Notes
---1AC meant to be modular. There is an example 1AC with an environment and Sea
Power advantage. Other advantages can be mixed and matched to make other 1ACs.
Most advantages have 1AC and add on versions in the file
---Good background reading about the IOOS can be found in their most recent summit
report
http://www.iooc.us/summit/report/
---FYI what is the IOOS
The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System, or IOOS®, is a coordinated network of people and
technology that work together to compile and distribute data on our coastal waters, Great Lakes, and
oceans
IOOS coastal and marine data (e.g., water temperature, water level, currents, winds, and waves) are
collected by many different tools including satellites, buoys, tide gauges, radar stations, and underwater
vehicles. A variety of tools is needed to collect data on global, national, regional, and local levels. Some
of these tools are in the water collecting data while others may be on land or in space. Most of the data
collected are streamed to a database, making them easier to access.
While many of these data collection tools already exist, the benefit of IOOS is the one common system
to connect all of these data so that scientists can quickly find information to track, predict, manage, and
adapt to changes in our marine environment.
IOOS data supports environmental efforts such as tracking harmful algal blooms and emergency
response needs by assisting with search and rescue operations. IOOS delivers the data and information
needed to increase the understanding of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes so decision makers can
improve safety, enhance our economy, and protect our environment.
---Some of the main reform issues
The activities and members of the U.S. IOOS community are broad and complex. There are 18
Federal agencies involved in the U.S. IOOS program , as well as 11 U.S. IOOS Regional Associations
that encompass efforts focused in U.S. coastal waters, the Great Lakes, and U.S. territories and their
waters in the Pacific and the Caribbean . In addition, there are many Federal and academic scientists
representing the U.S. Government in various United Nations-sponsored groups that plan and oversee
global ocean observation programs. This diverse community is managed largely through cooperation
rather than clear directive or budgetary authority, which has contributed to both the strong growth,
and the integration weaknesses , of the U.S. IOOS program.
The major themes and challenges we must focus on in the next decade
include:
► Improve governance to address high-level coordination and support needs
Pursue new funding mechanisms and potential public-private partnerships to complement
traditional funding
Develop a complete census of existing observing efforts
► Increase the breadth and scope of ocean observations to address increased demand
Develop a web-based central "market-place " for bringing users, requirements, data providers,
new technologies, and available data and products together
► Improve branding, attribution, and user awareness of U.S. IOOS and its many contributors and
participants
► Develop common design processes and common data/product standards
► Increase the level of integration across the U.S. IOOS enterprise, moving from cooperative to
more coordinated approaches
► Maintain forward momentum and continue to grow U.S. IOOS, while addressing needed
improvements.
Twenty-five major recommendations arose from the presentations and discussions of participants
at the Summit. These cover the gamut of U.S. IOOS concerns, including governance, funding, user
engagement and outreach, as well as design processes and integration. Detailed recommendations
address: system design processes, alignment of system design and modeling, assessments,
integration projects, expanded observation needs, new observing technologies, data management
and communications, and modeling and analysis.
Most of the recommendations are directed at various segments of the U.S. IOOS community, with a
major focus on improving the integration of activities across those involved at the local, regional,
national, and global levels. But several significant recommendations are also directed outside the
immediate U.S. IOOS community to governing bodies who have oversight of the programs, like the
National Ocean Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Ocean Caucuses of the U.S.
House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. All recommendations are presented in Chapter Six of
the Report.
1AC
1AC-Inherency
Observation One: SQ efforts to create an integrated ocean observation system are
inadequate-Expanded implementation of the IOOS is key to effective management of
a laundry list of economic, security, and environmental threats
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart
phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across
most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant
ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports
and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled
areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage
from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal
needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS
users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product
needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another
billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United
States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely
underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal
power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on
expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction
products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of
the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related
natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing
food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social
networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide
U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also
develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both
providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of
drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater
accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety,
security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face
increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and
data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S.
IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership,
governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in
communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all
over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and
economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of
defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real
estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom
in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of
information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is
critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S.
IOOS must address this issue more fully . People need technology and access to the right information
so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most
people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will
need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We
must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and
local products—before, during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is
impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to
understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer
proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of
these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In
many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid
information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and
mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it
into the hands of the people who need it the most . U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing
data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable,
economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Plan
Plan: The United States federal government should substantially expand
implementation of the integrated Ocean Observing System by increasing the breadth
and scope of ocean observations and efforts to increase the integration of data
collection and delivery.
Plan: The United States federal government should substantially increase its
exploration of the earth’s oceans by fully implementing the Integrated Ocean
Observing System.
1AC – Environment Advantage
Advantage One: Environment
IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection
Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South
Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s
Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of
Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of
Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote
Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing
Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf
Abstract—Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global
Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System ( IOOS ),
required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible
resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for
mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better
understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data
are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are
several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are
indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical
variables to
support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and
transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain
the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the
globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal
and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government,
and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will
define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required
to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations.
Ocean observation causes effective management policies
Dr. Andrew Rosenberg 11, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at
the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries
Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform,”
http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/
U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we know that while humans
are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained — by vast oceans.¶ In addition to
supporting incredible biodiversity, oceans provide benefits to people in the form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places
to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and wind
power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for technology developers,
manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and develop new economic opportunities around the globe.
America can lead this global innovation.¶ Unfortunately, the health of our oceans is in serious
decline ; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are stressed, habitats for ocean life are
degraded and endangered marine species are struggling to recover. Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants,
which in turn has stressed the communities and industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To turn the tide , our national, state and local leaders must make a
commitment to more coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on
sound science, and scientific work must be a funding priority
in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide.¶ The Joint Ocean Commission
Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and
established by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy
has the potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced
Great Lakes — which was
monitoring, assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and
are affected by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental,
social and economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more
effectively manage these resources
and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to
monitoring what is happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how
the physical, biological, chemical and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact. The Joint Initiative report
recommends fully supporting an ocean observation system that would integrate data from sensors at
the bottom of the ocean, from buoys on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing
technology high above the Earth.¶ The report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to
have a better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in
order to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal
communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including
the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, I believe that
communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy infrastructure near the coast.” ¶ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound investment in improving
our economy. The
data and information collected from research activities will be used to inform coastal
development , promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant marine-based
recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation.
Ocean ecosystems are collapsing – only the aff can mobilize international solutions
Sherman ‘11 (Kenneth, 2011, “The application of satellite remote sensing for assessing productivity in relation to fisheries yields of the
world’s large marine ecosystems,” ICES Journal of Marine Science, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ph.D, Director of U.S. LME Program, Director of the Narragansett Laboratory and Office of
Marine Ecosystem Studies at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Oceanography at the
University of Rhode Island)
In 1992, world
leaders at the historical UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized that the
exploitation of resources in coastal oceans was becoming increasingly unsustainable, resulting in an
international effort to assess, recover, and manage goods and services of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). More than $3 billion in support
to 110 economically developing nations have been dedicated to operationalizing a five-module approach supporting LME assessment and
management practices. An
important component of this effort focuses on the effects of climate change
on fisheries biomass yields of LMEs, using satellite remote sensing and in situ sampling of key indicators
of changing ecological conditions. Warming appears to be reducing primary productivity in the lower
latitudes, where stratification of the water column has intensified. Fishery biomass yields in the Subpolar LMEs of the Northeast Atlantic
are also increasing as zooplankton levels increase with warming. During the current period of climate warming, it is especially important for
space agency programmes in Asia, Europe, and the United States to continue to provide satellite-borne
radiometry data to the global networks of LME assessment scientists. Overfishing, pollution,
habitat loss, and climate change are causing serious degradation in the world’s coastal oceans and
a downward spiral in economic benefits from marine goods and services. Prompt and large-scale
changes in the use of ocean resources are needed to overcome this downward spiral. In 1992, the world
community of nations convened the first global conference of world leaders in Rio de Janeiro to address ways and means to improve the
degraded condition of the global environment (Robinson et al., 1992). Ten years later (2002), at a follow-up World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg (Sherman, 2006), world leaders agreed to a Plan of Implementation for several marine-related targets
including achievement of: (i) “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; (ii) introduction of the ecosystems
approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; (iii) designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and
(iv) maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. More recently, in Copenhagen in 2009,
world leaders agreed to non-binding actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate the effects of global climate change. For
the period 2010–2020, the international
community of maritime nations is pursuing solutions for
recovering depleted marine fish stocks, restoring degraded habitats, controlling pollution, nutrient
overenrichment, and ocean acidification, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to climate change.
This effort at improving the ecological condition of the world’s 64 large marine ecosystems (LMEs) is
global in scope and ecosystems-orientated in approach (Sherman et al., 2005). LMEs are regions of 200 000 km2 or more, encompassing
coastal areas from estuaries to the continental slope and the seaward extent of well-defined current systems along coasts lacking
continental shelves (Figure 1). They are defined by ecological criteria including bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophically
linked populations (Sherman, 1994). The LMEs
produce 80% of the world’s marine fisheries yields annually and are
growing sinks of coastal pollution and nutrient overenrichment. They also harbour degraded habitats (e.g. corals, seagrasses,
mangroves, and oxygen-depleted dead zones). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a financial group located in Washington, DC,
supports developing countries committed to the recovery and sustainability of coastal ocean areas, by providing financial and catalytic
support to projects that use LMEs as the geographic focus for ecosystem-based strategies to reduce coastal pollution, control nutrient
overenrichment, restore damaged habitats, recover depleted fisheries, protect biodiversity, and adapt to climate change (Duda and
Sherman, 2002).
Accelerating ocean loss causes extinction
Alex David Rogers 6/20/11, Ph.D. in marine invertebrate systematics and genetics from the University of Liverpool is a Professor in
Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford AND Dan Laffoley, PhD on marine ecology at the University of Exeter,
and Senior Advisor, Marine Science and Conservation Global Marine and Polar Programme (IPSO Oxford, “International earth system expert
workshop on ocean stresses and impacts”, July 20, 2011, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf)
The workshop enabled leading experts to take a global view on how all the different effects we are having on the ocean are compromising its
ability to support us. This examination of synergistic threats leads to the conclusion that we have underestimated the overall risks and that the
whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts, and that degradation is now
happening at a faster rate than predicted. It is clear that the traditional economic and consumer
values that formerly served society well, when coupled with current rates of population increase, are
not sustainable. The ocean is the largest ecosystem on Earth, supports us and maintains our world in
a habitable condition. To maintain the goods and services it has provided to humankind for millennia demands change in how we
view, manage, govern and use marine ecosystems. The scale of the stresses on the ocean means that deferring action will increase costs in the
future leading to even greater losses of benefits. The key points needed to drive a common sense rethink are: • Human actions have resulted
in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increased hypoxia. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are three
symptoms that indicate disturbances of the carbon cycle associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth (e.g. Erwin, 2008;
Veron, 2008a,b; Veron et al., 2009; Barnosky et al., 2011). • The
speeds of many negative changes to the ocean are near
to or are tracking the worstcase scenarios from IPCC and other predictions. Some are as predicted,
but many are faster than anticipated, and many are still accelerating. Consequences of current rates
of change already matching those predicted under the “worst case scenario” include: the rate of decrease in
Arctic Sea Ice (Stroeve et al., 2007; Wang & Overland, 2009) and in the accelerated melting of both the Greenland icesheet (Velicogna, 2009;
Khan et al., 2010; Rignot et al., 2011) and Antarctic ice sheets (Chen et al., 2009; Rignot et al., 2008, 2011; Velicogna, 2009);
sea level rise
release of trapped methane from the seabed
(Westbrook et al., 2009; Shakova et al., 2010; although not yet globally significant Dlugokencky et al., 2009). The ‘worst
case’ effects are compounding other changes more consistent with predictions including: changes in
the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand & Reid, 2003; Beaugrand 2004, 2009; Beaugrand et al., 2003;
(Rahmstorf 2007a,b; Rahmstorf et al., 2007; Nicholls et al., 2011); and
2010; Cheung et al. 2009, 2010, Reid et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2011; Philippart et al., 2011; Schiel, 2011; Wassmann et al., 2011; Wernberg
et al., 2011); changes in primary production (Behrenfeld et al., 2006; Chavez et al., 2011); changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms
(Heisler et al., 2008; Bauman et al., 2010); increases in health hazards in the oceans (e.g. ciguatera, pathogens; Van Dolah, 2000; Lipp et al.,
2002; Dickey & Plakas, 2009); and
loss of both large, longklived and small fish species causing widespread
impacts on marine ecosystems, including direct impacts on predator and prey species, the
simplification and destabilization of food webs, reduction of resilience to the effects of climate
change (e.g. Jackson et al. 2001; Pauly et al., 1998; Worm & Myers, 2003; Baum & Myers, 2004; Rosenberg et al., 2005; Worm et al., 2006;
Myers et al., 2007; Jackson, 2008; Baum & Worm, 2009; Ferretti et al., 2010; Hutchings et al., 2010; WardkPaige et al., 2010; Pinskya et al.,
2011). • The magnitude of the cumulative impacts on the ocean is greater than previously understood Interactions between different impacts
can be negatively synergistic (negative impact greater than sum of individual stressors) or they can be antagonistic (lowering the effects of
individual impacts). Examples
of such interactions include: combinations of overfishing, physical
disturbance, climate change effects, nutrient runoff and introductions of nonknative species leading
to explosions of these invasive species, including harmful algal blooms, and dead zones (Rabalais et al.,
2001, 2002; Daskalov et al., 2007; Purcell et al., 2007; Boero et al., 2008; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Bauman et al., 2010;
VaquerkSunur & Duarte, 2010); increased temperature and acidification increasing the susceptibility of corals to bleaching (Anthony et al.,
2008) and acting synergistically to impact the reproduction and development of other marine invertebrates (Parker et al., 2009); changes in the
behavior, fate and toxicity of heavy metals with acidification (Millero et al., 2009; Pascal et al., 2010); acidification may reduce the limiting
effect of iron availability on primary production in some parts of the ocean (Shi et al., 2010; King et al., 2011); increased uptake of plastics by
fauna (Andrady 2011, Hirai & Takada et al. 2011, Murray & Cowie, 2011), and increased bioavailability of pollutants through adsorption onto
the surface of microplastic particles (Graham & Thompson 2009, Moore 2008, Thomson, et al., 2009); and feedbacks of climate change impacts
on the oceans (temperature rise, sea level rise, loss of ice cover, acidification, increased storm intensity, methane release) on their rate of CO2
uptake and global warming (Lenton et al., 2008; Reid et al 2009). • Timelines
for action are shrinking. The longer the
delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the
financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts
and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures. • Resilience of the ocean to climate change impacts is severely
compromised by the other stressors from human activities, including fisheries, pollution and habitat destruction. Examples include the
overfishing of reef grazers, nutrient runoff, and other forms of pollution (presence of pathogens or endocrine disrupting chemicals (Porte et al.,
2006; OSPAR 2010)) reducing the recovery ability of reefs from temperaturekinduced mass coral bleaching (Hoeghk Guldberg et al., 2007;
Mumby et al., 2007; Hughes et al., 2010; Jackson, 2010; Mumby & Harborne, 2010) . These multiple stressors promote the phase shift of reef
ecosystems from being coralkdominated to algal dominated. The loss of genetic diversity from overfishing reduces ability to adapt to stressors.
• Ecosystem collapse is occurring as a result of both current and emerging stressors. Stressors include chemical pollutants, agriculture runkoff,
sediment loads and overkextraction of many components of food webs which singly and together severely impair the functioning of
ecosystems. Consequences include the potential increase of harmful algal blooms in recent decades (Van Dolah, 2000; Landsberg, 2002;
Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Wang & Wu, 2009); the spread of oxygen depleted or dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2002; Diaz &
Rosenberg, 2008; VaquerkSunyer & Duarte, 2008); the disturbance of the structure and functioning of marine food webs, to the benefit of
planktonic organisms of low nutritional value, such as jellyfish or other gelatinousklike organisms (Broduer et al., 1999; Mills, 2001; Pauly et al.
2009; Boero et al., 2008; Moore et al., 2008); dramatic changes in the microbial communities with negative impacts at the ecosystem scale
(Dinsdale et al., 2008; Jackson, 2010); and the impact of emerging chemical contaminants in ecosystems (la Farré et al., 2008).
This
impairment damages or eliminates the ability of ecosystems to support humans. • The extinction
threat to marine species is rapidly increasing. The main causes of extinctions of marine species to date
are overexploitation and habitat loss (Dulvy et al., 2009). However climate change is increasingly adding to
this, as evidenced by the recent IUCN Red List Assessment of reforming corals (Carpenter et al., 2008). Some
other species ranges have already extended or shifted polekwards and into deeper cooler waters (Reid et al., 2009); this may not be possible
for some species to achieve, potentially leading to reduced habitats and more extinctions. Shifts
in currents and temperatures
will affect the food supply of animals, including at critical early stages, potentially testing their ability
to survive. The participants concluded that not only are we already experiencing severe declines in many species to the point of
commercial extinction in some cases, and an unparalleled rate of regional extinctions of habitat types (eg mangroves and seagrass meadows),
but we now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. Unless action is taken
now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, overexploitation,
pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean. It is notable that the occurrence of multiple high intensity
stressors has been a prerequisite for all the five global extinction events of the past 600 million years (Barnosky et al., 2009).
Scenario 1 is coral:
Ocean observation through IOOS is key to preserve coral reef ecosystems
Dr .Rusty Brainard 9, PhD in Physical Oceanography from the US Naval Postgraduate School, Chief of
the Coral Reef Ecosystem Division at the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Pacific Islands Fisheries
Science Center; Dr Kevin Wong, PhD in Biological and Agricultural Engineering from UC Davis; Ron Karl
Hoeke, oceanographer for the Joint Institute of Marine and Atmospheric Research, M.S. in coastal
oceanography from the Florida Institute of Technology and Doctoral candidate at James Cook University;
Jamison Grove, E Smith, P Fisher-Pool, M Lammers, D Merritt, OJ Vetter, CW Young; “Coral reef
ecosystem integrated observing system: In-situ oceanographic observations at the US Pacific islands and
atolls,” Journal of Operational Oceanography Vol. 2 No. 2,
http://www.pifsc.noaa.gov/library/pubs/Hoeke_etal_JOO_2009.pdf
Coral reef ecosystems are among the most biologically diverse and productive ecosystems on earth. They
provide economic and environmental services to hundreds of millions of people in terms of shoreline protection; areas of natural beauty and
recreation; and sources of food, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, jobs, and revenue.1 At
are deteriorating at alarming rates
present, coral reef ecosystems worldwide
due to local anthropogenic stressors, such as overexploitation, habitat destruction, disease,
invasive species, land-based runoff, pollution, and marine debris; and to stressors associated with global cli-mate change, especially increased
ocean temperatures and ocean acidification.2,3 A
thorough understanding of coral reef ecosystem dynamics is
required if these valuable natural resources are to be conserved and, in some cases, re-stored. In addition to
basic research, an increased level of assessment and monitoring is required for the sustainable
management and resilience of coral reefs, echoing calls for increased coastal monitoring at all
latitudes .4,5,6¶ Overview of CREIOS ¶ In response to calls for increased assessment, monitoring, and mapping to facilitate improved
management and con-servation of coral reef ecosystems, the United States Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) was established in
1998 byPresidential Executive Order. Through the coordinated ef-forts of its members, composed of federal agencies as wellas state, territorial,
and freely associated state governments,the task force coordinates
US efforts to protect, restore, and promote the sustainable
nation’s coral reef eco-systems. As part of this national effort, and in conjunction with ongoing efforts to
establish an Integrated Ocean Ob-serving System ( IOOS ), the NOAA Coral Reef Conserva-tion Program initiated the development of
CREIOS to provide a diverse suite of long-term ecological and environ-mental observations and
information products over a broad range of spatial and temporal scales. The goal of CREIOS is to better understand the
condition of and processes influencing the health of the nation’s coral reef ecosystems and to provide
this information to resource managers and policymakers to assist them in making timely, science-based
management decisions to conserve coral reefs.
use of the
Satellite monitoring essential- key to overall ecosystem health
Robinson ‘10 (Ian, 2010, Discovering the Ocean from Space [electronic resource] The unique applications of satellite oceanography / by
Ian S. Robinson., BA and MA Mechanical Sciences, Cambridge University, PhD Engineering Magneto-hydrodynamics, University of Warwick,
1973, Higher and Senior Scientific Officer, Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Bidston, Lecturer, senior lecturer and reader, University of
Southampton Department of Oceanography, Head of Department of Oceanography, Professor, University of Southampton School of Ocean and
Earth Science, Professorial Fellow, Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton)
However, there
is one aspect of reef biology in which the wider overview provided by satellite oceanography
techniques has become essential, and important enough to require this subsection to itself. This is the issue of coral
bleaching, and the role that satellite monitoring of sea surface temperature (SST) plays in identifying regions
where reefs are at risk of bleaching. Corals are underwater animals that attach themselves to stony substrates. The order of
corals known as stony corals, or scleractinians, are found as large colonies of individual coral polyps, each of which produces limestone
deposits. Over the years these deposits have created the large reef systems found in shallow tropical and temperate seas, which provide a
unique habitat for rich and complex ecosystems (see, e.g., pp. 117–141 in Barnes and Hughes, 1999). Corals thrive by hosting within their cells
symbiotic algae called Zooxanthellae, which provide the coral with oxygen and organic compounds resulting from photosynthesis, while
themselves obtaining from the coral carbon dioxide and other chemical compounds needed for photosynthesis. The algae give coral reefs their
rich coloration and the symbiotic relationship is essential for the health of the whole reef ecosystem. Coral
bleaching is the name
given to the situation when corals are subject to physiological stress and respond by ejecting the
zooxanthellae. The departure of the algae is visually evident because corals lose the pigments that give them their yellow or brown coloration.
In this case the white limestone substrate that the corals have deposited shows through the translucent cells of the polyps which then appear
pale or even white. If
the stress is quickly removed the algae return within a few weeks and the corals recover,
but if the stress is prolonged for many weeks the corals will die and continue to appear stark white. The loss of live
corals eventually causes damage to the whole reef ecosystem. Consequently coral-bleaching events pose a
serious threat that is taken seriously by marine environmental managers.
Independently prevents extinction
Philippine Daily Inquirer ‘2
[“REEFS UNDER STRESS”, 12-10, L/N]
The artificial replacement of corals is a good start. Coral
reefs are the marine equivalent of rainforests that are also
being destroyed at an alarming rate not only in the Philippines but all over the world. The World Conservation Union says reefs
are one of the "essential life support systems" necessary for human survival, homes to huge numbers of animals
and plants. Dr. Helen T. Yap of the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines said that the
country's coral
reefs, together with those of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, contain the biggest number of species of
plants and animals. "They lie at the center of biodiversity in our planet," she said.
Scenario 2 is ocean acidification
IOOS observations stop ocean acidification
Iglesias-Rodriguez et al. 2010
M. Debora, School of Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, TOWARDS AN
INTEGRATED GLOBAL OCEAN ACIDIFICATION OBSERVATION NETWORK
http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/176715/1/FCXNL-09A02b-2113336-1-IglesiasRodriguez_OceanObs09_PlenaryPaper_Acidification_formatted.pdf
One of the biggest challenges facing the community is to unveil the mechanisms behind biological
adaptation over realistic time frames and thereby determine which species do or do not have the
ability to adapt to future ocean acidification. Most experimental approaches used to date only address
physiological responses to environmental selection pressure rather than long-term adaptation. There is
an urgent need to conduct manipulations involving time-scales of multiple generations (cell division,
generation of organisms) and environmental change at rates representative of those experienced by
biota in the open ocean (Boyd et al., 2008). Monitoring potential adaptation in real time in the field,
particularly in those areas of high susceptibility to ocean acidification (polar latitudes, upwelling zones)
will provide information central to representing and forecasting the repercussions of ocean
acidification on biota. Information from these platforms will be used to calibrate the findings in the
laboratory experiments/mesocosms with strains/populations and to inform policy makers and marine
resource managers. Data repositories of detailed carbonate chemistry, biological performance and
molecular adaptation to environmental selection pressure will not only provide first hand information
about natural selection processes in real time but will also answer fundamental questions of how
changes in carbon chemistry alter the abundance and physiology of functional groups. While work with
single strains/species provides valuable information about regulation of processes, it does not account
for the complexity of natural populations, physical transport effect, interactions between bacteria and
viruses and eukaryotic phytoplankton, mortality, etc. Many countries are presently engaged in ocean
acidification research and monitoring activities, for example, the EU projects EPOCA, MEECE and
MedSeA, the German BIOACID project, the UK Ocean Acidification Research Programme, US (emerging
program supported by NSF, NOAA, NASA, USGS) , and Japan MoE and MEXT Ocean Acidification
Research Programmes. The proposed activities will require a coordinated international research effort
that is closely linked with other international carbon research programs, such as the CLIVAR/CO2 Repeat
Hydrography Program. The SOLAS-IMBER Working Group on Ocean Acidification
(http://www.imber.info/C_WG_SubGroup3.html) and the IOCCP could play roles to coordinate and
integrate, at the international level, the research, training and outreach activities. The Global Ocean
Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and interface with the data synthesis activities,
data archiving and international data management activities of the carbon and ocean acidification
programs. The main role of the Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network is to gain a robust
understanding of the chemical and biological impacts of ocean acidification by conducting (1) timeseries measurements in open ocean and coastal observatories at several levels of organization from
molecular to ecosystem level; (2) in-situ manipulations and mesocosm experiments, and autonomous
measurements aboard voluntary observing ships; and (3) global and regional monitoring using satellite
data. Cooperation with well established international programs such as the IODP, and forming a global
network with good spatial and temporal coverage will be central to its success. The application of
genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic approaches to studying oceanic ecosystem may open new
opportunities for understanding the organisms control on elemental cycles though time. Robotic in-situ
devices deployed on moorings can be powerful tools and are now available as autonomous samplers, to
report on genomic data of microbial community composition (Greenfield et al., 2006; 2008; Scholin et al,
2008). Building this global time series to assess changes in ocean chemistry and biology will improve
coupling between biogeochemistry, physiology, and modelling and play a major role in providing sound
scientific evidence to society and decision makers on the consequences of future acidification of
oceans, seas and coastal waters and on the time scales required for CO2 emissions reduction to
reduce the risks from acidification.9. CONCLUDING REMARKS The rate of change in ocean pH and
carbon chemistry is expected to accelerate over this century unless societal decisions reduce CO2
emissions dramatically. Quantifying how these changes are going to affect ecosystem functioning,
ocean biogeochemistry and human society is a priority. Emerging technology in the oceanographic
community is revolutionizing the way we sample the oceans. An integrated international
interdisciplinary program of ship-based hydrography, time-series moorings, floats and gliders with
carbon system, pH and oxygen sensors, and ecological surveys is already underway. This network will
incorporate new technology to investigate changes at many levels of organization (from molecular to
ecosystem level to global) to determine the extent of the large-scale changes in the carbon chemistry of
seawater and the associated biological responses to ocean acidification in open ocean as well as coastal
environments. Many countries have endorsed these activities, and it will be the responsibility of
leading countries and institutions to ensure continuity of these efforts in ocean acidification research
and monitoring activities. The Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and
interface with the data synthesis activities, data archiving and international data management activities
of the carbon and ocean acidification programs.
Acidification destroys the ecosystem- management key
Sean D. Connell ’13, Professor of Marine Biology at the University of Adelaide, August 26, 2013, “The
other ocean acidification problem: CO2 as a resource among competitors for ecosystem dominance,"
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1627/20120442
Ocean acidification is often considered in terms of its direct negative effects on the growth and
calcification of organisms with calcareous shells or skeletons. We argue that this focus overlooks the
important role of ocean acidification as a resource, which can enhance the productivity of algae known
to influence the status of kelp forests and coral reefs (i.e. mat-forming algae or mats). We have
highlighted how ocean acidification can indirectly tip the competitive balance towards dominance by
mats through mechanisms that generate new space (e.g. disturbance or storm events), which enables
colonization and persistence of mats rather than the original kelp or coral state.
Ocean acidification, therefore, has the capacity to act as a resource that shifts the status of
subordinates into dominant competitors. Consequently, human activities that alter the availability of
resources have important implications for the relative competitive abilities of major ecosystem
components. We suggest that additional stressors will influence the effect of ocean acidification on
producers, and that many cumulative impacts may reflect multiplicative rather than additive
interactions. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we argue that if these synergies involve local stressors,
then environmentally mediated ecosystem shifts may be greatly ameliorated by managing local
stressors. Nevertheless, there are few assessments of whether management of local processes can
weaken the feedbacks that reinforce altered state and enable the reversibility of phase-shifts.
Importantly, we suggest that in the face of changing climate (e.g. ocean acidification and temperature),
effective management of local stressors (e.g. water pollution and overfishing) may have a greater
contribution in determining ecosystem states than currently anticipated. Thus, we highlight how ocean
acidification has the potential to influence competitive abilities via changes in resource availability,
with implications for the stability and persistence of the system as a whole.
Independently causes extinction
Rogers 2/17 [Alex Rogers, Scientific Director of IPSO and Professor of Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of
Oxford, 2014, “The Ocean’s Death March,” http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/17/the-oceans-death-march/]
This problem is unquestionably serious, and here’s why: The
rate of change of ocean pH (measure of acidity) is 10 times
faster than 55 million years ago. That period of geologic history was directly linked to a mass extinction event as
levels of CO2 mysteriously went off the charts. Ten times larger is big, very big, when a measurement of 0.1
in change of pH is consistent with significant change! According to C.L.Dybas, On a Collision Course: Oceans Plankton and Climate
Change, BioScience, 2006: “This acidification is occurring at a rate [10-to-100] times faster [depending upon the area] than ever recorded.” In
other words, as far as science is concerned, the rate of change of pH in the ocean is “off the charts.”
Therefore, and as a result, nobody knows how this will play out because there is no known example in geologic history of such a rapid change in
pH. This begs the biggest question of modern times, which is: Will ocean acidification cause an extinction event this century, within current
lifetimes? The Extinction Event Already Appears to be Underway According
to the State of the Ocean Report, d/d October 3,
the ocean is unprecedented in the
Earth’s known history. We are entering an unknown territory of marine ecosystem change… The next
2013,International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO): “This [acidification] of
mass extinction may have already begun. ” According to Jane Lubchenco, PhD, who is the former director (2009-13) of the US
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the effects of acidification are already present in some oyster fisheries, like the West Coast
of the U.S. According to Lubchenco: “You can actually see this happening… It’s
not something a long way into the future. It
is a very big problem,” Fiona Harvey, Ocean Acidification due to Carbon Emissions is at Highest for 300M Years, The Guardian October
2, 2013. And, according to Richard Feely, PhD, (Dep. Of Oceanography, University of Washington) and Christopher Sabine, PhD, (Senior Fellow,
University of Washington, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean): “If
the current carbon dioxide emission
trends continue… the ocean will continue to undergo acidification, to an extent and at rates that have not occurred
for tens of millions of years… nearly all marine life forms that build calcium carbonate shells and skeletons studied by scientists thus far have
shown deterioration due to increasing carbon dioxide levels in seawater,” Dr. Richard Feely and Dr. Christopher Sabine, Oceanographers,
Carbon Dioxide and Our Ocean Legacy, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April
2006. And, according to Alex Rogers, PhD, Scientific Director of the International Programme on the State of the Ocean, OneWorld (UK) Video,
Aug. 2011: “I think if we
continue on the current trajectory, we are looking at a mass extinction of marine species
even if only coral reef systems go down, which it looks like they will certainly by the end of the century.”
“Today’s human-induced acidification is a unique event in the geological history of our planet due to
its rapid rate of change. An analysis of ocean acidification over the last 300 million years highlights the unprecedented rate of change
of the current acidification. The most comparable event 55 million years ago was linked to mass extinctions… At that time, though the rate of
change of ocean pH was rapid, it may have been 10 times slower than current change,” IGBP, IOC, SCOR [2013], Ocean Acidification Summary
for Policymakers – Third Symposium on the Ocean in a High- CO2 World, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm, Sweden,
2013. Fifty-five million years ago, during a dark period of time known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), huge quantities of
CO2 were somehow released into the atmosphere, nobody knows from where or how, but temperatures around the world soared by 10
degrees F, and the ocean depths became so corrosive that sea shells simply dissolved rather than pile up on the ocean floor. “Most, if not all,
of the five global mass extinctions in Earth’s history carry the fingerprints of the main symptoms of…
global warming, ocean acidification and anoxia or lack of oxygen. It is these three factors — the ‘deadly trio’ —
which are present in the ocean today. In fact, (the situation) is unprecedented in the Earth’s history because of the high rate and
speed of change,” Rogers, A.D., Laffoley, D. d’A. 2011. International Earth System Expert Workshop on Ocean Stresses and Impacts, Summary
Report, IPSO Oxford, 2011. Zooming in on the Future, circa 2050 – Location: Castello Aragonese Scientists have discovered a real life Petri dish
of seawater conditions similar to what will occur by the year 2050, assuming humans continue to emit CO2 at current rates. This real life Petri
dish is located in the Tyrrhenian Sea at Castello Aragonese, which is a tiny island that rises straight up out of the sea like a tower. The island is
located 17 miles west of Naples. Tourists like to visit Aragonese Castle (est. 474 BC) on the island to see the display of medieval torture devices.
But, the real action is offshore, under the water, where Castello Aragonese holds a very special secret, which is an underwater display that gives
scientists a window 50 years into the future. Here’s the scoop: A quirk of geology is at work whereby volcanic vents on the seafloor surrounding
the island are emitting (bubbling) large quantities of CO2. In turn, this replicates the level of CO2 scientists expect the ocean to absorb over the
course of the next 50 years. “When
you get to the extremely high CO2 almost nothing can tolerate that ,”
according to Jason-Hall Spencer, PhD, professor of marine biology, School of Marine Science and Engineering, Plymouth University (UK), who
studies the seawater around Castello Aragonese (Elizabeth Kolbert, The Acid Sea, National Geographic, April, 2011.) The adverse effects of
excessive CO2 are found everywhere in the immediate surroundings of the tiny island. For example, barnacles, which are one of the toughest of
all sea life, are missing around the base of the island where seawater measurements show the heaviest concentration of CO2. And, within the
water, limpets, which wander into the area seeking food, show severe shell dissolution. As a result, their shells are almost completely
transparent. Also, the underwater sea grass is a vivid green, which is abnormal because tiny organisms usually coat the blades of sea grass and
dull the color, but no such organisms exists. Additionally, sea urchins, which are commonplace further away from the vents, are nowhere to be
seen around the island. The only life forms found around Castello Aragonese are jellyfish, sea grass, and algae; whereas, an abundance of
underwater sea life is found in the more distant surrounding waters. Thus, the Castello Aragonese Petri dish is essentially a dead sea except for
weeds. This explains why Jane Lubchenco, former
head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, refers to
ocean acidification as global warming’s “equally evil twin ,” Ibid. To that end, a slow motion death march is
consuming life in the ocean in real time, and we humans are witnesses to this extinction event.
