laracy 07 (Joseph R. Laracy1 Complex Systems Research Laboratory, Damien Bador2, Danielle Adams3, Annalisa Weigel4
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, with Richard Chambers, Daniel Kwon, David Proudfoot, Shen Qu, and Ted Shoepe, 11/26/2007, http://lean.mit.edu/docman/view-document-details/1702-solar-power-satellites-historicalperspectives-with-a-look-to-the-future.html ) Atmospheric side effects were a large concern. The most sensitive issues dealt with the ionosphere, a layer between 50 and 400 km from the Earths surface. Concerns arose regarding the ability of the microwave power beam from the SPS to heat the ionosphere sufficiently to alter its electron density. This would harm communication systems that depend on dense electron regions. This could also lead to undesirable scattering in the microwave beam path. The rocket effluents from the SPS launches could also interact with the ionosphere to reduce electron density. Another fear was that weather could be altered in the troposphere due to the exhaust of frequent launches. This is an area of large uncertainty.30 A major concern

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

12

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
about the SPS design was its potential for interference with other electronic systems. As mentioned in the CDEP Final Program review, Electromagnetic systems likely to experience SPS interference would include military systems, public communications, radar, aircraft communications, public utility and transportation system communications, other satellites, and radio and optical astronomy.31 Such a long and varied list clearly puts this issue into the realm of a serious social problem. In particular, military systems close to the transmitter or receiver would be threatened. Also, radio and optical astronomy would be very difficult with an SPS system in place. For radio astronomy, Earth based systems close to receiving antenna sites would be affected by interference. Meanwhile, optical astronomy would be limited because the SPS would create light pollution.32

Satellite and ground communications are crucial to readiness and operational success Daniels 07 (Gerald B. Daniels, Colonel, USA, 2007, AIR WAR COLLEGE AIR UNIVERSITY THE LOSS OF MILITARY
SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITY AND ITS IMPACT TO NATIONAL SECURITY) war and win without space. Today, a string of satellites is the backbone of the communications, command and control infrastructure the military depends on. Over the past decade there has been a shift in understanding about what space can bring to the fight. Todays joint warfighters are more appreciative of the decisive, precise combat effects space brings to the battlefield - General Lance W. LordVIII The ability to communicate is fundamental to military activities providing information to filed commanders, commanding and controlling forces, and sending targeting information to combat units. Military strategy doctrine, theory, and rhetoric are increasingly occupied with information and its potential for improving combat performance. The challenge is how to measure the impact if satellite communications is lost. In order to assess the impact, one must have a good understanding of what bandwidth represents to make trade-off decisions on different types of capabilities. In logisticians, for example, it is easier to express the number of short tons of logistic throughput as C-5 aircraft equivalents. The vision of a C-5 conjures up three important aspects of transportation: capacity (an aircraft load), overall capability (total number of available airframes and sortie rates), and cost. Using this analogy, a commander immediately understands what it takes to move his or her requirement forward in terms of time, cost, and level of effort. Unfortunately, a similar analogy does not exist for bandwidth although one could use the airlift comparison to illustrate some aspects of bandwidth. Simply put, the greater the volume of VIII General Lance W. Lord, Commander of Air Force Space Command 20 information to be transmitted, the larger the requirement for bandwidth to move it- higher bandwidth allows faster transmission of information.31 Modern military forces in the war on terrorism are light, lean, mobile, autonomous, and expeditionary. These forces feed off a constant flow of information they need for positioning and timing, mobile communications, ISR and warning to achieve their varied and dangerous missions. In many cases, this data is primarily provided by space systems. Without these critical space capabilities, our forces would lose situational awareness and connectivity. That could spell disaster at a critical time when ground forces are trying to find a specific target or location, are involved in a firefight or are just trying to get from one place to another in countries with few, if any, road signs. Thats where satellite communications, GPS and imagery help make operating in Iraq and Afghanistan successful and effective. Less than 15 years ago, relying on spaced-based capabilities to direct battles on the ground was a relatively new capability for the U.S. military. Not even in their wildest dreams would most people think it would one day be possible for a pilot to sit in an air-conditioned room at some stateside base and fly an unmanned aerial vehicle over Afghanistan to gather intelligence, carry on surveillance, do reconnaissance even fire Hellfire missiles at enemy forces.32Chapter 7 Conclusion U.S. leaders have more accurate and current information on developments, issues, and crises in virtually all parts of the world. Due in large part to space systems, U.S. military forces know more about their adversaries, see the battlefield more clearly, and can strike more quickly and precisely than any other military force in history. Space systems are inextricably woven into the fabric of Americas national security. - Peter B. TeetsIX The purpose of this document was to assess the loss of military satellite communications capability and its impact to national security. The U.S. will continue to face a broad spectrum of conflicts ranging from peacetime competition to global war. The diversity of missions and the lethality of future battlefields require the integration of capabilities that will increase readiness, combat power, and force survivability. The U.S. military must be capable of adapting to the demands of the situation. The employment of communications satellite systems enhances our warfighting capabilities, reduces the military footprint, and improves the "tooth-to-tail" ratio. The ability to see and communicate, regardless of distance or theater maturity, enables U.S. forces to react faster than the enemy and to execute their missions more effectively and efficiently. The bandwidth provided by communications satellites supplies the means for enhancing command and control, facilitating the maneuver of forces, reducing the commander's uncertainty, and improving fire support, air defense, intelligence collection, and combat service support operations.

