advantage cps - michigan7 2013 gjp.docx

8/14/2019 Advantage CPs - Michigan7 2013 GJP.docx

1/53

Advantage CPs GJP 7wk Juniors


2/53

Border Security


3/53

Anti-Corruption Efforts

CP Text: The United States federal government should increase its anti-corruptionefforts in regards to border security by thoroughly investigating all Border Patrol,

Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcementagents that work in relation to the U.S.-Mexico border, improving the screeningprocess for new employees, and prosecuting all employees found to be engaging incorrupt practices.

Attempts to secure the border have been undermined by a corresponding increasein corruption anti-corruption efforts are key to ensure border securityKolb 1/15/2013(Joseph, Contributor to Fox News, Study Finds corruption on rise among border agents, rep says security atrisk http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/study-finds-corruption-on-rise-among-border-agents-rep-says-security-at-risk/ )//JSA government watchdog report has identified a dramatic increase indocumented corruption cases amongU.S. border and immigration agents, finding nearly 150 have been arrested or indicted since 2005.In atrend one top lawmaker said puts national security "in jeopardy," the Government

Accountability Office tracked the rise in corruption cases among Border Patrol,Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcementagents. The report, issued last month, found spotty standards in screening new applicantsand keeping tabs on agents after they're hired. It found the trend was tied in partto the demand to beef up security, particularly along the southwest border, by hiring more agents, and has raisedred flags in Congress. "Just one employee collaborating with a drug smuggler or terroristcan put our entire nation at risk," said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, chairman of the House Committee onHomeland Security. McCaul, who along with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., requested the report, said one problem is that while theCBP now polygraphs all new hires, it does not follow up and test employees after they join. "The GAO report confirms that not onlyis corruption still a problem, CBP still lacks adequate controls to detect corruption, such as post-employment polygraphing," McCaultold FoxNews.com, adding that one CBP official has said that among those who become corrupt, the behavior sets in roughly 8.8years into service. According to the GAO's findings, since 2005, 2,170 agents have been arrested for non-corruption charges such asdomestic violence and driving while intoxicated. However, 144 were arrested or indicted for direct corruption-related activities suchas drug and human smuggling. By Oct. 2012, 125 of these agents had been convicted. While the GAO downplayed the matter by

noting the cases only represented less than 1 percent of the entire agency, a May 2012 article by the Center for InvestigativeReporting showed thatbetween 2006 and 2010 the number of corruption cases beinginvestigated jumped from 244 to 870."In fiscal year 2011 alone, the DHS Inspector General received almost900 allegations of corruption from within CBP and ICE," McCaul said. McCaul has long asserted the presence ofIslamic extremists groups such as Hezbollah -- which has been found to be

working in collaboration with Mexican cartels -- coupled with the prospect of acorrupt officer intentionally allowing these individuals into the U.S. could becatastrophic. The crux of the GAO's report found that the CBP was unable to handle the rapid demand for agents and thatthere was a disconnect between supervisors and the agency's Office of Internal

Affairs, which did not maintain or track information obtained from backgroundchecks, drug tests or polygraphs. The agency has also failed to consistentlyconduct monthly quality assurance reviewsof its adjudications since 2008, hampering effortsto prevent future incidents of corruption. A culture of resisting the efforts of theOffice of Internal Affairs was also uncovered. The GAO report said thatDepartment of Homeland Security officials have testified that CBP's increasedhiring of officers and agents since fiscal year 2006 likewise increased theopportunities for attempted corruption. Between 2006 and August 2012, morethan 17,000 new agents were hired, the majority of whom were stationed along theU.S.-Mexico border. There is speculation that some applicants may have appliedto work for CBP with pre-existing ties to drug cartels facilitating drug trafficking . In 2010, the CBP assistant commissioner for internal affairs told the homeland security subcommittee that only one in 10
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/study-finds-corruption-on-rise-among-border-agents-rep-says-security-at-risk/http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/study-finds-corruption-on-rise-among-border-agents-rep-says-security-at-risk/http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/study-finds-corruption-on-rise-among-border-agents-rep-says-security-at-risk/http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/study-finds-corruption-on-rise-among-border-agents-rep-says-security-at-risk/


4/53

applicants was even polygraphed during the rush to hire new agents. Of this group, some60 percent were deemed unsuitable for hiring. This prompted the passage of the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010 whichrequires that by January 2013, all applicants be polygraphed before hiring. With an estimated $40 billion in drugs crossing theU.S.-Mexico border annually, the battle against temptation is daunting. In 2005, agent Juan Alfredo Alvarez accepted some $1.5million to let trucks loaded with more than a ton of marijuana through checkpoints in southeast Texas. Raul and Fidel Villarealwere arrested in Tijuana after being charged with smuggling hundreds of undocumented immigrants through the San Ysidro area ofCalifornia. In 2011, Abel Canales accepted $8,000 to allow drug shipments to pass from Mexico into the U.S. through Arizona.Solomon Ruiz was sentenced to 14 years in prison after he was caught directing drug shipments into the U.S. Ruiz asked for a

$10,000 retainer fee and said that he charged $4,000 to escort a car and $6,000 to escort a van. "We must ensure thatDHS commits to an effective integrity strategy as part of a comprehensive strategyto secure our borders," McCaul said. "Untilthe department addresses its own Internal

Affairs failures and implements clear ethical standards, our national security willbe in jeopardy." A CBP representative said the agency would follow the GAO report's recommendations. "CBP agreeswith the seven recommendations the GAO report on CBP's workforce integrity has identified and will implement appropriatemeasures to address all of them including the feasibility of expanding the polygraph program to incumbent law enforcement officers,developing a plan to implement a comprehensive integrity strategy, and completing post-corruption analysis reports for all CBPemployees who have been convicted of corruption-related activities to help identify and prevent future corruption and misconductrisks," CBP spokeswoman Joanne Ferreira said.


5/53

Extensions

Current innovations in border security are enough but a comprehensive andcoordinated anti-corruption effort is needed to ensure solvencyBecker 13Andrew,Border agency report reveals internal struggles with corruption, Jan 29, http://cironline.org/reports/border-agency-report-reveals-internal-struggles-corruption-4126//MJ

Turf battles, internal dysfunction and other troubles have left U.S. Customs and Border Protectiongrasping toget a handle on corruption and other misconduct within its ranks, according to an internal study that has been kept secret for more

than a year.The agency, the nations largest federal law enforcement force with nearly 60,000 employees, has struggled tostreamline its own disciplinary system, to stamp out an internal code of silencethat protects corrupt co-workers from exposure or even to fully understand how

bad the corruption problem is.These woes and more are highlighted in a study conducted by the HomelandSecurity Studies and Analysis Institute, which acts as a think tank for the Department of Homeland Security. The 80-pageunclassified report, reviewed by the Center for Investigative Reporting, highlights nagging problems, some of which date back to

2002.As the department has bolstered border security by adding thousands of newagents, expanding its Southwest border fence and deploying sophisticatedsurveillance technology, Mexican crime syndicates increasingly have turned to

bribing agency employees and have attempted to infiltrate U.S. law enforcementranks with their own operatives to avoid those obstacles.Customs and Border Protection hasidentified at least 15 attempts of infiltration, according to the study, which did not give specific examples. That number could bemuch higher now as the agency, as mandated by a 2010 law, has ramped up efforts to administer polygraph exams to all new

applicants.As part of lie detector tests, prospective hires have admitted to drug trafficking,human smuggling and other illegal activity, according to examples the agency previously provided to theCenter for Investigative Reporting.One applicant told examiners that he smuggled 230 people across the border and shuttled drugdealers around border towns so they could conduct their business. Another admitted to various crimes, including transporting

$700,000 in drug money and 50 kilograms of cocaine across the Southwest border.Since Oct. 1, 2004, 147 agencyofficers and agents have been charged with or convicted of corruption-relatedoffenses, ranging from taking bribes to allow drugs into the country to stealing government money. About a dozen of thosecases came to light in 2012.This is a small minority of the workforce, but it represents a threat to ournational security, the authors wrote in the study.The most recent incident involves a Border Patrol agent in Yuma, Ariz.,who wasarrestedDec. 2 when federal agents caught the two-year veteran as he loaded nearly 150 pounds of marijuana into his patrol

vehicle while on duty.The border agency has made strides to address the persistent problem of corruption, the report contends.In particular, the agency has used data to research and analyze potential threats and security weaknesses. One example, dubbedOperation Side Door, examines leads and other data from applicants who have admitted to involvement with smuggling to detectpossible links to current agency employees. Another, called Operation Southern Exposure, evaluates seizure data to spot potential

employee misconduct.Despitethose innovations, the agency still lacks a comprehensiveand coordinated approach to ferret out corruption , the study found.