Scenario 3 is Algae Blooms
IOOS solves HABs and waterborne pathogens
Tom Malone 11, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the Horn Point Laboratory, University of
Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PhD in Biology from Stanford University, and Mary Culver,
manager of the Applied Sciences Program at the NOAA Coastal Services Center and Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management in Charleston, SC, Ph.D. in Oceanography from the Univ. of Washington,
“Managing Public Health Risks: Role of Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)” in Oceans and
Public Health: Risks and Remedies from the Sea, p 25-26, google books
The cumulative effects of natural hazards, human activities, and climate change are and will continue to be most pronounced in the coastal zone where people and
ecosystem goods and services are most concentrated, exposure to natural hazards is greatest, and inputs of energy and matter from land, sea, and air converge
(Costanza et al, 1993; McKay and Mulvaney, 2001; Nicholls and Small, 2002; Small and Nicholls, 2003). Changes
occurring in coastal waters
affect public health and well-being, the safety and efficiency of marine operations, and the capacity of ecosystems to support goods and
services (including the sustainability of living marine resources and biodiversity). Although these changes tend to be local in scale, they are occurring in coastal
ecosystems worldwide and are often local expressions of larger scale variability and change, including both natural and anthropogenic drivers or “forcings”:¶
Natural hazards (Epstein, 1999; Flather, 2000; Michaels et al., 1997)¶ Global warming and sea level rise (Barry et al., 1995; Levitus et al., 2000; Najjar et al., 1999) ¶
Basin scale changes in ocean-atmosphere interactions (El Nino Southern Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation, and Pacific Decadal Oscillation) (Barber and Chavez,
1986; Beaugrand et al., 2003; Koblinsky and Smith, 2001; Wilkinson et al., 1999) ¶ Human alterations of the environment (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects
of Marine Pollution [GESAMP], 2001; Heinz Center, 2002; Peierls et al., 1991; Vitousek et al., 1997),¶ Exploitation of living resources (Jackson et al., 2001; Myers and
Worm, 2003)¶ Introductions of nonnative species (Carlton, 1996; Hallegraeff, 1998) ¶ Each of these
drivers of change has been shown to
influence human health risks, from exposure to waterborne human pathogens to the toxins produced
by harmful algae bloom (HAB) organisms (affecting people through direct contact, inhalation of aerosols, and seafood consumption). The
clearest and most direct impacts on the oceans and human health occur in coastal areas that are subject to intense human use (sewage discharge, agriculture and
aquaculture practices, human habitation and recreation, fishing, etc.) and are susceptible to flooding from tsunamis, storm surges, and excessive rainfall associated
with tropical storms and monsoons (National Research Council [NRC], 1999). There is also increasing evidence that global
scale changes in the
abundance and distribution of both waterborne and vector-borne diseases are occurring in response to global
warming and changes in the hydrological cycle (Colwell, 1996; Epstein, 1999; Hains and Parry, 1993; Rogers and Packer, 1993). ¶
Ecosystem-Based Approaches to Managing Health Risks ¶ The oceans and Great Lakes are conduits for many pathogenic
microorganisms and their toxins (Table CS1-3). Their distributions and exposure risks in aquatic systems are governed by their sources; their
behavior once introduced into the aquatic environment (e.g., rates of growth, mortality, migration, buoyancy, etc.); their place in the food web; and by water
motions that transport, disperse, or concentrate them. The
most effective ways to reduce the immediate cost of lives and
human suffering from exposure to waterborne pathogens and harmful algal blooms is to detect
changes in risk more rapidly , provide timely accurate predictions of changes in risk in both time
and space, and control the sources (e.g., reduce inputs of untreated sewage wastes that transport pathogens, reduce land-based inputs of
anthropogenic nutrients that stimulate some HAB organisms, and reduce the temporal and spatial extent of coastal flooding that can promote events such as
cholera epidemics and the growth of HAB organisms). ¶ Increases in risk to levels that lead to beach and shellfish bed closures are typically localized, episodic, and
dynamic. Consequently, rapid,
timely, and accurate assessments of risk are difficult if not impossible based on
traditional sampling regimes (e.g. monthly or biweekly monitoring of sewage outfalls and daily shoreline sampling at a limited number of beach
sites). Remote sensing and the development of species-specific in situ sensors for waterborne pathogens
and HABs thus have great potential for providing the means to address these challenges .¶ For example,
satellite-based synthetic aperture radar (SAR) provides high resolution (<100 m) active microwave observations of sea surface roughness that are independent of
cloud cover and time of day. At surface wind speeds between 2 m sec-1 and 7 m sec-1, areas with biogenic or anthropogenic surfactant films that dampen small
waves are detected by SAR as patterns of low backscatter return. Studies in the Southern California Bight illustrate the ability of SAR to detect and track the fate of
storm-water runoff and sewage discharge (DiGiacomo et al., 2004; Svejkovsky and Jones, 2001). In combination with field surveys, land-based high-frequency radar,
and numerical models, these studies demonstrate the potential for rapid
detection and timely predictions that can be used to
inform management and mitigation decisions that reduce public health risks and increase the economic and social
value of beaches and living resources. The IOOS provides a platform for achieving these objectives .
Solves, and existing systems are insufficient
Tom Malone 11, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the Horn Point Laboratory, University of
Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PhD in Biology from Stanford University, and Mary Culver,
manager of the Applied Sciences Program at the NOAA Coastal Services Center and Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management in Charleston, SC, Ph.D. in Oceanography from the Univ. of Washington,
“Managing Public Health Risks: Role of Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)” in Oceans and
Public Health: Risks and Remedies from the Sea, p 30-31, google books
Harmful algal blooms and waterborne pathogens are important cases in point. Ecosystem-based management
strategies are aimed at preventing HABs (e.g., reduce nutrient loading) and pathogen contamination (e.g., sewage
treatment) before they occur, mitigating their effects (e.g., close shellfish beds, close beaches, move net pens of cultured
salmon) and controlling them once they occur (e.g., reducing their magnitude, containing their distribution). Achieving
these objectives requires the development of four related capabilities for both implementing adaptive management and
assessing their efficacy: More rapid detection of waterborne pathogens, and HAB organisms and their toxins Timely predictions
of where and when public health risks are likely to be unacceptably high Timely forecasts of trajectories and
contaminated water masses in time and space Products developed that provide relevant information at the appropriate time and
space scales and in the format needed for the user community to implement prevention, mitigation, and control strategies Rapid
detection is a high priority for both waterborne pathogens and HABs, and molecular techniques offer
a way forward. For example, species-specific DNA probes from ribosomal sequences have the potential to provide accurate and
rapid diagnostic tools for the evaluation of environmental samples (NRC, 1999). When combined with polymerase chain reaction (PCR),
these probes allow detection of an increasing number of pathogens and indicators. The recent application of real-time PCR to field diagnostics
of microbial pathogens reveals the potential of this approach for rapid and reliable detection of pathogens in aquatic systems. The IOOS will
provide a platform for testing and deploying sensors that directly measure biological and chemical
variables, such as pathogens and toxins, in near real-time to verify the location and intensity of
events. To the extent that allochtonous waterborne pathogens behave as passive particles with known half-lives and their sources are well
documented and quantified, the development of operational nowcasting and forecasting abilities depends primarily on more rapid detection of
pathogens and increases in the spatial resolution of hydrodynamic models. The HAB challenge is more complex. It will not be possible to
develop operational models for HAB prediction based on environmental conditions until the combination of environmental factors that
promote the growth and accumulation of one species over others are quantified and physical-biological interactions are parameterized (e.g.,
how environmental factors such as turbulence, advective transport, light, nutrient, grazing, and inherent biological attributes interact with each
other to favor the development of a given species). Developing this capacity will require significant advances in our understanding of the
processes of species succession, in the development of coupled, data assimilating physical-ecological models; and in the capacity to estimate
the distribution and abundance of HAB species and toxins rapidly with time-space estimates of physical and chemical fields using a combination
of in situ and remote sensing techniques. These include (1) more accurate estimates of sea surface chlorophyll a and accessory pigment fields
on space scales of < 1 km based on ocean leaving radiance measurements from satellites and aircraft (improve the skill of coastal algorithms
and increase spatial resolution), (2) long-term, high resolution time series by instrumenting moorings and fixed platforms with sensors to
measure apparent optical properties and nutrient concentrations (N, P, Si) synoptically with temperature, salinity, currents, and waves; (3)
techniques for rapid, species-specific identification and enumeration, including near real-time measurement and telemetry of HAB cell
densities; (4) techniques for more rapid measurement of HAB toxins, including in situ detection and near real-time telemetry; and (5) rapid
access to data from both in situ and satellite-based observations. Until then, statistical models will be used to predict where and when HABs are
likely to occur based on historical records of the location, frequency, and magnitude of HABs or on correlations of HABs with environmental
variables or indices. This not only places a high priority on research (predictive models, real-time sensing technologies), it places a high priority
on detection: initially, IOOS must focus on the development of the capacity to detect HAB organisms and toxins routinely and rapidly in the
context of changes in the distribution of key environmental factors. To these ends, priority should be placed on the establishment of a global
network of sentinel (early warning) and reference (to develop climatologies of HABs and associated environmental conditions) stations for longterm time series observations and the development of an integrated data communications and management system for rapid access to and
dissemination of data on HAB organisms’ abundance, toxin concentrations, and key environmental variables (temperature, salinity, surface
waves and currents, concentrations of inorganic and organic forms of N, P and Si). This information from an IOOS system integrated with
epidemiological data on symptoms and diseases in human and animal populations will provide a comprehensive data source to assess the risks
and health impacts associated with HABs. Programs such as those described in
the Gulf of Mexico and Great Lakes and others on
the U.S. West Coast, in Washington state, southern California, and central California, provide early
warning systems for HABs, but they will have a limited lifetime unless they are made operational as part
of a multipurpose, integrated observing system for the oceans, Great Lakes, and coastal ecosystems. The
incorporation of well-tested detection and forecasting systems for HABs and pathogens into the IOOS
bridges the gap between advances in science and the application of these advances to develop
information products for the public good.
Sensing images key to prevent algal blooms from destroying fish stocks
Robinson, 10 (Ian, 2010, Discovering the Ocean from Space [electronic resource] The unique applications of satellite oceanography / by
Ian S. Robinson., BA and MA Mechanical Sciences, Cambridge University, PhD Engineering Magneto-hydrodynamics, University of Warwick,
1973, Higher and Senior Scientific Officer, Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Bidston, Lecturer, senior lecturer and reader, University of
Southampton Department of Oceanography, Head of Department of Oceanography, Professor, University of Southampton School of Ocean and
Earth Science, Professorial Fellow, Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, JPL)
However, there
are some aspects of aquaculture management in which remote sensing does offer
benefits, and has the potential to be used operationally. These are concerned with providing warning of marine
environmental hazards that come from the coastal sea adjacent to a sheltered bay or estuary where a fish farm is
located. This is the circumstance where information supplied from satellites about the wider geographical
context is useful. Physical hazards such as storms or anomalous wave conditions are best predicted through routine meteorological
forecasting, and do not benefit from specific remote-sensing input other than that already assimilated in wind and wave forecasts (see
Chapter 8). However, the
hazard of harmful algal blooms, which can be catastrophic for fish stocks, is one
problem in which remote sensing can play a role if circumstances are appropriate. Sometimes an algal bloom originates
from some distance away, and it may be just chance circumstances of wind and tide which bring it towards the
aquaculture site. Such blooms can be monitored from space (Yin et al., 1999) using a combination of ocean color
and SST sensors.
Fishery management prevents extinction
VOA, 10
(Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1,
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Bluefin-Tuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing-111159869.html)
Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance of marine life in
check. Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller organisms might affect the entire
underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far,
those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on
the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist
who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the sale of bluefin tuna. "Scientists tell us that when
a top
predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say
you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if you let these large fish become depleted because they anchor the
ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change
dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain. Government officials and members of environmental groups met in Paris in midNovember to discuss fishing
regulations that may affect all life on Earth. Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with
the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says the bluefin is in jeopardy. "The fish is in worse shape
than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's
stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and
Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us to this point. "The
quotas are designed to let
fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but even within quotas, there's consistent lack of
enforcement, fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the
depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to near-extinction followed increased Japanese
demand for fresh sushi starting in the 1970s and 80s. And fishing practices that target the two primary regions in which blue fin spawn: the
Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart," said Sue Lieberman. "If you
want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light on a bigger
problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish it's estimated have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's
happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing
like that," said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale
fishing. Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it." "If
countries really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious about
enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. "Management of fish species on
the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's about the very future of
our planet," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and we can't keep … and governments can't
keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen to the fishing industry; we'll
worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury."
IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection
Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South
Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s
Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of
Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of
Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote
Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing
Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf
Abstract—Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global
Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System ( IOOS ),
required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible
resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for
mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better
understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data
are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are
several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are
indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical
variables to
support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and
transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain
the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the
globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal
and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government,
and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will
define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required
to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations.
Solves SCS fishing disputes
Caitlin Werrell 14, and Francesco Femia, Co-Founders & Directors of the Center for Climate and
Security,
“Fisheries and Conflict Zones: The Critical Role of Satellite Technology,”
http://climateandsecurity.org/2014/01/07/fisheries-and-conflict-zones-the-critical-role-of-satellitetechnology/
Al-Abdulrazzak continues with an interesting and important point about the utility of satellite technology, especially for collecting
data in difficult-to-reach regions:¶ These results, which provide the first example of fisheries catch estimates from space, speak to
the potential of satellite technologies for monitoring fisheries remotely, particularly in areas that
were once considered too dangerous or expensive for fisheries surveillance and enforcement. For example,
we were able to reveal and account for 17 illegal operating traps in Qatar, and suggest that similar methods can be used to expose other illegal marine practices
such as monitoring activities in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and assessing the magnitude of oil spills. ¶ This utility
of satellite technology
would also apply to zones of instability and conflict, where fisheries data (and other sorts of data, including water
and climate information) are of critical importance for assessing vulnerability and instability, but are
difficult-to-impossible to collect due to circumstances on the ground. For example, see NASA’s satellite data on freshwater losses in the Middle East (the TigrisEuphrates-Western Iran region) – of critical importance in an unstable region where many ground-based data sources sources lay in zones inaccessible to
researchers.¶ Satellites
may also be crucial, for example, in tracking fisheries dynamics in the contested South
China Sea , which because of a warming ocean, is seeing fish stocks gradually moving northwards.
Accurate data and monitoring could be crucial in this area, as geopolitical tensions between China, its
Asian neighbors, and the United States, over claims to the sea, could be non-trivially affected by such
changes (see Will Rogers’ discussion of this in a CNAS report from 2012).¶ In short, satellite technologies are critical in a changing
(and unstable) world. We should not allow the pressures of austerity to make us forget this.
Those are the most likely scenario for SCS conflict
Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt 12, China and Northeast Asia director for the International Crisis Group,
former IR fellow at CFR, June 25 2012, “Fish Story,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/06/25/fish_story
Despite the
overwhelming preoccupation with the potentially abundant energy reserves in the South China Sea, fishing has
emerged as a larger potential driver of conflict . Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam rely on
the sea as an economic lifeline. And China is the largest consumer and exporter of fish in the world. And as
overfishing continues to deplete coastal stocks through Southeast Asia, fishermen are venturing out further into
disputed waters.¶ All this is worsening a trend of harassment, confiscation of catch and equipment, detention, and
mistreatment of fishermen. Further fueling tensions is the way countries in the region are wielding unilateral
fishing bans to assert jurisdiction over disputed waters under the pretext of environmental protection. Worryingly, the claims of
sovereignty also serve to justify greater civilian patrols in the sea -- opening up still more possibilities of runins with fishing vessels. And when ships go bump in the night, growing nationalist sentiment limits
governments' ability to resolve the disputes and sows the seeds for future problems .
Consider it a lesson in how a common fishing run-in can turn into a crisis that can bring an entire region to its knees.
Nuclear war – high risk of miscalc
Hellman 12 (Martin, Professor @ Stanford University,
http://nuclearrisk.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/another-early-warning-sign/~~23more-1138)
The “World Anti-Fascist War” is what we call World
War II – a war in which Japanese aggression killed almost 20
million Chinese, most of them civilians. The infamous “Rape of Nanking” is the best known of numerous
atrocities and war crimes that Japan inflicted on China. This is not to say that the Senkaku/Diaoyu
should be returned to China, only that we need to be aware of how high emotions run on both sides,
and that China has some legitimate grievances from the past. And, of course, Japan was not uniquely blood
thirsty. Millions of Chinese died at Chinese hands during the Chinese Civil War; the mistakes of Mao’s Great
Leap Forward led to millions of deaths; and the Cultural Revolution killed somewhere between half a million and three million more Chinese,
some by public beatings that could be likened to atrocities during the Rape of Nanking.
Given the level of irrationality that is
possible on both sides , and the reasonable arguments that each side can advance for its claims to
these islands, it is not in our national security interests to issue security guarantees to Japan over
these islands. There is too much risk that our “insurance policy” will have to pay off, potentially with
a nuclear war and millions of American deaths . Such an outcome is unlikely, but if we keep risking
small chances of being destroyed, eventually one will realize that potential.
1AC Sea Power Advantage
Advantage Two: Sea Power
US data collection declining—lower data return rate and disconnected sensors
Gagosian 14(Robert, April 25, Testimony of ¶ Robert B. Gagosian ¶ President and CEO of the Consortium for
Ocean Leadership ¶ Before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science , )
Recent hypotheses suggest that the extreme weather events we have had t.his past year may be¶
attributable to a persistent shift in the jet stream due to a rapidly melting polar region as well as a
warmei¶ North Pacific Ocean. If this is t.he case, ice storms in Mobile, Alabama or monsoon-like
rain events in¶ Boulder, Colorado, may become more frequent, along with their significant economic
costs.¶ Unfortunately, as the demand for more and better data and information to understand ocean
and¶ atmospheric trends increases, we are instead losing our capabilities to collect data at sea and
from space¶ to build more capable and accurate long-term forecasts. For instance, the inability to
service the buoys¶ comprising the TAO Array (Tropical Atmosphere Ocean project in the equatorial
Pacific) has resulted in¶ a degradation of the data return rate to just 40 percent capacity from an
optimally operating systeml. Thi:¶ situation greatly reduces our ability to accurately forecast El Nifio
and La Nina strengths and thus risks¶ proper preparation to deal with episodes of droughts and
flooding.¶ Given that the ocean absorbs, stores and transfers most of the heat (and a high percentage
of the carbon)¶ on our planet, the ability to understand, forecast and prepare for extreme weather
events requires¶ investments in basic research to better understand air-ice-sea interactions as well as
observations of the¶ physical environment from space, land and sea. Without this basic knowledge
and prediction capabilities¶ on regional and seasonal scales, we are essentially flying blind in terms
of managing resources (e.g.¶ agriculture, fisheries, freshwater) and protecting public health. There are
many major natural threats¶ facing our nation and significant challenges ahead in understanding,
forecasting and mitigating them, all¶ of which require significant financial resources. We believe that
our appropriations requests would¶ enable our nation to maintain the assets and capabilities
necessary to better understand the physical,¶ chemical, geological and biological changes to the
natural environment and use this information to help¶ Of course, the ocean also impacts life beyond
weather, climate and extreme events.
IOOS key to navy battle space awareness—greater weapon performance and better
reaction time to threats
West 7(Dick, September, Consortium for Ocean Leadership and Retired Rear Admiral USN, EMBRACING THE ¶
FULL SPECTRUM OF ¶ IOOS ENVIRONMENTAL ¶ INFORMATION ¶ FOR MDA,
http://oceanleadership.org/files/MDA_Proceedings_lowres.pdf)
Working toward complete ¶ Maritime Domain Awareness will ¶ require utilizing the Integrated ¶
Ocean Observing System ¶ (IOOS) to provide the data and ¶ operations necessary to perform ¶
assessments such as forecasts and ¶ observations. A fully operable ¶ IOOS will integrate the regional
¶ systems and allow research data to ¶ be fully interoperable for a wide ¶ variety of operational
needs. In ¶ most situations, real-time data and ¶ a fully integrated system allow ¶ for assessments to
have a higher ¶ degree of spatial and temporal ¶ variables, greater impact from ¶ sensor or weapon
performance, ¶ and a better reaction time to threats. ¶ Limiting factors to accomplishing at relatively
low resolutions; provide ¶ boundary and initial conditions ¶ for higher resolution models until ¶
information is given for a specific ¶ local area. Limiting factors to accomplishing ¶ this include the
lack of accessible ¶ data due to security issues, lack ¶ of fully developed databases, ¶ and
compatibility issues with ¶ data collection. Another limiting ¶ factor, and consequently the most ¶
important, is the difficult transition ¶ from research information to an ¶ operational system. Possible ¶
solutions to making such a ¶ transition easier include co-locating ¶ researchers and operations staff
and ¶ keeping inter-agency cooperation a ¶ high priority. Being able to develop ¶ that transition from
research to ¶ usable information will contribute ¶ to building IOOS stronger and more ¶ usable for
the different customers ¶ including the military and assisting ¶ them with what they need to have ¶
Maritime Domain Awareness.
Scenario One is Deterrence
Naval power is key to prevent multiple scenarios for extinction—land forces are
becoming irrelevant
England et al 11(Mr. England is a former secretary of the Navy. Mr. Jones is a former commandant of the Marine
Corps. Mr. Clark is a former chief of naval operations., July 11, The Necessity of U.S. Naval Power, WSJ,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303339904576406163019350934)
All our citizens, and especially our servicemen and women, expect and deserve a thorough review of
critical security decisions. After all, decisions today will affect the nation's strategic position for
future generations.¶ The future security environment underscores two broad security trends. First,
international political realities and the internationally agreed-to sovereign rights of nations will
increasingly limit the sustained involvement of American permanent land-based, heavy forces to the
more extreme crises. This will make offshore options for deterrence and power projection ever more
paramount in support of our national interests.¶ Second, the naval dimensions of American power
will re-emerge as the primary means for assuring our allies and partners, ensuring prosperity in
times of peace, and countering anti-access, area-denial efforts in times of crisis. We do not believe
these trends will require the dismantling of land-based forces, as these forces will remain essential
reservoirs of power. As the United States has learned time and again, once a crisis becomes a
conflict, it is impossible to predict with certainty its depth, duration and cost.¶ That said, the U.S. has
been shrinking its overseas land-based installations, so the ability to project power globally will
make the forward presence of naval forces an even more essential dimension of American influence.¶
What we do believe is that uniquely responsive Navy-Marine Corps capabilities provide the basis on
which our most vital overseas interests are safeguarded. Forward presence and engagement is what
allows the U.S. to maintain awareness, to deter aggression, and to quickly respond to threats as they
arise. Though we clearly must be prepared for the high-end threats, such preparation should be
made in balance with the means necessary to avoid escalation to the high end in the first place.¶ The
versatility of maritime forces provides a truly unmatched advantage. The sea remains a vast space
that provides nearly unlimited freedom of maneuver. Command of the sea allows for the presence of
our naval forces, supported from a network of shore facilities, to be adjusted and scaled with little
external restraint. It permits reliance on proven capabilities such as prepositioned ships.¶ Maritime
capabilities encourage and enable cooperation with other nations to solve common sea-based
problems such as piracy, illegal trafficking, proliferation of W.M.D., and a host of other ills, which if
unchecked can harm our friends and interests abroad, and our own citizenry at home. The flexibility
and responsiveness of naval forces provide our country with a general strategic deterrent in a
potentially violent and unstable world. Most importantly, our naval forces project and sustain power
at sea and ashore at the time, place, duration, and intensity of our choosing.¶ Given these enduring
qualities, tough choices must clearly be made, especially in light of expected tight defense budgets.
The administration and the Congress need to balance the resources allocated to missions such as
strategic deterrence, ballistic missile defense, and cyber warfare with the more traditional ones of sea
control and power projection. The maritime capability and capacity vital to the flexible projection of
U.S. power and influence around the globe must surely be preserved, especially in light of available
technology. Capabilities such as the Joint Strike Fighter will provide strategic deterrence, in addition
to tactical long-range strike, especially when operating from forward-deployed naval vessels.¶
Postured to respond quickly, the Navy-Marine Corps team integrates sea, air, and land power into
adaptive force packages spanning the entire spectrum of operations, from everyday cooperative
security activities to unwelcome—but not impossible—wars between major powers. This is exactly
what we will need to meet the challenges of the future.
No major power in a world of naval power
Allen et al 7(James T. Conway --¶ General, U.S. Marine Corps, ¶ Commandant of the Marine Corps,¶ Gary Roughead
--¶ Admiral, U.S. Navy, ¶ Chief of Naval Operations,¶ Thad W. Allen --¶ Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard ,¶ Commandant of the
Coast Guard, October, A Cooperative Strategy ¶ for ¶ 21st Century Seapower,
http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf)
Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous ¶ to global stability as war
among major powers. Maintenance and ¶ extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower
advantage is a key ¶ component of deterring major power war. While war with another great ¶ power
strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous ¶ effects demands that it be actively
deterred using all elements of national ¶ power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—
our lethality, ¶ global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, ¶ and operational
agility—provide the joint commander with a range ¶ of deterrent options. We will pursue an
approach to deterrence that ¶ includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate against aggressors ¶
conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces. ¶ Win our Nation’s wars. In times of war,
our ability to impose local sea ¶ control, overcome challenges to access, force entry, and project and
¶ sustain power ashore, makes our maritime forces an indispensable ¶ element of the joint or
combined force. This expeditionary advantage ¶ must be maintained because it provides joint and
combined force ¶ commanders with freedom of maneuver. Reinforced by a robust sealift ¶ capability
that can concentrate and sustain forces, sea control and power ¶ projection enable extended
campaigns ashore.
Scenario Two is Taiwan
Naval power is key to prevent China attack on Taiwan
Hultin & Blair 6(Jerry MacArthur HULTIN and Admiral Dennis BLAIR, Naval Power and Globalization: ¶ The
Next Twenty Years in the Pacific, Jerry M. Hultin is former president of Polytechnic Institute of New York University
From 1997 to 2000 Mr. Hultin served as Under Secretary of the Navy., Dennis Cutler Blair is the former United States
Director of National Intelligence and is a retired United States Navy admiral who was the commander of U.S. forces in
the Pacific region, http://engineering.nyu.edu/files/hultin%20naval%20power.pdf)
Even if the interaction of US and Chinese decisions in future avoids a global naval arms ¶ race
centered in the Pacific, China will still have a capable regional navy. World events may put ¶ China
and the United States on opposite sides of an issue or crisis, leading to a maritime ¶ confrontation.
The most likely location for this scenario is Taiwan. Successful deterrence ¶ depends on the United
States having strong naval capability on station or quickly deployable so ¶ that there is no incentive
to China or other adversaries to initiate hostilities. ¶ The second Pacific area in which the United
States must maintain a deterrent capability ¶ based on naval power is around the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea is a failing state, but so long ¶ as Kim Jong II and his successors maintain their position
of power, they will need to be deterred ¶ from military aggression. ¶ ¶ To maintain deterrence,
American naval strategy in the Pacific must preserve its alliance ¶ base, its forward deployed posture
and its ability to reinforce quickly to assert maritime ¶ superiority throughout any crisis situation. ¶ ¶
Taiwan ¶ ¶ The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 remains a sound basis for forming the deterrent aspect ¶
of US naval strategy for Taiwan. It states that any change of Taiwan’s status must be by peaceful ¶
means, and that the United States will make defensive capabilities available for Taiwan and ¶ maintain
American forces to reinforce Taiwan’s defense if China threatens or attacks it. Just as ¶ importantly,
the United States has made it clear that it also opposes any Taiwanese attempts to ¶ change its status
towards independence. ¶ ¶ Currently, Chinese use of force against Taiwan cannot achieve military
success - ¶ Taiwanese forces with American support can defeat Chinese unprovoked aggression at all
levels ¶ from blockade through full-scale invasion. American naval strategy will need to maintain this
¶ balance as regional Chinese maritime and air power grows. This will require a combination of ¶
continued sales of defensive systems.and training assistance to Taiwan along with upgrading the ¶
U.S. navy’s missile defenses and anti-submarine systems and capabilities. There are heavy ¶ economic
and diplomatic penalties to China for using force against Taiwan. U.S. strategy must ¶ be to ensure
that, even if it is willing to accept these economic and diplomatic costs, China ¶ cannot succeed in
seizing and holding Taiwan. ¶ ¶ Copyright, September 2006 24Page 12 of 16 ¶ However, although the
People’s Liberation Army cannot achieve military success against ¶ Taiwan, it can cause extensive
military, human and economic damage. If it is willing to pay the ¶ political, economic and military
costs, China can “teach Taiwan a lesson” for pursuing ¶ independence. For this reason, the current
military balance among Taiwan, China and the United ¶ States is currently stable, offering advantages
to neither side to change the status quo. It is very ¶ clear that there would only be losers from
conflict, not winners. An important objective of the ¶ deterrence and defense objectives of US naval
strategy in the Pacific is to maintain that stable ¶ balance as China increases its military power.
That causes nuclear war
Glaser 11(Charles, April, Will China’s Rise lead to War?, Charles Glaser-- Professor of Political Science and
International Affairs; Director, Institute for Security and Conflict Studies, Foreign Affairs, vol. 90, Issue 2)
A crisis over Taiwan could fairly easily escalate to nuclear war, because each ¶ step along the way
might well seem rational to the actors involved. Current U.S. ¶ policy is designed to reduce the
probability that Taiwan will declare ¶ independence and to make clear that the United States will not
come to Taiwan's ¶ aid if it does. Nevertheless, the United States would find itself under pressure to ¶
protect Taiwan against any sort of attack, no matter how it originated. Given the different interests
and perceptions of the various parties and the limited control ¶ Washington has over Taipei's
behavior, a crisis could unfold in which the United ¶ States found itself following events rather than
leading them. ¶ Such dangers have been around for decades, but ongoing improvements in ¶
China's military capabilities may make Beijing more willing to escalate a Taiwan ¶ crisis. In
addition to its improved conventional capabilities, China is modernizing ¶ its nuclear forces to
increase their ability to survive and retaliate following a ¶ large-scale U.S. attack. Standard
deterrence theory holds that Washington's ¶ current ability to destroy most or all of China's nuclear
force enhances its ¶ bargaining position. China's nuclear modernization might remove that check on ¶
Chinese action, leading Beijing to behave more boldly in future crises than it has ¶ in past ones.
Scenario Three is Trade
Naval power is key to global trade—allows for the safe transport of goods
Eaglen and McGrath 11(Mackenzie and Bryan, May 16, Thinking About a Day Without Sea Power:
Implications for U.S. Defense Policy, Mackenzie Eaglen is Research Fellow for National Security in the Douglas and
Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation. Bryan McGrath is a retired naval officer and the Director of Delex
Consulting, Studies and Analysis, The Heritage Foundation,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/thinking-about-a-day-without-sea-power-implications-for-usdefense-policy)
If the United States slashed its Navy and ended its mission as a guarantor of the free flow of
transoceanic goods and trade, globalized world trade would decrease substantially. As early as 1890,
noted U.S. naval officer and historian Alfred Thayer Mahan described the world’s oceans as a “great
highway…a wide common,” underscoring the long-running importance of the seas to trade.[12]¶
Geographically organized trading blocs develop as the maritime highways suffer from insecurity and
rising fuel prices. Asia prospers thanks to internal trade and Middle Eastern oil, Europe muddles
along on the largesse of Russia and Iran, and the Western Hemisphere declines to a “new normal”
with the exception of energy-independent Brazil.¶ For America, Venezuelan oil grows in importance
as other supplies decline. Mexico runs out of oil—as predicted—when it fails to take advantage of
Western oil technology and investment. Nigerian output, which for five years had been secured
through a partnership of the U.S. Navy and Nigerian maritime forces, is decimated by the bloody
civil war of 2021. Canadian exports, which a decade earlier had been strong as a result of the oil
shale industry, decline as a result of environmental concerns in Canada and elsewhere about the
“fracking” (hydraulic fracturing) process used to free oil from shale.¶ State and non-state actors
increase the hazards to seaborne shipping, which are compounded by the necessity of traversing key
chokepoints that are easily targeted by those who wish to restrict trade. These chokepoints include
the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran could quickly close to trade if it wishes. More than half of the
world’s oil is transported by sea. “From 1970 to 2006, the amount of goods transported via the
oceans of the world…increased from 2.6 billion tons to 7.4 billion tons, an increase of over
284%.”[13] In 2010, “$40 billion dollars [sic] worth of oil passes through the world’s geographic
‘chokepoints’ on a daily basis…not to mention $3.2 trillion…annually in commerce that moves
underwater on transoceanic cables.”[14] These quantities of goods simply cannot be moved by any
other means. Thus, a reduction of sea trade reduces overall international trade.¶ U.S. consumers face
a greatly diminished selection of goods because domestic production largely disappeared in the
decades before the global depression. As countries increasingly focus on regional rather than global
trade, costs rise and Americans are forced to accept a much lower standard of living. Some domestic
manufacturing improves, but at significant cost.¶ In addition, shippers avoid U.S. ports due to the
onerous container inspection regime implemented after investigators discover that the second dirty
bomb was smuggled into the U.S. in a shipping container on an innocuous Panamanian-flagged
freighter. As a result, American consumers bear higher shipping costs. The market also constrains
the variety of goods available to the U.S. consumer and increases their cost.¶ A Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) report makes this abundantly clear. A one-week shutdown of the Los Angeles and
Long Beach ports would lead to production losses of $65 million to $150 million (in 2006 dollars) per
day. A three-year closure would cost $45 billion to $70 billion per year ($125 million to $200 million
per day). Perhaps even more shocking, the simulation estimated that employment would shrink by
approximately 1 million jobs.[15] These estimates demonstrate the effects of closing only the Los
Angeles and Long Beach ports.¶ On a national scale, such a shutdown would be catastrophic. The
Government Accountability Office notes that:¶ [O]ver 95 percent of U.S. international trade is
transported by water[;] thus, the safety and economic security of the United States depends in large
part on the secure use of the world’s seaports and waterways. A successful attack on a major seaport
could potentially result in a dramatic slowdown in the international supply chain with impacts in the
billions of dollars.[16]¶ As of 2008, “U.S. ports move 99 percent of the nation’s overseas cargo,
handle more than 2.5 billion tons of trade annually, and move $5.5 billion worth of goods in and out
every day.” Further, “approximately 95 percent of U.S. military forces and supplies that are sent
overseas, including those for Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, pass through U.S.
ports.”[17]
Trade collapse causes war
Griswold 7(Daniel, April 20, Trade, Democracy and Peace: The Virtuous Cycle, Daniel T. Griswold is director of
the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies., http://www.cato.org/publications/speeches/trade-democracypeace-virtuous-cycle)
The world has somehow become a more peaceful place.¶ A little-noticed headline on an Associated Press
story a while back reported, “War declining worldwide, studies say.” In 2006, a survey by the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute found that the number of armed conflicts around the world has
been in decline for the past half-century. Since the early 1990s, ongoing conflicts have dropped from 33 to
17, with all of them now civil conflicts within countries. The Institute’s latest report found that 2005
marked the second year in a row that no two nations were at war with one another. What a
remarkable and wonderful fact.¶ The death toll from war has also been falling. According to the
Associated Press report, “The number killed in battle has fallen to its lowest point in the post-World War II
period, dipping below 20,000 a year by one measure. Peacemaking missions, meanwhile, are growing in
number.” Current estimates of people killed by war are down sharply from annual tolls ranging from 40,000
to 100,000 in the 1990s, and from a peak of 700,000 in 1951 during the Korean War.¶ Many causes lie behind
the good news—the end of the Cold War and the spread of democracy, among them—but expanding trade
and globalization appear to be playing a major role in promoting world peace. Far from stoking a
“World on Fire,” as one misguided American author argued in a forgettable book, growing commercial ties
between nations have had a dampening effect on armed conflict and war. I would argue that free
trade and globalization have promoted peace in three main ways.¶ First, as I argued a moment ago,
trade and globalization have reinforced the trend toward democracy, and democracies tend not to
pick fights with each other. Thanks in part to globalization, almost two thirds of the world’s
countries today are democracies—a record high. Some studies have cast doubt on the idea that
democracies are less likely to fight wars. While it’s true that democracies rarely if ever war with each other, it
is not such a rare occurrence for democracies to engage in wars with non-democracies. We can still hope that
has more countries turn to democracy, there will be fewer provocations for war by non-democracies.¶ A
second and even more potent way that trade has promoted peace is by promoting more economic
integration. As national economies become more intertwined with each other, those nations have
more to lose should war break out. War in a globalized world not only means human casualties and
bigger government, but also ruptured trade and investment ties that impose lasting damage on the
economy. In short, globalization has dramatically raised the economic cost of war.¶ The 2005 Economic
Freedom of the World Report contains an insightful chapter on “Economic Freedom and Peace” by Dr. Erik
Gartzke, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Dr. Gartzke compares the propensity of
countries to engage in wars and their level of economic freedom and concludes that economic freedom,
including the freedom to trade, significantly decreases the probability that a country will experience a military
dispute with another country. Through econometric analysis, he found that, “Making economies freer
translates into making countries more peaceful. At the extremes, the least free states are about 14
times as conflict prone as the most free.Ӧ Effect of Economic Freedom on Militarized Interstate
Disputes¶ By the way, Dr. Gartzke’s analysis found that economic freedom was a far more important variable
in determining a countries propensity to go to war than democracy.¶ A third reason why free trade
promotes peace is because it allows nations to acquire wealth through production and exchange
rather than conquest of territory and resources. As economies develop, wealth is increasingly
measured in terms of intellectual property, financial assets, and human capital. Such assets cannot
be easily seized by armies. In contrast, hard assets such as minerals and farmland are becoming relatively
less important in a high-tech, service economy. If people need resources outside their national borders,
say oil or timber or farm products, they can acquire them peacefully by trading away what they can
produce best at home. In short, globalization and the development it has spurred have rendered the
spoils of war less valuable.