Space Leadership Frontline

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

13

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
Hegemony is inevitable No viable competitor and empirics Haas 9 (Lawrence Haas, former senior White House official and Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at
the American Foreign Policy Council, 2009, http://www.dissentmagazine.org/democratiya/article_pdfs/d16Haas.pdf) After reviewing the ills that beset America, from a weak economy to a misguided energy policy, from failing schools to costly health care, Barack Obama focused on the nations mood. Less measurable, but no less profound, the new President suggested in his inaugural address, is a sapping of confidence across our land; a nagging fear that Americas decline is inevitable, that the next generation must lower its sights. If such fear nags at Americans, it may be because of what we so often hear. Journalists, scholars, and diplomats seem to compete for the pithiest way to pronounce that, when it comes to America, as a French foreign minister put it, The magic is over It will never be as it was before. Pithy enough? How about Waving Goodbye to Hegemony (from a New York Times magazine headline) or U.S. influence is in steep decline (from the Washington Post) or The United States unipolar moment is over (from the Council on Foreign Relations Richard Haass) or It will not be the New American Century (from a French scholar). Weve been here before not as a nation in decline, mind you, but as one stressing about it. Today, a cursory look at America might justify the fears. But a more serious survey of the global landscape suggests that, despite its current troubles, America will retain its top spot in the worlds pecking order, and that it may emerge from todays global downturn even stronger than before relative to its competitors. While, in America, we face serious problems, our would-be challengers from China to Russia, from Europe to the Middle East to Latin America are mired in their own problems that may prove even more daunting. Americas path is in Americas hands. We have the power to fix every one of our problems, no matter how large any single one may seem. History suggests that we will do so eventually. What Winston Churchill said of us still rings true: Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing after they have exhausted all other possibilities. Declinism of past and present Declinism, as it applies to America, has a rich tradition but, to date, a history of failed prophecy. Like the cicadas that blanket Washingtons trees and sidewalks every 17 years, the declinists rear their heads about once a generation, propagating the latest versions of their thesis, showcasing evidence of Americas creeping weakness from economic stagnation to military setback to diplomatic reversal. From a momentary setback or perhaps a string of them for the United States, the declinists offer visions of long-term corrosion. The intellectual parlour game is as old as the Republic. Europeans widely expected the American experiment to fail. British contempt for the young nation led to the War of 1812. Nor did Americas rise to global behemoth by the late 19th Century deter the doomsday-ers. If anything, they grew bolder. No sooner had the United States emerged victorious from World War II than critics lamented Soviet supremacy in the Cold War that had just begun. Weve lost the peace, John Dos Passos wrote in early 1946 in Life. Friend and foe alike look you accusingly in the face and tell you how bitterly they are disappointed in you as an American. Maos victory in China in 1949, Americas stalemate in Korea in the early 1950s, Soviet suppression of Hungary in 1956, Moscows launch of Sputnik in 1957, and candidate John Kennedys warning of a U.S.-Soviet missile gap in 1960 all seemed to prove that history favoured communism over capitalism. American prosperity and Kennedy-era optimism provided a short respite from further declinism. The U.S. debacle in Vietnam, North Koreas capture of the USS Pueblo, Soviet and Cuban adventurism in Africa, Irans seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and Americas economic struggles in the 1970s painted the United States as a helpless giant. President Nixon transformed declinism into national policy, seeking dtente with the Soviets to ease U.S. entry into a new world of balance with the Soviet Union, Europe, China, and Japan. President Carter reinforced decline fever, lamenting our crisis of confidence in his malaise speech. After President Reagan sought to reassert U.S. supremacy, launching a military build-up and confronting the Soviets in hotspots the world over, Yales Paul Kennedy warned (in his best-selling The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers) of Americas imperial overstretch, in which our global obligations would surpass our ability to finance them. Other declinists of the period included David Calleo (Beyond American Hegemony) and Walter Russell Mead, (Mortal Splendor). Americas victory in the Cold War mocked declinism, but recent events have ignited its rebirth. Todays declinists includes veterans of past battles, notably Kennedy, and new players Fareed Zakaria (The Post-American World), Charles Kupchan (The End of the America Era), Francis Fukuyama (America at the Crossroads), Andrew Bacevich (The Limits of Power), and a host of government officials and journalists. They write books and op-eds and appear on TV and radio, reviewing Americas missteps while suggesting they presage a more multi-polar world. For some, like Kennedy, declinism is a lifes work, as his recent Wall Street Journal oped, American Power Is on the Wane, makes clear. For others, its a step along an intellectual journey. While Fukuyama moved from Western triumphalism (in his The End of History and the Last Man of 1992) to declinism, Mead moved the other way, predicting recently in the New Republic that America will emerge from todays global economic crisis in a stronger position atop the international power rankings. Todays declinists do not agree on what will cause Americas relative downfall. For some, its Iraq that strained our military and displayed the limits of