Corruption is on the rise and nothing is being done about itBecker 13(Andrew , A journalist that has appeared in several prestigious journals. The Washington Journal, The New York Times, Jan 29,http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/29/as-obama-offers-immigration-plan-report-shows-border-patrol-corruption.html )//JSA prolonged turf battle with the departments inspector general, which has been criticized for its owninefficiencies,has contributed to the border agencys blind spots , the internal study found.

The departments inspector generalhas withheld information, neglectedinvestigations and accumulated a backlog of investigations that at one pointreached more than 1,000 corruption cases.Charles K. Edwards, who is leading the Homeland Securityinspector generals office, testified in August during a House government reform hearing that turf battles among the agencieshave

subsided and his investigators could handle the nearly 1,600 cases of alleged employee misconduct open at the time.Theneglected cases and other inefficiencies have allowed employees suspected ofcorruption to remain in sensitive security positions or had their careers stunted

before they were found not guilty, the study found.Corruption-related cases generallyhave increased in recent years.Whether that is attributable to a hiring surge that in a decade has roughly doubled
http://bordercorruption.apps.cironline.org/person/detail/aaron-anaya/155/http://bordercorruption.apps.cironline.org/person/detail/aaron-anaya/155/http://bordercorruption.apps.cironline.org/person/detail/aaron-anaya/155/http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/29/as-obama-offers-immigration-plan-report-shows-border-patrol-corruption.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/29/as-obama-offers-immigration-plan-report-shows-border-patrol-corruption.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/29/as-obama-offers-immigration-plan-report-shows-border-patrol-corruption.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/29/as-obama-offers-immigration-plan-report-shows-border-patrol-corruption.htmlhttp://bordercorruption.apps.cironline.org/person/detail/aaron-anaya/155/


6/53

the size of the U.S. Border Patrol is inconclusive, the study says. According to the report, thats because the inspector general has notshared enough information with the agency.Susan Ginsburg, a former U.S. Treasury official and 9/11 Commission member, said itscritical that agencies combine information and data so the Homeland Security Department and Congress have a clear picture of

corruption at the border.Its a pain in the neck for the department, but there are always going to be a fewrotten apples in law enforcement, Ginsburg said. What hurts is when youre not doingeverything you can to prevent it and to weed them out .

Efforts to the secure the border will fail until steps are taken to address corruptiontoo many new hires, too fastGuidi 11Ruxandra, 1 in 100 border security agents under investigation, June 30, http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/jun/30/one-out-hundred-border-agents-under-investigation-/The CBP is now required to administer lie-detector tests to all applicants and to conduct periodic background checks of all

employees. But according to critics, the current hiring drive makes it difficult to keep up with allthe testing -- some of which is contracted out to private security companies. Still, CBP CommissionerBersin has admitted that one-third of all applicants who take the lie-detector test fail it .Thistrend comes as no surprise to Terry Nelson, a registered Republican and nine-year veteran of the Border Patrol. Nelson has argued

that the agency has struggled with corruption and cartel infiltration for a long time .I believe that our border security peoplehave been infiltrated by the cartels and I think it began 12 to 15 years ago, butreally it

began after the attacks of September 11th, 2001, said Nelson.Nelson was an agent in the 1970s and '80sin El Paso

where, he said, there were also many temptations. But back then, background checks were done by theFBI, not by private contractors. The agents were older on average and more professional, and there was less turnoverof staff, he said. Today, according to Nelson, the Border Patrol is stuck with too many new hires,too fast.


7/53

AFF Answers

Corruption is rare less than 1% of the border workforce and most arrests arefor minor offensesDavidson 13Joe, Customs and Border Protection corruption is rare, but serious when it happens, studyshows, Jan 11, Washington Post,https://bangordailynews.com/2013/01/11/news/nation/customs-and-border-protection-corruption-is-rare-but-serious-when-it-happens-study-shows/The first thing to note about a recent report on corruption at Customs and Border Protection isthat the Government Accountability Office study found very few dirty officers.

Arrests of CBP employees for corruption-related activities since fiscal years 2005account for less than 1 percent of CBPs entire workforce per fiscal year, the GAOsays. Also worth noting is that most arrests, by far,were for such conduct as drunkendriving and domestic violence, not such corrupt activities as drug and peoplesmuggling.

Corruption will be solved in status quo agents will be rotatedPowell 12Stewart, To stop corruption, changes may be coming to border, Jan 27,http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Border-agents-could-be-randomly-transferred-to-2760158.php

WASHINGTON - As the threat of internal corruption dogs the ranks of border security forces,the Obama administration is considering regularly rotating agents to otherlocations to distance them from the persuasive power and money of Mexico's drugcartels. Such a decision would subject locally recruitedU.S. Border Patrol agentsandCustoms and Border Protection officers to the periodic relocations alreadyrequired for agents within the FBI,U.S. Secret Service,theDrug Enforcement

Administrationand other premier federal law enforcement agencies.
http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Border+Patrol%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Customs+and+Border+Protection%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Secret+Service%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Drug+Enforcement+Administration%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Drug+Enforcement+Administration%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Drug+Enforcement+Administration%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Drug+Enforcement+Administration%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Drug+Enforcement+Administration%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Secret+Service%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Customs+and+Border+Protection%22http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news%2Fhouston-texas&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22U.S.+Border+Patrol%22


8/53

Climate Change


9/53

Energy Stability Board CP

CP text: The United States federal government should initiate the creation of anEnergy Stability Board.

CP solves for global energy security and climate changeVictor and Yueh 10David G. Victor is a Professor at the School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at theUniversity of California, San Diego, where he directs the Laboratory on International Law andRegulation. Linda Yueh is Fellow in Economics at St. Edmund Hall, at the University of Oxford,

where she directs the China Growth Center. (David and Linda, The New Energy OrderManaging Insecurities in the Twenty-first Century, Foreign Affairs V89N1,http://ilar.ucsd.edu/assets/001/500645.pdf)//SLRThe other big shift in the world energy system is growing concern about theenvironmental impact of energy use, especially emissions of carbon dioxide, anintrinsic byproduct of burning fossil fuels with conventional technology and the

leading human cause of global warming. Worries about climate change are one reason why the majorstimulus packages passed since the global financial crisis began in 2007 have included hefty green-energy measures: by someaccounts, these have made up 15 percent of global fiscal stimulus spending. Some believe that such green-tinted stimulus measures

will spur a revolution pushing for cleaner and more secure energy. Perhaps. But there is no doubt that energysystems are in for a major change. Curbing global warming will likely requirecutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by more than halfover the next few decades, and that goal cannot be achieved by just tinkering at themargins.In the face of these new realities, the international and nationalinstitutions that were created to help promote energy security over the last threedecades are struggling to remain relevant. The most important one, the iea, has made littleheadway in involving the new giant energy consumers in its decision-making. Thatmeans that it is struggling even to fulfill one of its hallmark functionsto standready to coordinate government responses to energy shocksbecause a large, and

growing, fraction of oil consumers fall outside its ambit and are wary of market-based approaches to energy security. Other institutions are doing no better. Europeanstates that depend on gas imported from Russia have signed a treaty and created an organization aimed at making those supplies

more secure, but the practical eaect of both steps has been nil. It was a good thing for the g-20 to announcea cut in energy subsidies at a summit in Pittsburgh last Septemberenergysubsidies encourage excessive consumption, harming both energy security andthe environmentbut the g-20 has no plan for actually implementingthat policy, and it has too many competing issues on its agenda. The big oil producers inopec have mobilized around the goal of promoting what they call demand security, but the cartel has no power to guaranteedemand for its products. Likewise, the institutions charged with addressing newenvironmental challenges are barely effective: the Kyoto Protocol has had littleimpact on emissions, and the disputes that arose at the international climateconference in Copenhagen in December over how to craft a successor treaty are

making it hard for investors to justify spending the massive capital needed forcleaner energy systems. Despite the existence of many international institutionsattending to energy matters today, dangerous vacuums in governance haveappeared. The traditional solution of creating big new institutions, such as a worldenergy organization to replace the more exclusive iea, will not work.What isneeded instead is a mechanism for coordinating hard-nosed initiatives focused ondelivering energy security and environmental protection. To be effective, thosemeasures will have toadvance the interests of the most important governments, of importers and exporters alike, andthey will have to align with the needs of the private and state firms that provide most of