Add Ons
2AC Disease
Ocean mapping and explorations solves diseases – cures are within species
Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special
correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”,
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/
In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it (relatively) affordable and accessible came
to an end after 30 years. Those three decades provided numerous technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag
of nearly $200 billion, the program had its champions and its detractors. It was, however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing
With the iconic space program ending, many people have asked,
"What’s next? What is the next giant leap in scientific and technological innovation?" Today a possible
answer to that question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing
recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie
beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean. You may think I’m doing my grandfather
Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it
comes to ocean exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of
the American spirit of innovation and leadership.
Jacques Cousteau" introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the
ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden
opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A
new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries
that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an
early treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind,
to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the
tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating
jobs as well as technologies and goods.
Disease spread will cause extinction
Leather 10/12/11 (Tony, “The Inevitable Pandemic” http://healthmad.com/conditions-anddiseases/the-inevitable-pandemic/, PZ)
You will have pictured this possible scenario many times, living in a country where people are suddenly
dropping like flies because of some mystery virus. Hospitals full to overflowing, patients laid out in
corridors, because of lack of room, health services frustrated, because they just can’t cope. You feel
panic with no way of knowing who will be the next victim, intimate personal contact with anyone the
death of you, quite possibly. This is no scene from a movie, or even a daydream, but UK reality in 1998,
when the worst influenza epidemic in living memory swept savagely across the country. Whilst this
was just one epidemic in one country, how terrifying is the idea that a global pandemic would see this
horror story repeated many times over around the globe, death toll numbers in the millions.
Humanity is outnumbered many fold by bacteria and viruses, the deadliest of all killers among these
microscopic organisms. Death due to disease is a threat we all live with daily, trusting medical science
combat it, but the fact is, frighteningly, that we have yet to experience the inevitable pandemic that
might conceivably push humanity to the edge of extinction because so many of us become victims.
Devastating viral diseases are nothing new. Bubonic plague killed almost half all Roman Empire citizens
in542AD. Europe lost three quarters of the population to the Black Death in 1334. One fifth of
Londoners succumbed to the 1665 Great Plague, and Russia was the site of the first official influenza
pandemic, in 1729, which quickly spread to Europe and America, at the costs of many thousands of
lives. Another epidemic of so-called Russian flu, originating in 1889 in central Asia spreading rapidly
around the world, European death toll alone 250,000 people. In 1918 so-called Spanish Influenza killed
40million people worldwide, another strain originating Hong Kong in 1969 killed off 700,000, a 1989 UK
epidemic killing 29,000. Small numbers, granted, as compared to the world population of seven billion,
but the truth is that, should a true world pandemic occur, western governments will of course want to
save their own people first, potentially globally disastrous. World Health Organisation laboratories
worldwide constantly monitor and record new strains of virus, ensuring drug companies maintain
stockpiles against most virulent strains known, maintaining a fighting chance of coping with new
pandemics. They do theoretical models of likely effects of new pandemics, their predictions making
chilling reading. Put into perspective, during a pandemic, tanker loads of antiviral agents, which simply
do not exist would be needed so prioritizing vaccination recipients would be inevitable. Such a
pandemic would, in UK alone, be at least 10 times deadlier than previously experienced, likely number
of dead in first two months 72,000 in London alone. Any new virus would need a three to six month
wait for effective vaccine, so the devastation on a global scale, flu virus notoriously indifferent to
international borders, would be truly colossal. Our knowledge of history should be pointing the way to
prepare for that living nightmare of the next, inevitable world pandemic. The microscopic villains of
these scenarios have inhabited this planet far longer than we have, and they too evolve. It would be
comforting to think that humanity was genuinely ready, though it seems doubtful at best.
2AC Climate
Data gathering is key to resolve climate change
Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior
Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the
Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a
New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf)
National security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a matter of national security and
may even be a denning security challenge of the 21st century. Nonetheless, some national security professionals have yet to full)' conceptualize
how climate change could impact their areas of responsibility, or whether they need to analyze potential implications at all. What is more,
they currently lack the "actionable- data necessary to generate requirements, plans, strategies, training and
materiel to prepare for future challenges, 'though the scope and quality of available scientific information has improved in recent
years, this information docs not always reach - or is not presented in a form that is useful to - the decision makers who need it. Closing this
gap between national security policy makers who consume information and the scientists who
produce it is essential for the nation to effectively deal with the national security implications of climate change.
Today, a thin thread of climate information links producer and consumer communities, but different needs, priorities, processes and cultures
separate them - in addition to a divisive political debate surrounding the validity of climate science. As
new public policies, regulations
into effect and the consequences of climate change become more obvious, the demand
for information is likely to surge. Multiple barriers impede improved communication, the producer community tends to be stoveand laws come
piped. Even though consumers often need interdisciplinary science and analysis. Consumers, who may also be stove-piped in various agencies
or subject areas, may lack familiarity with or access to these separate communities, as well as the tools or time to navigate scientific
information and disciplines. Indeed, the immediate needs of consumers do not align well with the longer timelines Involved in scientific inquiry,
and consumer communities have not signaled the kinds of actionable data they require in order to make decisions. Broadly speaking, scientists
do not commonly serve public policy goals, at least not directly. And the academic community does not necessarily value communication with
non-scientific constituencies. To
make matters worse, there is a clear shortage of "translators" who can
interpret climate science into actionable information for policy makers. Finally, a two-way
conversation about such information requires trusting relationships, which, for a variety of reasons,
may not always exist between the scientific and national security policy communities. Scientists and
national security professionals can bridge this gap. Consumers of information can signal the kinds of
information they need by commissioning studies and collaborating or contracting with scientific organizations. Producers of climate
information can rise to the occasion, accept that their work is critical to good governance and invest time and resources into better
communication. For this approach to work, however, both producer and consumer institutions will need to change their incentive structures. In
short, policy makers and scientists need to build new bridges in order to address climate change. Some degree of separation is healthy for the
sake of setting policy priorities and maintaining scientific integrity. But regardless, decision
makers at all levels of government
have already moved from merely studying climate change to responding to it - both to mitigate the damage
from greenhouse gases and to adapt to potentially unavoidable changes over the next 20-30 years. For the nation, and the national
security community specifically, to deal with national and international challenges associated with climate change, these two
communities will need to work more closely together.
Warming is the only existential risk
Deibel ’07—Prof IR @ National War College (Terry, “Foreign Affairs Strategy: Logic for American
Statecraft,” Conclusion: American Foreign Affairs Strategy Today)
Finally, there is one major existential threat to American security (as well as prosperity) of a
nonviolent nature, which, though far in the future, demands urgent action. It is the threat of global
warming to the stability of the climate upon which all earthly life depends. Scientists worldwide have
been observing the gathering of this threat for three decades now, and what was once a mere
possibility has passed through probability to near certainty. Indeed not one of more than 900 articles
on climate change published in refereed scientific journals from 1993 to 2003 doubted that
anthropogenic warming is occurring. “In legitimate scientific circles,” writes Elizabeth Kolbert, “it is
virtually impossible to find evidence of disagreement over the fundamentals of global warming.”
Evidence from a vast international scientific monitoring effort accumulates almost weekly, as this
sample of newspaper reports shows: an international panel predicts “brutal droughts, floods and violent
storms across the planet over the next century”; climate change could “literally alter ocean currents,
wipe away huge portions of Alpine Snowcaps and aid the spread of cholera and malaria”; “glaciers in the
Antarctic and in Greenland are melting much faster than expected, and…worldwide, plants are blooming
several days earlier than a decade ago”; “rising sea temperatures have been accompanied by a
significant global increase in the most destructive hurricanes”; “NASA scientists have concluded from
direct temperature measurements that 2005 was the hottest year on record, with 1998 a close second”;
“Earth’s warming climate is estimated to contribute to more than 150,000 deaths and 5 million
illnesses each year” as disease spreads; “widespread bleaching from Texas to Trinidad…killed broad
swaths of corals” due to a 2-degree rise in sea temperatures. “The world is slowly disintegrating,”
concluded Inuit hunter Noah Metuq, who lives 30 miles from the Arctic Circle. “They call it climate
change…but we just call it breaking up.” From the founding of the first cities some 6,000 years ago until
the beginning of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere remained relatively
constant at about 280 parts per million (ppm). At present they are accelerating toward 400 ppm, and by
2050 they will reach 500 ppm, about double pre-industrial levels. Unfortunately, atmospheric CO2 lasts
about a century, so there is no way immediately to reduce levels, only to slow their increase, we are
thus in for significant global warming; the only debate is how much and how serous the effects will be.
As the newspaper stories quoted above show, we are already experiencing the effects of 1-2 degree
warming in more violent storms, spread of disease, mass die offs of plants and animals, species
extinction, and threatened inundation of low-lying countries like the Pacific nation of Kiribati and the
Netherlands at a warming of 5 degrees or less the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets could
disintegrate, leading to a sea level of rise of 20 feet that would cover North Carolina’s outer banks,
swamp the southern third of Florida, and inundate Manhattan up to the middle of Greenwich Village.
Another catastrophic effect would be the collapse of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation that keeps
the winter weather in Europe far warmer than its latitude would otherwise allow. Economist William
Cline once estimated the damage to the United States alone from moderate levels of warming at 1-6
percent of GDP annually; severe warming could cost 13-26 percent of GDP. But the most frightening
scenario is runaway greenhouse warming, based on positive feedback from the buildup of water vapor
in the atmosphere that is both caused by and causes hotter surface temperatures. Past ice age
transitions, associated with only 5-10 degree changes in average global temperatures, took place in just
decades, even though no one was then pouring ever-increasing amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.
Faced with this specter, the best one can conclude is that “humankind’s continuing enhancement of
the natural greenhouse effect is akin to playing Russian roulette with the earth’s climate and
humanity’s life support system. At worst, says physics professor Marty Hoffert of New York
University, “we’re just going to burn everything up; we’re going to heat the atmosphere to the
temperature it was in the Cretaceous when there were crocodiles at the poles, and then everything
will collapse.” During the Cold War, astronomer Carl Sagan popularized a theory of nuclear winter to
describe how a thermonuclear war between the Untied States and the Soviet Union would not only
destroy both countries but possibly end life on this planet. Global warming is the post-Cold War era’s
equivalent of nuclear winter at least as serious and considerably better supported scientifically. Over
the long run it puts dangers from terrorism and traditional military challenges to shame. It is a threat
not only to the security and prosperity to the United States, but potentially to the continued existence
of life on this planet
2AC Biodiversity
Ocean ecosystems are collapsing – only the aff can mobilize international solutions
Sherman ‘11 (Kenneth, 2011, “The application of satellite remote sensing for assessing productivity in relation to fisheries yields of the
world’s large marine ecosystems,” ICES Journal of Marine Science, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ph.D, Director of U.S. LME Program, Director of the Narragansett Laboratory and Office of
Marine Ecosystem Studies at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Oceanography at the
University of Rhode Island)
In 1992, world
leaders at the historical UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized that the
exploitation of resources in coastal oceans was becoming increasingly unsustainable, resulting in an
international effort to assess, recover, and manage goods and services of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). More than $3 billion in support
to 110 economically developing nations have been dedicated to operationalizing a five-module approach supporting LME assessment and
management practices. An
important component of this effort focuses on the effects of climate change
on fisheries biomass yields of LMEs, using satellite remote sensing and in situ sampling of key indicators
of changing ecological conditions. Warming appears to be reducing primary productivity in the lower
latitudes, where stratification of the water column has intensified. Fishery biomass yields in the Subpolar LMEs of the Northeast Atlantic
are also increasing as zooplankton levels increase with warming. During the current period of climate warming, it is especially important for
space agency programmes in Asia, Europe, and the United States to continue to provide satellite-borne
radiometry data to the global networks of LME assessment scientists. Overfishing, pollution,
habitat loss, and climate change are causing serious degradation in the world’s coastal oceans and
a downward spiral in economic benefits from marine goods and services. Prompt and large-scale
changes in the use of ocean resources are needed to overcome this downward spiral. In 1992, the world
community of nations convened the first global conference of world leaders in Rio de Janeiro to address ways and means to improve the
degraded condition of the global environment (Robinson et al., 1992). Ten years later (2002), at a follow-up World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg (Sherman, 2006), world leaders agreed to a Plan of Implementation for several marine-related targets
including achievement of: (i) “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; (ii) introduction of the ecosystems
approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; (iii) designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and
(iv) maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. More recently, in Copenhagen in 2009,
world leaders agreed to non-binding actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate the effects of global climate change. For
the period 2010–2020, the international
community of maritime nations is pursuing solutions for
recovering depleted marine fish stocks, restoring degraded habitats, controlling pollution, nutrient
overenrichment, and ocean acidification, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to climate change.
This effort at improving the ecological condition of the world’s 64 large marine ecosystems (LMEs) is
global in scope and ecosystems-orientated in approach (Sherman et al., 2005). LMEs are regions of 200 000 km2 or more, encompassing
coastal areas from estuaries to the continental slope and the seaward extent of well-defined current systems along coasts lacking
continental shelves (Figure 1). They are defined by ecological criteria including bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophically
linked populations (Sherman, 1994). The LMEs
produce 80% of the world’s marine fisheries yields annually and are
growing sinks of coastal pollution and nutrient overenrichment. They also harbour degraded habitats (e.g. corals, seagrasses,
mangroves, and oxygen-depleted dead zones). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a financial group located in Washington, DC,
supports developing countries committed to the recovery and sustainability of coastal ocean areas, by providing financial and catalytic
support to projects that use LMEs as the geographic focus for ecosystem-based strategies to reduce coastal pollution, control nutrient
overenrichment, restore damaged habitats, recover depleted fisheries, protect biodiversity, and adapt to climate change (Duda and
Sherman, 2002).
Accelerating ocean loss causes extinction
Alex David Rogers 6/20/11, Ph.D. in marine invertebrate systematics and genetics from the University of Liverpool is a Professor in
Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford AND Dan Laffoley, PhD on marine ecology at the University of Exeter,
and Senior Advisor, Marine Science and Conservation Global Marine and Polar Programme (IPSO Oxford, “International earth system expert
workshop on ocean stresses and impacts”, July 20, 2011, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf)
The workshop enabled leading experts to take a global view on how all the different effects we are having on the ocean are compromising its
ability to support us. This examination of synergistic threats leads to the conclusion that we have underestimated the overall risks and that the
whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts, and that degradation is now
happening at a faster rate than predicted. It is clear that the traditional economic and consumer
values that formerly served society well, when coupled with current rates of population increase, are
not sustainable. The ocean is the largest ecosystem on Earth, supports us and maintains our world in
a habitable condition. To maintain the goods and services it has provided to humankind for millennia demands change in how we
view, manage, govern and use marine ecosystems. The scale of the stresses on the ocean means that deferring action will increase costs in the
future leading to even greater losses of benefits. The key points needed to drive a common sense rethink are: • Human actions have resulted
in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increased hypoxia. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are three
symptoms that indicate disturbances of the carbon cycle associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth (e.g. Erwin, 2008;
Veron, 2008a,b; Veron et al., 2009; Barnosky et al., 2011). • The
speeds of many negative changes to the ocean are near
to or are tracking the worstcase scenarios from IPCC and other predictions. Some are as predicted,
but many are faster than anticipated, and many are still accelerating. Consequences of current rates
of change already matching those predicted under the “worst case scenario” include: the rate of decrease in
Arctic Sea Ice (Stroeve et al., 2007; Wang & Overland, 2009) and in the accelerated melting of both the Greenland icesheet (Velicogna, 2009;
Khan et al., 2010; Rignot et al., 2011) and Antarctic ice sheets (Chen et al., 2009; Rignot et al., 2008, 2011; Velicogna, 2009);
sea level rise
(Rahmstorf 2007a,b; Rahmstorf et al., 2007; Nicholls et al., 2011); and release of trapped methane from the seabed
(Westbrook et al., 2009; Shakova et al., 2010; although not yet globally significant Dlugokencky et al., 2009). The ‘worst
case’ effects are compounding other changes more consistent with predictions including: changes in
the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand & Reid, 2003; Beaugrand 2004, 2009; Beaugrand et al., 2003;
2010; Cheung et al. 2009, 2010, Reid et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2011; Philippart et al., 2011; Schiel, 2011; Wassmann et al., 2011; Wernberg
et al., 2011); changes in primary production (Behrenfeld et al., 2006; Chavez et al., 2011); changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms
(Heisler et al., 2008; Bauman et al., 2010); increases in health hazards in the oceans (e.g. ciguatera, pathogens; Van Dolah, 2000; Lipp et al.,
2002; Dickey & Plakas, 2009); and
loss of both large, longklived and small fish species causing widespread
impacts on marine ecosystems, including direct impacts on predator and prey species, the
simplification and destabilization of food webs, reduction of resilience to the effects of climate
change (e.g. Jackson et al. 2001; Pauly et al., 1998; Worm & Myers, 2003; Baum & Myers, 2004; Rosenberg et al., 2005; Worm et al., 2006;
Myers et al., 2007; Jackson, 2008; Baum & Worm, 2009; Ferretti et al., 2010; Hutchings et al., 2010; WardkPaige et al., 2010; Pinskya et al.,
2011). • The magnitude of the cumulative impacts on the ocean is greater than previously understood Interactions between different impacts
can be negatively synergistic (negative impact greater than sum of individual stressors) or they can be antagonistic (lowering the effects of
individual impacts). Examples
of such interactions include: combinations of overfishing, physical
disturbance, climate change effects, nutrient runoff and introductions of nonknative species leading
to explosions of these invasive species, including harmful algal blooms, and dead zones (Rabalais et al.,
2001, 2002; Daskalov et al., 2007; Purcell et al., 2007; Boero et al., 2008; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Bauman et al., 2010;
VaquerkSunur & Duarte, 2010); increased temperature and acidification increasing the susceptibility of corals to bleaching (Anthony et al.,
2008) and acting synergistically to impact the reproduction and development of other marine invertebrates (Parker et al., 2009); changes in the
behavior, fate and toxicity of heavy metals with acidification (Millero et al., 2009; Pascal et al., 2010); acidification may reduce the limiting
effect of iron availability on primary production in some parts of the ocean (Shi et al., 2010; King et al., 2011); increased uptake of plastics by
fauna (Andrady 2011, Hirai & Takada et al. 2011, Murray & Cowie, 2011), and increased bioavailability of pollutants through adsorption onto
the surface of microplastic particles (Graham & Thompson 2009, Moore 2008, Thomson, et al., 2009); and feedbacks of climate change impacts
on the oceans (temperature rise, sea level rise, loss of ice cover, acidification, increased storm intensity, methane release) on their rate of CO2
uptake and global warming (Lenton et al., 2008; Reid et al 2009). • Timelines
for action are shrinking. The longer the
delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the
financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts
and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures. • Resilience of the ocean to climate change impacts is severely
compromised by the other stressors from human activities, including fisheries, pollution and habitat destruction. Examples include the
overfishing of reef grazers, nutrient runoff, and other forms of pollution (presence of pathogens or endocrine disrupting chemicals (Porte et al.,
2006; OSPAR 2010)) reducing the recovery ability of reefs from temperaturekinduced mass coral bleaching (Hoeghk Guldberg et al., 2007;
Mumby et al., 2007; Hughes et al., 2010; Jackson, 2010; Mumby & Harborne, 2010) . These multiple stressors promote the phase shift of reef
ecosystems from being coralkdominated to algal dominated. The loss of genetic diversity from overfishing reduces ability to adapt to stressors.
• Ecosystem collapse is occurring as a result of both current and emerging stressors. Stressors include chemical pollutants, agriculture runkoff,
sediment loads and overkextraction of many components of food webs which singly and together severely impair the functioning of
ecosystems. Consequences include the potential increase of harmful algal blooms in recent decades (Van Dolah, 2000; Landsberg, 2002;
Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Wang & Wu, 2009); the spread of oxygen depleted or dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2002; Diaz &
Rosenberg, 2008; VaquerkSunyer & Duarte, 2008); the disturbance of the structure and functioning of marine food webs, to the benefit of
planktonic organisms of low nutritional value, such as jellyfish or other gelatinousklike organisms (Broduer et al., 1999; Mills, 2001; Pauly et al.
2009; Boero et al., 2008; Moore et al., 2008); dramatic changes in the microbial communities with negative impacts at the ecosystem scale
(Dinsdale et al., 2008; Jackson, 2010); and the impact of emerging chemical contaminants in ecosystems (la Farré et al., 2008).
This
impairment damages or eliminates the ability of ecosystems to support humans. • The extinction
threat to marine species is rapidly increasing. The main causes of extinctions of marine species to date
are overexploitation and habitat loss (Dulvy et al., 2009). However climate change is increasingly adding to
this, as evidenced by the recent IUCN Red List Assessment of reforming corals (Carpenter et al., 2008). Some
other species ranges have already extended or shifted polekwards and into deeper cooler waters (Reid et al., 2009); this may not be possible
for some species to achieve, potentially leading to reduced habitats and more extinctions. Shifts
in currents and temperatures
will affect the food supply of animals, including at critical early stages, potentially testing their ability
to survive. The participants concluded that not only are we already experiencing severe declines in many species to the point of
commercial extinction in some cases, and an unparalleled rate of regional extinctions of habitat types (eg mangroves and seagrass meadows),
but we now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. Unless action is taken
now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, overexploitation,
pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean. It is notable that the occurrence of multiple high intensity
stressors has been a prerequisite for all the five global extinction events of the past 600 million years (Barnosky et al., 2009).
2AC Overfishing
Only ocean observation allows for effective management policies
Rosenberg 11 (Dr. Andrew Rosenberg, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New
Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for
Global Reform,” http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/)
U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we
know that while humans are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained
— by vast oceans.¶ In addition to supporting incredible biodiversity, oceans provide benefits to people in the
form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an
estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and
oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for
technology developers, manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and
develop new economic opportunities around the globe. America can lead this global innovation.¶ Unfortunately, the
health of our oceans is in serious decline; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are
stressed, habitats for ocean life are degraded and endangered marine species are struggling to recover.
wind power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our
Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants, which in turn has stressed the communities and
industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To
turn the tide, our national, state and local leaders must make a commitment
to more coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on sound science,
and scientific work must be a funding priority in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide.¶ The Joint Ocean
Commission Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of
our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and Great Lakes — which was established
by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy has the
potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced monitoring,
assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and are affected
by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental, social and
economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more effectively
manage these resources and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint
Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, I believe that monitoring what is
happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how the physical, biological, chemical and human
elements of ocean ecosystems interact. The Joint Initiative report recommends fully supporting an ocean
observation system that would integrate data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean, from buoys
on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing technology high above the Earth.¶ The
report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to have a
better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in order
to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal
communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure
that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy
infrastructure near the coast.Ӧ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound
investment in improving our economy. The data
and information collected from research activities will be used to
inform coastal development, promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant
marine-based recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us
compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation.
Fishery management prevents extinction
VOA, 10 (Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1, http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/BluefinTuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing--111159869.html)
Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance of marine life in
check. Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller organisms might affect the entire
underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far,
those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on
the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist
who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the sale of bluefin tuna. "Scientists tell us that when
a top
predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say
you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if you let these large fish become depleted because they anchor the
ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change
dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain. Government officials and members of environmental groups met in Paris in midNovember to discuss fishing
regulations that may affect all life on Earth.
Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with
the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says the bluefin is in jeopardy. "The fish is in worse shape
than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's
stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and
Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us to this point. "The
quotas are designed to let
fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but even within quotas, there's consistent lack of
enforcement, fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the
depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to near-extinction followed increased Japanese
demand for fresh sushi starting in the 1970s and 80s. And fishing practices that target the two primary regions in which blue fin spawn: the
Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart," said Sue Lieberman. "If you
want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light on a bigger
problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish it's estimated have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's
happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing
like that," said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale
fishing. Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it." "If
countries really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious about
enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. "Management of fish species on
the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's about the very future of
our planet," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and we can't keep … and governments can't
keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen to the fishing industry; we'll
worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury."
2AC SCS
IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection
Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South
Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s
Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of
Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of
Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote
Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing
Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf
Abstract—Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global
Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System ( IOOS ),
required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible
resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for
mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better
understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data
are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are
several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are
indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical
variables to
support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and
transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain
the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the
globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal
and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government,
and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will
define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required
to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations.
Solves SCS fishing disputes
Caitlin Werrell 14, and Francesco Femia, Co-Founders & Directors of the Center for Climate and
Security,
“Fisheries and Conflict Zones: The Critical Role of Satellite Technology,”
http://climateandsecurity.org/2014/01/07/fisheries-and-conflict-zones-the-critical-role-of-satellitetechnology/
Al-Abdulrazzak continues with an interesting and important point about the utility of satellite technology, especially for collecting
data in difficult-to-reach regions:¶ These results, which provide the first example of fisheries catch estimates from space, speak to
the potential of satellite technologies for monitoring fisheries remotely, particularly in areas that
were once considered too dangerous or expensive for fisheries surveillance and enforcement. For example,
we were able to reveal and account for 17 illegal operating traps in Qatar, and suggest that similar methods can be used to expose other illegal marine practices
such as monitoring activities in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and assessing the magnitude of oil spills. ¶ This utility
of satellite technology
would also apply to zones of instability and conflict, where fisheries data (and other sorts of data, including water
and climate information) are of critical importance for assessing vulnerability and instability, but are
difficult-to-impossible to collect due to circumstances on the ground. For example, see NASA’s satellite data on freshwater losses in the Middle East (the TigrisEuphrates-Western Iran region) – of critical importance in an unstable region where many ground-based data sources sources lay in zones inaccessible to
researchers.¶ Satellites
may also be crucial, for example, in tracking fisheries dynamics in the contested South
China Sea , which because of a warming ocean, is seeing fish stocks gradually moving northwards.
Accurate data and monitoring could be crucial in this area, as geopolitical tensions between China, its
Asian neighbors, and the United States, over claims to the sea, could be non-trivially affected by such
changes (see Will Rogers’ discussion of this in a CNAS report from 2012).¶ In short, satellite technologies are critical in a changing
(and unstable) world. We should not allow the pressures of austerity to make us forget this.
Those are the most likely scenario for SCS conflict
Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt 12, China and Northeast Asia director for the International Crisis Group,
former IR fellow at CFR, June 25 2012, “Fish Story,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/06/25/fish_story
Despite the
overwhelming preoccupation with the potentially abundant energy reserves in the South China Sea, fishing has
emerged as a larger potential driver of conflict . Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam rely on
the sea as an economic lifeline. And China is the largest consumer and exporter of fish in the world. And as
overfishing continues to deplete coastal stocks through Southeast Asia, fishermen are venturing out further into
disputed waters.¶ All this is worsening a trend of harassment, confiscation of catch and equipment, detention, and
mistreatment of fishermen. Further fueling tensions is the way countries in the region are wielding unilateral
fishing bans to assert jurisdiction over disputed waters under the pretext of environmental protection. Worryingly, the claims of
sovereignty also serve to justify greater civilian patrols in the sea -- opening up still more possibilities of runins with fishing vessels. And when ships go bump in the night, growing nationalist sentiment limits
governments' ability to resolve the disputes and sows the seeds for future problems.
Consider it a lesson in how a common fishing run-in can turn into a crisis that can bring an entire region to its knees.
2AC Sea Power
Oceanographic data is key sea power – information dominance.
Titley 2010
RAdm. David W. Titley, Oceanographer and Navigator of the Navy, January 2010 https://www.seatechnology.com/features/2010/0110/naval_oceanography.html
There is a growing recognition within the U.S. Navy that information
is evolving from a supporting function to a main
battery of 21st century American sea power. In response, the chief of naval operations (CNO) this year reorganized his staff
around the creation of an Information Dominance Directorate. As part of this initiative, naval oceanography is joining other
information-centric capabilities—including intelligence, information technology, information warfare and the space cadre—in
what the CNO has designated as the Information Dominance Corps. Environmental data collection and
processing, long a staple of naval oceanography, is a key contributor to decision superiority. For the
naval oceanography community, raw data are turned into actionable information using a concept
known as “Battlespace on Demand,” a four-tiered construct that begins with the collection of environmental data from an array
of remote and in-theater sensors. At the second tier, these data are used to characterize and predict the environment
using two supercomputing centers and trained specialists. The third tier is translating the predicted
environment into fleet and joint force war-fighting impacts. At the final tier, this information facilitates
decision superiority by informing options, courses of action, sensor employment, asset allocation and
timing, and the quantification of risk based on environmental considerations. Sensing Technology
Information dominance depends on cutting-edge technology , and the naval oceanography community continues to
work with national laboratories, research institutions and universities, and the commercial technology community to ensure we maintain that
edge. The use of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) for monitoring the marine environment is a subject of continuing interest and
investment. This year, the Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command awarded a contract to Teledyne Brown Engineering Inc. (Huntsville,
Alabama) to design the littoral battlespace sensing glider (LBS-G). The contract could deliver up to 150 Slocum gliders between fiscal year (FY)
2011 and FY 2015 if all options are exercised. These autonomously operated vehicles are configured to carry an array of sensors for collecting
environmental data. The command also released a University of Washington Seaglider from the icebreaker U.S. Coast Guard cutter Healy
(WAGB-20) while operating in the Chukchi Sea. Data from the glider will improve the performance and aid in the evaluation of oceanographic
computer models for the Arctic. The Naval Oceanographic Office recently took delivery of a Hydroid Inc. (Pocasset, Massachusetts) REMUS 600
AUV to apply multibeam technology to accurate bottom mapping. This system contains an inertial navigation system, a Doppler-aided bottom
velocity sonar and acoustic transponder position updates that will greatly improve vehicle positioning capabilities. The oceanographer of the
Navy is also investing in a modified version of the T-AGS oceangoing military survey vessel, T-AGS 66, which will include a moon pool for the
deployment and retrieval of unmanned vehicles. Numerical Modeling As
technological advances increase sensing
capabilities, there will be more data available to give us a higher resolution look at environmental
parameters, but that also means we need greater capacity with numerical models to enhance our
predictive capabilities. This year, 1,300 separate products were produced to support combat forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than
40 ports were surveyed to provide a baseline for mine countermeasure efforts and on-demand weather modeling requirements increased by
almost 10 percent. A significant advancement this year was the integration of the Navy Data Assimilation System-Accelerated Representer into
the Navy’s global atmospheric model to incorporate time variability through previous model runs. This allows the adaptation of observational
data into the model run regardless of when the information was sampled and provides the ability to identify trends in the data and get a better
initialization before the model starts its run. One challenge of protecting against piracy attacks off the Horn of Africa is the vast amount of sea
space that must be covered. To assist in this effort, the Piracy Performance Surface Model was developed to forecast probable concentrations
of pirate activity based on weather, sea conditions and the latest analysis from the intelligence community. Hosting the world’s most extensive
oceanographic database at the Department of Defense Supercomput-ing Resource Center in Stennis Space Center, Mississippi, the Naval
Ocean-ographic Office has expanded its capabilities so that oceanographic numerical modeling is now on par with our ability to model the
atmosphere at the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center in Monterey, California. The Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model,
jointly developed by the Navy and NOAA, is under final validation and on the verge of becoming operational. This model maintains the high
horizontal resolution of the Navy’s global ocean model, which takes into consideration the influence of atmospheric winds on the ocean
surface, but also allows for variable vertical resolution to account for coastal, nearshore impacts on the ocean thermal structure. This year has
seen progress toward the pursuit of partnerships to enhance the capabilities of environmental modeling. The National Unified Operational
Prediction Capability is an
integration effort of Navy, U.S. Air Force and NOAA models to support unparalleled global
modeling capability that can be adapted by individual agencies for specific applications. Another partnership formed
this year was between the Navy, DOER Marine (Alameda, California) and Google Inc. to integrate archived Navy ocean data into the new ocean
segment of Google Earth. This
will serve to help educate the public on the ocean and expand digital ocean
data holdings, enhancing the Navy’s ability to process, create and search oceanographic products in
an effort to better maintain the safety of the fleet and enhance war-fighter effectiveness. Climate Change
We will need these partnerships to help us develop models that will improve our understanding of the
changing conditions in the Arctic and global climate change in general. The Department of Defense is aware of the
challenges and opportunities climate change will present in the future. Last May, the CNO created Task Force Climate Change to make
recommendations to Navy leadership regarding policy, strategy, force structure and investments relating first to the changing Arctic and
subsequently to global climate change. The oceanographer of the Navy was appointed to lead the task force, which includes representatives
from various Navy and Coast Guard staffs, program offices and fleet commands, and NOAA.
Naval power deters great power wars, reassures allies and facilitates cooperation to
solve global problems
England et al., former deputy secretary of defense, 2011
(Gordon, “The Necessity of U.S. Naval Power”, 7-11, http://gcaptain.com/necessity-u-s-navalpower?27784, ldg)
The future security environment underscores two broad security trends. First, international political
realities and the internationally agreed-to
sovereign rights of nations will increasingly limit the sustained involvement of American permanent land-based, heavy
forces to the more extreme crises. This will make offshore options for deterrence and power projection ever more
paramount in support of our national interests. Second, the naval dimensions of American power will re-emerge as the primary
means for assuring our allies and partners, ensuring prosperity in times of peace, and countering anti-access, area-denial
efforts in times of crisis. We do not believe these trends will require the dismantling of land-based forces, as these forces will remain essential
reservoirs of power. As the United States has learned time and again, once a crisis becomes a conflict, it is impossible to predict with certainty its depth, duration
and cost. That said, the
U.S. has been shrinking its overseas land-based installations, so the ability to project
power globally will make the forward presence of naval forces an even more essential dimension of
American influence. What we do believe is that uniquely responsive Navy-Marine Corps capabilities provide the basis on which our most
vital overseas interests are safeguarded. Forward presence and engagement is what allows the U.S. to maintain awareness, to deter aggression,
and to quickly respond to threats as they arise. Though we clearly must be prepared for the high-end threats, such preparation should be made
in balance with the means necessary to avoid escalation to the high end in the first place. The versatility of maritime forces provides a truly unmatched advantage.
The sea remains a vast space that provides nearly unlimited freedom of maneuver. Command of the sea allows for the presence of our naval forces, supported from
a network of shore facilities, to be adjusted and scaled with little external restraint. It permits reliance on proven capabilities such as prepositioned ships .