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

14

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
U.S. power. For those who acknowledge Americas startling turnaround in Iraq, its Afghanistan that will engulf America in a Vietnam-style quagmire. For others, todays economic crisis exposed the excesses of U.S.-led capitalism. Their prescription more governmental regulation that will weaken the leader of the free-market pack. For still others, its Chinas rise and Russias resurgence, the first of which will shift global power to the East and the second of which will restrict U.S. activity abroad. And for others, its no one event or U.S. error but instead the unsustainable nature of U.S. unipolarity and the inevitable rise of nations or blocs to counteract it. Questions for todays declinists Well, maybe. But, declinists have a few questions to answer. Why will todays economic distress and military challenge bring Americas decline when prior challenges of greater magnitude did not? What would a post-America world look like, and why should we buy the starry-eyed hopes of Americas fiercest critics that a U.S. retreat would make the world more peaceful and more just? Who or what will supplant the United States atop the world stage, especially when no alternative nation or bloc seems ready to assume the mantle? To be sure, the United States faces big challenges, probably the most complex set in decades. On the economic front, businesses are shedding jobs, credit is frozen, financial institutions are teetering, stocks are weak, and consumer confidence is collapsing. On the military front, Americas armed forces are strained, Afghanistan offers no easy solution, and exploding budget deficits will encourage Obama and Congress to seek the first defense cuts of the post9/11 period. On the diplomatic front, the United States will try to convince Iran to scrap its nuclear program, to improve its relations with Pakistan while targeting the Taliban and al-Qaeda strongholds in the Northwestern territories, and to strengthen its ties to its European allies even as it clashes with them over strategy and military contributions in Afghanistan. But step back a bit, and prospects for continued U.S supremacy look brighter. The economy has not reached the depths of the 1981-82 recession and to state the obvious it will eventually recover. The issue is how bad things will get and when the recovery will arrive. Economists project unemployment will top nine percent before its over, the turnaround will not begin until at least the end of 2009, and it may take years to restore strong growth. As for defense, even with cuts, the gap between annual U.S. expenditures and those of any other nation remains huge. Moreover, the United States spends just four percent of its Gross Domestic Product on defense and international affairs, a historically low figure compared to, for instance, 10 percent under President Kennedy. It has fewer active duty troops than in the 1950s, drawn from a population thats twice as large. The notion that America cant afford its military obligations has never been less true. Not long ago, nations or blocs that were ready to challenge America seemed plentiful. Today, each is plagued with problems. China is reeling from the global economic crisis, with rising unemployment and smouldering domestic discontent. Russia is suffering from the dramatic drop in oil prices, the resulting squeeze on governmental revenues, and deep-seated social and economic problems. Iran and Venezuela, Americas two loudest nemeses, are also reeling from low oil prices, forcing their leaders to address surging economic woes and stabilize their own rule. A united Europe, with a combined military and foreign policy, remains a pipe dream. Today, despite its problems America remains the worlds goliath, in the words of Michael Mandelbaum. It is the go-to power for maintaining peace, ensuring global commerce, and responding to humanitarian disasters. U.S. security treaties encompass more than half of the world. As Robert J. Lieber put it, In many instances, and particularly in urgent and dire cases such as the Balkan crises, the choice boils down to this: either the United States will act or no one will. We should not expect that reality to change any time soon.

Heg doesnt solve war Benjamin H. Friedman, Research Fellow in Defense and Homeland Security Studies @ Cato Institute, July 20, 2010,
http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-bf-07202010.html, Military Restraint and Defense Savings Another argument for high military spending is that U.S. military hegemony underlies global stability. Our forces and alliance commitments dampen conflict between potential rivals like China and Japan, we are told, preventing them from fighting wars that would disrupt trade and cost us more than the military spending that would have prevented war. The theoretical and empirical foundation for this claim is weak. It overestimates both the American military's contribution to international stability and the danger that instability abroad poses to Americans. In Western Europe, U.S. forces now contribute little to peace, at best making the tiny odds of war among states there slightly more so.7 Even in Asia, where there is more tension, the history of international relations suggests that without U.S. military deployments potential rivals, especially those separated by sea like Japan and China, will generally achieve a stable balance of power rather than fight. In other cases, as with our bases in Saudi Arabia between the Iraq wars, U.S. forces probably create more unrestthan they prevent. Our force deployments can also generate instability by prompting states to develop nuclear weapons. Even when wars occur, their economic impact is likely to be limited here.8 By linking markets, globalization provides supply alternatives for the goods we consume, including oil. If political upheaval disrupts supply in one location, suppliers elsewhere will take our orders. Prices may increase, but markets adjust. That makes American consumers less dependent on any particular supply source, undermining the claim that we need to use force to prevent unrest in supplier nations or secure trade routes.9 Part of the confusion about the value of hegemony comes from misunderstanding the Cold War. People tend

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

15

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
to assume, falsely, that our activist foreign policy, with troops forward supporting allies, not only caused the Soviet Union's collapse but is obviously a good thing even without such a rival. Forgotten is the sensible notion that alliances are a necessary evil occasionally tolerated to balance a particularly threatening enemy. The main justification for creating our Cold War alliances was the fear that Communist nations could conquer or capture by insurrection the industrial centers in Western Europe and Japan and then harness enough of that wealth to threaten us either directly or by forcing us to become a garrison state at ruinous cost. We kept troops in South Korea after 1953 for fear that the North would otherwise overrun it. But these alliances outlasted the conditions that caused them. During the War, Japan, Western Europe and South Korea grew wealthy enough to defend themselves. We should let them. These alliances heighten our force requirements and threaten to drag us into wars, while providing no obvious benefit. Another argument employed to justify our defense budget is that we must spend heavily on defense today to prepare for future rivals. But the best hedge against an uncertain future is a prosperous and innovative economy, unburdened by excessive debt and spending. Advocating substantial defense spending cuts does not require predicting that the current, historically-benign threat environment will never chang