10/53

the investment in energy infrastructure.foreign affairs. Producers and consumers, each group unsure of theother, cannot agree on how best to finance and manage a more secure energy system.A model for these effortsexists in international economic law. Once saddled with too many institutions and too little governance, theworld economic system developed a series of ad hoc arrangements during the last several decades that have evolved into an effectivemanagement system. Although the system is still imperfect, it now governs most international trade and a growing proportion of

finance and banking. The Financial Stability Board, which issues standards for judging theadequacy of banks capitalization, is a particularly apt example of the systemssuccess.Its so-called Basel standards, created after the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, have been highly eaective: manycountries and banks have adopted them on the understanding that it is in their interests to run well-governed financial sectors that

conform to widely recognized criteria.A similar Energy Stability Board could be created to helpgovern- ments and existing international institutions better manage todays energyproblems. It could work with the major new energy consumers, such as China, toset investment standards that both align with their interests and are consistent

with the market rules that govern most trade in energy commodities and haveworked well for some time now. It could also help the governments that arespending the most on green energy coordinate their efforts; without bettergovernance, these green stimulus programs risk triggering trade wars and wasting

vast sums of money. Following the example of economic law, success with theseinitiatives would undoubtedly help the existing energy institutions do a better job

and could also spawn broader norms for governing energy security.


11/53


12/53

Regulation. Linda Yueh is Fellow in Economics at St. Edmund Hall, at the University of Oxford,where she directs the China Growth Center. (David and Linda, The New Energy OrderManaging Insecurities in the Twenty-first Century, Foreign Affairs V89N1,http://ilar.ucsd.edu/assets/001/500645.pdf)//SLRSupport for new green technology is a second area regarding which a vacuum ingovernance has made it hard for governments to achieve their common interests.

The energy sector is one of the most exciting technological frontiers today. This is partly because climate change is transformingwhat societies expect from energy supplies, but it is also, and most immediately, because of the role that governments hopeinvestments in energy infrastructure will play in economic recovery. Over the past year, governments have talked a great deal aboutcoordinating their efforts to revive economic activity worldwide. Yet for the most part, each state is making decisions on its own,even though the International Monetary Fund, among other international institutions, has argued that a better-coordinated effortwould do more to boost the global economy. The problem is most obvious regarding the green part of the $2.5 trillion that is being

spent globally to stimulate the world economy. The United States and China alone are spending $1.5trillion, including a large fraction on energy projects. South Korea has devoted 85 percent of itsstimulus package to green investments, promoting energy efficiency and low-emissions power plants. The British government has

set aside hundreds of millions of pounds to support research and development in green industries. Coordination isneeded, however, because the market for green-energy technology is global; ideaspromoted in one country can quickly spread to the rest of the world through themarketplace.For example, U.S. spending on renewable sources of energy caninvigorate U.S., Chinese, and European firms that supply solar cells and wind

turbines, boosting all three economies at the same time. And Chinese spending onnew power grids can benefit the Western companies, as well as the Chinese ones,that develop the requisite technology. Coordinating these green-technologyprograms offers the prospect of a viable new global industry in clean technology, atleast in theory. In practice, however, such stimulus plans are prone to economic nationalism. The United States program, forexample, includes rules that favor U.S. suppliers, and one of the results, to cite an ongoing example, is that a Chinese company tryingto bring Chinese technology to a wind farm in Texas will find itself in a hostile investment climate. Yet a true energy revolutioncannot happen if technologies are nationalized; indeed, all the best and most competitive energy technologies have been improved

by global competition. One way to get coordination started would be to require the leadingspenders on green technologyin decreasing order, the United States, theEuropean Union, Japan, and Chinato offer periodic assessments of how theirown programs are working and where new efforts, including joint ones, areneeded. And with the right forum for coordination in place, such early endeavors

could eventually spread more widely.

CP is key to the credibility of other bilateral efforts and best solves for China U.S.leadership is key

Victor and Yueh 10David G. Victor is a Professor at the School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at theUniversity of California, San Diego, where he directs the Laboratory on International Law andRegulation. Linda Yueh is Fellow in Economics at St. Edmund Hall, at the University of Oxford,

where she directs the China Growth Center. (David and Linda, The New Energy OrderManaging Insecurities in the Twenty-first Century, Foreign Affairs V89N1,http://ilar.ucsd.edu/assets/001/500645.pdf)//SLRAnother disappointment has been the failure of the worlds leading governments to invest adequately in energy research anddevelopment. (Despite the worlds growing energy problems, the proportion of global economic output devoted to energy research

and development is lower today than it was in the early 1980s.) Just as the Financial Stability Board, after it had proved itself, wasasked to take on new tasks, such as devising internationally acceptable rules for bankers compensation in light of the global

financial crisis, the Energy Stability Board could be asked to issue guidelines for how tohandle research and development and other issues that are difficult to keep on theagenda of existing institutions yet crucial to the long-term development of theenergy system. The board could also help build support for important initiatives,such as the new U.S.- and Chinese-led efforts to build a more secure system fornuclear fuel.Getting started will require leadership. Only the United States andChina can play the part, given their dominant roles as the worlds largest energy


13/53

consumers.But although the two countries have long professed their common desire to cooperate on energy issues, they havestruggled to do anything practical. Moreover, strictly one-on-one dealings cannot solve the worldsmost pressing energy problems; the United States and China cannot set the agendaentirely on their own. Working in tandem through the Energy Stability Board,however, would give their bilateral efforts more credibility with other importantactors and with international institutions. The United States and China know that such cooperation would

serve their interests. Beijings current strategy of locking up energy supplies is notsustainable without strong norms to make these investments seem less toxicpolitically to other important countries, especially the key Western ones .Workingthrough the Energy Stability Board would serve the United States interests, too:

Washington will achieve very little of what it wants to get done in the world ofenergy, such as a more effective scheme for cutting greenhouse gas emissions

worldwide, without giving a prominent role to other major energy consumers andother potential technology suppliers. An effective mechanism for engaging China would also give the Obamaadministration the political cover it needs to pass national legislation on global warming. One of the biggest hurdles in doing so hasbeen its inability to convince a skeptical Amer- ican public that China, India, and other major developing countries are also willing toplay useful roles. Although energy commodities and technologies are traded globally, the system for governing the markets for theseimportant goods is fragmented and increasingly impotent. As the experience with global financial and trade regulation shows, that

need not be the case. Nor is it necessary to devise grand new institutions to fix the problem. A nimble energy agency

focused on practical approaches to the new realities of the world energy marketcan fill the gaps.

Current international institutions aimed at energy security failVictor and Yueh 10David G. Victor is a Professor at the School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at theUniversity of California, San Diego, where he directs the Laboratory on International Law andRegulation. Linda Yueh is Fellow in Economics at St. Edmund Hall, at the University of Oxford,

where she directs the China Growth Center. (David and Linda, The New Energy OrderManaging Insecurities in the Twenty-first Century, Foreign Affairs V89N1,http://ilar.ucsd.edu/assets/001/500645.pdf)One lesson from this experience is that any effort to coordinate global energy policymust include all the most powerful players. Yet today, the most visible institutionsfor governing energy do not do this. Efforts to expand the IEA have been hobbled by therequirement that the agency's members also belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD. Thus, the 28-strong IEA includes many countries

with small and shrinking energy needs but excludes emerging giant energyconsumers, such as China and India. Partial solutions have been devised -- granting

various states observer status, conducting joint studies with the IEA's highly competentsecretariat -- but they have not resolved the fundamental problem: when the IEA coordinatesresponses to an energy crisis, important players with large oil stockpiles,which could be themost helpful, have no voice. The only comprehensive solution wouldbe to rewrite the IEA'smembership rules. But this idea is a nonstarter partly because itwould mean turning theorganization into an even bigger forum, and existing members fear that their power would bediluted, as happened to the members of the G-8 when the G-20 grew more important.Another

lesson to be drawn from the success of global economic governance is that cooperation musthave broad appeal, beyond the most important players . Global trade talks havemade the most progress when they have focused on actions, such as the reduction oftariffs, that have a big impact on trade, are rooted in mutual interests, andare easyto enforce. Such successes then set the stage for governments to extend existing trade rules tomany more countries and to take on harder tasks, such asbuilding the WTO's dispute-resolution system. Similarly, the G-20's norms against tax havens have spread more widelyfollowing success in such states as Liechtenstein and Switzerland. Since the financial crisis


14/53


15/53

Geoengineering


16/53

+Sunshades

CP Text: The United States federal government should develop and deploysunshades.