Maritime capabilities encourage and enable cooperation with other nations to solve common sea-based
problems such as piracy, illegal trafficking, proliferation of W.M.D., and a host of other ills, which if unchecked can harm
our friends and interests abroad, and our own citizenry at home. The flexibility and responsiveness of naval forces provide our country with a general strategic
deterrent in a potentially violent and unstable world. Most importantly, our naval forces project and sustain power at sea and ashore at the time, place, duration,
and intensity of our choosing. Given these enduring qualities, tough choices must clearly be made, especially in light of expected tight defense budgets. The
administration and the Congress need to balance the resources allocated to missions such as strategic deterrence, ballistic missile defense, and cyber warfare with
the more traditional ones of sea control and power projection. The maritime capability and capacity vital to the flexible projection of U.S. power and influence
around the globe must surely be preserved, especially in light of available technology. Capabilities such as the Joint Strike Fighter will provide strategic deterrence,
in addition to tactical long-range strike, especially when operating from forward-deployed naval vessels. Postured to respond
quickly, the NavyMarine Corps team integrates sea, air, and land power into adaptive force packages spanning the
entire spectrum of operations, from everyday cooperative security activities to unwelcome — but not
impossible — wars between major powers. This is exactly what we will need to meet the challenges of the future.
2AC Trade
IOOS key to maritime trade which is key to overall trade
U.S. IOOS Summer Report 13 (The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is a national-regional partnership working to ¶ provide new tools and
forecasts to improve safety, enhance the economy, and protect our environment. August 2013. A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System from the U.S. IOOS Summer Report.
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf July 8, 2014).
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones
are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the
world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The
increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential
gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas. The
awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from
super-storms, which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that
inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except
that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users
in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs
over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion
over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and
around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely
underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power,
aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded,
reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products.
Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide, because of the role of
maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural
disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food
and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will
require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products
on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to
respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data
and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the
budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with
Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic
development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward
pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination;
and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will
need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared
liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications,
knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world,
including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21
st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of
a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy
(Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information
content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this
data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical, however,
especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this
issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the
best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know
when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into
a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem
by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before,
during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm
and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some
fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts
and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes,
and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency
response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is
severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization
products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the
people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product
standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable,
politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Trade solves war
Boudreaux 06 (Donald J. Boudreaux was the Chairman of the Department of Economics at GMU. Currently he is the Director of the Centerf or the Study of Public Choice. He
was recently President of the Foundation for Economic Education. “Want World Peace? Support Free Trade” from The Christian Science Monitor. 10/20/06.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p09s02-coop.html July 8, 2014.)
Back in 1748, Baron de Montesquieu observed that "Peace is the natural effect of trade. Two nations
who differ with each other become reciprocally dependent; for if one has an interest in buying, the
other has an interest in selling; and thus their union is founded on their mutual necessities."¶ ¶ If Mr.
Montesquieu is correct that trade promotes peace, then protectionism – a retreat from open trade –
raises the chances of war.¶ Plenty of empirical evidence confirms the wisdom of Montesquieu's
insight: Trade does indeed promote peace.¶ During the past 30 years, Solomon Polachek, an economist
at the State University of New York at Binghamton, has researched the relationship between trade and
peace. In his most recent paper on the topic, he and co-author Carlos Seiglie of Rutgers University
review the massive amount of research on trade, war, and peace.¶ They find that "the overwhelming
evidence indicates that trade reduces conflict." Likewise for foreign investment. The greater the
amounts that foreigners invest in the United States, or the more that Americans invest abroad, the
lower is the likelihood of war between America and those countries with which it has investment
relationships.¶ Professors Polachek and Seiglie conclude that, "The policy implication of our finding is
that further international cooperation in reducing barriers to both trade and capital flows can
promote a more peaceful world."¶ Columbia University political scientist Erik Gartzke reaches a similar
but more general conclusion: Peace is fostered by economic freedom. Economic freedom certainly
includes, but is broader than, the freedom of ordinary people to trade internationally. It includes also
low and transparent rates of taxation, the easy ability of entrepreneurs to start new businesses, the
lightness of regulations on labor, product, and credit markets, ready access to sound money, and other
factors that encourage the allocation of resources by markets rather than by government officials.¶
Professor Gartzke ranks countries on an economic-freedom index from 1 to 10, with 1 being very
unfree and 10 being very free. He then examines military conflicts from 1816 through 2000. His findings
are powerful: Countries that rank lowest on an economic-freedom index – with scores of 2 or less –
are 14 times more likely to be involved in military conflicts than are countries whose people enjoy
significant economic freedom (that is, countries with scores of 8 or higher).¶ Also important, the
findings of Polachek and Gartzke improve our understanding of the long-recognized reluctance of
democratic nations to wage war against one another. These scholars argue that the so-called
democratic peace is really the capitalist peace.¶ Democratic institutions are heavily concentrated in
countries that also have strong protections for private property rights, openness to foreign commerce,
and other features broadly consistent with capitalism. That's why the observation that any two
democracies are quite unlikely to go to war against each other might reflect the consequences of
capitalism more than democracy.¶ And that's just what the data show. Polachek and Seiglie find that
openness to trade is much more effective at encouraging peace than is democracy per se. Similarly,
Gartzke discovered that, "When measures of both economic freedom and democracy are included in a
statistical study, economic freedom is about 50 times more effective than democracy in diminishing
violent conflict."¶ These findings make sense. By promoting prosperity, economic freedom gives
ordinary people a large stake in peace.¶ This prosperity is threatened during wartime. War almost
always gives government more control over resources and imposes the burdens of higher taxes,
higher inflation, and other disruptions of the everyday commercial relationships that support
prosperity.¶ When commerce reaches across political borders, the peace-promoting effects of
economic freedom intensify. Why? It's bad for the bottom line to shoot your customers or your
suppliers, so the more you trade with foreigners the less likely you are to seek, or even to tolerate,
harm to these foreigners. Senators-elect Sherrod Brown (D) of Ohio and Jim Webb (D) of Virginia
probably don't realize it, but by endorsing trade protection, they actually work against the long-run
prospects for peace that they so fervently desire.
2AC Oil Spills
The plan provides spill response
French-Mcray 8 [Deborah P. French-McCay, PhD 1, Christopher Mueller1 , James Payne, PhD2 , Eric Terrill, PhD3 , Mark Otero3 , Sung Yong Kim3 , Melissa
Carter3 , Walter Nordhausen, PhD4 , Mark Lampinen4 , Brooke Longval1 , Melanie Schroeder1 , Kathy Jayko1 , Carter Ohlmann, PhD5.May 2008, “Dispersed Oil
Transport Modeling Calibrated by Field-Collected Data Measuring Fluorescein Dye Dispersion,”
http://www.asascience.com/about/publications/pdf/2008/393IOSC_FrenchMcCay_dispers-2007.pdf //jweideman]
.
New federal regulations regarding response plan oil removal capacity (Caps) requirements for tank vessels and marine transportation-related
facilities being developed by the US Coast Guard (USCG, 1999) are expected to result in an increased use of chemical dispersants to treat oil
spills in the United States. Othergovernment authorities (US and internationally) are also considering more dispersant use and designating "PreApproval Zones" for dispersant application in the event of oil spills. The application of dispersants in those and other areas may reduce the
impacts to wildlife (e.g., seabirds, sea otters) and shoreline habitats, with the potential tradeoff that the dispersed oil will cause impacts to
water column organisms (French McCay and Payne, 2001; French McCay et al., 2005). Computer simulations (French McCay et al.. 2006) of
large dispersed oil slicks (representing the maximum potential volume that could be dispersed in one location, with area — 1.5 square miles)
indicate that the resulting plumes may persist for several days with hydrocarbon concentrations at levels toxic to aquatic organisms. However,
model inputs for such predictions are uncertain; in particular the transport and dispersion rates of oil
components in the water column that determine exposure and effects on water column biota. Oil-spill
fate and transport modeling may be used to evaluate water column hydrocarbon concentrations,
potential exposure to organisms (zooplankton), and the impacts of oil spills with and without use of dispersants. A
number of such analyses have been performed using SIMAP (French McCay, 2003, 2004), which uses wind data, current data,
and transport and weathering algorithms to calculate the mass of oil components in various
environmental compartments (water surface, shoreline, water column, atmosphere, sediments, etc.), oil pathways over time
(trajectories), surface oil distributions, and concentrations of the oil components in water and sediments. SIMAP's biological efleets model was
then used to evaluate exposure, toxicity, and effects on each habitat and species (or species group) in the area of the spill. Often,
currents that transport oil components and organisms are estimated by a hydrodynamic model;
however, observational current data, such as from high- frequency-radar (HF-Radar) systems, drifters, or
current meters, may also be used. The transport models for such analyses are highly sensitive to the
current velocities and turbulent dispersion coefficients input to the models, as are further calculations
utilizing the transport results. In this study, we evaluate the usefulness of field- collected data from a set of
fluorescein dye studies off San Diego, California, to document movement and dispersion of subsurface dissolved
components (dye or dissolved hydrocarbons) over time. We analyzed HF Radar and driller measurements of near-surface currents,
dispersion coefficients based on dye spreading measurements, modeling of wind-forced surface water drift as a function of wind speed and
direction (based on published results of fluid dynamics studies), and water density profiles to determine their efficacy and accuracy as inputs
for modeling transport of near-surface constituents (such as dissolved hydrocarbons from naturally entrained or chemically dispersed oil).
Details of these studies are in Payne et al. (2007a, b) and French-McCay et al. (2007). Payne et al. (2008, these proceedings) provide an
overview of the objectives, methods, and field results.
Spills devastate biodiversity-extinction
Ingoldsby 10 [Joseph Emmanuel Ingoldsby writes and exhibits on issues relating to biodiversity. Recent publications include Vanishing Landscapes and
Endangered Species, The Science Exhibition: Curation and Design, Museum Press, UK, 2010; Vanishing Landscapes: The Atlantic Salt Marsh, Leonardo Journal, 422-2009, MIT Press; and Requiem for a Drowning Landscape, Orion Magazine, 4-2009. Environmental articles are compiled within Joseph Ingoldsby’s blog site,
Earth Elegies. 7/21/10, “Silent Summer: How Oil Disaster Impacts Biodiversity,” https://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/21-4 //jweideman]
Residents from the Gulf of Mexico report that schools of fish, manta rays, sharks, dolphins and sea
turtles are fleeing the plumes of oil and solvents to the shallow waters off of the coasts of Alabama
and Florida. Marine biologists from Duke University state that that the animals sense the change in
water chemistry and try to escape the contaminated water dead zones by swimming toward the
oxygen rich shallows. Here, they could be trapped between the approaching plumes of oil and the
shoreline. Scientists warn of a mass die off. Death comes in the spawning and nesting season within the Gulf of Mexico's biodiverse ecosystems. We have witnessed the immediate impact of oil on the threatened brown pelican,
the egrets, the laughing gulls and other shore and migratory birds, grounded with oiled plumage as
they try to rear their spring nestlings. This is also the time when the endangered Kemp Ridley turtles migrate through the Gulf of Mexico to
spawn, and when loggerhead turtles drag themselves up on the Gulf sands to lay their eggs. Their hatchlings face an uncertain future as they return to the polluted
Gulf of Mexico to begin their life's journey. This is also the time when the endangered manatees leave their winter gathering spots in warm springs to migrate to
their summer range along the Gulf coast and the time when Gulf sturgeon congregate in coastal waters for upstream migration exposing them to harm. We do not
readily see the impact to the diverse marine fisheries of the Gulf and Atlantic. The Gulf of Mexico is the nursery for a host of marine species, including the embattled
western Atlantic blue fin tuna. The Gulf of Mexico is the principal spawning ground of the migratory Western Atlantic tuna. Their spawning coincided with the
Horizon oil disaster. The
larval and juvenile fish are most vulnerable to the toxic effects of oil and dispersants
documented within their spawning ground. Scientific analysis of the viability of the 2010 spawning is necessary to determine the future
health of the tuna population. According to the World Wildlife Fund, the Atlantic blue fin tuna population has fallen 90% since
the 1970s and the species faces a serious risk of extinction. With the loss of the fisheries and the shrimp and oyster operations,
go the fishing communities and a way of life on the bayou. Fishing is often familial and multigenerational. The Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and sinking may
have broken the familial transferal of working knowledge between father and son and from son to grandson. No one knows how many years it will take for the Gulf
of Mexico to heal from the deadly infusion of oil, methane and toxic dispersants. The tragedy on the Gulf Coast galvanizes public attention as images of the slow
demise of brown pelicans, sea turtles, dolphins, sperm whales and sea birds covered in oil flood our television screens. We are looking at the expansion of eutrophic
dead zones; the contamination of the entire water column in the Gulf of Mexico- killing deep-water corals and giant squid to the black skimmers feeding on the
surface; the tragic loss of species and biodiversity; and the potential disappearance of the fishing cultures of the Gulf. This will be the "Silent Summer" that could
last for years. The
poisonous mix of oil, methane and dispersants will be the final nail in the coffin of these
vanishing landscapes and endangered species. We know from past oil spills that the toxic effects
continue decades later. Long time residents of New England may remember the grounding of the oil tanker, Florida, which broke up on the rocky
shoals off Old Silver Beach, West Falmouth on 16 September 1969 spewing 189,000 gallons of #2 fuel into Buzzards Bay. Scientists from the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution documented the damages to the marine ecosystem and coastline over the ensuing years. Their observations are helpful to codify the
environmental damages to sensitive coastal wetlands by oil contamination. To this day, toxic oil remains in the sediment layers of the marshlands ringing the
Falmouth shore and oil continues to inhibit growth and colonization of the subsoil by the marsh grass roots, fiddler crabs and other organisms. The vertical burrows
of the fiddler crabs veer horizontally avoiding the oil stained layer of soil. The marsh grass roots stop above the oil and spread horizontally, 41 years after the
Buzzards Bay oil spill. Retired Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Marine biologist, George Hampson has observed the daily impact of oil on the sensitive estuary
since that unprecedented day in 1969. He spoke of animals coming out of the sediments because the oil was saturating the flats and marshlands All of the clams
rose to the surface and extended their long necks trying to escape the oil along with invertebrates which floated to the surface. Soon the tide pools were filled with
life, where they slowly died. This was called the "Silent Fall" because all of the birds and animals were gone. Now
along the coastline of the
Gulf of Mexico we see the "Silent Summer" of dead and dying animals trying to escape the poisonous
mix of oil and the dispersant Corexit combined with the oxygen depleting methane gas. Video footage documents crabs climbing out of the water as a toxic
sheen approaches the shore. In the morning the crabs are floating belly up in the water. The air is laden with chemicals wafting up from the
water, which has become poisonous to marine life and the fumes dangerous to the long term health of those who breath it. According to scientific studies, the
Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 resulted in profound physiological effects to fish and wildlife. These
included reproductive failure, genetic
damage, curved spines, lowered growth and body weights, altered feeding habits, reduced egg
volume, liver damage, eye tumors, and debilitating brain lesions. Reports document that oil cleanup workers exposed to hot
water beach washing of the toxic oil and dispersant mix in 1989 filed compensation claims for respiratory system damage, according to the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health. Many have debilitating medical complications 21 years later. These ailments include respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and
blood disorders. History
repeats itself. The only hope is that this unnatural disaster will galvanize the public's
attention and give the President and members of Congress the courage to protect Nature's
biodiversity; and to promote and substantively fund alternative energy sources and clean, green technologies for our future. We are at the
tipping point of peak oil and technological change. Now is not the time for equivocation. We must embrace the future or be
damned by the next generation.
2AC Water Wars
Clean water scarcity is increasing- major catalyst for conflict
UNFT 12 [The United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT) is an internal United Nations (UN) support
mechanism that assists UN Resident Coordinators (RCs) and UN Country Teams (UNCTs) in developing conflict prevention strategies and programmes. 2012,
“Renewable Resources and Conflict,” http://www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/GN_Renewable_Consultation.pdf //jweideman]
Pressure on limited fresh water resources is mounting, driven by increasing population, economic growth,
industrial pollution, and loss of forested watersheds. The predicted effects of climate change are likely
to aggravate water scarcity even further in some regions. As demand is increasing, some countries are
already reaching the limits of their water resources. As a result, competition for water is intensifying –
whether between countries, urban and rural areas, economic sectors, or different livelihood groups.
This may make water an increasingly politicized issue.19 There are an estimated 263 international rivers, covering 45.3 percent of
the land-surface of the earth (excluding Antarctica).20 However, fewer than 10 countries possess 60 percent of the world’s
available fresh water supply: Brazil, Russia, China, Canada, Indonesia, the United States, India,
Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.21 Water use has been growing at more than twice
the rate of population increase in the last century. Forexample, while the world’s population tripled,
the use of renewable water resources grew six-fold. Over the last 50 years, freshwater withdrawals have tripled. 22
Worldwide agriculture accounts for 70 percent of all water consumption, compared to 20 percent for industry and 10
percent for domestic use.23 Unless agricultural water use is optimized, water demand for agriculture worldwide
would increase by 70 to 90 percent by 2050, creating acute problems for countries that are already
reaching the limits of their water resources.24 Today, four hundred and fifty million people in twenty-nine countries suffer from water
shortages.25 It is predicted that 47 percent of the world population will be living in areas of high water stress by
2030.26 The concept of water stress applies to situations where there is not enough water for all uses, whether agricultural, industrial or domestic. It has
been proposed that when annual per capita renewable freshwater availability is less than 1,700 cubic meters, countries begin to experience periodic or regular
water stress. Below 1,000 cubic meters, water scarcity begins to hamper economic development as well as human health and well-being.27 Based on these
criteria, the UN estimates that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity and two-thirds of the world’s
population could be under conditions of water stress. In
2010, access to clean drinking water became an official basic
human right. A resolution introduced by Bolivia was adopted by the UN General Assembly without
opposition. Although the decision does not make the right to water legally enforceable, it is symbolically important and places
more political obligations on national governments. The combination of rising water scarcity due to
increases in demand and the potential consequences of climate change make the need for
cooperative, equitable and sustainable management of national and transboundary water resources
more important than ever. The main sources of conflict over water include: r Competition between
different water sectors (agriculture, industrial, domestic); r Competition between different livelihood
groups (farming, livestock, fishing);r Degradation ofwater quality caused by pollution (industrial, agriculture,
urban); r Reduction of water supply caused by development/infrastructure projects; r Lost access to water
supplies and/or exhaustion of supply; r Natural variation in water availability and sudden contraction
of supply; r Exclusive control of water resources and access; r Conversion from public to private management and changes in pricing structure; r Unclear
water use and access rights; and, r Uncoordinated transboundary management.
Plan Solves clean water
IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to
Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]
A clean, safe water supply is one of our Nation's great natural resources; maintaining it requires a
well- integrated system of monitoring for changes in temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH,
pathogens, nutrients, and contaminants. Our coastal waters, estuaries, rivers, streams, and Great Lakes are
monitored for protection of the environment as well as to ensure their waters are safe for drinking and
recreation. Each year. Federal and State Government agencies, industry, academia, and private organizations devote
significant
time, energy, and money to monitor, protect, manage, and restore water resources and watersheds.
U.S. IOOS has identified several important variables related to monitoring water quality in our Nation's waters:
temperature, salinity, ocean color, dissolved oxygen, pH, pathogens, dissolved nutrients, optical properties, total suspended matter, colored
dissolved organic matter, and contaminants. Abundance
and type of plant and animal fauna are also important
indicators of water quality conditions. The data collected through monitoring activities can be used to detect trends, identify
emerging concerns, and to evaluate effectiveness of pollution control programs. Monitoring water quality can use a variety
of methods, such as hand collection or monitoring by in situ sensors deployed on buoys or stationary platforms,
and can occur at regular intervals or when a specific need arises. Real-time decisions are often made based on water
quality data supplied by U.S. IOOS partners. As an example, Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS), in partnership with NOAA’s Great
Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, is supporting monitoring activities that provide oxygen levels, water temperature, and wave
heights. The Cleveland Division of Water tracks the data, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding unsafe drinking water and
human health. This information acts
as a warning system to allow the utility to avoid drawing in hypoxic
(low levels of dissolved oxygen) waters orenable it to treat affected water appropriately. Other
municipalities receive similar information from U.S. IOOS partners, which allow them to monitor their
drinking water as well.
Scarcity goes nuclear in every region
NPR 10 [NPR citing Steven Solomon who has written for The New York Times, BusinessWeek, The Economist, Forbes, and Esquire. He has been a regular
commentator on NPR’s Marketplace. 1/3/10, “Will The Next War Be Fought Over Water?” http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122195532
//jweideman]
Just as wars over oil played a major role in 20th-century history, a new book makes a convincing case that many 21st
century conflicts will be
fought over water. In Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power and Civilization, journalist Steven Solomon argues that water is
surpassing oil as the world's scarcest critical resource. Only 2.5 percent of the planet's water supply is
fresh, Solomon writes, much of which is locked away in glaciers. World water use in the past century grew twice as fast as world population. "We've
now reached the limit where that trajectory can no longer continue," Solomon tells NPR's Mary Louise Kelly. "Suddenly
we're going to have to find a way to use the existing water resources in a far, far more productive manner than we ever did before, because there's simply not
enough." One issue, Solomon says, is that water's cost doesn't reflect its true economic value. While a society's transition from oil may be painful, water
is
irreplaceable. Yet water costs far less per gallon — and even less than that for some. "In some cases, where there are large political subsidies, largely in
agriculture, it does not [cost very much]," Solomon says. "In many cases, irrigated agriculture is getting its water for free. And we in the cities are paying a lot,
and industries are also paying an awful lot. That's unfair. It's inefficient to the allocation of water to the most productive economic ends." At the same time,
Solomon says, there's
an increasing feeling in the world that everyone has a basic right to a minimum 13
gallons of water a day for basic human health. He doesn't necessarily have an issue with that. "I think there's plenty of
water in the world, even in the poorest and most water-famished country, for that 13 gallons to be
given for free to individuals — and let them pay beyond that," he says. Solomon says the world is
divided into water haves and have-nots. China, Egypt and Pakistan are just a few countries facing
critical water issues in the 21st century. In his book he writes, "Consider what will happen in waterdistressed, nuclear-armed, terrorist-besieged, overpopulated, heavily irrigation dependent and
already politically unstable Pakistan when its single water lifeline, the Indus river, loses a third of its
flow from the disappearance from its glacial water source." Solomon notes some good water news, too. The United States has
made significant progress in curbing its water use, thanks to market forces and legislation such as the Clean Water Act. "Our water use between 1900 and 1975
actually tripled relative to population growth," he says. "Since 1975 to the present day, it has flat-lined. And we still had a population increase of about 30
percent and our GDP continued to grow. So it's an amazing increase in water productivity."
2AC Port Security/Terrorism
Threat of global terrorism increasing-Increase in IOOS integration efforts key to
maximize information delivery and port security
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart
phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across
most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The
increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and
potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled
areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage
from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that
inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster
than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of
ocean product needs over the next decade. The
world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by
another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the
United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is
largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal
power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on
expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction
products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of
the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related
natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing
food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking
will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these
platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly
become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will
affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local
jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S.
Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean
observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will
need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and
products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all
over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed,
some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of
water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There
has been an unprecedented boom
in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of
information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is
critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S.
IOOS must address this issue more fully . People need technology and access to the right information
so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most
people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will
need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must
address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after
disasters. The
amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting
we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm
intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning
criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this
information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where
multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by
differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result,
and warnings are improving, but
potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the
most . U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build
a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Terrorists are committed to detonating a nuclear weapon on American soil – U.S.
ports will be the trafficking point
Calvan, 2012 (Bobby, Boston Globe Staff and former foreign reporting fellow with the D.C.-based International Center for
Journalists, “US to miss target for tighter port security”, Boston Globe, 6/12/12, http://articles.boston.com/2012-0612/nation/32176427_1_homeland-security-cargo-containers-nuclear-bomb/3)
The Department of Homeland Security will miss an initial deadline of July 12 to comply with a
sweeping federal law meant to thwart terrorist attacks arriving by sea, frustrating border security
advocates who worry that the agency has not done enough to prevent dangerous cargo from coming
through the country’s ocean gateways, including the Port of Boston.¶ Only a small fraction of all metal cargo
containers have been scanned before arriving at US ports, and advocates for tighter port security say
all maritime cargo needs to be scanned or manually inspected to prevent terrorists from using ships
bound for the United States to deliver a nuclear bomb.¶ The scenario might be straight out of a Hollywood script, but the
threat of terrorism is not limited to airplanes, according to Homeland Security critics, including Representative Edward Markey of
Massachusetts. Markey accuses the agency of not making a good-faith effort to comply with a 2007 law he coauthored requiring all US-bound
maritime shipments to be scanned before departing overseas docks.¶ “We’re not just missing the boat, we could be missing the bomb,’’ the
Malden Democrat said.
“The reality is that detonating a nuclear bomb in the United States is at the very top
of Al Qaeda’s terrorist targets. ’’¶ Only about 5 percent of all cargo containers headed to the United
States are screened, according to the government’s own estimate, with some shipments getting only a cursory
paperwork review.¶ Homeland Security officials argue that wider screening would be cost-prohibitive, logistically and technologically difficult,
and diplomatically challenging. While acknowledging the threat as real, they are exercising their right under the 2007 law to postpone for two
years the full implementation of the congressionally mandated scanning program. That would set the new deadline for July 2014.¶ Critics say
Terrorists have long sought to obtain uranium or plutonium to
construct a nuclear bomb, global security analysts say. Government officials, including President Obama and his predecessor, George
W. Bush, have worried that terrorist cells could be plotting further devastation in the United States, perhaps through
radioactive explosives called “dirty bombs.’’¶ Homeland Security “has concluded that 100 percent scanning of incoming
the consequences of delay could be catastrophic.
maritime cargo is neither the most efficient nor cost-effective approach to securing our global supply chain,’’ said Matt Chandler, an agency
spokesman. Homeland Security “continues to work collaboratively with industry, federal partners, and the international community to expand
these programs and our capability to detect, analyze, and report on nuclear and radiological materials,’’ Chandler said, adding that “we are
more secure than ever before.’’¶ The agency has used what it calls a “risk-based approach’’ to shipments. As a result, Homeland Security has
focused on cargo originating from 58 of the world’s busiest seaports, from Hong Kong to Dubai. Last year, US agents stationed at those ports
inspected 45,500 shipments determined to be high risk, according to joint testimony by Homeland Security, Coast Guard, and US Customs
officials in February before the House Homeland Security Committee.¶ Republicans have been wary of forcing the agency to comply with the
scanning mandate because of the presumed cost, perhaps at least $16 billion - a figure disputed by Markey and others who cite estimates that
the program could cost a comparatively modest $200 million.¶ Representative Candice Miller, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House
subcommittee on border and maritime security, was more inclined to accept the estimate from Homeland Security officials. In light of the
country’s budget troubles, “we have to try and prioritize,’’ she said.¶ Scanning cargo “100 percent would be optimal,’’ she conceded, “but it’s
not workable.’’¶ Still, she acknowledged the need to secure the country’s borders, whether by air, land, or sea.¶ There
is no dispute
that a terrorist attack at a major port could be catastrophic to the global economy . Much of the world’s
products - T-shirts sewn in China, designer shoes from Italy, and other foreign-made products - arrives in the United States in large, metal cargo
containers.¶ While some countries have voluntarily improved cargo screening, others have not. Large retailers have opposed measures that
could increase their costs. Without full scanning compliance, it is often difficult to determine if shipments have been inspected because cargo is
sometimes transferred from ship to ship offshore.
Nuclear terrorism causes extinction
Ayson, 2010 (Robert, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria
University of Wellington, “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7,
July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)
But these
two nuclear worlds—a non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear
exchange—are not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and
especially an act of nuclear terrorism, could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive
exchange of nuclear weapons between two or more of the states that possess them. In this context, today’s
and tomorrow’s terrorist groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new state possessors of small nuclear
arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by third parties. These risks were
considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1 problem. It may require a
considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism could lead to such a massive
inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well be wondered just how Russia
and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as the most obvious state
sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort of terrorist behavior
that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example, how
might the
United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear
terrorism had come from Russian stocks,40 and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for nuclear laxity? The
correct attribution of that nuclear material to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the observation by Michael May
et al. that while the debris resulting from a nuclear explosion would be “spread over a wide area in tiny fragments, its radioactivity makes it
detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of the explosion, the
Alternatively, if the act of
nuclear terrorism came as a complete surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a
terrorist group was fully responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state
possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities in
Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea, perhaps Iran if its program
continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out in this high stakes game of
materials used and, most important … some indication of where the nuclear material came from.”41
nuclear Cluedo? In particular, if the act of nuclear terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in Washington’s relations with
Russia and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would officials and political leaders not
be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the
chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the
United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or
if they were confronting each other from a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at
the present time. The reverse might well apply too: should a nuclear terrorist attack occur in Russia or China during a
period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow and
Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible
perpetrator or encourager of the attack?
2AC Science Leadership
Ocean exploration leads to a large increase in technology output – exploration will
become the new target of American innovation
Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special
correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”,
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/
In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it
(relatively) affordable and accessible came to an end after 30 years. Those three decades provided numerous
technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag of nearly $200 billion, the program had its champions and its
detractors. It was,
however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing the American spirit of
innovation and leadership. With the iconic space program ending, many people have asked, "What’s
next? What is the next giant leap in scientific and technological innovation?" Today a possible answer to that
question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition
that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what
covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean. You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau
and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean
exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau"
introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential
resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing
need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A
new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help
inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an early
treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy
conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove
of knowledge. In addition, such
discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well
as technologies and goods.
Science leadership solves hard and soft power – technology solves hegemony while
diplomacy created by science leadership solves for soft power
Coletta 2009 Damon Coletta, PhD in political science, September 2009, “Science, Technology, and the
Quest for International Influence”,
http://www.usafa.edu/df/inss/Research%20Papers/2009/09%20Coletta%20Science%20and%20Influenc
eINSS(FINAL).pdf
After the industrial revolution, science
leadership has been associated with increased national capability
through superior commercial and military technology. With the rising importance of soft power and
transnational bargaining, when America‘s hard power cannot be deployed everywhere at once,
maintaining leadership in basic science as the quest to know Nature may be key to curbing legitimate
resistance and sustaining America‘s influence in the international system. The catch is that American
democracy imposes high demands on the relationship between science, state, and society. Case studies of
the Office of Naval Research and U.S. science-based relations with respect to Brazil, as telling examples of U.S. Government science policy
via the mission agency, reveal how difficult it is for a democratic power to strike the right balance between applied activities and
fundamental research that establishes science leadership. To
discover sustainable hegemony in an increasingly
multipolar world, American policy makers will need more than the Kaysen list of advantages from
basic science. Dr. Carl Kaysen served President John Kennedy as deputy national security adviser and over his long career held
distinguished professorships in Political Economy at Harvard and MIT. During the 1960s, Kaysen laid out a framework with four important
reasons why a great power, the United States in particular, should take a strategic interest in the basic sciences. 1. Scientific
discoveries provided the input for applied research, which in turn produced technologies crucial for
wielding economic and military power. 2. Scientific activity educated a cadre of operators for
leadership in industries relevant to government such as health care and defense. 3. Science
proficiency generated the raw elements for mounting focused, applied efforts such as the Manhattan
Project during World War II to build the first atomic bomb. 4. Scientific progress built a basic research
reserve that when necessary could move quickly to shore up national needs.
Primacy ensures peace – deterrence and relations, both hard and soft power are key
Posen and Ross 1997 Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science at MIT and
director of MIT's Security Studies Program Andrew L. Ross, PhD in political science, International
Security, Volume 21, Number 3, Winter 1997, pg. 30, “Competing visions for US Grand Strategy”,
http://www.comw.org/pda/14dec/fulltext/97posen.pdf
Primacy, like selective engagement, is motivated by both power and peace. But the particular
configuration of power is key: this strategy holds that only a preponderance of U.S. power ensures
peace.41 The pre-Cold War practice of aggregating power through coalitions and alliances, which
underlies selective engagement, is viewed as insufficient. Peace is the result of an imbalance of power in
which U.S. capabilities are sufficient, operating on their own, to cow all potential challengers and to
comfort all coalition partners. It is not enough, consequently, to be primus inter pares, a comfortable position for selective
engagement. Even the most clever Bismarckian orchestrator of the balance of power will ultimately fall short. One
must be primus solus. Therefore, both world order and national security require that the United
States maintain the primacy with which it emerged from the Cold War. The collapse of bipolarity
cannot be permitted to allow the emergence of multipolarity; unipolarity is best. Primacy would have been
the strategy of a Dole administration. Primacy is most concerned with the trajectories of present and possible
future great powers. As with selective engagement, Russia, China, Japan, and the most significant members of the European Union
(essentially Germany, France, and Britain), matter most. War among the great powers poses the greatest threat to
U.S. security for advocates of primacy as well as those of selective engagement. But primacy goes
beyond the logic of selective engage- ment and its focus on managing relations among present and
potential future great powers. Advocates of primacy view the rise of a peer competitor from the midst of the great powers to
offer the greatest threat to international order and thus the greatest risk of war. The objective for primacy, therefore, is not merely to
preserve peace among the great powers, but to preserve U.S. suprem- acy by politically, economically, and militarily outdistancing any
global challenger.
2AC Stem
Better ocean data attracts new STEM majors
Yoder 2012
Jim Yoder has a B.A. in Botany from DePauw University and a M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of
Rhode Island in Oceanography, former Director, Division of Ocean Sciences National Science Foundation
http://livebettermagazine.com/article/ocean-observing-systems-stimulating-interest-in-stem/
Ocean observing systems and ocean observatories are being developed and deployed in the U.S. and around the
world to make sustained and continuous oceanographic measurements and to deliver that information
in real-time to research, operational and commercial users. Many also see educational applications from data collected by ocean
observing systems, including real-time data. A challenge for the educators is whether data from these systems can
help generate student interest in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) and, thus, become an
important tool for training the scientific and technical workforce of tomorrow. Real-time data is
potentially interesting, even exciting, to students because students will be seeing the data at the same
time as scientists and everyone else. This raises the possibility that students and other learners will be active participants
in the discovery process. The hope is that this potentially interesting and exciting data from the ocean systems will
help stimulate interest in STEM in general and in the ocean environment in particular. For this to occur, however, educators need
to package real-time and other data from observing systems in a form and context that can be readily used and interpreted by students. Ocean
observing systems are not a new concept, although using the data for educational purposes is comparatively new. The U.S. Navy has had ocean
observing systems in place for military purposes for many decades. For example, development of the Navy’s Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS)
for using acoustic signatures to track Russian submarines was started long ago. ARGO is an example of an international civilian ocean observing
program that was started more than a decade ago. ARGO involves international ocean scientists who deploy thousands of profiling floats
throughout the global ocean using commercial, oceanographic and other ships of opportunity. The floats move with ocean currents and
measure temperature and salinity with depth (profiles) from the surface to 2000m, as well as the average speed of ocean currents. Each float
cycles from the surface to 2000m every 10 days and each has an operational lifetime of about 4-5 years. Each float thus has the potential for
measuring hundreds of profiles. When the float is at the surface it transmits its data via satellite links back to processing centers in Brest,
France, or Monterey, Calif. All ARGO data are publically available in near real-time at no charge. With more than 3,500 floats scattered
throughout the global ocean, ARGO temperature, salinity and velocity data can be used to teach basic concepts like temperature patterns of
the global ocean, how to read and interpret graphs and illustrate complex ocean phenomena, such as how climate change is affecting the
ocean. Given the broad range of possible audiences for learning about ARGO, educators are using several different approaches: materials and
lesson plans for classrooms, workshops that target the science community and online resources, such as Google Earth and Wikipedia, which
provide the public (free-choice learners) the capability to study the ocean with ARGO data. These approaches are similar to what is now being
developed for other observing systems. The U.S. is developing two new ocean observing systems and both include educational applications in
their respective portfolios. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is
leading the development of
an operational system called the “Integrated Ocean Observing System” ( IOOS ). The purpose of IOOS is to provide
information and data to increase understanding of U.S. coastal waters so decision-makers can take
action to improve safety, enhance the economy and protect the environment. The National Science
Foundation’s Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) is constructing infrastructure to support sensors to measure physical, chemical, geological
and biological variables in the ocean and seafloor to support scientific research. The total national investment in both of these systems will
likely exceed $500M by 2015, and the costs to operate will likely exceed more than $50M per year. The
systems are anticipated to
have a major impact on ocean science research and operations. In addition to research and operational users,
educational applications for data from IOOS and OOI are being developed, including educational uses of
data delivered in near real-time. As mentioned above, the challenge for educators is to package real-time data in a form and
context that can be readily used and interpreted by students and their teachers. This is particularly challenging for K-12 audiences because
younger students and their teachers lack experience and tools to produce analytical products, such as simple statistics and graphs from raw
data streams. Putting data products into an oceanographic context is also difficult when students lack basic knowledge of the ocean
environment. For example, a series of graphs showing how ocean water temperature changes with depth, and why those profiles change with
season, is not very interesting in itself. Students need the context, e.g. they also need to understand something about mixing between surface
and deeper waters as well as how seasonal changes in the amount of solar energy reaching surface ocean waters affects ocean mixing, and why
this is important. Younger students likely will need to work with data products produced for them by their teachers or by online educators that
display data in very simple ways and then link it to a lesson plan that puts the observations into the right context (example). With the possible
exception of advanced high-school students, real-time data streams from ocean observing systems are probably not for K-12 students.