Space is too vulnerable to be effective Lt Col Donald Christy, MA in Strategic Studies, 2006. United States Policy on Weapons in Space,
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil307.pdf Space is a fragile weapons platform. For defense, space is as static as an earth bound fortification. 53 It takes a great amount of energy to achieve a particular orbit and it is both time and energy consuming to change an orbit. 54 As a result, satellite systems are typically deployed in constellations requiring large numbers and increased expense to achieve global coverage. Like a weakness in a fortification, this allows an adversary to concentrate on one point and potentially overwhelm the system. 55 Space systems reside in stable, observable and predictable orbits. The laws of orbital mechanics govern their motion. A satellites presence is observable through the electro-optical spectrum. Therefore, an adversary will likely know the precise current and future location of any satellite system. Command, control and logistics are expensive and complex. Command and control nodes provide terrestrial targets as necessary to the overall
systems function as the space based segment. The cost per pound to place objects in orbit is very high and launches occur from a few static terrestrial locations. Command and control relies on terrestrial networks subject to jamming or destruction. Maintenance, refueling and rearming (if necessary) are impractical or, at best, orders of magnitude more difficult than for aircraft.

Warming Frontline
Cant solve warming mitigation alone requires 0 emissions to solve Romm sighting Caldeira 08 (Ken Caldeira atmospheric scientist, Department of Global Ecology Carnegie Institution of Washington, JOE ROMM is a Fellow at American Progress and is the editor of Climate Progress, omm was acting
assistant secretary of energy for energy efficiency and renewable energy in 1997, where he oversaw $1 billion in R&D, demonstration, and deployment of low-carbon technology. He is a Senior Fellow at American Progress and holds a Ph.D. in physics from MIT. Feb 28, 2008, http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2008/02/28/202398/stabilizing-climate-requires-near-zero-emissions/) Avoiding climate catastrophe will probably require going to near-zero net emissions of greenhouse gases this century. That is the conclusion of a new paper in Geophysical Research Letters (subs. reqd) co-authored by one of my favorite climate scientists, Ken Caldeira, whose papers always merit attention. Here is the abstract: Current international climate mitigation efforts aim to stabilize levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, human-induced climate warming will continue for many centuries, even after atmospheric CO2 levels are stabilized. In this paper, we assess the CO2 emissions requirements for global temperature stabilization within the next several centuries, using an Earth system model of intermediate complexity. We show first that a single pulse of carbon released into the atmosphere increases globally averaged surface temperature by an amount that remains approximately constant for several centuries, even in the absence of additional emissions. We then show that to hold climate constant at a given global temperature requires near-zero future carbon emissions. Our results suggest that future anthropogenic emissions would need to be eliminated in order to stabilize global-mean temperatures. As a consequence, any future anthropogenic emissions will commit the climate system to warming that is essentially irreversible on centennial timescales. Since the rest of the article is behind a firewall, let me extract a couple of key findings: our results suggest that if emissions were eliminated entirely, radiative forcing from atmospheric CO2 would decrease at a rate closely matched by declining ocean heat uptake, with the result that while future warming commitment may be negligible, atmospheric temperatures may not decrease appreciably for at least 500 years. In short, the time for dramatic action is upon us. The study concludes: In the absence of human intervention to actively

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

16

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
remove CO2 from the atmosphere, each unit of CO2 emissions must be viewed as leading to quantifiable and essentially
permanent climate change on centennial timescales. We emphasize that a stable global climate is not synonymous with stable radiative forcing, but rather requires decreasing greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere. We have shown here that stable global temperatures within the next several centuries can be achieved if CO2 emissions are reduced to nearly zero. This means that avoiding future human-induced climate warming may require policies that seek not only to decrease CO2 emissions, but to eliminate them entirely. Bottom line: Stopping global warming is very hard easily the greatest challenge the human race has ever faced. The best we can hope for at this point is to limit warming to below the threshold where the carbon-cycle feedbacks kick into overdrive, bringing about catastrophe (80 feet of sea level rise, widespread desertification, >50% species loss). In all likelihood we need to slow cut emissions deeply and quickly enough that we get to the point this century where we can actually have net negative emissions, by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere while emitting almost none

China is a bigger polluter than all of North America The Guardian 11 (Simon Rogers and Lisa Evans, Simon Rogers edits the Guardian Datablog and Datastore - and is a news editor
for the Guardian. Previously worked as a researcher for Where Does My Money Go?, now a data researcher for The Guardian. January 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/31/world-carbon-dioxide-emissions-country-data-co2) On pure emissions alone, the key points are: China emits more CO2 than the US and Canada put together - up by 171% since the year 2000 The US has had declining CO2 for two years running, the last time the US had declining CO2 for 3 years running was in the 1980s The UK is down one place to tenth on the list, 8% on the year. The country is now behind Iran, South Korea, Japan and Germany India is now the world's third biggest emitter of CO2 - pushing Russia into fourth place The biggest decrease from 2008-2009 is Ukraine - down 28%. The biggest increase is the Cook Islands - up 66.7% But that is only one way to look at the data - and it doesn't take account of how many people live in each country. If you look at per capita emissions, a different picture emerges where: Some of the world's smallest countries and islands emit the most per person - the highest being Gibraltar with 152 tonnes per person The US is still number one in terms of per capita emissions among the big economies - with 18 tonnes emitted per person China, by contrast, emits under six tonnes per person, India only 1.38 For comparison, the whole world emits 4.49 tonnes per person