The counterplan solves warming betterVictor et al 2009a Professor at Stanford Law School, Director of Stanford's Program on Energy and SustainableDevelopment, and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. M. Granger Morgan is Head of Carnegie MellonUniversity's Department of Engineering and Public Policy and Director of the Climate Decision Making Center. Jay Apt is Professorof Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. John Steinbruner is Professor of Public Policy and Director of theCenter for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland. Katharine Ricke is a doctoral student at Carnegie MellonUniversity (David G., March/April 2009 The geoengineering option http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/22456/The_Geoengineering_Option.pdf )Each year, the effects of climate change are coming into sharper focus. Barely a month goes by without some fresh bad news: icesheets and glaciers are melting faster than expected, sea levels are rising more rapidly than ever in recorded history, plants areblooming earlier in the spring, water supplies and habitats are in danger, birds are being forced to find new migratory patterns. Theodds that the global climate will reach a dangerous tipping point are increasing. Over the course of the twenty-first century, keyocean currents, such as the Gulf Stream, could shift radically, and thawing permafrost could release huge amounts of additionalgreenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Such scenarios, although still remote, would dramatically accelerate and compound theconsequences of global warming. Scientists are taking these doomsday scenarios seriously because the steady accumulation of

warming gases in the atmosphere is forcing change in the climate system at rates so rapid that the outcomes are extremely difficultto predict. Eliminating all the risks of climate change is impossible because carbon dioxide emissions,the chief human contributionto global warming, are unlike conventional air pollutants, which stay in the atmosphere for only hours or days. Once carbondioxide enters the atmosphere, much of it remains for over a hundred years. Emissions from anywhereon the planet contribute to the global problem, and once headed in the wrong direction, the climate system is slow torespond to attempts at reversal.As with a bathtub that has a large faucet and a small drain, the only practical

way to lower the level is by dramatically cutting the inflow.Holding global warming steady at its current ratewould require a worldwide 60-80 percent cut in emissions, and it would still take decades for the atmospheric concentration ofcarbon dioxide to stabilize. Most human emissions of carbon dioxide come from burning fossil fuels, and most governments havebeen reluctant to force the radical changes necessary to reduce those emissions. Economic growth tends to trump vague and elusiveglobal aspirations. The United States has yet to impose even a cap on its emissions, let alone a reduction. The European Union hasadopted an emissions-trading scheme that, although promising in theory, has not yet had much real effect because carbon prices arestill too low to cause any significant change in behavior. Even Norway, which in 1991 became one of the first nations to impose a stifftax on emissions, has seen a net increase in its carbon dioxide emissions. Japan, too, has professed its commitment to taming globalwarming. Nevertheless, Tokyo is struggling to square the need for economic growth with continued dependence on an energy systempowered mainly by conventional fossil fuels. And China's emissions recently surpassed those of the United States, thanks to coal-fueled industrialization and a staggering pace of economic growth. The global economic crisis is stanching emissions a bit, but it will

not come close to shutting off the faucet. The world's slow progress in cutting carbon dioxide emissions andthe looming danger that the climate could take a sudden turn for the worse require policymakersto take a closer look at emergency strategies for curbing the effects of global warming. Thesestrategies, often called "geoengineering," envision deploying systems on a planetary scale, suchas launching reflective particles into the atmosphere or positioning sunshades to cool the earth . Thesestrategies could cool the planet,but they would not stop the buildup of carbon dioxide or lessen all its harmful impacts.For this reason, geoengineering has been widely shunned by those committed to reducing emissions. Serious research ongeoengineering is still in its infancy, and it has not received the attention it deserves from politicians. The time has come to take it

seriously. Geoengineering could provide a useful defense for the planet -- an emergency shield thatcould be deployed if surprisingly nasty climatic shifts put vital ecosystems and billions of peopleat risk. Actually raising the shield, however, would be a political choice. One nation's emergency can be another's opportunity,and it is unlikely that all countries will have similar assessments of how to balance the ills of unchecked climate change with the riskthat geoengineering could do more harm than good. Governments should immediately begin to undertake serious research on

geoengineering and help create international norms governing its use. THE RAINMAKERS Geoengineering is not a newidea. In 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson received the first-ever U.S. presidential briefing on the dangers of climate change,the only remedy prescribed to counter the effects of global warming was geoengineering. That advice reflected the scientific cultureof the time, which imagined that engineering could fix almost any problem. By the late 1940s, both the United States and the SovietUnion had begun exploring strategies for modifying the weather to gain battlefield advantage. Many schemes focused on "seeding"clouds with substances that would coax them to drop more rain. Despite offering no clear advantage to the military, "weathermakers" were routinely employed (rarely with much effect) to squeeze more rain from clouds for thirsty crops. Starting in 1962, U.S.government researchers for Project Stormfury tried to make tropical hurricanes less intense through cloud seeding, but with no clearsuccess. Military experts also dreamed of using nuclear explosions and other interventions to create a more advantageous climate.


17/53

These applications were frightening enough that in 1976 the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Prohibition of Militaryor Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques to bar such projects. By the 1970s, after a string of failures, the

idea of weather modification for war and farming had largely faded away. Today's proposals for geoengineering aremore likely to have an impact because the interventions needed for global-scale geoengineeringare much less subtle than those that sought to influence local weather patterns. The earth'sclimate is largely driven by the fine balance between the light energy with which the sun bathesthe earth and the heat that the earth radiates back to space.On average, about 70 percent of theearth's incoming sunlight is absorbed by the atmosphere and the planet's surface; the remainderis reflected back into space. Increasing the reflectivity of the planet (known as the albedo) byabout one percentage point could have an effect on the climate system large enough to offset thegross increase in warming that is likely over the next century as a result of a doubling of theamount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.Making such tweaks is much more straightforward than causing rainor fog at a particular location in the ways that the weather makers of the late 1940s and 1950s dreamed of doing.


18/53

Extensions

CP solvesAngel 06- an astronomer and optics expert at the University of Arizona(Roger, Feasibility of cooling the Earth with a cloud of small spacecraft near the inner Lagrange point

(L1) http://www.pnas.org/content/103/46/17184.full.pdf)Projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are for global temperature to rise between 1.5 and 4.5C by 2100 (1),but recent studies suggest a larger range of uncertainty. Increases as high as 11C might be possible given CO2 stabilizing at twicepreindustrial content (2). Holding to even this level of CO2 will require major use of alternative energy sources and improvements inefficiency (3). Unfortunately, global warming reasonably could be expected to take the form of abrupt and unpredictable changes,rather than a gradual increase (4). If it were to become apparent over the next decade or two that disastrous climate change driven

by warming was in fact likely or even in progress, then a method to reduce the suns heat input would becomean emergency priority. A 1.8% reduction is projected to fully reverse the warming effect of adoubling of CO2 (5), although not the chemical effects. One way known to reduce heat input, observed after volcaniceruptions, is to increase aerosol scattering in the stratosphere (6). Deployment of 3 to 5 million tonsyear of sulfur would be neededto mitigate a doubling of CO2. This amount is not incompatible with a major reduction in the current atmospheric sulfur pollution of

55 million tonsyear that goes mostly into the troposphere. The approach we examine here to reduce solarwarming is to scatter away sunlight in space before it enters the Earths atmosphere. Thepreferred location is near the Earthsun inner Lagrange point (L1) in an orbit with the same 1-

year period as the Earth,in-line with the sun at a distance 1.5 million km (Gm) (Fig. 1). From this distance, thepenumbra shadow covers and thus cools the entire planet.