Nevertheless, younger
students with adequate guidance can still learn about daily and seasonal changes
in the ocean and why they occur by looking at a sequence of graphs produced for them. They can also
learn about organisms that live in the ocean from video streams associated with ocean observatories ,
such as Neptune and Venus. Ocean observing data will obviously be most useful if it can be linked to national and state science standards. The
process for how K-12 students and teachers can effectively use data from observing systems, including real-time data to better train students to
participate in the STEM workforce of the future, was described recently as a process involving four key steps (Hotaling 2007). Step one is the
ocean observing data needs to be accessible, which means the data needs to be available, including to schools and classrooms lacking
sophisticated computers and fast networks. It also needs to be understandable by non-specialists, i.e. it has to be in context of important and
simply described ocean processes. Step two is the data has to be useable, which means it must be engaging and meaningful, fit within STEM
curricula and satisfy educational standards. Step three is teachers themselves must be adequately trained so they are comfortable using and
discussing ocean observing data in a classroom. This requires effective professional development via online or face-to-face training or a
combination thereof. Step four is the importance of preparation at the K-12 level, so students entering four-year or community colleges know
something about how to apply observatory data to real-life situations. This
would lead to much quicker and effective
training of a well-qualified STEM workforce with the skills to manage and utilize data from sensors
and sensor networks, whether associated with ocean observations or any other sensor network, including those associated with
commercial operations. A top priority for educational uses of data from NSF’s Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) is the focus on special tools
and lessons for undergraduates. Undergraduate class projects and senior theses can obviously take better advantage of real-time and other
observatory data than K-12 students given that undergrads have better skills and access to better analysis tools as well as more time to analyze
and interpret longer records of observations. The
expectation is that undergraduate ocean science or other science
majors, non-science majors and community college students can work with real-time data, if provided
the software tools to simplify data streams and to provide context. The first three steps listed above for K-12 are
certainly applicable to undergraduate students and their professors, although college science professors should not need the level of
professional development that K-12 teachers will require. Data analysis tools for undergraduates, and perhaps advanced high-school students,
need to be scaled to examine relations between, perhaps, just two ocean variables – temperature and salinity, for example. Furthermore, there
has to be a web-based framework that puts the data into context for undergraduates. A web interface, for example, could allow an
undergraduate interested in undersea earthquakes to examine the real-time record of an undersea seismometer (basically a chart showing the
strength of earth movements) while at the time ingesting and then watching video illustrating different types of undersea lava flows. The most
sophisticated college users, such as ocean science graduate students and ocean science faculty, will likely use commercially available data
analysis packages to study relations between many data sources and from many locations.
STEM leadership’s key to the sustainability and legitimacy of hegemony–
independently solves extinction
Coletta, USAF Professor of Political Science, 09
(Damon, Duke University , Ph.D. in Political Science, December 1999 Harvard University , Master in
Public Policy, 1993 Stanford University , Master in Electrical Engineering, 1989 Stanford University ,
B.S.E.E., 1988, “Science, Technology, and the Quest for International Influence,”
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA536133&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Less appreciated is how scientific
progress facilitates diplomatic strategy in the long run, how it contributes to Joseph Nye‘s
soft power, which translates to staying power in the international arena. One possible escape from the
geopolitical forces depicted in Thucydides‘ history for all time is for the current hegemon to maintain its lead in science,
conceived as a national program and as an enterprise belonging to all mankind. Beyond the new technologies for projecting military or economic power, the
scientific ethos conditions the hegemon‘s approach to social-political problems. It effects how the leader
organizes itself and other states to address well-springs of discontent—material inequity, religious or ethnic
oppression, and environmental degradation. The scientific mantle attracts others‘ admiration, which
softens or at least complicates other societies‘ resentment of power disparity. Finally, for certain global problems—nuclear
proliferation, climate change, and financial crisis—the scientific lead ensures robust representation in
transnational epistemic communities that can shepherd intergovernmental negotiations onto a conservative,
or secular, path in terms of preserving international order. In today‘s order, U.S. hegemony is yet in doubt even though
military and economic indicators confirm its status as the world‘s lone superpower. America possesses
the material wherewithal to maintain its lead in the sciences, but it also desires to bear the standard for
freedom and democracy. Unfortunately, patronage of basic science does not automatically flourish with liberal democracy. The free market and the
mass public impose demands on science that tend to move research out of the basic and into applied realms. Absent the lead in basic discovery,
no country can hope to pioneer humanity‘s quest to know Nature. There is a real danger U.S. state and society could
permanently confuse
sponsorship of technology with patronage of science, thereby delivering a self-inflicted
blow to U.S. leadership among nations.
2AC Oil Production
Satellite mapping finds oil- it increases production capabilities
Short 11 [Nicholas M. Short, Sr is a geologist who received degrees in that field from St. Louis University (B.S.), Washington University (M.A.), and the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Ph.D.); he also spent a year in graduate studies in the geosciences at The Pennsylvania State University. In his early postgraduate career, he worked for Gulf Research & Development Co., the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and the University of Houston. During the 1960s he
specialized in the effects of underground nuclear explosions and asteroidal impacts on rocks (shock metamorphism), and was one of the original Principal
Investigators of the Apollo 11 and 12 moon rocks. 2011, “Finding Oil and Gas from Space” https://apollomapping.com/wpcontent/user_uploads/2011/11/NASA_Remote_Sensing_Tutorial_Oil_and_Gas.pdf //jweideman]
If precious metals are not your forte, then try the petroleum industry. Exploration
for oil and gas has always depended on
surface maps of rock types and structures that point directly to, or at least hint at, subsurface conditions
favorable to accumulating oil and gas. Thus, looking at surfaces from satellites is a practical, costeffective way to produce appropriate maps. But verifying the presence of hydrocarbons below surface
requires two essential steps: 1) doing geophysical surveys; and 2) drilling into the subsurface to
actually detect and extract oil or gas or both. This Tutorial website sponsored by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists is a simplified
summary of the basics of hydrocarbon exploration. Oil and gas result from the decay of organisms - mostly marine plants (especially microscopic algae and
similar free-floating vegetation) and small animals such as fish - that are buried in muds that convert to shale. Heating through burial and pressure from the
overlying later sediments help in the process. (Coal forms from decay of buried plants that occur mainly in swamps and lagoons which are eventually buried by
younger sediments.). The decaying liquids and gases from petroleum source beds, dominantly shales after muds convert to hard rock, migrate from their sources
to become trapped in a variety of structural or stratigraphic conditions shown in this illustration:The oil and gas must migrate from deeper source beds into
suitable reservoir rocks. These are usually porous sandstones, but limestones with solution cavities and even fractured igneous or metamorphic rocks can
contain openings into which the petroleum products accumulate. An essential condition: the
reservoir rocks must be surrounded (at
least above) by impermeable (refers to minimal ability to allow flow through any openings - pores or
fractures) rock, most commonly shales. The oil and gas, generally confined under some pressure, will escape to the surface - either
naturally when the trap is intersected by downward moving erosional surfaces or by being penetrated by a drill. If pressure is high the oil and/or gas moves of its
own accord to the surface but if pressure is initially low or drops over time, pumping is required.
Exploration for new petroleum sources
begins with a search for surface manifestations of suitable traps (but many times these are hidden by burial and other
factors govern the decision to explore). Mapping of surface conditions begins with reconnaissance, and if that
indicates the presence of hydrocarbons, then detailed mapping begins. Originally, both of these maps required field
work. Often, the mapping job became easier by using aerial photos. After the mapping, much of the more intensive exploration depends on geophysical
methods (principally, seismic) that can give 3-D constructions of subsurface structural and stratigraphic traps for the hydrocarbons. Then, the potential traps are
sampled by exploratory drilling and their properties measured. Remote
sensing from satellites or aircraft strives to find one
or more indicators of surface anomalies. This diagram sets the framework for the approach used; this is the so-called microseepage
model, which leads to specific geochemical anomalies:
Offshore drilling is necessary to curb competition with China over resources
DiMicco and Pickens 10 [Dan DiMicco is chairman and chief executive officer of Nucor Corp. T. Boone Pickens is chief executive officer of BP Capital.
7/21/10, “No need to end offshore drilling” Politico) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39977.html]
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has led some people to call for a reversal of the decision to expand offshore drilling in our country, while
others now want an end to offshore drilling entirely. We believe this would be a mistake. We need a vigorous examination to determine the cause of the spill
and ensure that such a disaster never happens again. But
we cannot lose sight of the important role that offshore drilling
— along with other domestic energy resources — plays in increasing U.S. energy and economic security. We need to
develop traditional energy resources even as we build the necessary infrastructure for alternative energy use. We are both concerned
about America’s future prosperity. Our nation seems to be going down a road that puts our energy and economic
security at risk. While the recession has cut energy use here, it is growing in many developing
countries, particularly China. A global race for energy resources is on — and China is way out front.
China’s state-owned oil companies are now maneuvering to control a substantial amount of oil and
natural gas in Africa, Asia and South America. China’s energy investments are also in our own
backyard. Beijing has invested in five oil sands projects in Alberta, Canada, and signed agreements with Cuba to explore for oil on land and offshore.
China could soon be drilling closer to U.S. shores than we are. China has deals in more than 21
countries, through direct oil and natural gas purchases as well as “loans for energy” — in which China
builds energy infrastructure in exchange for the resource. These deals could potentially deliver more
than 7.8 billion barrels of oil to China. As with manufacturing, aggressive government intervention fuels China’s growing dominance in
energy. Beijing maintains direct ownership of oil companies and finances deals through state-owned banks. Why should we care about China’s energy play?
Because the United States is already too dependent on other countries for its energy needs. The United States imports nearly two-thirds of the oil it uses daily —
12 million barrels per day, much of it from nations hostile to our interests. Forty years ago, 85 percent of the world’s oil reserves were open to private
investment. Today, only 20 percent are open, with the remaining 80 percent state-owned or controlled. We are nearing a day when oil sales are dictated less by
commercial purposes and instead by political or military considerations. While China is aggressively securing energy resources, Washington is paralyzed by a
political system unable to address our long-term economic and energy security needs. This is why we are concerned about the political backlash against offshore
drilling. Our political system is increasingly short-term in its outlook and driven by the 24-hour news cycle. These factors lead U.S. political leaders to sacrifice
long-term planning for short-term political gain. Energy is just one area in which this puts our nation’s future at risk. Fortunately, the American people still take a
long-term view. Polls taken after the Gulf oil spill revealed that a majority of Americans say they still support drilling off U.S. coasts. Some people
have framed the issue as a choice between offshore drilling and clean shores — implying that we cannot have both. But we can have both. Government and the
industry need to learn from this tragedy so that we can develop safer, smarter practices. We have abundant energy resources right here that we have neglected
to use. For example, we have a 100-year supply of
advances have opened up new shale areas with large natural gas reserves.
natural gas from reserves both on land and offshore. Technological
US-China resource competition causes conflict
Klare 8 [Michael T, renowned expert on natural resource issues, author of The Race for What's Left, Rising Powers Shrinking. “The end of the world as you
know it,” 8, http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174919 //jweideman]
Oil at $110 a barrel. Gasoline at $3.35 (or more) per gallon. Diesel fuel at $4 per gallon. Independent truckers forced off the road. Home heating oil rising to
unconscionable price levels. Jet fuel so expensive that three low-cost airlines stopped flying in the past few weeks. This is just a taste of the latest energy news,
signaling a profound change in how all of us, in this country and around the world, are
going to live -- trends that, so far as anyone
can predict, will only become more pronounced as energy supplies dwindle and the global struggle
over their allocation intensifies. Energy of all sorts was once hugely abundant, making possible the worldwide economic expansion of the past
six decades. This expansion benefited the United States above all -- along with its "First World" allies in Europe and the Pacific. Recently, however, a select group
of former "Third World" countries -- China and India in particular -- have sought
to participate in this energy bonanza by
industrializing their economies and selling a wide range of goods to international markets. This, in
turn, has led to an unprecedented spurt in global energy consumption -- a 47% rise in the past 20 years alone, according
to the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE). An increase of this sort would not be a matter of deep anxiety if the world's primary energy suppliers were capable of
producing the needed additional fuels. Instead, we face a frightening reality: a marked slowdown in the expansion of global energy supplies just as demand rises
precipitously. These supplies are not exactly disappearing -- though that will occur sooner or later -- but
they are not growing fast
enough to satisfy soaring global demand. The combination of rising demand, the emergence of
powerful new energy consumers, and the contraction of the global energy supply is demolishing the
energy-abundant world we are familiar with and creating in its place a new world order. Think of it as:
rising powers/shrinking planet. This new world order will be characterized by fierce international
competition for dwindling stocks of oil, natural gas, coal, and uranium, as well as by a tidal shift in power and
wealth from energy-deficit states like China, Japan, and the United States to energy-surplus states like
Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. In the process, the lives of everyone will be affected in one way or another -- with poor and middle-class consumers in
the energy-deficit states experiencing the harshest effects. That's most of us and our children, in case you hadn't quite taken it in. Here, in a nutshell, are five key
forces in this new world order which will change our planet: 1. Intense competition between older and newer economic powers for available supplies of energy:
Until very recently, the mature industrial powers of Europe, Asia, and North America consumed the lion's share of energy and left the dregs for the developing
world. As recently as 1990, the members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of the world's richest nations,
consumed approximately 57% of world energy; the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact bloc, 14% percent; and only 29% was left to the developing world. But that ratio
is changing: With strong economic growth in the developing countries, a greater proportion of the world's energy is being consumed by them. By 2010, the
developing world's share of energy use is expected to reach 40% and, if current trends persist, 47% by 2030. China
plays a critical role in all
this. The Chinese alone are projected to consume 17% of world energy by 2015, and 20% by 2025 -- by
which time, if trend lines continue, it will have overtaken the United States as the world's leading
energy consumer. India, which, in 2004, accounted for 3.4% of world energy use, is projected to reach 4.4% percent by 2025, while consumption in
other rapidly industrializing nations like Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Turkey is expected to grow as well. These rising economic
dynamos will have to compete with the mature economic powers for access to remaining untapped
reserves of exportable energy -- in many cases, bought up long ago by the private energy firms of the
mature powers like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP, Total of France, and Royal Dutch Shell. Of necessity, the new contenders have
developed a potent strategy for competing with the Western "majors": they've created state-owned
companies of their own and fashioned strategic alliances with the national oil companies that now
control oil and gas reserves in many of the major energy-producing nations. China's Sinopec, for
example, has established a strategic alliance with Saudi Aramco, the nationalized giant once owned by
Chevron and Exxon Mobil, to explore for natural gas in Saudi Arabia and market Saudi crude oil in China. Likewise, the China
National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) will collaborate with Gazprom, the massive state-controlled Russian natural gas monopoly, to build pipelines and deliver
Russian gas to China. Several of these state-owned firms, including CNPC and India's Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, are now set to collaborate with Petróleos
de Venezuela S.A. in developing the extra-heavy crude of the Orinoco belt once controlled by Chevron. In this new stage of energy competition, the
advantages long enjoyed by Western energy majors has been eroded by vigorous, state-backed
upstarts from the developing world.
Nuclear war
Doble 11 [John, has an M.A. in International Affairs from American University and a B.A. in Political Science and History from the University of WisconsinMadison. “Maritime Disputes a Likely Source of Future Conflict” http://www.policymic.com/articles/2279/maritime-disputes-a-likely-source-of-future-conflict
December]//jweideman
Yesterday, the
U.S. and China were involved in a nuclear exchange. The cause of this conflict was a war brought
about between China and the Philippines after the Philippines seized several of the Spratly Islands to secure natural
resources and the sea lanes traversing the South China seas, both of which it would use to advance itself in the global economy. China refused to accept
this action and attacked, and the U.S. was dragged in after the president was pressured by Congress and American allies to honor America’s
mutual-defense agreement with the Philippines. The result was disastrous. While this is a hypothetical example, similar scenarios are
becoming increasingly probable. Due to increasing economic competition and climate change, a source of future conflict will be the
contest for control over the seas. The U.S. must adequately plan for future contingencies to avoid any surprises and to discern what it needs to do
to prevent the worst-case scenario from occurring. Economic competition on the seas can be seen most clearly in terms of port construction. As it
stands, over 90% of all goods measured by weight or volume are transported by cargo ship, and port construction greatly increase a nation’s access to foreign
markets and appeal as a manufacturing center. Conversely, a nation’s investment in ports reduces the amount of goods traveling to other nations, thus damaging
their economies. Unlike other forms of infrastructure investment, maritime infrastructure implicitly affects international security. This competition has already
created conflict in the Middle East. Bilateral efforts to improve relations between Iraq and Kuwait were scuttled earlier this year after Kuwait announced it was
investing heavily in building a new port (the Mubarak Kabeer) only 20 kilometers away from a port Iraq was building (the Grand al-Faw). Rapprochement swiftly
ended over Iraqi fears of economic strangulation and calls for eternal brotherhood were replaced by curses. Nowadays, rumors abound that Iraqi and Kuwaiti forces
are infiltrating the border areas and Iraqi militants have already launched rockets from Iraq into Kuwait and threatened to kidnap the contractors building the
Mubarak Kabeer port. While threatening, this conflict is unlikely to explode as Iraq is in no shape to wage war and labors under a history of belligerence it is trying
to expunge. But what if a similar sequence of events occurred in Southeast/East Asia, where GDP is growing an average of 6%-7% a year(with China at 9.1%) and
states can operate more freely? The U.S. is investing more resources in the region at the exact moment when growing economic competition make conflict more
likely. Secondly, climate change will soon have a massive impact on the world’s coastal areas. Global sea levels are likely to rise between 80 to 200cm at the end of
the century and would submerge large tracts of land, displacing millions of people and wiping out urban and agricultural areas. Since they are built on the coast, this
would also damage or destroy many ports worldwide and jeopardize international commerce as we know it. These losses would be difficult to replace given the
increased environmental pressures Southeast/East Asian states would face as well as the spillover problems that would arise as low-lying countries sink into the sea
and collapse. Competition
over the ports that survive will be fierce as whoever possesses them would likely
dominate the sea lanes and international commerce for some time, leading to regional dominance. Similarly, economic competition
and climate change are going to going to cause havoc on the military industrial base supporting naval power in the region. It is expensive to build a competitive
navy, and many states will be unable to afford it if they need to constantly adapt to economic and environmental pressure. China and India are already building up
their naval forces and will likely be naval powers into the foreseeable future, but the U.S. will gain a lot of allies in the future struggling to get the U.S. involved in
every security dispute they have. Like WWI, someone may gamble incorrectly, and a conflict that starts as a minor incident may explode into something much
greater. The
U.S. consequently needs to utilize all facets of American power, from military to diplomatic to foreign aid, to confront these complex
challenges and prevent them from escalating out of control. We need to promote broader acceptance of free trade on the open
seas as well as democratic governance to limit the appeal of coercive power and the ability to use that power arbitrarily. We need a way to maintain the strength of
our alliances without getting sucked into conflicts we don’t want, besides selling more weapons that only make war increasingly likely. Regardless of the exact
policies, policymakers need to start thinking ahead on how it will deal with the implications economic competition and climate change are going to have on
maritime power. Intelligent observers of the Middle East knew for years that the authoritarian status quo was unsustainable, yet no plans were made to respond to
the collapse of those regimes and our response could have been better. Current
Southeast/East Asia
is equally untenable. Do we have a plan in place?
trends indicate that the current status quo in
IOOS Mechanism
Inherency
SQ Fragmented
Status quo observation efforts are fragmented
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
The existing U.S. ocean observing system was built with the support of a wide range of sponsors and
users with applications as varied as safe navigation and beach water quality monitoring. Much of the
system arose as a "mission-dependent, uncoordinated collection of sensors rather than a carefully
designed, multi-sensor, multi-user observing system . We must examine the existing system to
identify improvements -- from co-locating more sensors on existing platforms to re-locating existing
platforms based on scientific and operational need. In the coming decade it will be important for the
U.S. IOOS® program to develop more mature and comprehensive processes for defining and
prioritizing requirements and observing system design that integrate across global to local scales .
Accurate products and predictions within the U.S. IOOS geographic area require accurate information
at its offshore boundary, thus increased interoperability with international GOOS efforts is required.
Inputs from terrestrial watersheds into the coasts and Great Lakes must also be integrated, to combine
river flooding and coastal storm surge into coastal flooding predictions. Identification of essential
capabilities in each of the U.S. IOOS subsystem components can provide common threads for the
design. This chapter assesses the progress toward developing a comprehensive design, and highlights
steps that need to be taken.
SQ not implementing
Expanding IOOS implementation key
JOCI 2011
Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, AmericA’s OceAn Future Ensuring HEaltHy ocEans to support a
vibrant Economy http://www.jointoceancommission.org/resource-center/1-Reports/2011-0607_JOCI_Americas_Ocean_Future.pdf
Good ocean science will require consistent and dedicated investment. In this time of fiscal austerity, it may be
difficult to find new funds to enhance America's marine science capabilities. But investing in ocean science, research, and
education is important to supporting economic as well as environmental well-being. Ocean-related
data and information are critical for informed coastal development, efficient marine transportation,
safe commercial fishing, and vibrant marine-based recreation and tourism. Communities that rely on these
activities—and other goods and services that ocean and coastal ecosystems provide—need to be able to quantify their contribution to the
economy so they can make good decisions about their management going forward. Education in ocean and coastal sciences and technology
should also be improved as part of the national push to bolster our scientific and technical workforce, so that the U.S. can continue to lead an
innovation-based global economy. Supporting a better understanding of our oceans and coasts is a sound economic investment for today and
for the future. Ocean Observation, Monitoring, Modeling, and Assessment Successful implementation of the National Ocean Policy and its
strategic goals will require coordination and investment in ocean
and coastal observing, long-term monitoring, modeling, and
ecosystem assessment. These programs are essential for understanding the complex problems our ocean and
coastal communities face; knowing whether our policies and management systems are meeting
environmental, social, and economic goals; identifying how our policies can be improved; and developing new
and innovative solutions. Better decision making and long-term monitoring of the outcomes of those
decisions requires a fully developed and supported Integrated Ocean Observing System ( IOOS ). The IOOS
integrates data on what is happening in our oceans—including data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean,
from buoys on the ocean's surface, and from satellites with remote- sensing technology high above
the Earth. The IOOS allows us to better understand, model, and forecast changes to the planet and its
oceans. This in turn allows us to understand how these changes will affect ocean economies and
communities that depend on them, improve the safety of marine operations, improve national and homeland security, and
mitigate the effects of natural hazards. Unfortunately, these benefits have been limited by insufficient
commitment and investment. In one stark example, the federal government was unable to accurately
detect, monitor, or forecast the subsurface oil plume from the Gulf of Mexico spill, which resulted in
uninformed management decisions, conflicting scientific predictions, and confusing communications with a concerned public. In addition to
ocean observation and monitoring efforts, there is a strong need for the development of improved ocean-related models. Better models can
help managers understand and forecast conditions under various planning scenarios and management approaches. They can improve our
understanding of how the physical, biological, chemical, and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact. This is essential for the more
integrated, coordinated, and forward-looking management of ocean resources. Gaining a comprehensive picture of the environmental, cultural,
and economic characteristics of ocean and coastal ecosystems will be essential for improving our management of these resources. This includes
gaining a better understanding of the contributions that ecosystem services and recreational uses make to our local, state, and national
economies. Integrated ecosystem assessments at the regional or sub-regional scales can address this need. These assessments should go
beyond a static snapshot and consider ecological, spatial, and temporal variations. They should be coordinated across federal agencies, states,
tribes, and academic partners and should be regularly updated to serve as the basis for planning and management actions and a focal point for
regional scientific efforts. RECOMMENDATION Congress and
the Administration should fund and implement the
Integrated Ocean Observing System so that managers can understand how ocean ecosystem changes
will affect ocean resources, ocean economies, and the communities that depend on them. They should also
support the development of better models for forecasting ocean conditions under various management scenarios.
Solvency
Data = effective Policy
The plan provides effective management
IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to
Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]
The IOOC recognizes that U.S. IOOS must be responsive to environmental crises while maintaining the
regular long-term ocean observation infrastructure required to support operational oceanography
and climate research. As a source of our Nation’s ocean data and products, U.S. IOOS often serves as a resource for
the development of targeted applications for a specific location or sector. At the same time, U.S. IOOS
organizes data from across regions and sectors to foster the national and international application of local data
and products broadly across oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. Events over the last few years, including
Hurricane Sandy and the Deep Water Horizon oil spill have awakened U.S. communities to the value
and necessity of timely ocean information. IOOC commends U.S. IOOS for responsive and capable
support to the Nation in these events in addition to diverse everyday support to the Nation’s
maritime economy. We have much more work to do to build and organize the ocean-observing infrastructure of the Nateion and look
forward to wrking with congress on this continuing challenge.
Full implementation of IOOS is key to effective ocean management
Dr. Andrew A. Rosenberg 9, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at
the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries
Service, and Dr. Paul A. Sandifer, Ph.D. in Marine Science from the University of Virginia, Chief Science
Advisor for NOAA’s National Ocean Service, “What Do Managers Need?” Chapter 2 in Ecosystem-Based
Management for the Oceans,
http://www.pelagicos.net/MARS6910_spring2013/readings/EBM_for_the_Oceans_ch2.pdf
One ray of hope is provided by the recently released national Ocean Research Priorities Plan and Implementation Strategy developed by the US Joint Subcommittee
on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST 2007). This is the first comprehensive ocean research plan that involves every agency of the US government concerned in
any way with ocean research. The overarching goal of the plan is “to provide the guidance to build the scientific foundation to improve society’s stewardship and
use of, and interaction with, the ocean.” The plan focuses on three central elements of ocean science and technology: (1) capability to forecast ocean and oceaninfluenced processes and phenomena, (2) development of scientific support for EBM, and (3) deployment of an ocean-observing sys-tem. These three--ocean
forecasting, EBM, and ocean observing--permeate the entire document and its twenty national research priori-ties organized within six societal themes. The JSOST
(2007) further recognized the breadth of scientific support and integration that would be needed to implement EBM, stating that a multi-dimensional, multidisciplinary effort to enhance current understanding of ecosystem processes, determine which interactions are most critical, and assess the dynamics of the natural
and human factors affecting those interactions would be necessary (see also box2.4). Full
development and implementation of the
Integrated Ocean Observing System(IOOS) and other ocean and coastal observatories will provide a foundation of
monitoring data that could enable and enhance manage-ment in many ocean sectors. An IOOS that includes not only high-resolution measurements in time and space of the physical and chemical
properties within an ecosystem, but also bio-logical attributes, and that incorporates high-resolution data on human
activities within that ecosystem, would open up an entirely new world of information for management. Such a
system and its related information flows would enable forecasting of ocean processes and phenomena, including
severe storms, currents, status of fishery stocks and other biological resources, and human health
risks. The requi-site tools are rapidly becoming available, with a variety of data collection methods ‰from
mea-surements of waves, temperature, currents,and productivity in real time with buoys, satellites, and radar to the monitoring of fishing activity with vesselmonitoring systems, and shipping with automated identification sys-tems (USCOP 2004), and even development of a wide range of biological sensors (JSOST 2007;
Sandifer et al. 2007). Using
these new tools would allow management to operate on a spatial and temporal
resolution that has never before been possible. However, developing new management strategies and tactics that can take advantage
of such high-resolution in-formation is an important area for growth and research.
Integration Solvency
Data is insufficient-integrated system is key to effective policy
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
Example 4. Data is not enough; it must be integrated The Gulf of Maine buoy array of NERACOOS has
provided continuous oceanographic measurements for over a decade. There are now seven buoys in
the array sited at coastal shelf depths ranging from 50 to 250 meters and providing temperature
measurements at 3 to 7 depths throughout the water column. Analysis of this time series shows
statistically significant warming trends at all depths for all locations, providing the first depth-resolved
rates of temperature variability for the U.S. East Coast from continuous data. Ecosystem data are
lacking, however, so there is no telling what impact this warming condition is having on the
ecosystem. User engagement is successful when the data are integrated in new ways to provide new
understandings or new information for decision-making. The impact of data is limited without
human resources funded for analysis and for making the results available to broader user groups .
IOOS needs to increase integration efforts to maximize information delivery-key to a
laundry list of economic, security, and environmental threats (in 1AC)
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart
phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across
most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant
ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports
and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled
areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage
from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal
needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS
users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product
needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another
billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United
States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely
underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal
power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on
expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction
products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of
the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related
natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing
food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social
networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide
U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also
develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both
providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of
drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater
accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety,
security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face
increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and
data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S.
IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership,
governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in
communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all
over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and
economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of
defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real
estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom
in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of
information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is
critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S.
IOOS must address this issue more fully . People need technology and access to the right information
so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most
people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will
need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We
must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and
local products—before, during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is
impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to
understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer
proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of
these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In
many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid
information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and
mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it
into the hands of the people who need it the most . U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing
data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable,
economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Integration is the lynchpin of successful ocean policy-is a pillar of human survival
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
The ocean is of fundamental importance to the national security and economy of the United States.
Decades of focused investment in ocean observing and prediction have produced many examples of
substantive societal and economic benefit resulting from improved knowledge of ocean and coastal
waters and their behavior. Many complex and difficult questions about the ocean remain , including
many that have implications for the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans. Because the ocean
provides much of the oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere, provides all of the fresh water on land
through a cycle of evaporation-to-clouds-to-rain, and regulates the Earth's climate, the overall state of
the global ocean and its changes profoundly affect all Americans, in fact all of humankind .
Recognizing this, the United States has embarked on a series of efforts to develop an ocean observing
system capable of addressing broad societal needs. This system is known as the U.S. Integrated Ocean
Observing System (U.S. IOOS"). The activities and members of the U.S. IOOS community are broad and
complex. There are 18 Federal agencies involved in the U.S. IOOS program, as well as 11 U.S. IOOS
Regional Associations that encompass efforts focused in U.S. coastal waters, the Great Lakes, and U.S.
territories and their waters in the Pacific and the Caribbean. In addition, there are many Federal and
academic scientists representing the U.S. Government in various United Nations-sponsored groups that
plan and oversee global ocean observation programs. This diverse community is managed largely
through cooperation rather than clear directive or budgetary authority, which has contributed to both
the strong growth, and the integration weaknesses , of the U.S. IOOS program. A major focus for the
next decade of U.S. IOOS is to develop comprehensive processes that more fully integrate the
requirements, technologies, data/product development and dissemination, testing and modeling
efforts across the regional, national, and global sectors of the U.S. IOOS program.
Integration through IOOS is key to effectiveness---the alternative is uncoordinated
research that fails to deliver information to relevant decision-makers
David L. Martin 3, PhD in Oceanography from the University of Washington, Associate Director,
Applied Physics Laboratory at the University of Washington, former Director of the Operational
Oceanography Center at the Naval Oceanographic Office, “The National Oceanographic Partnership
Program, Ocean.US, and Real Movement Towards an Integrated and Sustained Ocean Observing
System,” Oceanography Vol 6 No 4, http://www.tos.org/oceanography/archive/16-4_martin_d.pdf
The oceans are of fundamental importance to our society. They are energy sources and modifiers of our weather, a buffer for the security
of our nation, vast reservoirs of living resources, natural laboratories for scientists and educators, highways for national and international commerce and places of
recreation for our citizenry. Human
population growth and its preferential concentration in coastal regions around
subjecting the oceans, particularly the coastal ecosystems, to increasing pressures and
damaging their ability to deliver the goods and services, with those services ranging from the dilution of human effluent to serving as
nursery grounds for commercial fisheries, upon which we have come to depend. In order to make rational, scientifically
the world however is
sound decisions about a host of activities that impact the ocean and coastal ecosystems, we must have
two fundamental capabilities: first, we must be able, on a comprehensive and cosmopolitan basis, to monitor the present state
of the ocean and coastal ecosystems, and second, we must be able to make robust predictions about the future
states of these ecosystems. We have neither of these capabilities today . ¶ As a nation, the U nited S tates has
historically responded to these two grand challenges in an uncoordinated and frequently competitive fashion . Thus,
when considering the sum of all ocean monitoring related efforts across the various governmental components of our
federalist structure (e.g., federal, tribal, state and local), these programs are frequently duplicative , are inherently inefficient from a
resource expenditure standpoint, and, most importantly, they
fail to deliver information and knowledge on the causes and
consequences of anthropogenic actions and natural variability in a timely enough manner to allow
their incorporation
into scientifically sound decision making about the ocean and coastal environment. This
need not be the case . There has been a convergence of interests and understanding about the importance
of developing and maintaining an integrated and sustained ocean observing system ( IOOS ) in both the international and national arenas over the past
decade. Because of this decadal focus on sustained ocean observations and convergence of interests in the political realm that understand the importance of
developing this vital national capability, the time has come to close the gap between scientifically sound, long-term ocean observations and the decision making
process.
The plan is integration- status quo data collection is ineffective and time consuming
Signell and Snowden 14 [Richard P. Signell, U.S. Geological Survey, Derrick P. Snowden, U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System Office, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 3/19/14, “Advances in a Distributed Approach for Ocean Model Data Interoperability”
http://testbed.sura.org/sites/default/files/jmse-02-00194.pdf //jweideman]
Ocean modelers typically require many different types of input data for forcing, assimilation and
boundary conditions, and routinely produce GB or larger amounts of output data. Depending on which model is used, the horizontal coordinate of
the output data may be on a regular, curvilinear, or unstructured (e.g., triangular) grid, while the vertical coordinate may be on a uniform or stretched grid with
a number of different possibilities (e.g., sigma, sigma-over-z, s-coordinate, isopycnal). Ocean
modelers therefore often spend large
amounts of time on mundane data manipulation tasks such as searching and reformatting data from
external sources, writing custom readers for specific models so that results between models can be
compared and assessed, as well as responding to custom data requests from consumers of their
model products. Better tools reduce time spent on these mundane data manipulation tasks, thereby
increasing time spent on modeling and analysis work. The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS® ) has been
working on better tools to support not only its member organizations, but the entire ocean science
community. U.S. IOOS (hereafter referred to simply as IOOS), is a collaboration between Federal, State, Local, Academic and Commercial partners to
manage ocean observing and modeling systems to meet the unique needs of each region around the US
[1–3]. Federal partners provide the ―National Backbone‖, and 11 IOOS Regional Associations (RAs) build upon the backbone with local assets to create
observational and modeling systems designed to be more than the sum of the parts, capable of responding to the societal needs of each individual region (e.g.,
harmful algal blooms, eutrophication, search and rescue, oil spills, navigation, mariculture) (Figure 1). In 2008, IOOS held a community modeling workshop
attended by 57 members spanning federal, research and private sectors, including modelers and stakeholders, and the workshop produced a report with nine
specific recommendations to advance the state of ocean modeling in the US [4]. One of recommendations was to ―develop an implementation plan for a
distributed, one-stop shopping national data portal and archive system for ocean prediction input and output data‖. The US Geological Survey (USGS) had been
working on model data interoperability for their collaborative projects on sediment transport modeling [5–7] and in 2009 agreed to send one of their modelers
to the U.S. IOOS Program Office, within the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for a one year detail to lead the effort.