Warming inevitable tectonic plates Khilyukl and chilingar 06, [lf khilyukl and gv chilingar, department of civil and environmental engineering, university of
southern California, on global forces of nature driving the earths climate: are humans involved?, environmental geology, vol 50 number 6|AF] Most of atmospheric gases are generated in the inner layers of the Earth (mostly in the mantle) over geologic history and are transferred to the upper systems (atmosphere and hydrosphere) by outgassing. Outgassing is a process of upward migration of various gases generated in the mantle and the Earths crust and seeping through the Earths surface into the atmosphere and the World Ocean (Khilyuk et al. 2000). Most of the gasses (methane, carbon dioxide, water vapor, hydrogen, helium, and others) formed in the process of chemical reactions under different physicochemical conditions are continuously migrating upward and forming the atmosphere throughout the geologic history. The Earths atmosphere and hydrosphere were formed about 4 billion years (BY) ago by outgassing (Vinogradov 1967; Holland 1984; Sorokhtin and Sorokhtin 2002). This process is going on at the present time. The rate of outgassing is determined by the rate of tectonic activity. As a universal measure of the rate of global tectonic activity one can use the rate of heat flux through the Earths surface, because its level indicates the magnitude of total energy generated in the mantle. If, for some reason, it is not possible to estimate the value of the heat flux, then the rate of oceanic floor spreading (in the spreading zones) can be substituted for it. The rate of spreading is directly translated into the rate of displacement of the tectonic plates that presently averages 4.55 cm/year (Sorokhtin and Ushakov 2002). Main gasses generated in the mantle and on the ocean floor are: carbon dioxide, methane, and hydrogen. Carbon dioxide (CO2) dissolves mostly in the oceanic water and transforms to abiogenic methane (CH4) and carbonate (2MgCO3) (Sorokhtin and Sorokhtin 2002) through the following chemical reactions: 4Fe2SiO4 + 12Mg2SiO4 + 18H2O + CO2 4Mg6[Si4O10][OH]8 (serpentine) + 4Fe2O3 (hematite) + CH4 + 183.47 kcal/mol of heat 4Mg2SiO4 (olivine) + 4H2O + 2CO2 Mg6[Si4O10][OH]8 (serpentine) + 2MgCO3 + 72.34 kcal/mol of heat 2CaAl2Si2O8 (anorthite) + 4H2) + 2CO2 Al4[Si4O10][OH]8 (kaoline) + 2CaCO3 + 110 kcal/mol of heat These reactions are accompanied by a very large amount of heat release. This heat contributes considerably to the heat flux through the Earths surface. Thus, the rate of abiogenic CH4 generation on the ocean floor in the spreading zones can be used as a measure of global tectonic activity. In turn, the rate of the Earths tectonic activity can be used as a measure of the Earths outgassing rate. CH4 gas enters the atmosphere, contributing to the greenhouse effect and depleting ozone

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

17

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
concentration through the following reaction: CH4 + O3 + Solar radiation CO2 + H2O + H2 Due to a high level of current tectonic activity, there is a pronounced increase in the current methane gas generation at the oceanic floor (Yasamanov 2003). Yasamanov estimates that about 51015 g/year of CH4 are currently released to oceanic water at the spreading zones of mid-ocean ridges only. He believes that the increasing concentration of methane leads to significant increase in the atmospheric carbon dioxide content that considerably amplifies the atmospheric greenhouse effect. Gases accumulating in the atmosphere and the rate of outgassing determine the properties of gaseous atmospheric mixture, in particular, changing the density and thermal capacity of the air. One can assume that: the greater the rate of outgassing, the higher the atmospheric pressure. According to the adiabatic theory of heat transfer in the atmosphere (Khilyuk and Chilingar 2003), the latter leads to increase in the atmospheric global temperature. Studying the origin and evolution of the Earths atmosphere, one needs to take into account that the primordial Earths matter contained only traces of volatile elements (H2, He) and compounds. All other volatile compounds (H2O, CO2, O2, HCl, HF), except possibly N2, were mostly degassed out of the Earth mantle throughout geologic history (Sorokhtin and Sorokhtin 2002). Outgassing could start only after fusion of the upper layers of the Earths matter and beginning of the Earths tectonic activity (about 4 billion years ago). Under plausible assumption that the rate of Earths degassing is proportional to its tectonic activity and realistic estimates of the original amounts of volatile components in gaseous primordial atmosphere and solid matter of the Earth, Sorokhtin and Sorokhtin (2002) modeled degassing of N2, CO2, H2O, and O2, out of the mantle and their accumulation in atmosphere and hydrosphere. The results of their modeling demonstrated, for example, that the nitrogen of contemporary atmosphere contains 55% of the relic gas and 45% of the gas of magmatic origin. Geologic evolution of the relative content of nitrogen in the atmosphere (under three different hypotheses of the origin of the dominant amount of N2) is shown in Fig. 3. The most probable intermediate evolution of the nitrogen partial pressure in the atmosphere is presented by the curve 2. To estimate the amount of total anthropogenic CO2 emission, one can use an excellent compendium of data on estimates of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN, USA (Marland et al. 2002). The estimates in this compendium are expressed in million metric tons of carbon. The data set comprises the annual releases of CO2 from 1751 to 2002. They can be roughly sorted out into two groups: before the year of 1900 and after the year of 1900. The data of the first group exhibit linear growth of the emission in eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, whereas the data from the second group show exponential growth of the anthropogenic CO2 emission in twentieth century. This observation allows one to use a piece-wise approximation for the data of compendium: a linear function for the first group and an exponential function for the second group. Using the endpoints of the domain intervals for evaluation of the coefficients of the approximating equations, the writers obtained the following piece-wise function (considering that CO2 emission prior to the year of 1800 is negligible in comparison with later data): where t is time, in years, and C is the annual carbon dioxide emission rate in 106 metric tons of carbon/year. The writers used this approximating function (Eq. 7) for computing a rough estimate of the total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission throughout human history. Integrating the first function over the interval [0, 100], one obtains 27,100106=2.711010 ton. Integration of the second function over the interval [100, 202] results in 253,543106=2.535431011 ton. The latter number indicates that the total anthropogenic CO2 emission in the twentieth century is about one order of magnitude higher than that in nineteenth century. Adding these two numbers together, the total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission throughout the human history is estimated at about 2.811011 metric tons of carbon. Recalculating this amount into the total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission in grams of CO2, one obtains the estimate 1.0031018 g, which constitutes less than 0.00022% of the total CO2 amount naturally degassed from the mantle during geologic history. Comparing these figures, one can conclude that anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission is negligible (indistinguishable) in any energy-matter transformation processes changing the Earths climate.