Sunshades are a feasible alternative solves warming

Stiles 06- Professor at the University of Arizona (Lori, Back to Eurek Alert, "Space Sunshade might be feasible in globalwarming emergency", http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-11/uoa-ssm110306.php)

The possibility that global warming will trigger abrupt climate change is something people might not want to think about. ButUniversity of Arizona astronomer Roger Angel thinks about it. Angel, a University of Arizona Regents' Professor and one of theworld's foremost minds in modern optics, directs the Steward Observatory Mirror Laboratory and the Center for AstronomicalAdaptive Optics. He has won top honors for his many extraordinary conceptual ideas that have become practical engineering

solutions for astronomy. For the past year, Angel has been looking at ways to cool the Earth in an emergency. He's beenstudying the practicality ofdeploying a space sunshade in a global warming crisis, a crisis whereit becomes clear that Earth is unmistakably headed for disastrous climate change within adecade or two. Angel presented the idea at the National Academy of Sciences in April and won aNASA Institute for Advanced Concepts grant for further research in July. His collaborators on the grantare David Miller of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Nick Woolf of UA's Steward Observatory, and NASA Ames Research

Center Director S. Pete Worden. Angel is now publishing a f irst detailed, scholarly paper, "Feasibility of cooling the Earthwith a cloud of small spacecraft near L1,"in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The planwould be to launch a constellation of trillions of small free-flying spacecraft a million milesabove Earth into an orbit aligned with the sun, called the L-1 orbit.The spacecraft would form a long,cylindrical cloud with a diameter about half that of Earth, and about 10 times longer.About 10 percent of the sunlightpassing through the 60,000-mile length of the cloud, pointing lengthwise between the Earth andthe sun would be diverted away from our planet. The effect would be to uniformly reducesunlight by about 2 percent over the entire planet, enough to balance the heating of a doubling

of atmospheric carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere. Researchers have proposed various alternatives forcooling the planet, including aerosol scatterers in the Earth's atmosphere. The idea for a space shade at L1 to deflect sunlight fromEarth was first proposed by James Early of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 1989. "The earlier ideas were for bigger,

heavier structures that would have needed manufacture and launch from the moon, which is pretty futuristic," Angel said. "Iwanted to make the sunshade from small 'flyers,' small, light and extremely thin spacecraft thatcould be completely assembled and launched from Earth, in stacks of a million at a time. Whenthey reached L1, they would be dealt off the stack into a cloud. There's nothing to assemble in space." The lightweight flyers designed

by Angel would be made of a transparent film pierced with small holes. Each flyer would be two feet in diameter,1/5000 of an inch thick and weigh about a gram, the same as a large butterfly.It would use "MEMS"technology mirrors as tiny sails that tilt to hold the flyers position in the orbiting constellation. The flyer's transparency


19/53

and steering mechanism prevent it from being blown away by radiation pressure. Radiation pressureis the pressure from the sun's light itself. The total mass of all the fliers making up the space sunshade structure would be 20 milliontons. At $10,000 a pound, conventional chemical rocket launch is prohibitively expensive. Angel proposes using a cheaper waydeveloped by Sandia National Laboratories for electromagnetic space launches, which could bring cost down to as little as $20 apound. A total 20 electromagnetic launchers launching a stack of flyers every 5 minutes for 10 years could deploy the sunshade.

The electromagnetic launchers would ideally run on hydroelectric power, but even in the worst-case environmental scenario with coal-generated electricity, each ton of carbon used to make

electricity would mitigate the effect of 1000 tons of atmospheric carbon. Once propelled beyond Earth'satmosphere and gravity with electromagnetic launchers, the flyer stacks would be steered to L-1 orbit by solar-powered ionpropulsion, a new method proven in space by the European Space Agency's SMART-1 moon orbiter and NASA's Deep Space 1 probe.

"The concept builds on existing technologies," Angel said. "It seems feasible that it could bedeveloped and deployedin about 25 years at a cost of a few trillion dollars.With care, the solar shade shouldlast about 50 years. So the average cost is about $100 billiona year, or about two-tenths ofone percent of the global domestic product ." He added, "The sunshade is no substitute for developingrenewable energy, the only permanent solution. A similar massive level of technological innovation and financial investment could

ensure that. "But if the planet gets into an abrupt climate crisis that can only be fixed by cooling, itwould be good to be ready with some shading solutions that have been worked out."


20/53

CO2 Ag NB

Sunshades is the best of both worlds solves the impact to warming while gainingthe benefits of CO2Knovel 12(Scientists Studying Whether Geoengineering Could Offset Global Climate Change, 1/27,http://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.html) Julia Pongratz=postdoc researcher at Stanford Department of GlobalEcologyWith global temperatures and population rising, scientists are increasingly studying howgeoengineering could potentially allay foodshortages, among other concerns. A shifting global climate is worrying lawmakers throughout the world, as higher temperatures anda dearth of precipitation in many regions have eroded crop yields. With total global population projected tocontinue to climb at arapid clip over the next century, scientists are working to develop geoengineering schemes that could combat such negative effects.Some parts of the world are already feeling the effects of a simultaneous uptick in temperatures and drop in precipitation. Farmersin areas in the Middle East and Africa, among other locations, are struggling to cultivate crops amid current environmentalconditions. If the problems are left untreated, they could wreak havoc on future food supplies, sending prices soaring. Over the pastfew years,the prices of many commodities have surged. Inclement weather in Australia, Russia, China and North America hurt grainproduction, for example. For nations that rely on others for such critical food staples, the jump in prices was particularly worrying.

Researchers contend thatgeoengineering technologies could be used to fight global climate change.Stanford Universityenvironmental scientist Ken Caldeira noted that governments could decide to employgeoengineering as they "do something desperate to protect our food and our people." China hasfamously employed geoengineering technology for the better part of the past decade. Prior to thestart of the 2008 Olympics, officials said they were working to prevent rain from affecting opening ceremonies through ageoengineering scheme. Scientists have posited a slew of geoengineering theories, with some more plausible than others, NPRreports. One such scheme involves the blasting of tiny particles into the upper atmosphere that could disperse sunlight before itreaches Earth's surface. Geoengineering enthusiasts assert that such a system would mimic the effects of volcanic ash clouds, whosesulfate droplets naturally do so. The Carnegie Institution for Science recently championed such an approach. Carnegie researcher

Julia Pongratz said that by using high-flying airplanes to constantly replenish a layer of small particles inthe stratosphere, governments could cultivate food growth. Pongratz and her colleagues argued in theirfindings, published online in Nature Climate Change, that so-called "sunshade geoengineering" could spur thegrowth of crops in many regions of the world. The team of scientists concluded, moreover, that sunshadegeoengineering was beneficial when compared both with current atmospheric conditions and

with the future projection of doubled carbon dioxide. This,according to the researchers, is becausedeflecting sunlight lowers global temperatures but does not affect carbon dioxide

concentrations. "In many regions, future climate change is predicted to put crops under temperature stress, reducing yields,"Pongratz said. "At the same time, the beneficial effects that a higher CO2 concentration has on plantproductivity remain active."

Sunshades solve warming while accessing the benefits of CO2Quick 12(Darren, Study finds sunshade engineering could improve crop yields, 1/26, http://www.gizmag.com/sunshade-geoengineering-study/21225/)

In the face of potentially catastrophic effects on global food production, some have proposeddrastic solutions to counteract climate change such as reflecting sunlight away from the Earth.Anew study from the Carnegie Institution for Science examining the effects of sunshadegeoengineering has concluded that such an approach would be more likely to improve food

securitythan threaten it. Just as large volcanoes cool the planet by ejecting massive amounts of small particles into thestratosphere, one sunshade geoengineering proposal would involve using high-flying airplanes torelease small particles in the stratosphere that would scatter sunlight back into space.Just like thevolcanic particles, these would fall back to Earth within a year so they would have to be constantlyreplenished to stop the planet heating back up. The fear is that such an approach could have unintendedconsequences for the climate, particularly in terms of its effect of precipitation. While climate change in recent decades has beenfound to negatively affect crop yields in many regions, a new study led by Carnegie's Julia Pongratz is the first to examine thepotential effect of geoengineering on food security. To assess the impact of sunshade geoengineering on crop yields, Pongratz's team,which included Carnegie's Ken Caldeira and Long Cao, as well as Stanford University's David Lobell, used two different climatemodels. The team first simulated climates with CO2 levels similar to what exists today. A second set doubled CO2 levels to simulatelevels that could be reached in several decades if current trends in fossil-fuel burning continued unabated. A third set doubled the
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/01/20/145535536/geoengineered-food-climate-fix-could-boost-crop-yields-but-with-risks?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://www.usatoday.com/weather/research/2008-02-29-china-weather_N.htmhttp://www.usatoday.com/weather/research/2008-02-29-china-weather_N.htmhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://www.usatoday.com/weather/research/2008-02-29-china-weather_N.htmhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/1232-scientists-studying-whether-geoengineering-could-offset-global-climate-change.htmlhttp://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/01/20/145535536/geoengineered-food-climate-fix-could-boost-crop-yields-but-with-risks?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


21/53

levels of CO2, but with a layer of sulfate aerosols in the stratosphere deflecting about two percent on incoming sunlight away fromEarth. The team then applied the simulated changes to crop models that are commonly used to project future yields. They found that

forboth current and doubled CO2 levels, sunshade geoengineering would lead to increased cropyields in most regions. This because while such an approach would reduce temperatures bydeflecting sunlight back into space, it wouldn't affect the levels of CO2. "In many regions, futureclimate change is predicted to put crops under temperature stress, reducing yields. This stress is

alleviated by geoengineering," Pongratz said. "At the same time, the beneficial effects that a higherCO2 concentration has on plant productivity remain active."