Proliferation of data sources makes use and management impossible- integration solves
Blower et al 10 [J.D. Blower, ) Environmental Systems Science Centre. S.C. Hankin, tegrated Science Data Management, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans. ,
R. Keeley, Integrated Science Data Management, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, S. Pouliquen IFREMER. J. de la Beaujardière, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. E. Vanden Berghe, Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University. G.Reed, Australian Ocean Data Centre Joint Facility. F. Blanc,
Space Oceanography Division, M.C. Gregg, U.S. National Oceanographic Data Center, J. Fredericks , Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. , D. Snowden,
NOAA/Climate Program Office. 2010, “OCEAN DATA DISSEMINATION: NEW CHALLENGES FOR DATA INTEGRATION”
http://www.oceanobs09.net/plenary/files/draft%20papers/FCXNL-09A02b-1864228-1-Oceandatadisseminationplenaryv1.0.pdf //jweideman]
The continuous growth in capacity and availability of the Internet has led to a similar increase in its
use for disseminating ocean data. Through the use of Internet and Web technologies, ocean data can be made available to a wide variety of
users in a highly flexible manner. Internet-based dissemination systems, from which users “pull” data, provide extra capabilities above those provided by
broadcast or “push” systems, such as the ability to monitor usage patterns and customize data feeds on-the-fly for particular users. These technologies will be
the focus of this paper, although we acknowledge that other methods remain valuable, particularly for applications in which high-bandwidth Internet access is
not readily available, and where high reliability,
high data throughput and timeliness are important. Historically, each
project or observing platform has maintained its own data management and dissemination system.
This has led to a proliferation of online data sources, meaning that users frequently experience
difficulties in finding the data they require, or in finding the authoritative copy of a dataset that
appears on the Internet many times. Recent trends have focussed on global data assembly centres (e.g.
Argo, drifters, and OceanSites) and on assembling data from various platforms into consolidated collections in
support of specific goals, such as the WOCE2 Data Assembly Centres, the Coriolis database of in situ observations3 , the GHRSST4 project for sea
surface temperature [4], the AVISO5 project for altimetry data and the U.S. Observing System Monitoring Center6 [5,6] Work
still needs to be
done in helping the many users of ocean data to discover, evaluate and access the data they need [7].
It is widely agreed that users of ocean data require information to be presented in a consistent
manner, irrespective of the source of the data; section 2 of this paper discusses current efforts towards increasing the consistency of
data across projects and platforms. Recently, much attention has been given to the adoption of open geospatial standards for the discovery, encoding,
visualization and dissemination of data; section 3 examines their strengths and weaknesses for the ocean community. Section 4 describes some recent efforts
that employ new technologies to create large “virtual databases” of observations of the ocean and other elements of the earth system. Finally, the paper
concludes (section 5) by drawing out the main current challenges in data dissemination and making recommendations for future activities.
Laundry List
IOOS critical to responding to all ocean related crisis
-disasters
-Climate
-Energy
-Maritime transportation
-homeland security
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
UNDERSTANDING OF THE NEED FOR IOOS Recent events underscore the importance of IOOS to the
economic, security and environmental interests of the United States. • Ocean, coastal and Great Lakes
observations have proven to be e ssential for responding to weather, ocean, and human-mediated
disasters on global, regional and local scales; as well as in reducing and mitigating the economic,
social, and cultural risks of extreme events. • The increasingly clear understanding of the scope and
impacts of environmental changes, including sea level rise, the increase in ocean acidity, and the need
to respond, adapt to and manage those changes, calls for a more extensive and sustained monitoring
of the oceans and coasts as critical to understanding and predicting the earth's climate systems . •
Challenges of maintaining the quality and quantity of food and water for the US population and a
rapidly growing global population will require improvements in our ability to predict ocean state
conditions , weather, climate and extreme events including drought, harmful algal blooms and other
conditions. • Economic development and Job growth in areas experiencing dynamic change, such as
the energy sector and maritime transportation, accentuate the need for the public and private
sectors in the United States to understand ocean and coastal conditions as they relate to a
transforming global economy, and to ensure safe and efficient operations. • A new dynamic of
national and homeland security emphasizes that we must enhance our ability to monitor the oceans.
• The increasing need for sustained marine ecosystem goods and services requires a robust
infrastructure for biological, biogeochemical and ecological observations. • Ocean, coastal and Great
Lakes observing leads to the creation of new high quality jobs to provide information supporting
improved decision making in industries that depend on the oceans. Now, more than ever, the United
States requires a sustained and integrated ocean observing system .
Needs Funds
Increased funding for IOOS is key---the alternative is a fragmented approach and loss
of observational resources due to inadequate funds
IOOS Summit Report 12, a report synthesizing outcomes from a meeting attended by 200
representatives and informed by white papers from hundreds of ocean observing experts, “IOOS
Summit Report Version 1-3”, September 18, 2012, http://www.iooc.us/wpcontent/uploads/2012/09/DRAFT-IOOS-Summit-Report-2012-09-18-V1-3.docx
Although U.S. IOOS is a line item in the NOAA budget, it is largely an unfunded federal mandate . Many
naysayers continue to question the value of integration , believing that agency programs supported
with agency-unique budgets and supporting requirements are adequate. Clearly, this argument does not
address the inefficiencies of this fragmented approach , and fails to support U. S. IOOS as a national
ocean enterprise. This current state of play makes it difficult for the U.S. IOOS efforts to be taken seriously by
Federal partners. Challenge 8 lies at the heart of U.S. IOOS’ ‘ failure to thrive’ . What is needed are users and requirements
that can help make the case why
improved , coordinated funding must occur to enable an effective, integrated
Federal backbone . In an effort to try to emphasize that we all benefit through the contributions of many, the U.S. IOOS has sometimes been called a
National Ocean Enterprise. However, the coastal, estuarine and Great Lakes communities can feel excluded by the “ocean” terminology, which makes this branding
effort counter effective.¶ By meeting all the previously identified challenges, advocacy will develop naturally if the stakeholders and users are actively engaged and
their requirements are being met. However, a proactive advocacy strategy that addresses federal agency, RA, private industry, and NGO roles and limitations is
needed. Federal agencies obviously would have a very different role in this strategy than other stakeholders. ¶ Recommendation 8A: NFRA should coordinate with
private industry, the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and other stakeholders to develop an advocacy strategy. One element of the strategy should be to
incorporate advocacy elements into the R2O process recommended for Challenges 4 through 7. ¶ Challenge 8B:
Lack of proper funding can lead
to user alienation and loss of existing observational resources .¶ There is often an awkward interaction
between users and the observing community that is trying to develop the U.S. IOOS because the
conversations mix discussions about technical needs with those of financial support. The observing
community has an earnest desire to define and fill user needs, but often cannot, having inadequate
funds to achieve the desired data stream, integrated product, or other informational assets. In this
situation, the issue of finances may be brought into the conversation prematurely, before the observing community has created credibility for their products. Such
interactions create a perception that the U.S. IOOS entity is more interested in obtaining money than in meeting user needs. At the other end of the interaction
spectrum, there are many users that have come to rely on observing system products without providing financial or political support for the system. The observing
system community is not adept at culminating that supportive relationship into advocacy or funding even when the timing is appropriate.
New funds are key to effective operational monitoring
IOOS association 14 [IOOS official organization, “The U. S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS®) A federal/regional program sponsored by
NOAA/NOS Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request” 2014, http://www.ioosassociation.org/sites/nfra/files/FY15%20Ask%20One%20Pager%20DRAFT.pdf //jweideman]
No less than $30 million to support the ongoing operation of the national network of regional coastal
observing systems. This would increase base funding to $23 million to the national network to provide
core data and information and to ensure that systems are operational in the face of the next
hurricane or extreme weather event, as well as provide $7 million for the continued operation of the
nation’s only high frequency radar network for the collection of real-time surface current observations
and to fill critical gaps and to bring all systems to full capacity. • $10 million for marine sensor innovation grants. The marine sensor
innovation program was initiated in FY 13 to support the transition of promising sensors from the development to operations to fill critical gaps in
monitoring such as biology, harmful algal bloom and ocean acidification. These competitive awards
were made to teams of IOOS regions, industry, and Federal partners ensures that IOOS remains stateof-the art and responsive to user needs.
IOOS key effective data
IOOS is critical to accurate prediction and forecasting of ocean conditions and weather
events
Lautenbacher 2013
Conrad, Retired Vice Admiral and Board Member of the South East Coastal Ocean Observing Regional
Association (SECOORA), House Testimony,
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP19/20130321/100498/HHRG-113-AP19-Wstate-LautenbacherV20130321.pdf
Superstorm Sandy was unprecedented in its size and impact on the mid-Atlantic and northeastern
regions of our country. We can all hope that this type of storm is not a new normal. Both before and during
the storm U.S. IOOS provided critical data that helped emergency managers prepare to protect lives and
property, and enabled scientists and weather forecasters to better understand the storm’s track,
intensity and the resulting storm surge. However, our understanding and forecasts of hurricane and extratropical
storm intensity must be improved. While significant gains have been made in recent years to forecasts of storm tracks, little
improvement has been demonstrated over the past 20 years for storm intensity – in large part due to
a lack of real-time data along the storm paths. Recent extreme events, including Superstorm Sandy and last year’s
Hurricane Irene, tragically reflect the need for enhancement of the nation’s observing and forecasting
capabilities to meet the growing demands for accurate predictions of impacts. This FY 14 budget request will
provide a small initial investment in extreme event readiness for each of the 11 IOOS Regional Associations. The critical infrastructure
that supports the nation’s readiness for the next extreme weather event, whether it’s a hurricane baring down on
the east coast, tsunami and flood on the west coast or extreme thunder storms in the Great Lakes region must be operational and
ready to deliver. I am suggesting that we begin to make the necessary investment. This request is in addition to funding of S22.5 million
that was requested through the Sandy Supplemental Appropriations Process to improve hurricane intensity forecasting in the five IOOS regions
along the North Atlantic Storm Pathway. Assuming the funding appropriated by this Congress and initiated by this committee through H.R. 152
(S25 million to improve weather forecasting and hurricane intensity forecasting capabilities, to include data assimilation from ocean observing
platforms and satellites) is applied by NOAA in the regions (IOOS Caribbean, IOOS Gulf of Mexico, IOOS Southeast, IOOS Mid-Atlantic, and IOOS
Northeast) to address hurricane intensity forecast improvements, then
the additional funding we are requesting will
begin to fill some of the most critical gaps in our national observing system, repair and upgrade aging
systems that have been operating for over 10 years, and harden a portion of our communication
systems to bolster reliability during events. Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill IOOS also demonstrated its value
during the tragic Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. The IOOS data management system rapidly and efficiently allowed for
the seamless integration of data from non-federal sources for use by the Unified Area Command. Prior to this,
valuable non- federal information collected by universities, state agencies or private companies was not assessable to
federal responders. The IOOS data management system, based on interoperable standards and services, now allows for the integration
of data from all relevant sources. In fact, approximately 75% of the data now served by NOAA's National Weather Service through the National
Data Buoy Center is from non-federal sources, most of which is directly attributable to the work being done and supported by the Regional
Associations. Information on surface currents from regional radars and models were provided to NOAA to assist with their daily projection of
the location of the oil slick. Much of the oil from the spill remained subsurface where, despite the availability of technology, we lacked the
ability to readily monitor the flow of oil. IOOS, through its regional network, redeployed several underwater gliders from around the country to
assist with subsurface monitoring efforts. This unique and flexible capability is one of the hallmarks of the IOOS system.We
must learn
from these experiences and invest in critical observing assets so that when the next event – a spill, a
hurricane, a flood - happens, we are able to provide emergency managers and others with the best possible
information. Without this capability, response and recovery operations will be negatively impacted,
and federal responders will be forced to deploy people and ships during the event at much higher cost, and with higher risks to lives and
property. Real-time Surface Current Information Aids Search and Rescue One of the unique capabilities IOOS funding supports is the nation’s
surface current observing network, a system of land-based radars. These radar systems are able to detect the speed and direction of ocean
currents regardless of cloud coverage. This information is relayed in real time to the Coast Guard’s environmental data server for use in search
and rescue operations. The results of a four1day test in July 2009 showed that when HF radar data were ingested into the Search and Rescue
system, the search area was decreased by 66% over a 961hour period. This decrease in search area represents significant savings, both in lives
and decreased search and rescue operational cost. A National Surface Current Mapping Plan estimates that $20 million is needed to build out
this system nationwide. Our request to maintain current funding levels of $5 million will insure the priority radars currently operating continue
to do so. Wise Investment An
independent cost estimate of the IOOS system, conducted by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Science and Technology Directorate and submitted to Congress on November 9, 2012, estimates that the fully developed
system – federal and regional, including weather and ocean satellites 1 to address key societal needs in next 15 years
cost $54 billion. The regional component, as identified in regional build out plans, is estimated at $534 million annually to fulfill needs of
users for timely and quality information. At current funding levels for the regional systems near $25 million a year, we are only
beginning to build the capacity necessary to meet user demands. Conclusion: IOOS Leads to Innovative
Solutions In tight fiscal times, IOOS provides a pathway for bringing forward new solutions, and will
play an ever-increasing role in meeting our Nation’s need for coastal ocean data and information.
IOOS is a flexible system that can facilitate the transition from research and development to
operations. IOOS’s capability to move vital observing assets from research institutions into operations in support of federal
response missions has been demonstrated, and will continue to be deployed to address unexpected events around
the country. Regional observations are efficiently filling critical gaps not currently being met by our federal partners. IOOS is
harnessing the flexibility and innovation of private and academic research and development
capability. The networked capability represented by IOOS works, and has repeatedly demonstrated its
value. IOOS is unique; IOOS is efficient; and IOOS is the future.
US Data Key
US key – training ground and international model.
Muller-Karger et al 2014
Frank, Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System, January 2, 2014,
ieee Geoscience and remote sensing magazine, University of South Florida Oceanography Professor,
https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf
9. CONCLUSIONS Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data comprise a key element of the IOOS
observing system in the US. It is a cornerstone technology for local as well as for large-scale and
international environmental assessment, research, and commercial applications. The US IOOS can
play a pivotal role in activities such as calibration and validation efforts, developing new research
and applications, refining a vision for Earth observation, and distributing science- quality, real-time
and archived products and timely infor- mation . The IOOS can help create efficiencies in develop- ing a
regional infrastructure and capitalize on the human knowledge of each region. It can also help ensure
viability of systems during emergencies. Ultimately, the IOOS can learn from international programs
and also provide train- ing opportunities to the international community. A number of core remote
sensing products are required by a broad range of stakeholders in the industry sector, and in operational
and research communities. Basic products include sea surface temperature (SST), chlorophyll, wind
speed/direction, salinity, and sea surface height. Newer products to be added include indices of water
quality, coastal and marine high spatial resolution habitat maps [status and trends), and biological
diversity assessments. Many of these products, however, require the launch of a new generation of
satellites. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and to fund, advance, and
maintain the infra- structure that provides improved remote sensing observa- tions and support for the
nation and societies around the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and academic
sectors (Universities) will enhance remote sens- ing support and product development for critical coastal
and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. This white
paper emphasizes the need for IOOS 10 inform operational and research agen- cies in the United
States of the types of observations and observing platforms required, including what types of satellite sensors need to be launched in the future to maintain continuity of observations, and the types
of new observa- tions required. Similar requirements of agencies and other stakeholders in other
countries may be satisfied through collaboration with the IOOS or similar regional entities.
US data is critical – provides more than half of global sensor platforms
Levy 2011
Joel, NOAA Climate Program Office, Climate Observation Division The Global Ocean Observing
Component of IOOS: Implementation of the Initial Global Ocean Observing System for Climate and the
Path Forward http://www.plocan.eu/doc/MTS%20Journal_2011_Vol45-No1.pdf
The Observational Subsystems of the In Situ Observing System NOAA is the world leader in implementing the in situ elements of the global ocean observing system for cli- mate. The NOAA Climate
Observa- tion Division sponsors the majority of the global components of the U.S. IOOS.7 The Climate
Observation Di- vision manages implementation of the global ocean observing system as a set of
observational networks Of Rlbsystom Each subsystem brings unique strengths and limitations; together
they build die whole system. The subsystems provide stand-alone data sets and analyses but are
interdependent and function syn- ergistically, supplying the observational infrastructure that
underlies national and international climate research and operational activities (see Figure 1).
Currently, over 8,000 observational platforms are deployed throughout the global ocean, with plans to
increase that number to bring the system into com- pliance with the initial GCOS design. NOAA sponsors
nearly half of the plat- forms presently deployed in the global ocean, with over 70 other countries
providing the remainder. Implementation of the U.S. obser- vational networks is accomplished by NOAA
laboratories and university- based cooperative institutes, working in close partnership with each other
under funding from the Climate Obser- vation Division. Satellites also provide critical contributions to
global ocean observation, but operation of the satel- lites does not (all under the mandate of the
Climate Observation Division.
US leadership is key
US Commission on Ocean Policy 2004
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter29.pdf
The United States has been a leader in ocean science and research since creation of the U.S. Commission on Fish
and Fisheries in 1871. Eleven years later, the 234-foot USS Albatross entered service as the first U.S. research vessel built exclusively for
fisheries and occanographic research. On land, major centers of activity included the Woods Hole Occanographic Institution, which has
attracted scientists from around the world for more than a century, and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, an innovator in marine
technology since 1903. Over
the last fifty years, dozens of other top-tier U.S. occanographic institutions have
developed. If the United States is to maintain its leadership status, it must build on this tradition by strengthening
international scientific partnerships for the purpose of deepening the world's understanding of the oceans. International
Ocean Science Programs International ocean research is conducted and coordinated by a variety of endues including the U.N.
Intergovernmental Occanographic Commission (IOC), which has sponsored conferences and meetings on an array of topics in this field. These
programs include efforts to understand EI Nino, the role of the oceans in the global carbon balance,
climate variability, and algal blooms. The Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR), an interdisciplinary body of the
International Council for Science, focuses on large-scale ocean research projects for long-term, complex activities. SCOR also promotes capacity
building in developing countries by including scientists from such countries in its working groups and other activities. Other institutions,
including the World Meteorological Organization, the U.N. Environment Program and the International Hydrographic Organization, arc doing
valuable work on climate change, coral reefs, and ocean surveys. The United States participates in and contributes to collaborative international
ocean research both to fulfill our global obligations and because it is in our national interest to do so. The more we know, the better we can
protect our long-term stake in healthy and productive oceans. Recommendation 29—6. The
United States should continue to
participate in and fund major international ocean science organizations and programs. The Global Ocean
Observing System An international effort is underway to gain a better understanding of the current state of
the world's oceans, and to revolutionize the ability to predict future ocean conditions. When fully
realized, the Global Ocean Observing System will use state-of-the-art technology to integrate data
streams from satellites and globally- deployed ocean sensors. These data will then be made available in usable form to
resource managers, businesses, and the general public. This initiative is part of a larger international effort to create a system that integrates
ocean, atmosphere, and terrestrial observations. The
U.S. role in helping to develop a Global Ocean Observing
System is closely linked with efforts to improve ocean data collection on a national scale. The U.S.
I ntegrated O cean O bserving S ystem will link the global system to regional ocean observing
systems in the United States. The value of developing national and global observing systems is discussed in Chapter 26, as arc the
needs for continued improvements in scientific and technological infrastructure, and enhanced international cooperation and coordination.
Improving international coordination of ocean observations and integrating these observations into
the broader suite of atmospheric and terrestrial observations, is a cornerstone of the ongoing effort to
strengthen the role of science in international policy-making.
Data Collection
IOOS is key to protecting the marine environment
NOAA 13 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Integrated Ocean Observing System,” Ocean Service NOAA, October 21,
2013, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/programs/ioos.html)
The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®)
serves as the nation’s eye on our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. IOOS
delivers the data and information needed to increase understanding of our coastal waters so decision
makers can act to improve safety, enhance the economy, and protect the environment. These data
are critical for everyday benefits – including understanding the impacts of climate change, transporting
goods in and out of ports safely and efficiently, and protecting people from eating contaminated seafood. IOOS is a federal, regional,
private sector, and academic partnership that tracks, predicts, manages, and adapts to changes in our marine
environments. There are thousands of tools – from satellites above Earth to sensors below the water – that
continuously collect ocean and coastal data. IOOS is the link that connects all these data. IOOS is expanding sources
of data and increasing access to existing data to save users time and money. We are adopting and
adapting standards and protocols – such as whether temperature is recorded in Celsius or Fahrenheit – in order to make
data easier to use. Integrated ocean information is now available in near real time, as well as retrospectively.
Easier and better access to this information is improving our ability to do many things, such as:
Predicting Severe Weather Forecasting Hazards Improving Search and Rescue Monitoring Water
Quality Optimizing Marine Operations Enhancing Oil Spill Response Minimizing Rip Current Deaths
Boosting Homeland Security Predicting Human Health
Satellites
Satellites provide physical, chemical, and biological data
Zhang et al 11 [RONG-HUA ZHANG= researcher at State Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment Dynamics, Second Institute of Oceanography, State
Oceanic Administration, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China, and Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland
, DAKE CHEN and GUIHUA WANG=researchers at State Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment Dynamics, Second Institute of Oceanography, State Oceanic
Administration, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China , “Using Satellite Ocean Color Data to Derive an Empirical Model for the Penetration Depth of Solar Radiation (Hp) in the
Tropical Pacific Ocean”, July 2011, JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC TECHNOLOGY vol. 28, pg 944-946//jweideman]
Ocean
biology–induced heating effects and bio climate coupling in the tropical Pacific have been of
much recent interest because of their potential for the modulation of ENSO. Physically, its effects on
heating in the upper ocean can be represented by the penetration depth of solar radiation (Hp). While
interannual variability in the physical system (e.g., SST) is well understood, simulated, and even predictable about 6 months or more in advance
(e.g., Zhang et al. 2005), studies on
biological processes and their feedback effects on physics in the ocean are
still in the early stage. At present, ocean models have considerable difficulty in accurately
representing biogeochemical variability. For example, current comprehensive ocean biogeochemistry
models still cannot realistically depict interannual Hp anomalies during ENSO cycles. As a result, most global
climate models have not adequately taken into account the effects of interannual Hp variability. In
particular, the effects have not been included in all of the coupled models currently used for real-time ENSO predictions. The advent of
space-based satellite observations has provided an unprecedented basin wide data of not only
physical fields, but also biological parameters in the ocean. Now, interannual Hp variability can be
routinely derived from remotely sensed Chl data. Previously, derived spatially and seasonally varying Hp fields have been
utilized in ocean and coupled ocean–atmosphere model simulations; the large effects are found on ocean and climate
simulations in the tropical Pacific, with strikingly modeldependent and even conflicting results.
Squo data collection methods including sattelites fail- new missions
Sandwell et al 01 [David T. Sandwell, prf. University of southern California, has been chief scientist on several seafloor mapping expeditions to remote
areas of the South Pacific. In conjunction with colleagues, Sandwell developed the most detailed map to date of the global sea floor, providing scientists with the
first uniform resolution view of 70 percent of the earth and opening up new areas of research in marine geology and geophysics. Walter Smith is a Geophysicist in
NOAA's Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry and Chair of the scientific and technical sub-committee ofGEBCO
, the international and intergovernmental committee
for the General Bathymetric Charts of the Oceans. Smith earned a B.Sc. at the University of Southern California, sarah gille, earned a BS in physics at Yale and a PhD
in physical oceanography from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Steven Jayne, Woods hole observation institute. Khalid Soofi is a Geoscience Fellow at
ConocoPhillips, Bernard Coakley, Geophysical Institute Tectonics & Sedimentation Research Group. 6/28/01, “Bathymetry from Space: White paper in support of a
high-resolution, ocean altimeter mission,” PDF Draft version //jweideman]
This comprehensive data set, a uniform survey of the continental margins, has not been obtained
during previous altimetric missions, could not be collected from a ship and will not be collected by any
of the geopotential satellite missions planned by either NASA or the ESA. Previous and future altimetric missions
have and will collect relatively lower resolution data. The increase in resolution with the new mission will greatly
increase our ability to image crustal scale structures of scientific and commercial interest. Shipboard
surveys, which can collect high-resolution data, are expensive and particularly difficult to execute in the shallow
waters that would be sampled during a high-resolution altimeter survey. The altimetric gravity anomaly data set
will be unique and immensely valuable for science and exploration; • A complete data set which will facilitate comparisons between continental
margins. • An exploration tool which will direct oil and gas exploration and permit extrapolation of known structures from well-surveyed areas.
• A uniform, high-resolution data set continuous from the deep ocean to the shallow shelf which will make it possible to follow fracture zones
out of the ocean basin into antecedent continental structures, to define and compare segmentation of margins along strike and identify the
position of the continent-ocean boundary. Conversely the continuity of geological features on land can be traced on to the Continental Margin.
• An image of the gravity field useful for the study of mass anomalies (eg sediment type and distribution) and isostatic compensation at
continental margins.
Climate Advantage
1AC
1AC Warming Advantage
Advantage ___ is Warming:
Scientific models prove human induced warming is real
Farley 14 (John W. Farley, American nuclear physicist and a professor of physics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, as well as the
Southern Nevada district's representative to the American Association of Physics Teachers, “The Scientific Case for Modern Anthropogenic
Global Warming,” Monthly Review, July 6, 2014, http://monthlyreview.org/2008/07/01/the-scientific-case-for-modern-anthropogenic-globalwarming)
When sunlight strikes the earth, infrared radiation is emitted by the earth. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere absorb this radiation, which
results in a warming of the earth. The
greenhouse effect is a very large effect: without greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere, the earth’s surface would likely be below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide
(CO2) in the atmosphere has been increasing since the Industrial Revolution began, due primarily to
the burning of fossil fuels and to deforestation. This increase in greenhouse gases causes an enhanced
greenhouse effect, which warms the earth. A straightforward calculation reveals that when the CO2 in the atmosphere
reaches twice the pre-industrial level, the enhanced greenhouse effect alone (i.e., neglecting any response by the earth to the enhanced
greenhouse effect) will warm the earth by 1.2 to 1.3˚C. There is no significant controversy among scientists about this part of global warming.
The earth will in fact respond to the increased temperature. This is called “feedback.” There is
controversy about the magnitude of the feedback. Analysis that takes feedback into account predicts
global warming in the range of 1.5 to 4.5˚C (as indicated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]).
Controversies among climate scientists concern the magnitude of the warming, not whether or not it is
occurring. Climate is controlled by a number of factors, including changes in the earth’s orbit, possibly solar variability,
possibly volcanoes, and the greenhouse effect. All but the last factor are entirely natural. Human activities are not the
only contribution to the greenhouse effect. Until the last two centuries, humanity had a negligible effect on climate, and all
climate change was naturally occurring. Some climate changes in the distant past have been very large (e.g., ice ages) and were not caused by
humans. None of these statements refute the proposition that human activities (particularly burning fossil fuels) are an important contribution
to the global warming that is occurring right now. Part 2: Summary of Alexander Cockburn’s Contrarian Arguments In his articles in The Nation
and on the CounterPunch Web site, Alexander Cockburn makes six arguments against anthropogenic global warming: During
the Great
Depression of the 1930s, the burning of fossil fuels plunged by 30 percent, but the concentration of CO2 in the
atmosphere did not decrease. Therefore, he contends, increased atmospheric CO2 does not come from the burning of fossil fuels.
Water vapor, not CO2, is the main greenhouse gas, and the portion of global warming attributable to CO2 is therefore tiny. When the earth
emerged from the most recent ice age some 10,000 years ago, the global temperature and the concentration of atmospheric CO2 both rose,
but the temperature rise preceded a rise in atmospheric CO2. Therefore it was the warming that caused the rise in CO2 and not vice-versa. The
warming was caused by a Milankovitch cycle, a small change in the earth’s motion. The increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is
caused by CO2 coming out of the oceans, not by the burning of fossil fuels. Hence the increase in atmospheric CO2 is natural, not
anthropogenic. The residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is only a year or two before it dissolves in the ocean. This turns out to be
important in supporting point 4 above. The forecasts of anthropogenic global warming are entirely dependent on the results of large-scale
computer models, which can be easily manipulated by the computer modelers to get any result they want by tweaking the variables in the
computer models. Based on these scientific arguments, Cockburn goes on to argue that the computer modelers proclaim their unjustified
doomsday forecasts in order to keep their grant funds flowing. He also argues that the nuclear power industry is supporting global warming
hysteria in order to promote nuclear power. Part 3: Global Warming in More Depth The greenhouse effect warms the earth. The warming
power of the sun is mostly in the visible and ultraviolet region of the spectrum. The surface of the earth re-radiates solar energy back toward
space in the form of infrared light. Because of greenhouse gases in it, the atmosphere is transparent to the visible light coming from the sun,
but opaque at many wavelengths in the infrared band, resulting in the trapping of thermal energy and the warming of the earth. This is the socalled greenhouse effect, which has been known for two centuries.4 The first scientist to realize that the atmosphere warms the earth may
have been the French mathematician and physicist Joseph Fourier in the 1820s (who should not be confused with the journalist and utopian
socialist Charles Fourier). The primary greenhouse gases are water vapor, CO2, and methane (natural gas, CH4). I
don’t know any
scientist who doubts that the greenhouse effect is a real effect. Too many people fail to appreciate
how large the greenhouse effect really is. A simple calculation based on the Stefan-Boltzmann law shows that if
there were no greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (and if nothing else about the earth changed as a result of removing
the greenhouse gases), the average surface temperature of the earth would be –18˚C (–1˚F), which is below the
freezing point of water.5 The actual observed average surface temperature of the earth is 15˚C (59˚F). Thus the greenhouse effect
raises the earth’s surface temperature by 33˚C (60˚F). In this sense, global warming has already
happened! Not only is the greenhouse effect a real effect, it is a large effect. The greenhouse effect is
intensifying as a result of the greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere due primarily to CO2
from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) and deforestation. Accurate data by direct experimental
measurement was not available until 1959, when the geochemist C. D. Keeling started taking data at Mauna Loa, Hawaii. That
measurement program has continued up to the present.6 Chart 1 shows the data from 1959 to the present. The data
show a seasonal cycle that matches the growing season in the Northern Hemisphere, with a maximum in May and a minimum in October.7
Most significant is a long-term upward trend: from 315 ppm in 1958 to 387 ppm in 2008. While other aspects of global warming have been
controversial, nobody
has ever doubted the data from this measurement program. The data are rock
solid. Several research teams have measured the atmospheric CO2 concentrations and the data from
the different researchers are in agreement. Although the earliest data from direct measurement of CO2 in the atmosphere are
from 1958, it is possible to extend the data earlier by examining air bubbles trapped in ice in Antarctica and Greenland. Data on the long-term
CO2 trend show that the CO2 level remained stable around 280 ppm during the last 10,000 years.8 Then CO2 began to rise around the time of
the Industrial Revolution, and is now 38 percent higher than pre-industrial levels. Climate scientists attribute the pre-industrial level of CO2
(280 ppm) to natural causes, and the rise since then to human activity, primarily due to the aforementioned causes.
We are reaching the tipping point. Need to act now
Sparks 12 (Donald L. Sparks, S. Hallock du Pont Chair in the Department of Plant and Soil Sciences and director of the Delaware
Environmental Institute, “Tipping Point,” Huffington Post, May 13, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/donald-lsparks/rio20_b_1593195.html?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=World)
This group
of biologists, ecologists, geologists, paleontologists and complex-system theoreticians from the United States, Canada, South
America, and Europe have spent a year and half reviewing evidence that Earth may be approaching a state shift, a
"tipping point" at which the global ecosystem may shift abruptly and irreversibly from one state to another. If this happens, the
world as we know it may not be recoverable, and these scientists conclude that this outcome is
looking more and more likely. An article by Paul Basken in last week's Chronicle of Higher Education explains the scientists' findings
in layman's terms. According to Basken, the report centers on a measure of how much of the Earth's surface has
been altered by people, "from forests and prairies to uses such as cornfields and parking lots." Human beings now number more
than 7 billion, and we have transformed 43 percent of the land we live on from its natural state to something else.
That figure is expected to top 50 percent by 2025, when the world's population reaches 8 billion. At that point,
environmental damage such as species extinctions, climate change, and chemical contamination may
have accumulated to such an extent as to be catastrophic.
IOOS data is crucial – and its modeled internationally
Culver and Scholz 08 (Mary Culver, program manager of Costal Management Services Division for the NOAA, Paul Scholz, division
chief of Coastal Management Services for the NOAA, “INTEGRATED OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM STRATEGIC PLAN,” IOOC, June 2008,
http://www.iooc.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Integrated-Ocean-Observing-System-Strategic-Plan.pdf)
Over the past decades, billions of dollars have been invested in observing and predicting global and
coastal ocean processes, as well as associated atmospheric processes, to produce the information
required for planning, forecasts, warnings, watches, climate assessments, and regulatory policies. These observing and
information systems reside in dozens of federal and state agencies, universities, and private industries and are tailored to the individual
missions of those who fund them. By continuing on this course of developing isolated, individual systems instead of an integrated system, the
nation over the next 20 years could unnecessarily spend billions of dollars on ocean observations because of the multiplied costs of
development, operations, and maintenance. About
two decades ago, officials and scientists realized that the
nation had to integrate the assets of its many ocean and coastal observing systems and focus them on
providing solutions to societal needs—solutions that address the missions of several agencies and organizations.
Catastrophic weather events, coastal pollution, dead zones, harmful algal blooms, declines in living
marine resources, climate change—all these underscore the importance of creating a more integrated
approach to providing data and information needed to manage and mitigate the impacts of human
activities, natural disasters, and climate change on goods and services provided by the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. While
the nation has developed some of the most sophisticated and comprehensive Great Lakes, estuarine, and marine monitoring programs in the
world, these
individual programs are not as robust, effective, or comprehensive as they could be in protecting
the societal and economic security of the nation, and therefore in providing the quality of life our citizens expect. In
addition,
operating separate, largely independent systems is inefficient both logistically and fiscally. The
expectation for integrating ocean observations is that the data, information, products, and services
from individual systems have numerous opportunities for synergistic value beyond their original
purpose. For a modest investment, existing individual assets and monitoring programs can be connected in a comprehensive oceanobserving framework to realize the full potential of the combined assets, enabling a variety of users to discover, utilize, and exploit existing
oceanographic data and information to generate value for our citizens and economy. An
integrated system enables not only
better decision-making for issues impacting the safety and well-being of citizens (e.g., disaster
mitigation and warning, water resource management, and marine transportation), but also supports a
value-added market similar to what has emerged from weather and climate services. This integrated system
also builds capacity to enable participation without the need to invest a tremendous amount on infrastructure or resources. Put simply, the
existing data provided by the observing systems operated by a range of federal, state, local, academic, and private entities could be much more
useful and timely if it were linked, conveyed, and made available for analyses in an integrated, standardized way. This would allow for the
development of improved products tailored to meet the current and future needs for ocean information that are being expressed by the user
communities. Recent
major advances in observation, modeling, and information technology now provide the
means to help the nation accomplish such an objective. Benefits of the Integrated Ocean Observing System IOOS
will provide data and information products needed to significantly improve the nation's ability to
achieve these seven interrelated societal benefits: 1. Improve predictions of climate change and weather and their
effects on coastal communities and the nation; 2. Improve the safety and efficiency of maritime operations; 3.