Backstoppping turn: A. Alternative energy development forces increased oil production lowers prices and jacks solvency Longmuir and Alhajji 07 Dr. Gavin Longmuir, consulting petroleum engineer, petroleum appraiser, and Dr. A.F. Alhajji,
associate professor of economics, 2/12/07, Oil and Gas Journal, West should consider ramifications of its off-oil rhetoric * Oil exporters could take Western commentators seriously and assume that oil importers will indeed reduce their demand for oil, leaving them with then-unmarketable oil in the ground. Their logical response to this threat would be to accelerate production of oil while their resources still have value. This would of course drive down the price of oil and undermine the economic feasibility of alternative energies. A collapse in the price of oil would kill several new energy technologies and ultimately increase demand for oil. In fact, the oil-producing countries might view increasing oil production and lowering prices as a logical policy to counter the anti oil policies of the governments of consuming countries. Historical data from

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

18

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
periods of oil price collapses support this point: Low oil prices increase oil demand, decrease efficiency improvements, choke alternative energy resources, and increase waste. * Alternatively, expecting a decline in demand for their oil, oilproducing countries might decide to reduce their planned investments in production capacity expansion and maintenance and mothball some planned projects, which would shortly lead to declining oil supplies. If new technologies do not come on line by the time oil production starts declining, the world will face a serious energy crisis, probably unparalleled in history. Reversing such a trend of declining investments would take years, despite massive increases in oil prices. This alternative is not a mere possibility: Several major projects have been mothballed in the past when the oil-producing governments deemed these projects not needed. * If oil-consuming countries do begin to reduce their dependence on oil, major oil exporters could seek to use their now less-valuable oil within their own borders as cheap fuel with which to expand heavy industries. Instead of exporting oil directly, they could export the energy from that oil embedded in metals, chemicals, and manufactured products at prices that far undercut Western products, constrained as Western manufacturers would be by having to use higher-cost alternative energy sources. The net result would be a loss of jobs and economic strength by the West without having any impact on the overall global consumption of fossil fuels. Even if Western countries successfully replaced imported oil with indigenous alternative energy sources, they would still have to live on the same planet as oil-exporting countries, whose fragile societies would then face the loss of their main source of revenue. Energy independence for current oil importers, if somehow achieved, would aggravate political instability in oil-exporting countries. In addition, it is unclear what will happen to the world monetary system without trade in oil and the associated recycling of petrodollars. A change to a world where most industrial countries depend on their own domestic energy resources would require a major change in the global financial system. Such a change would create its own difficulties, impacting even the industrial countries.

That massively boosts oil consumption and makes warming spiral out of control Paul Roberts, Mathematician at the University of Utah, 2004, The End of Oil: On the Edge of a Perilous New World pg 162
Yet as we have seen with the United States and other developed nations, such mitigating factors run up against a powerful array of economic and political forces countervailing influences that steadily push up energy demand and favor expediency at the expense of fuel efficiency. Oil prices, for example, could just as easily fall, at least in the short term, especially if countries with enormous reserves but little current production, such as Iraq and Iran, obtain the investment they need and start adding supplies to the world market. As we have seen, low prices discourage conservation and fuel efficiency, as well as reliance on alternatives like natural gas or hydrogen, or renewable energy, such as solar or wind. By one estimate, if oil prices fall to fifteen dollars a barrel and stay there until 2020 (a scenario fervently desired by the Bush administration), world oil demand will surge to 124 million barrels a day by 2020 around 20 million barrels more than in average, or business-as-usual: forecasts. Such an increase would put an enormous strain on oil producers, not to mention add significantly to pollution and other oil-related problems among them, more cars, greater suburban sprawl, and a far slower emergence of even such conventional alternative technologies as gasoline-electric hybrids. According to one study, a scenario in which prices averaged twenty-three dollars a barrel would encourage so much additional energy use that U.S. CO2 emissions would jump 50 percent by 2035, effectively destroying any chance at meeting a carbon target.