22/53

AFF Answers

CP cant solve warming andwill cause food crisis and ozone destructionOvitz 12- is a Collegian columnist (Kimberly, Sci-Fi Fix for carbon emissions, 1/29,http://dailycollegian.com/2012/01/29/sci-fi-fix-for-carbon-emissions/)Though sunshade and other geo-engineering processes attempt to alleviate anthropogenic effects on the environment, they also pose

serious consequences. Reducing the sunlight that reaches the earths surface could impact agriculturalyields and reduce precipitation rates, threatening food security and causing hunger and famine.Another likely consequence is ozone destruction. This would result in an increase in ultravioletradiation into the atmosphere; a phenomenon which occurs via large volcanic eruptions, on occasion, yet not constantlyover a span of 20 years by which this programs proposes. Simultaneously, sunshade geo-engineering doesnt accountfor the non atmospheric impacts of carbon emissions, like that of ocean acidification. A programsuch as this which masks takes the impacts of human error into account would likely avert political and scientific focus onreducing the entirety of carbon impacts in favor of a low cost, high risk, quick fix of geo-engineering. By attempting to regulate oneaspect of carbon emissions through geo-engineering, the uncertainty of the process creates many more uncertainties. Balancingbudgets on a variety of scales is part of our daily lives, and carbon emission is one of them. Further carbon emissions with initiativesto dissipate increasing amounts of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, appears counterintuitive to the matter of reducing an

abundance of emissions. The geo-engineering process provides a cover up of carbon emissions issue

without actually reducing the amount carbon in the atmosphere.Sunshades wont solve warming and will actually hurt the environment

Vergano2/25/11science reporter (Dan, Can Geo-engineering put the freeze on global warminghttp://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2011-02-25-geoengineering25_CV_N.htm)

Space mirrors. Hundreds of thousands of thin reflective yard-long disks fired into a gravitational balance point between the sunand Earth could dim sunlight. Cost aside, rocket failures or collisions might lead to a tremendous orbitaldebris cloud circling the Earth.And a recent Geophysical Research Letters space tourism reportsuggests the rocket fuel burned to launch the needed number of shades would dump enough

black soot which absorbs sunlight and heats the atmosphere to increase average globaltemperatures about 1.4 degrees. Leaving aside the environmental risks each one carries, the estimated costs tend toincrease with how quickly each method removes carbon or deflects sunlight. The space reflectors would top the bill ata cost of several trillion dollars over 25 years."Geoengineering technologies, once developed,

may enable short-sighted and unwise deployment, with potentially serious unforeseenconsequences ," said a 2009 American Meteorological Society statement. Turning over weather management to human beingsraises, "legal, ethical, diplomatic, and even national security concerns," the statement added. Deflected storm tracks could result in

floods such as the ones hitting Australia last month or Pakistan last year.And simply cutting temperatures won'tstop the rise in ocean acidification arising from increased carbon dioxide levels in the air, whichmay affect marine life underlying the ocean food web.


23/53

+Iron Fertilization

CP Text: The United States federal government should fertilize the Southern Ocean

with iron.

CP solves CO2 iron fertilization could cut emissions by up to 15% and delay the

tipping point of global warming

Horton 08 contributing writer, B.S. environmental studies Emory UniversityJennifer, How can adding iron to the ocean slow global warming?, March 31,

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/iron-sulfate-slow-global-warming.htm

Enter forward-thinking scientistsand companies like Planktos and Climos, who proposeaddingironto the world'soceansto reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levelsand,in turn, to decrease temperatures. The idea of dumping iron in the oceans to lowertemperatures has been around since the late 1980s and has been known variouslyascarbon sinking,ocean seeding oriron fertilization. The premise is actuallysimple. Iron acts as a fertilizer for many plants, and some, like the phytoplankton

that form the base of the marine food web, need it to grow. Adding iron to thewater stimulates phytoplankton growth, which in turn gobble up carbon dioxidethrough photosynthesis. The resulting decrease in carbon dioxide is supposed to help reducetemperatures since carbon dioxide is one of the main gases responsible for trapping heat on theearth's surface through thegreenhouse effect. Numerous iron dumping trials have

been conducted since oceanographer John Martin suggested the idea more than 15years ago[source:Haiken]. One trial conducted in 2004 indicated that each atom ofiron added to the water could draw between 10,000 and 100,000 atoms of carbonout of the atmosphere by encouraging plankton growth[source:Schiermeier]. Somescientists theorize that adding iron to the Southern Ocean alone could reduce carbondioxide levels by 15 percent[source:Schiermeier]. Scientist OliverWingentersuggests amore cautious approach, arguing that adding massive amounts of iron to the ocean could cause

a major cooling of more than 10 degrees Celsius [source:Wingenter]. He recommendsfertilizing just 2 percent of the Southern Ocean to cause a 2 degree Celsius coolingand to set back the tipping point of global warming 10 or more years[source:

Wingenter]. Instead of focusing on cutting carbon dioxide levels,Wingenter's researchconcentrated on increasing other gases that result from the phytoplankton

blooms, namely dimethyl sulfide, orDMS. DMS is largely responsible for cloudformation in the polar region and could increase cloud reflectivity, which would inturn reduce temperatures. During his iron fertilization experiments, Wingenter found thatadding iron increased the concentration of DMS five-fold[source:Wingenter].
http://science.howstuffworks.com/iron.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/iron.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/iron.htmhttp://geography.howstuffworks.com/oceans-and-seas/the-geography-of-oceans.htmhttp://geography.howstuffworks.com/oceans-and-seas/the-geography-of-oceans.htmhttp://geography.howstuffworks.com/oceans-and-seas/the-geography-of-oceans.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/iron-sulfate-slow-global-warming2.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/iron-sulfate-slow-global-warming2.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/iron-sulfate-slow-global-warming2.htmhttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://climos.com/news/articles/slowingglobal.htmhttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?arthttp://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/iron-sulfate-slow-global-warming2.htmhttp://geography.howstuffworks.com/oceans-and-seas/the-geography-of-oceans.htmhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/iron.htm


24/53

Extensions

CP solves CO2

Parry12 LiveScience senior staff writer

(Wynne, July 18, 2012, Could Fertilizing the Oceans Reduce Global Warming?,http://www.livescience.com/21684-geoengineering-iron-fertilization-climate.html)

Some hope fertilizing tiny, floating plants in the ocean, prompting them to suck carbon dioxide

out of the air, could help solve global warming. A new experiment confirms thiscontroversial idea

has some merit, although important questions remain. Using an eddy in the Southern Oceannear Antarctica,

researchers used iron fertilizerthe sort used to improve lawns to create a man-made algal bloom. In

the weeks that followed, researchers say, this bloom funneled a significant amount of Earth-warming

carbon down into the ocean's depths, where it will remain sequestered for some time, unable to

contribute to global warming. This experiment provides some important insight into this potential approach to combatingclimate change, said Ken Buesseler, of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, writing in Thursday's (July 19) issue of the

journal Nature. A potential solution? This general approach, modifying the planet to address climate change, is known as

geoengineering, and, geoengineering proposals like iron fertilization tend to raise many uncertainties and risks. Other

geoengineering ideas have included pumping aerosols into the atmosphere to block out solar radiation or tucking away excess

carbon in underground reservoirs. [Top 10 Craziest Environmental Ideas] Ocean fertilization is a controversial idea, prompting

protest from those who fear the unintended environmental impacts it may have. "Most scientists would agree that we are nowhere

near the point of recommending [iron fertilization of the oceans] as a geoengineering tool. But many think that larger and longer