Mitigate the effects of natural hazards more effectively; 4. Improve national and homeland security; 5. Reduce public
health risks; 6. Protect and restore healthy coastal ecosystems more effectively; and 7. Enable the
sustained use of ocean and coastal resources. These benefits will be accomplished by efficiently
linking observations to modeling via data management and communications to provide services, products, and
decision-support tools needed to achieve these goals. Some example "outcome/benefit vignettes" for IOOS are highlighted
in Box 1. To maximize the societal benefits, IOOS must focus development efforts on ready assets and
the greatest opportunities for valuable, synergistic uses. IOOS is a complex system of systems that is best implemented in
stages. Phased implementation requires the prioritization of existing assets that monitor variables that are essential and common to more than
one societal benefit. The highest priority assets measure these core variables, using both in situ and remote sensing platforms, to provide new
or existing products that can be improved by integrating data from more than one program, institution, or agency. Four
criteria were
used to prioritize existing federally operated or federally supported observing subsystem assets for
integration into the initial phase of IOOS: • Data streams produced by existing monitoring assets must
be well-documented, sustainable, reliable, and quality-controlled. • Data integration must lead to
products for more accurate and timely assessments of environmental conditions and predictions of changes in
conditions that have major socioeconomic consequences. • Assessment and prediction products must inform decisionmakers working in two or more of the seven societal goal areas. • Data integration resulting in new or
improved products and services must be feasible within a short time frame (e.g., 2 years).
Data gathering is key to resolve climate change
Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior
Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the
Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a
New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf)
National security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a matter of national security and
may even be a denning security challenge of the 21st century. Nonetheless, some national security professionals have yet to full)' conceptualize
how climate change could impact their areas of responsibility, or whether they need to analyze potential implications at all. What is more,
they currently lack the "actionable- data necessary to generate requirements, plans, strategies, training and
materiel to prepare for future challenges, 'though the scope and quality of available scientific information has improved in recent
years, this information docs not always reach - or is not presented in a form that is useful to - the decision makers who need it. Closing this
gap between national security policy makers who consume information and the scientists who
produce it is essential for the nation to effectively deal with the national security implications of climate change.
Today, a thin thread of climate information links producer and consumer communities, but different needs, priorities, processes and cultures
separate them - in addition to a divisive political debate surrounding the validity of climate science. As
new public policies, regulations
into effect and the consequences of climate change become more obvious, the demand
for information is likely to surge. Multiple barriers impede improved communication, the producer community tends to be stoveand laws come
piped. Even though consumers often need interdisciplinary science and analysis. Consumers, who may also be stove-piped in various agencies
or subject areas, may lack familiarity with or access to these separate communities, as well as the tools or time to navigate scientific
information and disciplines. Indeed, the immediate needs of consumers do not align well with the longer timelines Involved in scientific inquiry,
and consumer communities have not signaled the kinds of actionable data they require in order to make decisions. Broadly speaking, scientists
do not commonly serve public policy goals, at least not directly. And the academic community does not necessarily value communication with
non-scientific constituencies. To
make matters worse, there is a clear shortage of "translators" who can
interpret climate science into actionable information for policy makers. Finally, a two-way
conversation about such information requires trusting relationships, which, for a variety of reasons,
may not always exist between the scientific and national security policy communities. Scientists and
national security professionals can bridge this gap. Consumers of information can signal the kinds of
information they need by commissioning studies and collaborating or contracting with scientific organizations. Producers of climate
information can rise to the occasion, accept that their work is critical to good governance and invest time and resources into better
communication. For this approach to work, however, both producer and consumer institutions will need to change their incentive structures. In
short, policy makers and scientists need to build new bridges in order to address climate change. Some degree of separation is healthy for the
sake of setting policy priorities and maintaining scientific integrity. But regardless, decision
makers at all levels of government
have already moved from merely studying climate change to responding to it - both to mitigate the damage
from greenhouse gases and to adapt to potentially unavoidable changes over the next 20-30 years. For the nation, and the national
security community specifically, to deal with national and international challenges associated with climate change, these two
communities will need to work more closely together.
Warming causes a laundry list of impacts
Elliot 09 (Dr. Lorraine Elliott, Senior Fellow in International Relations The Australian National University, “Climate change, threat multiplier
and internal conflicts in Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia ,” RSIS, August 2009,
http://www.rsis.edu.sg/nts/Events/climate_change/session4/concept%20paper-Lorraine%20Elliot%20Session%20IV.pdf)
Food insecurity : Food insecurity refers to both a shortage of food and to vulnerability to high food
prices which puts staples out of reach of the poorest. It is a product of land degradation and loss of soil fertility caused by
deforestation, overuse of chemicals, inefficient irrigation and waterlogging as well as drought and desertification; diversion of food crops
into biofuels;
market failure manifest in rising food prices and an ineffective and unfair distribution of food; overcapitalisation of the global fishing industry and the over-exploitation of many of the world’s fish stocks; coastal and river pollution from
development that destroys breeding grounds. Food
insecurities can turn food exporting countries in the region into
net food importers, increasing their vulnerability to global markets and their reliance on the security of trade routes,
heightening poverty, and potentially intensifying domestic grievances and social disruptions. Up to an extra 130 million people
are anticipated to be at risk of hunger in the Asia Pacific as a result of climate change. The State
Meteorological Administration in China has calculated that global warming could cause that country’s grain
harvest to fall by 5 to 10 percent, with a food shortfall of 100 million metric tons by 2030, a serious problem in
a country which is already losing farmland to deserts and which has little capacity to increase arable
land.31 The unpredictability of wet and dry seasons is already having an impact on agriculture in
Southeast Asia, with harvests being disrupted, rural incomes dropping, and hunger and malnutrition
increasing, especially among children. Water stress: Most parts of the Asia Pacific are also projected
to experience increased water resource stress. ESCAP estimates that up to 650 million people in Asia
and the Pacific do not have sustainable access to safe water supplies.32 Vulnerability to water stress
and increased drought is anticipated to trigger distributional conflicts and ‘fuel existing conflicts over depleting resources,
especially where access to those resources is politicised’33 and where there are limited or weak institutional frameworks for the ‘adaptation of
water and crisis management systems’.34 International
Alert identifies China as a country already affected by
conflict over water rights.35 Other reports point to the Mekong River as one area where water shortages already create tension. 36
The UK Department of Defence anticipates that ‘large-scale farmers [will] … benefit at the expense of smaller [farmers], and there will be
disruption of fisheries in river delta regions, particularly the Mekong, where there is also likely to be increased tension over water resources’.37
Climate migration and climate refugees The potential for large-scale migrations of people – both within
countries and across borders – has been described as ‘perhaps the most worrisome problems associated with
rising temperatures and sea levels … [which could] could easily trigger major security concerns and
spike regional tension.’38 The Report of IPCC Working Group II suggests that as well as disruptions of human populations
within states and across national borders in the region, sudden sharp spikes in rural to urban migration is likely in
some countries, and the exacerbation of shortfalls in food production, rural poverty and urban unrest
in others.39 The numbers of climate refugees should nevertheless be questioned. Preston et al suggest, for example, that ‘although it is
likely that climate change will ultimately force the displacement of some populations within the Asia/Pacific region, considerable uncertainty
persists regarding the number of individuals that will be displaced, whether those displacements will drive internal or external migration, the
extent to which human adaptation can reduce displacement’.40 Northeast
Asia and Southeast Asia were not among the
regions singled out as being of most concern in terms of the geopolitical challenges of climate-induced
migration by the CSIS report.41 On the other hand, IISS reports that ‘the Chinese military expects to have to … face refugee flows from
Indonesia and the rest of Southeast Asia’.42 And the UK Department of Defence indicated, in its 2007 Strategic Trends analysis, that climaterelated population displacement was a distinct possibility in the major East Asian archipelagos.43
Not too late. Every reduction key.
Bornstein 07 (Seth Bornstein, Science Writer, The Associated Press & Adjunct Professor at New York University, “Global Warming
Unstoppable, Report Says,” Washington Post, February 2, 2007, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/02/02/AR2007020201093.html)
Global warming is so severe that it will "continue for centuries," leading to a far different planet in 100 years, warned
a grim landmark report from the world's leading climate scientists and government officials. Yet, many of the experts are hopeful that
nations will now take action to avoid the worst scenarios. They tried to warn of dire risks without scaring people so
much they'd do nothing _ inaction that would lead to the worst possible scenarios. " It's not too late ," said Australian
scientist Nathaniel Bindoff, a co-author of the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report issued Friday.
The worst can be prevented by acting quickly to curb greenhouse gas emissions, he said. The worst
could mean more than 1 million dead and hundreds of billions of dollars in costs by 2100, said Kevin Trenberth
of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, one of many study co-authors. He said that adapting will mean
living with more extreme weather such as severe droughts, more hurricanes and wildfires. "It's later than we
think," said panel co-chair Susan Solomon, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist who helped push through the
document's strong language. Solomon, who remains optimistic about the future, said it's close to too late to
alter the future for her children _ but maybe it's not too late for her grandchildren. The report was the first of
four to be released this year by the panel, which was created by the United Nations in 1988. It found: _Global warming is "very
likely" caused by man, meaning more than 90 percent certain. That's the strongest expression of
certainty to date from the panel. _If nothing is done to change current emissions patterns of
greenhouse gases, global temperature could increase as much as 11 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. _But if the
world does get greenhouse gas emissions under control _ something scientists say they hope can be done _ the best estimate is about 3
degrees Fahrenheit. _Sea
levels are projected to rise 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century. Add another 4
to 8 inches if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues. Sea level rise could get worse
after that. By 2100, if nothing is done to curb emissions, the melting of Greenland's ice sheet would be
inevitable and the world's seas would eventually rise by more than 20 feet, Bindoff said.
No adaptation – increased CO2 levels destroys the agriculture industry which
independently causes extinction
Roberts 13 (David Roberts, citing the World Bank Review’s compilation of climate studies, “If you aren’t alarmed about climate, you
aren’t paying attention,” grist, January 10, 2013, http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-alarmism-the-idea-is-surreal/)
We know we’ve raised global average temperatures around 0.8 degrees C so far. We know that 2
degrees C is where most scientists predict catastrophic and irreversible impacts. And we know that we
are currently on a trajectory that will push temperatures up 4 degrees or more by the end of the
century. What would 4 degrees look like? A recent World Bank review of the science reminds us. First, it’ll get hot: Projections for
a 4°C world show a dramatic increase in the intensity and frequency of high-temperature extremes. Recent
extreme heat waves such as in Russia in 2010 are likely to become the new normal summer in a 4°C world.
Tropical South America, central Africa, and all tropical islands in the Pacific are likely to regularly experience
heat waves of unprecedented magnitude and duration. In this new high-temperature climate regime, the coolest months are likely to be
substantially warmer than the warmest months at the end of the 20th century. In regions such as the Mediterranean, North Africa, the
Middle East, and the Tibetan plateau, almost all summer months are likely to be warmer than the most extreme
heat waves presently experienced. For example, the warmest July in the Mediterranean region could be 9°C warmer than today’s warmest July. Extreme
heat waves in recent years have had severe impacts, causing heat-related deaths, forest fires, and
harvest losses. The impacts of the extreme heat waves projected for a 4°C world have not been
evaluated, but they could be expected to vastly exceed the consequences experienced to date and potentially exceed the adaptive capacities of many
societies and natural systems. [my emphasis] Warming to 4 degrees would also lead to “an increase of about 150
percent in acidity of the ocean,” leading to levels of acidity “unparalleled in Earth’s history.” That’s bad news for, say, coral
reefs: The combination of thermally induced bleaching events, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise
threatens large fractions of coral reefs even at 1.5°C global warming. The regional extinction of entire coral reef ecosystems, which could
occur well before 4°C is reached, would have profound consequences for their dependent species and for the people who depend on them for food, income,
tourism, and shoreline protection. It
will also “likely lead to a sea-level rise of 0.5 to 1 meter, and possibly more, by 2100, with
several meters more to be realized in the coming centuries.” That rise won’t be spread evenly, even within regions and countries —
regions close to the equator will see even higher seas. There are also indications that it would “significantly exacerbate
existing water scarcity in many regions, particularly northern and eastern Africa, the Middle East, and
South Asia, while additional countries in Africa would be newly confronted with water scarcity on a national scale due to population growth.” Also,
more extreme weather events: Ecosystems will be affected by more frequent extreme weather
events, such as forest loss due to droughts and wildfire exacerbated by land use and agricultural
expansion. In Amazonia, forest fires could as much as double by 2050 with warming of approximately 1.5°C to 2°C above preindustrial levels. Changes
would be expected to be even more severe in a 4°C world. Also loss of biodiversity and ecosystem
services: In a 4°C world, climate change seems likely to become the dominant driver of ecosystem shifts,
surpassing habitat destruction as the greatest threat to biodiversity. Recent research suggests that large-scale loss of biodiversity is likely to
occur in a 4°C world, with climate change and high CO2 concentration driving a transition of the
Earth’s ecosystems into a state unknown in human experience. Ecosystem damage would be expected
to dramatically reduce the provision of ecosystem services on which society depends (for example,
fisheries and protection of coastline afforded by coral reefs and mangroves.) New research also indicates a “rapidly rising risk
of crop yield reductions as the world warms.” So food will be tough. All this will add up to “largescale displacement of populations and have adverse consequences for human security and economic and trade systems.” Given the
uncertainties and long-tail risks involved, “there is no certainty that adaptation to a 4°C world is possible.” There’s a small but non-trivial
chance of advanced civilization breaking down entirely. Now ponder the fact that some scenarios show us going up to 6 degrees
by the end of the century, a level of devastation we have not studied and barely know how to conceive. Ponder the fact that somewhere along the line, though we
don’t know exactly where, enough self-reinforcing feedback loops will be running to make climate change unstoppable and irreversible for centuries to come.
That would mean handing our grandchildren and their grandchildren not only a burned, chaotic, denuded world, but a world that
is inexorably more inhospitable with every passing decade.
YES WARMING
Real-General
Warming is real and anthropogenic – IPCC studies prove
GGW 14 (Global Greenhouse Warming, “Anthropogenic Climate Change,” global greenhouse warming, 2014, http://www.globalgreenhouse-warming.com/anthropogenic-climate-change.html)
The IPCC, Fourth Report released in 2007
stated that, multiple lines of evidence confirms that the post-industrial
rise in greenhouse gases does not stem from natural mechanisms. In other words this is
anthropogenic climate change , and the significant increases in the atmosphere of these potent
greenhouse gases are a result of human activity. The most potent of the greenhouse gases are carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N20). Alarmingly, these are a result of anthropogenic climate change,
and the gases are at the highest levels for over 650,000 years. The IPCC Fourth Report confirms that over
the past 8,000 years, and just before Industrialization in 1750 , carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere
increased by a mere 20 parts per million (ppm). The concentration of atmospheric CO2 in 1750 was 280ppm, and increased to
379 ppm in 2005. That is a whopping increase of 100 ppm in 250 years. For comparison and at the end of the most recent
ice age there was approximately an 80ppm rise in CO2 concentration. This rise took over 5,000 years,
and higher values than at present have only occurred many millions of years ago. Since 1750, it is
estimated that about two thirds of anthropogenic climate change CO2 emissions have come from
fossil fuel burning (coal and petroleum) and about one third from land use change (mainly
deforestation and agricultural). About 45% of this CO2 has remained in the atmosphere, while about
30% has been taken up by the oceans and the remainder has been taken up by the trees and plants. About half of a CO2 going
into the atmosphere is removed over a time scale of 30 years; a further 30% is removed within a few centuries; and the remaining 20% will
typically stay in the atmosphere for many thousands of years. In
recent decades, carbon emissions have continued to
increase. Global annual fossil emissions increased from an average of 6.4 GtC yr (one giga tonne of carbon per year) in the
1990s to 7.2 GtC yr in the period 2000 to 2005. Fossil fuel use is not the only human contribution to carbon dioxide
levels, and at least another 1.6GtC should be added for emissions from land use. To gain some idea of figures we are talking about here, 1
GtC is equal to 1,000,000,000 metric tonnes, that is one billion tonnes. While you think about these numbers, it should be pointed out that
when using the emission factors above, 1 GtC (carbon) corresponds to 3.67 GtCO2 (carbon dioxide). The box above shows why 1GtC =
3.67GCO2, and we will now work out how Many Gt of CO2 are emitted every year (and still rising). Firstly, we can add fossil fuel emissions 7.2
to land use, 1.6 to come up with a total of 8.8GtC annually. Secondly, we multiply 8.8 x 3.67 and so we have a total of 32.29GtCO2 being
emitted to the atmosphere each year! In
addition to escalating coal use after the Industrial Revolution, came the
widespread use of another fossil fuel; petroleum for transport. At the beginning of the 20th century,
annual global oil output was about 150 million barrels of oil, now, that amount is extracted globally in
just two days.
Anthropogenic
There is an overwhelming consensus that warming is caused exclusively by humans
Cook 13 (John Cook, Climate Communication Research Fellow at the Global Change Institute, University of Queensland, “We have
consensus; The 97%climate consensus is robust; 4 atomic bombs since '98,” National Post, September 26, 2013,
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/)
Human fingerprints are being observed all over our climate. Satellites measure less heat escaping to
space at the exact wavelengths that greenhouse gases trap energy. Surface measurements confirm more heat
returning to the Earth's surface. The result of the increased greenhouse effect is that since 1998, our planet has
been building up heat at a rate equivalent to four Hiroshima atomic bomb detonations every second.
Other patterns of human activity have also been measured, ruling out other possible causes of recent
global warming. The upper atmosphere is cooling while the lower atmosphere warms, a distinct fingerprint of greenhouse warming.
This rules out the sun as the driver of global warming, as does the fact that winters are warming faster
than summers. The internal consistency of evidence across disciplines amounts to a "consensus of evidence." The inevitable
consequence of a consensus of evidence is a consensus of scientists, manifesting in a multitude of
ways. Among actively publishing climate scientists, several studies have found 97% agreement that
humans are causing global warming. National Academies of Science from 80 different countries
endorse the consensus, as well as leading scientific organizations such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society. Earlier this year, I was part of a team that
published research in the journal Environmental Research Letters, measuring the level of scientific agreement on human-caused global
warming across 21 years of peer-reviewed climate papers. We identified over 4,000 papers stating a position on human-caused global warming
in their abstract. Among those abstracts, 97.1%
endorsed the consensus view. To independently confirm our
results, we went to the foremost experts - the very scientists who authored the papers. We invited
scientists to rate the level of endorsement of their own papers. Over 2,000 papers were rated by
1,200 scientists. The result obtained from the scientists was strikingly consistent with both our results
and previous studies: 97.2% consensus. As different papers expressed endorsement of consensus in
different ways, we adopted three precisely defined expressions of consensus. A paper either explicitly
quantified how much humans had contributed to warming, explicitly endorsed human-caused global
warming without quantification or implied the consensus without an explicit endorsement. No matter
which definition was used, or if all three were included together, the same result was obtained:
overwhelming consensus. For example, one definition of consensus specified that humans are causing
more than half of global warming, with rejection of consensus specifying that humans are causing less than half. Looking at
the scientists' ratings of their own papers with this definition, we found 96.2% consensus. For over
two decades, opponents of climate action have sought to manufacture doubt about the scientific
consensus. As far back as 1991, Western Fuels Association spent over half a million dollars on a campaign to "reposition global warming as
theory (not fact)". The infamous "Luntz memo," leaked in 2002, revealed the strategy of reducing support for climate mitigation policies not by
proposing alternative policies but by attacking scientific consensus. It came as no surprise when our research, finding an overwhelming and
strengthening scientific consensus, came under intense attack. Most attacks involved misrepresentation of our research. For example, Andrew
Montford argued in The Financial Post ("Meaningless consensus on climate change," Sept. 19) that apart from papers quantifying the human
contribution towards global warming, only "a few" climate papers give a qualitative endorsement. In Montford's opinion, over 3,800 papers
equals "a few," an extraordinary example of cognitive bias. Montford argues that a "vast majority" of papers claim no position on humancaused warming, ignoring the fact that according to the scientists who wrote the papers, the majority of climate papers accept human-caused
global warming. In fact, Montford gives the consensus found by the scientists who authored the papers a wide berth. This is because
independent confirmation from the actual authors of the climate papers falsifies all of his criticisms in one fell swoop. The
consensus is
robust. It's found in the abstracts of the papers. It's found in the full papers as rated by the papers'
actual authors. It's found using a number of definitions of consensus. Why does the 97%consensus
keep reappearing, in our results and in previous studies? The answer is simply that the proportion of climate
scientists dissenting from the consensus is vanishingly small. Out of the 29,286 scientists we found publishing climate
papers over the 21-year period, less than half a percent (0.4%) published papers rejecting the consensus. Whether you look
at it front-on, sideways or upside-down, you'll find overwhelming agreement among climate scientists that
humans are causing global warming. This consensus of scientists is the result of the overwhelming
consensus of evidence.
Warming is real and anthropogenic. Only government action solve
Lieberman 12 (Bruce Lieberman, freelance writer covering science and environmental topics, “Scientific Consensus Stronger than
Scientists Thought?” YALE Climate Connections, May 2, 2012, http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/05/scientific-concensus-strongerthan-scientists-though/)
More than two decades after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began publishing the latest
scientific consensus on the globe’s changing climate, widespread doubts persist in the U.S. over whether there
really is widespread agreement among scientists. It’s the primary argument of those who deny basic scientific foundations of warming. But
new and innovative survey results suggest the consensus among scientists might actually be stronger
than the scientists themselves had thought. The battles to define and debunk scientific consensus over
climate change science have been fought for years. In 2004, University of California San Diego science historian Naomi
Oreskes wrote about a broad consensus she found after studying 928 scientific papers published between 1993 and 2003. Meanwhile, the
blow-up over climate researchers’ hacked e-mails in 2009 fueled speculation among skeptics that “consensus” actually is the closely guarded
creation of a small cabal of scientists determined to silence opposing views, accusations now widely dismissed as unsubstantiated. That
perspective has been largely debunked, but the beat goes on. On the heels of a January 26 skeptics letter (“No Need to Panic About Global
Warming“) in The Wall Street Journal, there have been several follow-up commentaries. They include a vigorous rebuttal on March 22 in the
New York Review of Books by Yale University economist William D. Nordhaus; a follow-up response in the April 26 edition of same journal by
climate change skeptics Roger W. Cohen, William Happer and Richard Lindzen; and a second response by Nordhaus. Now, from
Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment, comes a fresh study on the
question of scientific consensus. Its findings offer something new: scientists appear actually to
underestimate the extent to which they, as a group, agree on key questions related to climate change
science. In sum, the newly released poll results identified surprisingly common points of agreement
among climate scientists; and yet for each point, those scientists underestimated the amount of agreement
among their colleagues. The results: Human activity has been the primary cause of increases in global
average air and ocean temperatures in the last 250 years. (About 90 percent of respondents agreed with this
characterization, but those respondents estimated that less than 80 percent of their scientist colleagues held that view.) If governmental
policies do not change, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will exceed 550 parts per million between
2050 and 2059. (More than 30 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 20 percent of their peers held that view.) If
and when atmospheric CO2 concentrations reach 550 ppm, the increase in global average surface
temperature relative to the year 2000 will be 2-3 degrees Celsius, or 3.2-4.8 F. (More than 40 percent agreed, but
those respondents estimated that less than 30 percent held that view.) If governmental policies do not change, in the year
2050, the increase in global average surface temperature relative to the year 2000 will be 1.5-2 degrees
Celsius, or 2.4-3.2 F). (More than 35 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 30 percent held that view.) The
likelihood that global average sea level will rise more during this century than the highest level given
in the 2007 assessment of the IPCC (0.59 meters, 23.2 inches) is more than 90 percent. (More than 30 percent agreed,
but those respondents estimated that less than 20 percent held that view.) Since 1851, the U.S. has experienced an average of six major
hurricane landfalls (> 111 mph) per decade. The total number of major hurricane landfalls in the U.S. from 2011-2020 will be seven to eight.
(Nearly 60 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 30 percent held that view.) The total number of major hurricane
landfalls in the U.S. from 2041 to 2050 will be seven to eight. (About 35 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that less than 30
percent held that view.) Given
increasing levels of human activity, the concentration of CO2 in the
atmosphere can be kept below 550 ppm with current technology — but only with changes in government policy.
(Nearly 70 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 50 percent held that view.)
Consensus
IPCC concludes warming is existent
Appleyard 13 (David Appleyard, senior editor for the Renewable Energy World, “IPCC Concludes Anthropogenic Warming is Real,” Real
Energy World, September 27, 2013, http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/09/ipcc-concludes-anthropogenicwarming-is-real)
A new report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that human impact on the
climate system is clear and evident in most regions of the globe. It is extremely likely that human
influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century, the analysis states,
adding that the evidence for this warming is unequivocal. “Observations of changes in the climate system are based on
multiple lines of independent evidence. Our assessment of the science finds that the atmosphere and
ocean have warmed, the amount of snow and ice has diminished, the global mean sea level has risen
and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased,” said Qin Dahe, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group I, which
developed the report titled Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis. Thomas Stocker, the other Co-Chair, added: "Continued
emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all components of the
climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of
greenhouse gas emissions." Stocker concluded: “As a result of our past, present and expected future
emissions of CO2, we are committed to climate change, and effects will persist for many centuries
even if emissions of CO2 stop.”
IPCC proves warming is on the rise
Muller 11 (Richard A. Muller, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of California Berkley, “The Case Against Global-Warming
Skepticism,” The Wall Street Journal, October 21, 2011,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket&mg=reno64wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348.html%3Fmod%3DWSJ_Opinion_L
EFTTopBucket)
Using data from all these poor stations, the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates an
average global
0.64ºC temperature rise in the past 50 years, "most" of which the IPCC says is due to human s. Yet the
margin of error for the stations is at least three times larger than the estimated warming. We know
that cities show anomalous warming, caused by energy use and building materials; asphalt, for
instance, absorbs more sunlight than do trees. Tokyo's temperature rose about 2ºC in the last 50 years. Could
that rise, and increases in other urban areas, have been unreasonably included in the global estimates? That warming may be real,
but it has nothing to do with the greenhouse effect and can't be addressed by carbon dioxide
reduction. Moreover, the three major temperature analysis groups (the U.S.'s NASA and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the U.K.'s Met Office and Climatic Research Unit) analyze only a small fraction of the
available data, primarily from stations that have long records. There's a logic to that practice, but it could lead to selection bias. For
instance, older stations were often built outside of cities but today are surrounded by buildings. These groups today use data from about 2,000
stations, down from roughly 6,000 in 1970, raising even more questions about their selections. On top of that, stations have moved,
instruments have changed and local environments have evolved. Analysis groups try to compensate for all this by homogenizing the data,
though there are plenty of arguments to be had over how best to homogenize long-running data taken from around the world in varying
conditions. These
adjustments often result in corrections of several tenths of one degree Celsius,
significant fractions of the warming attributed to humans.
IPCC records indicate that warming is real and anthropogenic
IPCC 07 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Observed changes in climate and their effects,” IPCC, 2007,
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms1.html)
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average
air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level
(Figure SPM.1). {1.1} Eleven of the last twelve years (1995-2006) rank among the twelve warmest years in the
instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850). The 100-year linear trend (1906-2005) of 0.74 [0.56 to 0.92]°C[1] is larger than
the corresponding trend of 0.6 [0.4 to 0.8]°C (1901-2000) given in the Third Assessment Report (TAR) (Figure SPM.1). The
temperature
increase is widespread over the globe and is greater at higher northern latitudes. Land regions have
warmed faster than the oceans (Figures SPM.2, SPM.4). {1.1, 1.2} Rising sea level is consistent with warming
(Figure SPM.1). Global average sea level has risen since 1961 at an average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm/yr and since
1993 at 3.1 [2.4 to 3.8] mm/yr, with contributions from thermal expansion, melting glaciers and ice caps, and the polar ice sheets. Whether
the faster rate for 1993 to 2003 reflects decadal variation or an increase in the longer-term trend is unclear.
{1.1} Observed decreases in snow and ice extent are also consistent with warming (Figure SPM.1). Satellite
data since 1978 show that annual average Arctic sea ice extent has shrunk by 2.7 [2.1 to 3.3]% per decade,
with larger decreases in summer of 7.4 [5.0 to 9.8]% per decade. Mountain glaciers and snow cover on average have
declined in both hemispheres. {1.1} From 1900 to 2005, precipitation increased significantly in eastern parts of North and South
America, northern Europe and northern and central Asia but declined in the Sahel, the Mediterranean, southern Africa and parts of southern
Asia. Globally, the
area affected by drought has likely[2] increased since the 1970s. {1.1} It is very likely
that over the past 50 years: cold days, cold nights and frosts have become less frequent over most
land areas, and hot days and hot nights have become more frequent. It is likely that: heat waves have
become more frequent over most land areas, the frequency of heavy precipitation events has
increased over most areas, and since 1975 the incidence of extreme high sea level[3] has increased
worldwide. {1.1} There is observational evidence of an increase in intense tropical cyclone activity in
the North Atlantic since about 1970, with limited evidence of increases elsewhere. There is no clear trend in the annual numbers of
tropical cyclones. It is difficult to ascertain longer-term trends in cyclone activity, particularly prior to 1970. {1.1} Average Northern
Hemisphere temperatures during the second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than during
any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely the highest in at least the past 1300 years. {1.1}
Observational evidence[4] from all continents and most oceans shows that many natural systems are
being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases. {1.2} Changes in snow,
ice and frozen ground have with high confidence increased the number and size of glacial lakes, increased
ground instability in mountain and other permafrost regions and led to changes in some Arctic and
Antarctic ecosystems. {1.2} There is high confidence that some hydrological systems have also been
affected through increased runoff and earlier spring peak discharge in many glacier- and snow-fed
rivers and through effects on thermal structure and water quality of warming rivers and lakes. {1.2} In
terrestrial ecosystems, earlier timing of spring events and poleward and upward shifts in plant and animal ranges are with very high confidence
linked to recent warming. In
some marine and freshwater systems, shifts in ranges and changes in algal, plankton
with high confidence associated with rising water temperatures, as well as related changes
in ice cover, salinity, oxygen levels and circulation. {1.2} Of the more than 29,000 observational data series, from 75
studies, that show significant change in many physical and biological systems, more than 89% are
consistent with the direction of change expected as a response to warming (Figure SPM.2). However, there is a
and fish abundance are
notable lack of geographic balance in data and literature on observed changes, with marked scarcity in developing countries. {1.2, 1.3} There is
medium confidence that other effects of regional climate change on natural and human environments are emerging, although many are
difficult to discern due to adaptation and non-climatic drivers. {1.2} They
include effects of temperature increases on:
{1.2} agricultural and forestry management at Northern Hemisphere higher latitudes, such as earlier spring
planting of crops, and alterations in disturbance regimes of forests due to fires and pests some aspects of human health, such as heat-related
mortality in Europe, changes in infectious disease vectors in some areas, and allergenic pollen in Northern Hemisphere high and mid-latitudes
some human activities in the Arctic (e.g. hunting and travel over snow and ice) and in lower-elevation alpine areas (such as mountain sports).
Data proves
Science records prove warming is real
Levy 12 (Dawn Levy, writer for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, “Carbon Dioxide Caused Global Warming at Ice Age’s End, Pioneering
Simulation Shows,” Oak Ridge National Library, April 4, 2012, https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/2012/04/04/carbon-dioxide-caused-global-warmingat-ice-ages-end-pioneering-simulation-shows/)
Climate science has an equivalent to the “what came first—the chicken or the egg?” question: What came first,
greenhouse gases or global warming? A multi-institutional team led by researchers at Harvard, Oregon State University, and the
University of Wisconsin used a global dataset of paleoclimate records and the Jaguar supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)
to find the answer (spoiler alert: carbon dioxide drives warming). The results, published in the April 5 issue of Nature, analyze
15,000
years of climate history. Scientists hope amassing knowledge of the causes of natural global climate
change will aid understanding of human-caused climate change. “We constructed the first-ever record of global
temperature spanning the end of the last ice age based on 80 proxy temperature records from around the world,” said Jeremy Shakun, a
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate and Global Change postdoctoral fellow at Harvard and Columbia Universities
and first author of the paper. “It’s
no small task to get at global mean temperature. Even for studies of the
present day you need lots of locations, quality-controlled data, careful statistics. For the past 21,000 years, it’s
even harder. But because the data set is large enough, these proxy data provide a reasonable estimate of
global mean temperature.” Proxy records from around the world—derived from ice cores and ocean and lake
sediments—provide estimates of local surface temperature throughout history, and carbon-14 dating indicates
when those temperatures occurred. For example, water molecules harboring the oxygen-18 isotope rain out faster than those containing
oxygen-16 as an air mass cools, so the ratio of these isotopes in glacial ice layers tells scientists how cold it was when the snow fell. Likewise,
the amount of magnesium incorporated into the shells of marine plankton depends on the temperature of the water they live in, and these
shells get preserved on the seafloor when they die. The
authors combined these local temperature records to
produce a reconstruction of global mean temperature. Additionally, samples of ancient atmosphere are
trapped as air bubbles in glaciers, providing a direct measure of carbon dioxide levels through time
that could be compared to the global temperature record. Being the first to reconstruct global mean temperatures
throughout this time interval allowed the researchers to show what many suspected but none could yet prove: “This is the first paper to
definitively show the role carbon dioxide played in helping to end the last ice age,” said Shakun, who co-wrote the paper with Peter Clark of
Oregon State University. “We
found that global temperature mirrored and generally lagged behind rising
carbon dioxide during the last deglaciation, which points to carbon dioxide as the major driver of global warming.” Prior results
based on Antarctic ice cores had indicated that local temperatures in Antarctica started warming before
carbon dioxide began rising, which implied that carbon dioxide was a feedback to some other leading driver of warming. The delay of
global temperature behind carbon dioxide found in this study, however, shows that the ice-core perspective
does not apply to the globe as a whole and instead suggests that carbon dioxide was the primary
driver of worldwide warming . While the geologic record showed a remarkable correlation between carbon dioxide and global
temperature, the researchers also turned to state-of-the-art model simulations to further pin down the direction of causation suggested by the
temperature lag. Jaguar recently ran approximately 14 million processor hours to simulate the most recent 21,000 years of Earth’s climate.
Feng He of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, a postdoctoral researcher, plugged the main forcings driving global climate over this time
interval into an (IPCC)–class model called the Community Climate System Model version 3, a global climate model that couples interactions
between atmosphere, oceans, lands, and sea ice. The climate science community developed the model with support from the (NSF), (DOE), and
and used many codes developed by university researchers. “Our
model results are the first IPCC-class Coupled General
Circulation Model (CGCM) simulation of such a long duration (15,000 years),” said He, who conducted the modeling with Zhengyu Liu
of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Bette Otto-Bliesner of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “This is of
particular significance to the climate community because it shows, for the first time, that at least one of
the CGCMs used to predict future climate is capable of reproducing both the timing and amplitude of climate
evolution seen in the past under realistic climate forcing.”
Artic Proves
Arctic melting shows a clear sign of increasing surface temperature
Morello 11 (Lauren Morello, senior science writer for Climate Central, “Polar Ice Sheets Melting Faster Than Predicted,” Scientific
American, March 9, 2011, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/polar-ice-sheets-melting-faster-than-predicted/)
Ice loss from the massive ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating, according to a new
study. If the trend continues, ice sheets could become the dominant contributor to sea level rise sooner
than scientists had predicted, concludes the research, which will be published this month in the journal Geophysical Research
Letters. "The traditional view of the loss of land ice on Earth has been that mountain glaciers and ice
caps are the dominant contributors, and ice sheets are following behind," said study co-author Eric Rignot,
a glaciologist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the University of California, Irvine. "In this study, we are showing
that ice sheets, mountain glaciers and ice caps are neck-and-neck." But that could soon change, Rignot
said, because the rate at which ice sheets are losing mass is increasing three times faster than the rate
of ice loss from mountain glaciers and ice caps. "I don't think we expected ice sheets to run neck-and-neck with mountain
glaciers, which basically sit in a warmer climate, this soon," he said. "At the same time, the mass loss on the ice sheet is not very large
compared to how much mass they store." Rignot was part of a research team that also included scientists from Utrecht University in the
Netherlands and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. The researchers based their analysis on a comparison of two
different methods to measure ice loss. Sea level rise estimates likely to increase One source was NASA's twin GRACE satellites, which orbit the
Earth about 200 kilometers apart from each other. Small changes in the planet's gravity field can push the satellites together, ever so slightly, or
pull them apart -- variations that scientists use to interpret the terrain below. The second method combined different satellite data that
measure the speed at which the ice sheets flow to the ocean, airborne measurements of the ice sheets' thickness and a regional climate model.