Russia Turn: A. The Russian economy will grow, but oil exports are key Bloomberg 7/22. Bloomberg News a premier site for updated business news and financial information Putin Sees High Oil
Prices, Balanced Budget This Year Moscow Times http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/putin-sees-high-oil-pricesbalanced-budget-this-year/440909.html Russia may be able to balance its budget this year thanks to higher oil prices and a growing economy, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said after the surplus widened in June. "We hope the deficit this year will be minimal, and perhaps we'll be able to make it through this year without one," Putin told a government meeting in Moscow on Thursday. The government expects deficits in 2012-14 and will need "strenuous work" to rein in costs. The federal budget surplus surged to 640.2 billion rubles ($23 billion) through June, equivalent to 2.7 percent of gross domestic product, the Finance Ministry said Thursday on its web site. The surplus in June widened to 5.9 percent of GDP from 5.3 percent a month earlier. Russia needs crude to average $115 a barrel this year to balance the budget, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said last month in St. Petersburg. It will average $125 for the next three years, according to preliminary budget parameters the Finance Ministry presented earlier this month. "I would ask you again to minimize expenses that are non-essential, and state bodies need to take a balanced approach to their spending on state programs," Putin said. "We know what the forecasts are for 2012 to

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

19

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
2014, and it's not by accident that we're planning for a small deficit." The budget, which usually sees higher spending in the second half, was in deficit at this time last year, Kudrin said at the meeting. The government is maintaining its forecast for a full-year shortfall of "just over 1 percent," he said, down from the 3.6 percent gap projected in the original budget plan.

B. Transition to alternatives tanks oil prices hurts Russian economy Carey 3 John Carey senior correspondent in BusinessWeek's Washington bureau Taming the Oil Beast
Businessweek Yet reducing oil use has to be done judiciously. A drastic or abrupt drop in demand could even be counterproductive. Why? Because even a very small change in capacity or demand "can bring big swings in price," explains Rajeev Dhawan, director of the Economic Forecasting Center at Georgia State University's Robinson College of Business. For instance, the slowdown in Asia in the mid-1990s reduced demand only by about 1.5 million bbl. a day, but it caused oil prices to plunge to near $10 a barrel. So today, if the U.S. succeeded in abruptly curbing demand for oil, prices would plummet. Higher-cost producers such as Russia and the U.S. would either have to sell oil at a big loss or stand on the sidelines. The effect would be to concentrate power--you guessed it--in the hands of Middle Eastern nations, the lowest-cost producers and holders of two-thirds of the known oil reserves. That's why flawed energy policies, such as trying to override market forces by rushing to expand supplies or mandating big fuel efficiency gains, could do harm.

C. Decrease oil prices collapses political stability in Russia McGiffert 7 Carola McGiffert senior fellow and director of Smart Power Initiatives at CSIS 2007 Global forecast: the top
security challenges of 2008 While it is obviously difficult to predict major discontinuity in Russia or elsewhere, the next administration will need to keep in mind that Russia for much of its history has shown a remarkable proclivity toward discontinuity and unpredictability. The current economic recovery and apparent political stabilization sit on a fairly fragile foundation. A crash in the price of oil will upset the current stability just as it was a precursor to major change and then collapse in the Soviet Union 20 years ago. There is no question that Putin and his team see themselves presiding over a stable authoritarian modernization of Russia for the next two to three decades. But history is replete with nations pursuing authoritarian modernization plans that have gone awry.

D. Russian economic decline results in nuke war Steven R David professor of political science 99 professor of political science at the john Hopkins U,
Foreign Affairs, January/February. AT NO TIME since the civil war of 1918 -- 20 has Russia been closer to bloody conflict than it is today. The fledgling government confronts a vast array of problems without the power to take effective action. For 70 years, the Soviet Union operated a strong state apparatus, anchored by the KGB and the Communist Party. Now its disintegration has created a power vacuum that has yet to be filled. Unable to rely on popular ideology or coercion to establish control, the government must prove itself to the people and establish its authority on the basis of its performance. But the Yeltsin administration has abjectly failed to do so, and it cannot meet the most basic needs of the Russian people. Russians know they can no longer look to the state for personal security, law enforcement, education, sanitation, health care, or even electrical power. In the place of government authority, criminal groups -- the Russian Mafia -- increasingly hold sway. Expectations raised by the collapse of communism have been bitterly disappointed, and Moscow's inability to govern coherently raises the specter of civil unrest. If internal war does strike Russia, economic deterioration will be a prime cause. From 1989 to the present, the GDP has fallen by 50 percent. In a society where, ten years ago, unemployment scarcely existed, it reached 9.5 percent in 1997 with many economists declaring the true figure to be much higher. Twenty-two percent of Russians live below the official poverty line (earning less than $ 70 a month). Modern Russia can neither collect taxes (it gathers only half the revenue it is due) nor significantly cut spending. Reformers tout privatization as the country's cure-all, but in a land without well-defined property rights or contract law and where subsidies remain a way of life, the prospects for transition to an American-style capitalist economy look remote at best. As the massive devaluation of the ruble and the current political crisis show, Russia's condition is even worse than most analysts feared. If conditions get worse, even the stoic Russian people will soon run out of patience. A future conflict would quickly draw in Russia's military. In the Soviet days civilian rule kept the powerful armed forces in check. But with the Communist Party out of office, what little civilian control remains relies on an exceedingly fragile foundation -- personal friendships between government leaders and military commanders. Meanwhile, the morale of Russian soldiers has fallen to a dangerous low. Drastic cuts in spending mean inadequate pay, housing, and medical care. A new emphasis on domestic missions has created an ideological split between