[iron fertilization] experiments should be performed to help us to decide which, if any, of the many geoengineering options at hand

should be deployed," Buesseler wrote. Phytoplankton, which includes microscopic marine plants and photosynthetic microbes,

blooms naturally in the ocean. However, in seawater, there is only limited iron, an element these

organisms need to grow, so by adding iron to seawater, it's possible to make a man-made bloom.In this study, the researchers fertilized an eddy because it offered a largely self-contained system, or "a gigantic test tube," said lead

researcher Victor Smetacek, with the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Potsdam, Germany. By mixing

an iron fertilizer into the seawater, the researchers created the equivalent of a good-size spring

bloom like those seen in the North Sea or off Georges Bank off the New England coast, which

turned the water from blue to turquoise, Smetacek said. Moving carbon The team found that after they addedthe iron, the levels of nutrients, including nitrogen, phosphorus and silicic acid, which algae

called diatoms use to construct their glass shells, declined until around 24 days after the

fertilizer was added. Dissolved inorganic carbon, which normally remains in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide

in the atmosphere, also declined more quickly than it could be replaced by the carbon dioxide in the

atmosphere. Meanwhile, their measurements revealed particulate organic matter, including the silica

the diatoms used to make their shells, and chlorophyll, the green pigment used in

photosynthesis, increased within the surface waters. After day 24, however, the particulate matterthe

remains of the algae that had sucked up the carbonsank, traveling down from the surface

layer, falling to depths between 328 feet (100 meters) to the seafloor, about 12,467 feet (3,800 m) below. If this organic

mattersettles into the deep ocean, it may not reach the surface for centuries or millennia , depending on oceancirculation, Smetacek said. Much of the former phytoplankton bits are likely to have settled on the seafloor as "fluff" "like a layer

of fluff that you would find under your bed if you did not vacuum it for a long time," Smetacek told LiveScience in an email.

"Eventually, this loose matter flattens into the sediments and a part gets buried; this stuff is sequestered for geological time scales."

(Geologists measure time in terms of millennia to many millions, even billions, of years.) Histeam estimated that for

every iron atom they introduced into the eddy, at least 13,000 carbon atoms were taken up into

the biomass of the algae, becoming available for export into deeper water. They also found that at leasthalf of the organic matter associated with the bloom nearly all of it made up of glass-walled diatoms sank below, 3,280 feet

(1,000 m).


25/53


26/53

(Wynne, July 18, 2012, Could Fertilizing the Oceans Reduce Global Warming?,

http://www.livescience.com/21684-geoengineering-iron-fertilization-climate.html)

Iron fertilizationhas another potentially important application, one unrelated to climate change, Smetacek said, suggesting

that it may have the potential to restore an ecosystem in the Southern Ocean,where whales once

fed on abundant swarms of krill. In spite of the loss of whales to whaling, their prey, shrimplike krill,

have declined dramatically. Smetacek believes this isbecause the whales played a crucial role inkeeping the waters fertilized with iron,which prompted the blooms of phytoplankton, which

feed the krill. Hehas proposed fertilizinga stretch ofAntarctic sea ice with iron to see how it affects

krill growth.


27/53

AFF Answers

Iron fertilization doesnt solve fails to sequester enough carbon, too costly, offsetby transportation of iron to remove ocean regions, and negative side effectsIPCC 07Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Ocean Fertilization and Other Geo-Engineering Options, 2007;http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch11s11-2-2.htmlIron fertilization of the oceans may be a strategy for removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Theidea is that it stimulates the growth of phytoplankton and therefore sequesters CO2 in the formof particulate organic carbon (POC).There have been eleven field studies in different ocean regions with the primaryaim of examining the impact of iron as a limiting nutrient for phytoplankton by the addition of small quantities (110 tonnes) of ironsulphate to the surface ocean. In addition, commercial tests are being pursued with the combined (and conflicting) aims of

increasing ocean carbon sequestration and productivity. It should be noted, however, thatiron addition will onlystimulate phytoplankton growth in ~30% of the oceans (the Southern Ocean, the equatorial Pacificand the Sub-Arctic Pacific),where iron depletion prevails. Only two experiments to date (Buesseler and Boyd,2003) have reported on the second phase, the sinking and vertical transport of the increased phytoplankton biomass to depths below

the main thermocline (>120m).The efficiency of sequestration of the phytoplankton carbon islow (


28/53

+AT Geoengineering Now

Geoengineering in its infancy needs more attentionVictor et al 9(David G., The Geoengineering Option, Foreign Affairs, March/April,

http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/22456/The_Geoengineering_Option.pdf)//mmSerious research on geoengineering is still in its infancy, and it has not received the attention itdeserves from politicians. The time has come to take it seriously. Geoengineering could providea useful defense for the planet -- an emergency shield that could be deployed if surprisinglynasty climatic shifts put vital ecosystems and billions of people at risk. Actually raising theshield, however, would be a political choice. One nation's emergency can be another'sopportunity, and it is unlikely that all countries will have similar assessments of how to balancethe ills of unchecked climate change with the risk that geoengineering could do more harm thangood. Governments should immediately begin to undertake serious research on geoengineeringand help create international norms governing its use.


29/53

+Politics NB

The CP is backed by a powerful geo-engineering lobby doesnt drain capital

Phantom Report 12(Bill Gates backs climate scientists lobbying for large scale geoengineering, 2-6, http://www.phantomreport.com/bill-gates-backs-climate-scientists-lobbying-for-large-scale-geoengineering)

A small group of leading climate scientists, financially supported by billionaires including BillGates, are lobbying governmentsand international bodies to back experiments into manipulating theclimate on a global scaleto avoid catastrophic climate change. The scientists, who advocate geoengineering methods suchas spraying millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth, argue that a plan B for climate changewill be needed if the UN and politicians cannot agree to making the necessary cuts in greenhouse gases, and say the US government

and others should pay for a major programme of international research. Concern is now growing that the small butinfluential group of scientists, and their backers, may have a disproportionate effect on majordecisions about geoengineering research and policy We will need to protect ourselves from vested interests[and] be sure that choices are not influenced by parties who might make significant amounts of money through a choice to modifyclimate, especially using proprietary intellectual property, said Jane Long, director at large for the Lawrence Livermore National

Laboratory in the US, in a paper delivered to a recent geoengineering conference on ethics. The eco-clique are lobbying

for a huge injection of public funds into geoengineering research. They dominate virtually everyinquiry into geoengineering. Every scientist hassome conflict of interest, because we would all like to see moreresources going to study things that we find interesting, said Caldeira. Do I have too much influence? I feel like I have too little. Ihave been calling for making CO2 emissions illegal for many years, but no one is listening to me. People who disagree with me mightfeel I have too much influence. The best way to reduce my influence is to have more public research funds available, so that ourfunds are in the noise. If the federal government played the role it should in this area, there would be no need for money from Gates.

Geoengineering is popular specifically iron fertilization

Michaelson 98 JD, Yale Law School, Yale University

(Jay, 1998, Geoengineering: A Climate Change Manhattan Project, Stanford University,

http://www.metatronics.net/lit/geo2.html)

Some geoengineeringproposals, however, mayactually carry economic benefits for the parties who

develop the technologies, andthus may more closely resemble politically attractive military

investments than politically painful restraints on economic growth. In other words, the Big Fix may

act as a plowshare but pay like a sword. Finally, geoengineering may be cheaper in political-

economic terms because of the relative distribution of costs among politically relevant entities.

Recall from part II.C.1 that climate change regulation*113 facedthe unfortunate challenge of forcing the most

powerful members of the industrialized world to incur the majority of the costs of GHG

emissions reduction,because existing concentrations of wealth are largely a result of the most

effective wealth- maximizing activities,whichpresently are tied to environmentally destructive

practices. Since overall growth is dependent on infrastructure, and infrastructure is dependent on greenhouse-gas-producingactivities (including energy production, industry, and transportation), it is easy to see why those who have the most resources (and

thus, usually the most political power) depend the most on the environmental status quo. Geoengineering, in contrast to

regulation, leaves powerful actors and their interests relatively intact. Insofar as it does, it is logical to conclude

that a geoengineered solution will be far less offensive to them, and thus more likely to succeed .