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

20

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
the old and new guard in the military leadership, increasing the risk that disgruntled generals may enter the political fray and feeding the resentment of soldiers who dislike being used as a national police force. Newly enhanced ties between military units and local authorities pose another danger. Soldiers grow ever more dependent on local governments for housing, food, and wages. Draftees serve closer to home, and new laws have increased local control over the armed forces. Were a conflict to emerge between a regional power and Moscow, it is not at all clear which side the military would support. Divining the military's allegiance is crucial, however, since the structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that regional conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's 89 republics, krais, and oblasts grow ever more independent in a system that does little to keep them together. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if even that far), power devolves to the periphery. With the economy collapsing, republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes to Moscow when they receive so little in return. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions, nearly all of which make some claim to sovereignty. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate non-Russians to secede from the Federation. Chechnya's successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar movements for autonomy and independence throughout the country. If these rebellions spread and Moscow responds with force, civil war is likely. Should Russia succumb to internal war, the consequences for the United States and Europe will be severe. A major power like Russia -- even though in decline -- does not suffer civil war quietly or alone. An embattled Russian Federation might provoke opportunistic attacks from enemies such as China. Massive flows of refugees would pour into central and western Europe. Armed struggles in Russia could easily spill into its neighbors. Damage from the fighting, particularly attacks on nuclear plants, would poison the environment of much of Europe and Asia. Within Russia, the consequences would be even worse. Just as the sheer brutality of the last Russian civil war laid the basis for the privations of Soviet communism, a second civil war might produce another horrific regime. Most alarming is the real possibility that the violent disintegration of Russia could lead to loss of control over its nuclear arsenal. No nuclear state has ever fallen victim to civil war, but even without a clear precedent the grim consequences can be foreseen. Russia retains some 20,000 nuclear weapons and the raw material for tens of thousands more, in scores of sites scattered throughout the country. So far, the government has managed to prevent the loss of any weapons or much material. If war erupts, however, Moscow's already weak grip on nuclear sites will slacken, making weapons and supplies available to a wide range of antiAmerican groups and states. Such dispersal of nuclear weapons represents the greatest physical threat America now faces. And it is hard to think of anything that would increase this threat more than the chaos that would follow a Russian civil war.

Peak Oil Frontline

Their Foster 05 evidence says we already shouldve hit the peak now No resource wars plenty of reserves Raymond J. Learsy, Commodities trader and member of the Wilson Council at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2005, Over a Barrel: Breaking the Middle East Oil Cartel, pg. 18-20
Second, Iran and Iraq also stopped drilling around the same time. This occurred not because they were trying to avoid finding more oil, bur because the were at war with each other and mired in political turmoil. With the regions three biggest potential sources of discovery calling a timeout, wildcatting was stepped up in less likely places like Oman, Syria, and Yemen. Not surprisingly, the reservoirs of oil found in those countries were smaller. Even so, the odds are that the announced size of the discoveries isnt the last word on the subject. Experience shows that reserves are almost always revised upward as fields are thoroughly explored and new technology is applied to production. The supposed dwindling pace of new oil discoveries is simply a red herring. It proves nothing about the amount of oil left to be found. While it seems unlikely that other fields as large as those in the Persian Gulf remain to be discovered, a large part of the world has yet to be thoroughly probed, and no one can rule out the possibility of equally significant discoveries at some point in the future. So let's state the facts clearly and forcefully: The world is not running out of oil, as alarmists insist. On the contrary, the industry is more likely to run out of markets long before the supply of oil peters out. So say experts like Morris A. Adelman, the respected oil analyst and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Just as the Stone Age did not end for lack of stones, Adelman wrote in his 199s book, Genie Out of the Bottle (paraphrasing, ironically enough, former Saudi oil minister Ahmed Zaki Yamnani), the Oil Age will not end because of the scarcity of oil. Rather, oil will inevitably be surpassed in convenience by a new source of energy in the future. In other words, we will never use it all. We began by using up the easiest oil to find and the cheapest to produce, and we are progressing to increasingly more difficult and costly wells as the inexpensive fields are drained. Earths last drop of oil will never be pumped, because

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

21

83504453.doc

DDW 2011

1
extracting it would cost many times its highest conceivable value as fuel. No matter the scenario, a point will inevitably be reached where what remains isnt worth the cost of bringing it out of the ground.

Resources are infinite Geddes 04, [marc geddes, writer, 2/12/04, http://solohq.com/War/MonsterFAQ.shtml|AF]
Answer: A significant disruption to supplies of critical resources can cause temporary problems, but in a free market, if resources start to become scarce, prices rise, leading to a search of substitutes and improved conservation efforts. The pool of resources is not fixed, because human ingenuity can find substitutes or new sources of resources. Supplies of most raw materials have been increasing throughout the 20th century, and the cost has been falling (See the entry on Natural resources). For instance, between 1950 and 1970, bauxite (aluminium source) reserves increased by 279 per cent, copper by 179 per cent, chromite (chromium source) by 675 per cent, and tin reserves by 10 per cent. In 1973 experts predicted oil reserves stood at around 700 billion barrels, yet by 1988 total oil reserves had actually increased to 900 billion barrels. Production of certain kinds of resources such as fossil fuels may finally be beginning to peak but there are renewable energy sources in development which can serve as substitutes. Simplistic thermodynamic analysis of energy production is misleading, because it's not the quantities of energy used or produced that determine economic value, but the utility, or usefulness if that energy to humans. If energy is being used more efficiently you don't need as much of it, and some forms of energy are more valuable than others- for instance kinetic energy in the form of wind power is less valuable than the same quantity of latent energy in the form of oil. Solar power is a virtually inexhaustible supply of new energy for stationary sources and the hydrogen fuel cell can serve for transportation in place of fossil fuels. Developing these technologies costs money, so to avoid resource shortages a good economy is essential. Libertarian capitalism is the system which generates wealth the fastest.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM

22