Geoengineering, even if it were to carry a higher immediate price tag,would carry lower overall political-

economic costs than legislative solutions because the costs are relatively minor to the

distributionally advantaged actors. In terms of political economy, playing well on Wall Street is a

significant asset. Social costs. Even if geoengineering were expensive, and even if it were not

superior to climate change regulation in terms of its effects on elites, it may yet be the cheapest

available strategy in terms of political economy because it carries almost no social costs


30/53

whatsoever. No one need change lifestyles, take a bus instead of a car, or pay more at the gas pump to combat climate

change, if geoengineering can offset the climate effects of business as usual. Consumptive patterns

of life, whichthe majority ofWesternersseem to enjoy, can continue unabated. [FN159] Nor (unfortunately)does geoengineering limit destructive practices like deforestation. [FN160] While these features may make geoengineering less

attractive to some environmental advocates, it is not a trivial political point that no one will bear the

significant economic and/or social*114 costs of changingthosebehaviors. For a policy-maker, the

costs of a policy are not only the immediate financial investments or sacrifices that are

necessary, they include undesirable political and social effects of implementation. Unlike reducingautomobile use in the United States, for example, with its avalanche of economic effects and perceived interference with Western

consumptive patterns, [FN161] seeding iron filings in the sea and layering particulate matter in the sky carry

very low social costs. To be sure, there are "social costs" associated with any government program, particularly one

which may carry a large taxpayer-funded price tag. [FN162] But it should be obvious that, compared with reducing fossil

fuel use, geoengineering requires very little commitment from "ordinary people ." [FN163] To theextent that this reduced burden of social costs translates into ease of implementation, geoengineering is more likely to succeed in the

long term than climate change regulation.


31/53

+AFF Answers

Geoengineering fails costly, risky, and cant be sustained - guaranteesenvironmental catastrophe

Moriarty and Honnery 10Patrick Moriarty, Ph.D. Department of Design, Monash University, and Damon Honnery, Ph.D. Department of Mechanical andAerospace Engineering, Monash University. Why Technical Fixes Wont Mitigate Climate Change. Journal of Cosmology, 2010,Vol 8, 1921-1927. http://journalofcosmology.com/ClimateChange107.htmlAs discussed here, geoengineering is action intended to manipulate climate on a global, or at least regional, scale. Corner andPidgeon (2010) have pointed out that our emissions of CO2 (which have raised atmospheric CO2 levels from the pre-industrial 280ppm to the present 387 ppm) could also be considered geoengineering. If so, we are merely arguing about different forms of thepractice. The potential use of geoengineering for climate mitigation received a boost with a paper by Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen(2006). Like the present authors, he argued that conventional methods of mitigation were not workingthe CO2 atmosphericconcentration continues to climb at about 2 ppm each year. His inspiration was the significant drop in global temperatures recordedin the year following the Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption in the Philippines in June 1991. The cooling resulted from the emissionof some 10 Mt of sulphate aerosols into the lower stratosphere in the tropics. Continuous deliberate placement of f ine sulphateaerosols in the lower stratosphere would reflect some of the incoming short-wave solar radiation, increasing the Earths albedo, and

counteracting the positive forcing from increased levels of GHGs. The options available for geoengineeringcan be either local in extent(such as altering the albedo of deserts, crops or urban areas) or global(such as theuse of giant space-based mirrors). Only aerosol placement in the tropical stratosphere, albedo enhancement of marine stratiform

clouds and reflective mirrors in space would have the potential to counteract a doubling or more of atmospheric CO2ppm (Lentonand Vaughan 2009). Of these global approaches, the cheapest is likely to be aerosol placement. Except for space-based mirrors, the

approaches appear both far cheaper and far faster to implement than more conventional mitigation methods. Because ofthe lack of progress in slowing emissions and the low cost and rapid coolingresulting from global measures, geoengineering is gaining acceptance . The U.K. RoyalSociety (2009) has endorsed it as a technique to be used alongside other mitigation methods. But implementingmeasures to reduce the planetary albedo run enormous risks. Global precipitation

would on average be reducedit is not possible to bring both global temperaturesand precipitation to their previous levels(Bala 2009).Acidification of the oceans wouldcontinue, potentially destabilising ocean ecosystems(Doney et al. 2009). Also,becauseelevated levels of CO2 will persist for centuries, so too must geoengineeringthecontinuous placement of aerosols, for example.Any abrupt cessation because of dangerous sideeffects discovered would rapidly raise the forcing to levels corresponding to theGHG concentrations at that time, resulting in very rapid warming, with possiblycatastrophic effects on ecosystems(Matthews and Caldeira 2007). Thus although the costs of aerosol placementmay well be modest, the overall cost of countering the unwanted consequences could be

very high. Recently, perhaps because of these serious drawbacks, some researchers have modelled the effects of more modestaerosol placement schemes. Rather than global year-round aerosol coverage, they have looked at techniques that might preventmelting of the Greenhouse ice cap or Arctic summer sea ice, or summer warming of the north Atlantic during the hurricane season(Caldeira and Wood 2008, MacCracken 2009). The aerosols might be locally applied, for part of the year, to address a very specificproblem resulting from climate change. But to be effective, their effects would necessarily be felt globally (Caldeira and Wood 2008),and if several of these projects were to be implemented simultaneously, the combined gobal effects might be extremely uncertain.

Geoengineering fails large technical and scientific uncertainties and doesnteliminate the need to reduce GHGsJohnson et al. 10Andrew Simms, policy director of New Economics Foundation, UK think tank, and head of NEF's Climate Change Programme, Dr.Victoria Johnson, researcher for the climate change and energy programme at NEF, MSc with distinction in Climate Change fromthe University of East Anglia and PhD in Atmospheric Physics at Imperial College, London and Peter Chowla, Policy and AdvocacyOfficer at the Bretton Woods Project. Growth isnt possible. New Economics Foundation, January 25,2010.http://www.neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/files/Growth_Isnt_Possible.pdf

In most cases, geoengineering schemes are viewed as a stopgap between now andsome point in the future where mitigation technology is cheaper and more widespread.There are, however, large technical and scientific uncertainties. For exampleProfessor DavidVictor, Director of the Laboratory on International Law and Regulation at Stanford University argues:real-world geoengineering will be a lot more complex and expensive than


32/53

currently thought because simple interventionssuch as putting reflective particles in thestratospherewill be combined with many other costlier interventions to offset nastyside effects.327 The large majority of academics working in the field of geoengineering research have been clearthat their research and technical propositions are not intended to distract from the efforts ofreducing greenhouse gas emissions as the first priority for controlling climatechange.However, many now argue that a technological intervention may be required parallel to current mitigationefforts.328

No solvency impractical, expensive, negative effectsGovindswamy 09Bala, climatologist at the Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - McGill University, (Problems

with geoengineering schemes to combat climate change, 9/22/08,http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/Problems%20with%20geoengineering%20schemes.pdf)//RNThe conclusion of the 1992 NAS report13 was that most geoengineering schemes, thoughfeasible, are impractical, cumbersome to manage, or too expensive. It suggested some furtherstudy, but did not find it worthy of great effort. In support of this conclusion, Schneider29 suggested toreduce slowly our economic dependence on carbon fuels, rather than try to counter the side

effects using risky options such as centuries of injecting sulphur into the atmosphere or iron intothe oceans. While acknowledging that all geoengineering schemes have serious flaws, Keith10 judged that this century is likely tosee serious debates about geoengineering. The serious debate indeed started when Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen8 published hisinfluential editorial article on geoengineering. Since the attempts to curb fossil-fuel emissions have been unsuccessful, Crutzensuggested that the usefulness of artificially enhancing the planetary albedo to counteract the climate forcing of growing CO2emissions might again be explored and debated. In a series of editorial comments8,3033, broad recommendations were made topursue scientific research on the effects of geoengineering schemes. However, Bengtsson34 expressed his reservations against

geoengineering schemes for the following reasons. (1) There is a lack of accuracy in climate prediction. (2)There is large difference in the timescale between the effects of CO2 and the effects of aerosols,forcingus to commit

advantage cps - michigan7 2013 gjp.docx

Documents