Combining the speed and thickness measurements allowed the scientists to determine how much ice
was flowing into the ocean, while the climate model allowed them to estimate how much snow was falling on the ice sheet.
Subtracting one from the other produced a "mass-balance" picture of net ice loss or growth for each ice sheet. The two data sets overlapped
for an eight-year period, from 2002 to 2010, and showed similar results. Based
on that close agreement between the two
measurement methods, the scientists had confidence that the full 18-year record produced by the
mass-balance method was generally accurate. Rignot said the results are "probably going to provide
more incentive for the next [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report] to revise sea level prediction a
little bit upwards." He cautioned that it's hard to extrapolate his new results to the end of the
century, because "18 years of data is not too much." In its last major report, released in 2007, the IPCC predicted
seas would rise between 7 and 23 inches by 2100 -- but couched that estimate with a giant caveat. The IPCC cautioned
that an additional rise could come from rapid and unpredictable melting in Greenland and Antarctica,
which it didn't attempt to estimate. Since that report was released, scientists have worked hard to improve their understanding
of ice sheet behavior and improve estimates of future sea level rise. Many researchers now believe the sea could rise an average of 3 to 6 feet
by the end of the century, with the more likely amount at the low end of that range.
Warming Fast
Warming is increasing at an exponential rate – it’s try or die
Kiehl 11 (Jeffery Kiehl, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research where he heads the Climate Change Research
Section, “EARTH’S HOT PAST COULD BE PROLOGUE TO FUTURE CLIMATE,” UCAR, January 13, 2011,
https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/3628/earth-s-hot-past-could-be-prologue-future-climate)
The magnitude of climate change during Earth’s deep past suggests that future temperatures may
eventually rise far more than projected if society continues its pace of emitting greenhouse gases, a new
analysis concludes. The study, by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jeffrey Kiehl, will appear as a
“Perspectives” piece in this week’s issue of the journal Science. Building on recent research, the study examines the relationship
between global temperatures and high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere tens of millions of years ago. It
warns that, if carbon dioxide emissions continue at their current rate through the end of this century,
atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gas will reach levels that last existed about 30 million
to 100 million years ago, when global temperatures averaged about 29 degrees Fahrenheit (16 degrees Celsius) above pre-industrial
levels. Kiehl said that global temperatures may gradually rise over the next several centuries or millennia in response to
the carbon dioxide. Elevated levels of the greenhouse gas may remain in the atmosphere for tens of
thousands of years, according to recent computer model studies of geochemical processes that the study cites. The study also
indicates that the planet’s climate system, over long periods of times, may be at least twice as
sensitive to carbon dioxide than currently projected by computer models, which have generally focused on
shorter-term warming trends. This is largely because even sophisticated computer models have not yet been able to incorporate critical
processes, such as the loss of ice sheets, that take place over centuries or millennia and amplify the initial warming effects of carbon dioxide.
“If we
don’t start seriously working toward a reduction of carbon emissions, we are putting our planet
on a trajectory that the human species has never experienced,” says Kiehl, a climate scientist who specializes in
studying global climate in Earth’s geologic past. “We will have committed human civilization to living in a different
world for multiple generations.” The Perspectives article pulls together several recent studies that look at various aspects of the
climate system, while adding a mathematical approach by Kiehl to estimate average global temperatures in the distant past. Its analysis of the
climate system’s response to elevated levels of carbon dioxide is supported by previous studies that Kiehl cites. The work was funded by the
National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor.
Tipping Point/Reversible
We are at the tipping point, but it is not too late
PE 14 (Planet Extinction, blog from scientist about preventing global warming, “Tipping Points - the Facts,” Planet Extinction, 2014,
http://www.planetextinction.com/planet_extinction_tipping_points.htm)
When the temperature gets high enough to cause forests to give up their CO2 rather than sequest it,
then every tonne of gas given up to the air increases the temperature and causes even more gas to be
given up. This is a tipping point - an irreversible moment when the dreaded feedback loop begins. This is now the central
issue for the scientific community: have humans already have gone too far, and may we now be helpless to stop
abrupt and runaway global warming. These ten major tipping points are are right at this moment being triggered.
Melting glaciers will raise sea levels so that less heat is reflected out to space Decline of the flow of fresh water
from the Arctic will collapse the Gulf Stream Forests will no longer absorb carbon, but become a source. Methane
clathrates held in the mud under the sea begin to burp Melting permafrost releases vast quantities of
methane Drought kills the Amazon forest and its carbon sink is released The benefits of being shielded
by global dimming ceases Bush fires increase the carbon load and reduce the storage capacity of forests
As oceans warm the seas absorb less carbon All the above plus disastrous weather and coral bleaching
and acidification of the oceans disrupt food production Triggering any one of these ten carbon sinks
would cause runaway greenhouse warming. The triggering of any one of them would start off the
others. The earth has over eons stored greenhouse gasses in forests, the soil and in the oceans. Recent scientific research has
shown that small rises in temperature can trigger these sinks into becoming sources, and thus tip the scales
against our survival. Only now, in the past five years, has the scientific community begun to pat serious attention
to them. We do not know if they will be triggered today or in decades, It seems there is a ten percent possibility that feedback loops from
glacial-meltdown, permafrost methane burping and/or rainforest collapse will commence within the next few years. Only intense and
immediate action beyond anything the world has ever done can stop this. If all the good intentions
from the Kyoto and Montreal meetings were to be executed in full and immediately, they would not alter the
outcome. Like Munich, these agreements were set by politicians playing for time. This is discussed in Footprints #2. The graph shows the range
of temperatures possible by the end of the century from computer modeling. The latest
IPCC meeting added 50% to these
figures. Taken together, concentrations of CO2 and methane have passed the threshold of 400ppm set as
the upper limit of safety by the International Conference on Climate Change. This is of the most enormous significance. It means
we have actually entered the era of dangerous climate change. We have already reached the point
where our children can no longer count on a safe environment. The Earth is about to be trapped in a vicious cycle of
positive feedback, which is why the issue is so serious and urgent. Any extra heat from any source (especially human
activity) is amplified, and as it is added this sets off other processes so that heating is accelerating. It is the self-regulating mechanism
of Gaia itself that, perversely, will make it hard to master global warming - because the system contains feedback mechanisms that in the past
have acted in concert to keep the Earth much cooler than it otherwise would be. Now, however, they
could easily combine to
amplify the warming being caused by our activities. It is NOT too late to minimise the risks - read what
YOU can do Personally and Politically Tragically, there are no large negative feedbacks that would reverse the heating process – save the
weathering of rocks and occasional fierce tropical storms. Neither can compete.
Global warming can be stopped – 10 warrants
NUFM no date (Northwestern University Faculty Management, “10 Ways to Stop Global Warming,”
http://www.northwestern.edu/fm/sustainability/environmental-education/10-ways-to-stop-global-warming.html)
Want to help stop global warming? Here are 10 simple things you can do and how much carbon
dioxide you'll save doing them. Change a light Replacing one regular light bulb with a compact
flourescent light buld will save 150 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. Drive less Walk, bike, carpool or take mass
transit more often. You'll save one pound of carbon dioxide for every mile you don't drive! Recycle more You can save 2,400 pounds of
carbon dioxide per year by recycling just half of your household waste. Check your tires Keeping your tires inflated
properly can improve your gas mileage by more than 3 percent. Every gallon of gasoline saved keeps 20 pounds of
carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Use less hot water It takes a lot of energy to heat water. Use less hot water by
taking shorter and cooler showers and washing your clothes in cold or warm instead of hot water (more than 500 pounds of CO2 saved per
year). Avoid
products with a lot of packaging You can save 1,200 pounds of carbon dioxide if you reduce
your garbage by 10 percent. Adjust your thermostat Moving your thermostat down just 2 degrees in
winter and up 2 degrees in summer could save about 2,000 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. Plant a
tree A single tree will absorb one ton of carbon dioxide over its lifetime. Turn off electronic devices Simply
turning off your television, DVD player, stereo and computer when you're not using them will save
you thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide a year.
AT: Adaptation
No Adapt
Cannot adapt to an increase in warming
Reilly 14 (John Reilly, co-director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, “Why We Can’t Just Adapt to
Climate Change,” MIT Technology Review, April 3, 2014, http://www.technologyreview.com/view/526116/why-we-cant-just-adapt-to-climatechange/)
The report does conclude with high confidence risks to low-lying coastal areas: emergencies during
extreme weather, mortality from heat, food insecurity, loss of livelihood in rural areas due to water
shortage and temperature increases, loss of coastal ecosystems and livelihoods that depend on them,
and loss of freshwater ecosystems. But again, this high confidence comes with an absence of quantification of how many/much
and the degree of risk. Will extreme weather double, triple, or quadruple the number of extreme emergency weatherrelated events of a given magnitude (dollars or lives lost)? Will it increase these incidences by 10 percent, or will some areas
face increased risk while other areas face reduced risk? In the end, the report is a compendium of things that might
happen or are likely to happen to someone or something, somewhere. But what does this actually mean for me, or
anyone who might read the report? I would avoid beachfront property. If my livelihood depended on a coastal resource, I would try to find a
different job, or at least urge my children to pursue another line of work. That is where a measure of wealth brings some resilience—I have
those options, others do not. The
report “quantifies” in some sense by establishing an element of “relative
risk,” concluding that the poor and marginalized in society are more vulnerable because they do not
have the means to adapt . Beyond this, it is not clear that climate prediction is at a high enough level to offer information that I can
use to take concrete actions for most day-to-day decisions and investments. What the report does provide is some documentation of
adaptation in action—what different regions, cities, sectors, and groups are doing to adapt—concluding that there is a growing body of
experience from which to learn. However, perhaps the greatest truth in the report is in the following statement: “Adaptation
is place
and context specific, with no single approach for reducing risks appropriate across all settings (high
confidence). Effective risk reduction and adaptation strategies consider the dynamics of vulnerability and
exposure and their linkages with socioeconomic processes, sustainable development, and climate
change.” Hence, while it’s possible to learn from others’ adaptation experiences, in the end, the specifics of climate change
in my place, given my circumstances, and the socio-economic environment in which I live will present me with very
different climate outcomes and opportunities to adapt than you will have where you live. This fact
alone raises the cost of adaptation, because to some degree each recipe needs to be invented anew. What worked in the past
likely won’t work in the future—or at least, not as well. And we need to process a lot of highly uncertain climate projections in developing the
new recipe.
Accelerated warming ensures no adaptation
UNEP 06 (United National Environment Program, ‘Why Can't Ecosystems Just Adapt?,” U.S. Global Change Research Information Office,
May 24, 2006,
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JkHanlYQI94J:www.gcrio.org/ipcc/qa/11.html+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)
Climate change has the potential to alter many of the Earth's natural ecosystems over the next century. Yet,
climate change is not a new influence on the biosphere, so why can't ecosystems just adapt without
significant effects on their form or productivity? There are three basic reasons. First, the rate of global
climate change is projected to be more rapid than any to have occurred in the last 10,000 years. Second,
humans have altered the structure of many of the world's ecosystems. They have cut down forests, plowed soils,
used rangelands to graze their domesticated animals, introduced non-native species to many regions, intensively fished lakes, rivers and
oceans, and constructed dams. These
relatively recent changes in the structure of the world's ecosystems have
made them less resilient to further changes. Third, pollution, as well as other indirect effects of the utilization of
natural resources, has also increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Consequently, it is
likely that many ecosystems will not be able to adapt to the additional stress of climate change
without losing some of the species they contain or the services they provide, such as supplying sufficient clean water to drink,
food to eat, suitable soils in which to grow crops, and wood to use as fuel or in construction. For millions of years, species have been shifting
where they grow and reproduce in response to changing climate conditions. Over
the next century, global warming could
result in approximately one-third of the Earth's forested area undergoing major transitions in species
composition. From the fossil record we have an indication of the maximum rate at which various plant species have migrated to more
suitable areas; from 0.04 km/yr (about 0.03 miles/yr) for the slowest to 2 km/yr (about 1.3 miles/yr) for the fastest. However, the projected
rate of surface temperature change in many parts of the world could require plant species to migrate at faster rates (1.5 to 5.5 km/yr or about 1
to 3.5 miles/yr). Thus, many
species may not be able to move rapidly enough to prosper. These changes in
in turn give rise to additional releases of carbon into the
atmosphere, further accelerating climate change. Moreover, as the old vegetation dies in areas most affected by climate
vegetation and ecosystem structure may
change, such as forests in northern latitudes, it is likely to be replaced by fast growing, often non-native species. These species commonly yield
less timber, provide lower quality forage for domesticated animals, supply less food for wild animals, and furnish poorer habitat for many
native animals. The
prevalence of pest species, such as weeds, rats, and cockroaches, may also increase. Humans
actively and productively use and manipulate large portions of the land surface of the Earth, whether
it be for agriculture, housing, energy, or forestry. These practices have created a mosaic of different land uses and
ecosystem types, resulting in fewer remaining large and contiguous areas of a single type of habitat than existed in the past. Therefore it will
often be difficult for plants and animals to move to a location with a more suitable climate even if a
species was able to migrate quickly enough. This was not the case thousands of years ago, when
ecosystems last experienced rapid climate change. Now, many of the world's ecosystems are
essentially trapped on small islands, cut off from one another, only capable of travel over a limited and shrinking number of
bridges. As this increasingly occurs, more species are likely to be stranded in an environment in which
they cannot survive and/or reproduce. Further complicating the response of many of the Earth's terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems to climate change is the prevalence of stress from other disturbances associated with resource use. In the case of trees, for
example, many species are already weakened by air pollution. Increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will raise the
photosynthetic capacity of many plants, but the net effect on ecosystem productivity is unclear, particularly when combined with higher air
temperatures or where soil nutrients are limiting. Among
the ecosystems that are most likely to experience the most
severe effects from climate change are those that are at higher latitudes, such as far northern (Boreal)
forests or tundra, as well as those where different habitat types converge, such as where grasslands meet forests, or forests give way to
alpine vegetation. Coastal ecosystems are also at risk, particularly saltwater marshes, mangrove forests,
coastal wetlands, coral reefs, and river deltas. Many of these ecosystems, already under stress from
human activities, may be significantly altered or diminished in terms of their extent and productivity
as a result of future climate change.
AT: Turns
AT: Ice Age
There won’t be any ice age for 15,000 years. New ice data demonstrates current
stability.
New Scientist Online 04 (News Scientist Online, “Record ice core gives fair forecast,” News Scientist, June 4, 2004,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn5094)
As long as humans do not mess it up, the Earth's climate is set at fair for the next 15,000 years . That is
according to information extracted from the oldest ice core ever drilled. The Antarctic core is the first to reach as far back as a warm
period with characteristics similar to our own interglacial. So it should help make more accurate predictions about when
to expect the next deep freeze. The ice core, drilled from a feature in central Antarctica called Dome C, is around 3
kilometres long and 10 centimetres wide. Changes in the relative proportions of hydrogen isotopes in the ice layers allow
scientists to compile a complete record of Antarctic temperatures going back 740,000 years. The core shows
the waxing and waning of eight ice ages. Most critically for making predictions about our climate, it is the first core to record a
period known as Termination V, around 430,000 years ago.
Next Ice Age is 50,000 years away
Brock 11 (Chris Brock, Staff writer for Watertown Daily Times, “Taking long, long view on climate change,” Watertown Daily Times, March
19, 2011, http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20110319/CURR04/303199998/?loc=interstitialskip)
Mr. Stager writes that most
climate models predict another ice age at the year 50,000. Humans, he said, have
stopped that "in its tracks" because of carbon dioxide emissions. The next ice age will arrive around
the year 130,000. But not if "we burn through all our remaining coal reserves during the next century
or so," Mr. Stager writes. If we do that, he said, the next ice age won't hit for the next half million years.
There is no chance of an ice age anytime soon
Skeptical Science 14 (Skeptical Science, “Are we heading into a new Ice Age?,” Skeptical Science, 2014,
http://www.skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age.htm)
According to ice cores from Antarctica, the past 400,000 years have been dominated by glacials, also known as ice ages, that last about
100,000. These glacials have been punctuated by interglacials, short warm periods which typically last 11,500 years. Figure 1 below shows how
temperatures in Antarctica changed over this period. Because
our current interglacial (the Holocene) has already lasted
approximately 12,000 years, it has led some to claim that a new ice age is imminent. Is this a valid
claim? To answer this question, it is necessary to understand what has caused the shifts between ice ages and interglacials during
this period. The cycle appears to be a response to changes in the Earth’s orbit and tilt, which affect the amount of summer sunlight reaching the
northern hemisphere. When this amount declines, the rate of summer melt declines and the ice sheets begin to grow. In turn, this increases the
amount of sunlight reflected back into space, increasing (or amplifying) the cooling trend. Eventually a new ice age emerges and lasts for about
100,000 years. So
what are today’s conditions like? Changes in both the orbit and tilt of the Earth do
indeed indicate that the Earth should be cooling. However, two reasons explain why an ice age is
unlikely: These two factors, orbit and tilt, are weak and are not acting within the same timescale – they
are out of phase by about 10,000 years. This means that their combined effect would probably be too weak to
trigger an ice age. You have to go back 430,000 years to find an interglacial with similar conditions , and
this interglacial lasted about 30,000 years. The warming effect from CO2 and other greenhouse gases is greater
than the cooling effect expected from natural factors. Without human interference, the Earth’s orbit and tilt, a slight
decline in solar output since the 1950s and volcanic activity would have led to global cooling. Yet global temperatures are
definitely on the rise. It can therefore be concluded that with CO2 concentrations set to continue to
rise, a return to ice age conditions seems very unlikely. Instead, temperatures are increasing and this
increase may come at a considerable cost with few or no benefits.
AT: CO2 Good
C02 stops photosynthesis
Brown 08 (Lester Brown, Director and Founder of the global institute of Environment in the U.S., “Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save
Civilization,” 2008, http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB3/PB3ch3_ss3.htm)
Higher temperatures can reduce or even halt photosynthesis, prevent pollination, and lead to crop dehydration.
Although the elevated concentrations of atmospheric C02 that raise temperature can also raise crop yields, the detrimental effect of
higher temperatures on yields overrides the C02 fertilization effect for the major crops. In a study of
local ecosystem sustainability, Mohan Wali and his colleagues at Ohio State University noted that as temperature
rises, photosynthetic activity in plants increases until the temperature reaches 20 degrees Celsius (68
degrees Fahrenheit). The rate of photosynthesis then plateaus until the temperature hits 35 degrees Celsius
(95 degrees Fahrenheit), whereupon it begins to decline, until at 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit), photosynthesis ceases
entirely '? The most vulnerable part of a plant's life cycle is the pollination period. Of the world's three food staples-rice, wheat, and corn-corn
is particularly vulnerable. In order for corn to reproduce, pollen must fall from the tassel to the strands of silk that emerge from the end of each
ear of corn. Each of these silk strands is attached to a kernel site on the cob. If the kernel is to develop, a grain of pollen must fall on the silk
strand and then journey to the kernel site. When
temperatures are uncommonly high, the silk strands quickly dry
out and turn brown, unable to play their role in the fertilization process. The effects of temperature
on rice pollination have been studied in detail in the Philippines. Scientists there report that the pollination of rice falls
from 100 percent at 34 degrees Celsius to near zero at 40 degrees Celsius, leading to crop failure.IR ''
Costs of C02 outweigh the benefits – we have comparative evidence
EDF 09 (Environmental Defense Fund, a US-based nonprofit environmental advocacy group, “Global Warming Myths and Facts,” 2009,
http://mrgreenbiz.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/global-warming-myths-and-facts-2/)
Although water vapor traps more heat than CO2, because of the relationships among CO2, water vapor and climate, to
fight global
warming nations must focus on controlling CO2. Atmospheric levels of CO2 are determined by how
much coal, natural gas and oil we burn and how many trees we cut down, as well as by natural processes like plant growth.
Atmospheric levels of water vapor, on the other hand, cannot be directly controlled by people; rather, they are determined by temperatures.
The warmer the atmosphere, the more water vapor it can hold. As a result, water vapor is part of an amplifying effect. Greenhouse
gases like CO2 warm the air, which in turn adds to the stock of water vapor, which in turn traps more
heat and accelerates warming. Scientists know this because of satellite measurements documenting a rise in
water vapor concentrations as the globe has warmed. The best way to lower temperature and thus reduce water
vapor levels is to reduce CO2 emissions. MYTH Global warming and extra CO2 will actually be beneficial — they reduce coldrelated deaths and stimulate crop growth. FACT Any beneficial effects will be far outweighed by damage and
disruption. Even a warming in just the middle range of scientific projections would have devastating
impacts on many sectors of the economy. Rising seas would inundate coastal communities, contaminate water
supplies with salt and increase the risk of flooding by storm surge, affecting tens of millions of people
globally. Moreover, extreme weather events, including heat waves, droughts and floods, are predicted to increase
in frequency and intensity, causing loss of lives and property and throwing agriculture into turmoil .
Even though higher levels of CO2 can act as a plant fertilizer under some conditions, scientists now think that the "CO2
fertilization" effect on crops has been overstated; in natural ecosystems, the fertilization effect can diminish
after a few years as plants acclimate. Furthermore, increased CO2 may benefit undesirable, weedy
species more than desirable species. Higher levels of CO2 have already caused ocean acidification, and
scientists are warning of potentially devastating effects on marine life and fisheries. Moreover, higher
levels of regional ozone (smog), a result of warmer temperatures, could worsen respiratory illnesses.
CO2 benefits weeds and isn’t a fertilizer
Weart 2003 (Spencer, Ph.D. in Physics and Astrophysics at the University of Colorado, Boulder, former fellow of the Mt. Wilson and
Palomar Observatories The Discovery of Global Warming, 2003, p 179-180)
Some scientists stuck by the old view that biological feedbacks were reassuring rather than alarming. They held
that fertilization
from the increased CO2 in the atmosphere would benefit agriculture and forestry so much that it would make up
for any possible damage from climate change. Studies found that for the planet as a whole, biomass was indeed absorbing more CO2 overall
than in earlier decades. However, the
consequences were not straightforward. For example, under some
circumstances the extra CO2 might benefit weeds and insect pests more than desirable crops. In any case, as the
level of the gas continued to rise, plants would reach a point (nobody could predict how soon) where they
would be unable to use more carbon fertilizer. There was a good chance that more warmth would
eventually foster decay, with a net emission of greenhouse gases. Meanwhile new evidence showed
that the biology of the oceans too could vary markedly. The drifting plankton, as complex as a rain forest but scarcely
explored by biologists, interacted strongly with the uptake or emission of CO2. All this had to be incorporated in models.
Impacts
WARMING => EXTINCTION
Human induced global warming is a real threat to human extinction
Brimelow 09 (Julian Brimelow, writer for Freelance, “Human-induced global warming: past, present and future,” Edmonton Journal,
March 22, 2009, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/)
Scientists from a wide range of disciplines have amassed overwhelming peer-reviewed research that supports the theory of
human-induced global warming. Regardless, there continues to be a misconception that there is widespread debate in the
scientific community about its validity. This misinformation is spread by people who believe global warming is a hoax. In their zeal, skeptics
often attempt to discredit and undermine the scientific process and portray scientists as alarmist. Actually, scientists are required to be prudent
and conservative when describing their findings. In contrast, skeptics' arguments are typically not held to the same rigorous standards. The
result is that the reputation of the sciences is tarnished and the layperson is left confused, overwhelmed and conflicted. This need not be so.
Humans have embarked on a radical and dangerous experiment with the Earth's climate system. Each
year we spew seven gigatonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and, in a short time, have
increased the concentration of CO2 to its highest level in at least 850,000 years. CO2 and other
greenhouse gases, such as methane, play a critical role in ensuring that the mean global surface air
temperature is near +14 C rather than -18 C. Another powerful greenhouse gas is water vapour. As the
atmosphere warms it can retain more moisture, thereby further increasing temperature. However, clouds
can act to either increase or decrease global temperatures, and work is continuing to improve our understanding of the net contribution of
water vapour. Numerous
independent observational data, such as glacier and sea ice records, together with multidisciplinary peer-reviewed scientific studies, show an overwhelming consensus that humans have
played a significant role in increasing global temperatures. Research has also found that the warming
from dramatic increases in greenhouse gases exceeds the impact of variations in natural drivers, such
as solar activity, acting on the same time scale.
Absent reduction in CO2 emissions, extinction is inevitable
Mazo 10 (Jeffrey Mazo – PhD in Paleoclimatology from UCLA, Managing Editor, Survival and Research Fellow for Environmental Security
and Science Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, 3-2010, “Climate Conflict: How global warming threatens
security and what to do about it,” pg. 122)
The best estimates for global warming to the end of the century range from 2.5-4.0C above pre-industrial levels,
depending on the scenario. Even in the best-case scenario, the low end of the likely range is 1.goC, and in the worst 'business as
usual' projections, which actual emissions have been matching, the range of likely warming runs from 3.1--7.1°C. Even
keeping emissions at constant 2000 levels (which have already been exceeded), global temperature would still be
expected to reach 1.2°C (O'9""1.5°C)above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century." Without early and severe reductions
in emissions, the effects of climate change in the second half of the twenty-first century are likely to be catastrophic for
the stability and security of countries in the developing world - not to mention the associated human tragedy. Climate
change could even undermine the strength and stability of emerging and advanced economies, beyond the knockon effects on security of widespread state failure and collapse in developing countries.' And although they have been condemned as melodramatic and alarmist,
many informed observers believe that unmitigated climate change beyond the end of the century
could pose an existential threat to civilisation." What is certain is that there is no precedent in human
experience for such rapid change or such climatic conditions, and even in the best case adaptation to
these extremes would mean profound social, cultural and political changes.
Species are already dying. It’s now or never for the AFF
Hoag 06 (Hannah Hoag, reporter for the National Geographic, “Global Warming Already Causing Extinctions, Scientists Say,” National
Geographic, November 28, 2006, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061128-global-warming.html)
No matter where they look, scientists are finding that global warming is already killing species—and
at a much faster rate than had originally been predicted. "What surprises me most is that it has
happened so soon," said biologist Camille Parmesan of the University of Texas, Austin, lead author of a new study
of global warming's effects. Parmesan and most other scientists hadn't expected to see species extinctions
from global warming until 2020. But populations of frogs, butterflies, ocean corals, and polar birds
have already gone extinct because of climate change, Parmesan said. Scientists were right about which species would
suffer first—plants and animals that live only in narrow temperature ranges and those living in cold climates such as Earth's Poles or
mountaintops. "The species dependent on sea ice—polar bear, ring seal, emperor penguin, Adélie penguin—and the cloud forest frogs are
showing massive extinctions," Parmesan said. Her review compiles 866 scientific studies on the effects of climate change on terrestrial, marine,
and freshwater species. The study appears in the December issue of the Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. Global
Phenomenon Bill Fraser is a wildlife ecologist with the Polar Oceans Research Group in Sheridan, Montana. "There
is no longer a
question of whether one species or ecosystem is experiencing climate change. [Parmesan's] paper
makes it evident that it is almost global," he said. "The scale now is so vast that you cannot continue to
ignore climate change," added Fraser, who began studying penguins in the Antarctic more than 30 years
ago. "It is going to have some severe consequences."
Every living organism is threatened by global warming
Blakemore 05 (Bill Blakemore, correspondent for ABC News, “Is Global Warming Leading to Extinction?,” ABC News, July 18, 2005,
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=942506&page=1)
All over the planet, hundreds of scientists are finding plants and animals suddenly scattering, withering
or outright disappearing as our world approaches sustained temperatures higher than today's species
ever evolved to be able to survive in. The new heat wave is attacking in many ways -- from melting
the sea-ice that polar bears need for hunting to bringing tropical rains two months too early, so plants
blossom too soon to feed the animals that depend on them. Three separate scientific survey studies, which pull together
hundreds of field studies from around the world, add to the same picture. The increase in the average global
temperature is causing havoc in many ecosystems -- and on a scale that's hard, at first, even to imagine. One study by
19 established scientists on five continents, predicts "on the basis of mid-range climate warming
scenarios, for 2050, that 15 [percent] to 37 percent of species in our sample will be committed to
extinction." "Do we want to destroy the creation? That's the question," says Edward O. Wilson, professor and curator of entomology at the
Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University. "That's what we're doing -- and at an accelerating rate." For
half a century, Wilson has uncovered the cohesive complexity of all life on Earth and focused on how
its rich biodiversity is being destroyed by human attacks, ranging from spreading pesticides to wiping out wildlife
habitats. He's found it painful to assess how global warming is now piling its assaults on top of all the
others. "I'm optimistic by nature, but I have to admit it's getting scary," says Wilson. "Most people
who've analyzed the situation believe that we could -- again, if the situation is unabated -- could lose half the
species of plants and animals in the world by the end of the 21st century. We're simply plinking them
out of existence -- in many cases without even knowing what they are." Nobody meant for this to
happen. And as hard news about global warming has become visible -- glaciers melting fast around
the world, more frequent spikes in heat-driven weather -- there's been emotional debate. Some who
deny it's even happening are accused by others of just being in denial. It's not surprising there's been
such disagreement and confusion about global warming because, in one sense, it's quite simply the
biggest problem we've ever faced. It's affecting the entire planet -- and all at once. And since the
warming atmosphere envelops all life forms in its blanket, this is also the most complex story ever.
Many millions of species with their intricate patterns of inter-dependence are each disrupted differently. So to begin to understand it,
we need people who are not afraid of complexity, who even enjoy it -- such as the scientists we sought out for this report.
Unchecked warming will certainly lead to extinction – IPCC proves
Walsh 13 (Bryan Walsh, senior writer for TIME magazine, covering energy and the environment, “Why a Hotter World Will Mean More
Extinctions,” TIME, May 13, 2013, http://science.time.com/2013/05/13/why-a-hotter-world-will-mean-more-extinctions/)
The end of last week saw the carbon concentrations in the atmosphere finally pass the 400-part-permillion threshold. That means carbon levels are higher now than they’ve been for at least 800,000 years,
and most likely far longer. There’s nothing special per se about 400 parts per million — other than giving all of us a change to
note it in article like this one — but it’s a reminder that we are headed very fast into a very uncertain future. Parts
per million and global temperature change, though, are just numbers. What matters is the effect they will have on life —
ours, of course, but also everything else that lives on the planet earth. I’ve written before that while I certainly worry and fear the impact that
unchecked climate change will have on humanity, I also feel relatively — relatively — confident that we will, in some ways, muddle through.
Human beings have already proved that they are extremely adaptable, living — with various degrees of success — from the hottest desert to
the coldest corner of the Arctic. I
don’t think a future where temperatures are 4˚F or 5˚F or 6˚F warmer on
average will be an optimal one for humanity, to say the least. But I don’t think it will be the end of our species either. (I’ve
always favored asteroids for that.) But the plants and animals that share this planet with us are a different story. Even
before climate change has really kicked in, human expansion had led to the destruction of habitat on land and in
the sea, as we crowd out other species. By some estimates we’re already in the midst of the sixth
great extinction wave, one that’s largely human caused, with extinction rates that are 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the
background rate of species loss. So what will happen to those plants and animals if and when the climate really starts warming? According
to a new study in Nature Climate Change, the answer is pretty simple: they will run out of habitable
space, and many of them will die. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that 20%
to 30% of species would be at increasingly high risk of extinction if global temperatures rise more than
2˚C to 3˚C above preindustrial levels. Given that temperatures have already gone up by nearly 1˚C, and carbon continues to pile up in the
atmosphere, that amount of warming is almost a certainty. But Rachel Warren and her colleagues at the University of East Anglia (UEA),
in England, wanted to know more precisely how that extinction risk intensifies with warming — and
whether we might be able to save some species by mitigating climate change. In the Nature Climate Change paper, they
found that almost two-thirds of common plants and half of animals could lose more than half their
climatic range by 2080 if global warming continues unchecked, with temperatures increasing 4˚C above preindustrial
levels by the end of the century. Unsurprisingly, the biggest effects will be felt near the equator, in areas like Central America, Sub-Saharan
Africa, the Amazon and Australia, but biodiversity will suffer across the board.
Oceans
Marine biodiversity is at risk of going extinct
Van Woesik 12 (Dr. Robert van Woesik, Director of the Institute for Research on Global Climate Change at Florida Institute of
Technology, “Coral survival's past is key to its future,” Science Daily, February 14, 2012,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120214215507.htm)
Florida Institute of Technology researchers are taking an historical approach to predict the extinction
risk of reef-building corals. Led by Robert van Woesik, professor of biological sciences, the scientists are
examining past events to gain insight into how these corals today may fare through climate change.
"We found strong relationships between past regional extinction events and modern coral
vulnerability, suggesting that extinction events are not merely chance events but depend on the
biological characteristics of the coral species. Our historical approach improves the accuracy of extinctionrisk assessment," said van Woesik. Corals are highly sensitive to climate change. Their risk of extinction is
increasing at an unprecedented rate as the oceans continue to warm. Assessing this danger, however, is
difficult because of limited data. Van Woesik's team looked at Caribbean extinction during the Plio-Pleistocene era and extinction
risk as determined by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Through the Plio-Pleistocene era, the Caribbean supported
more diverse coral reefs than today and shared considerable overlap with contemporary Indo-Pacific reefs. Regional
extinction in the
past and vulnerability in the present suggest that Pocillopora, Stylophora, and foliose Pavona are among the
most susceptible to local and regional isolation. These were among the most abundant corals in the
Caribbean Pliocene. Therefore, a widespread distribution did not equate with immunity to regional
extinction. The strong relationship between past and present vulnerability suggests that regional
extinction events are trait-based and not merely random episodes.
FAMINE/AG
Leads to resource wars
Broder 11 (John M. Broder, reports on energy and environment issues for the Washington bureau of The New York Times, “Climate
Change Drives Instability, U.N. Official Warns,” New York Times, February 15, 2011, http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/climatechange-drives-instability-u-n-official-warns/)
The United Nations' top climate change official said on Tuesday that food shortages and rising prices
caused by climate disruptions were among the chief contributors to the civil unrest coursing through North
Africa and the Middle East. In a speech to Spanish lawmakers and military leaders, Christiana Figueres. executive secretary of the United
Nations climate office, said that climate change-driven drought, falling crop yields and competition for water
were fueling conflict throughout Africa and elsewhere in the developing world. She warned that unless nations
took aggressive action to reduce emissions causing global warming such conflicts would spread, toppling governments and driving up military
spending around the world. It is alarming to admit that 11 the community of nations is unable to fully stabilize climate change, it will
threaten where we can live, where and how we grow food and where we can find water," said Ms. Figueres,
a veteran Costa Rican diplomat and environmental advocate. "In other words, it will threaten the basic foundation - the very stability on which
humanity has built its existence." Rising food prices were a factor in the January riots that unseated Tunisia's longtime president, Zine elAbidine Ben Ali, although decades of repression and high unemployment also fed the revolution. The
link between food and
resource shortages and Egypt's revolution is less clear. But Ms. Figueres said that long-term trends in arid regions did not
look promising unless the world took decisive action on climate change. She said that a third of all Africans now lived in drought- prone regions
and that by 2050 as many as 600 million Africans would face water shortages. "On
a global level, increasingly unpredictable
weather patterns will lead to falling agricultural production and higher food prices, leading to food
insecurity," she said in her address. "In Africa, crop yields could decline by as much as 50 percent by 2020.
Recent experiences around the world clearly show how such situations can cause political instability
and undermine the performance of already fragile states." She said that rising sea levels, more frequent
and severe natural disasters, pandemics, heat waves and widespread drought could lead to extensive
migrations with ithin countries and across national borders. Military leaders around the world, including those in the
United States, have warned that such effects of a changing climate can serve as "threat multipliers ."
adding stresses to nations and regions that already face heavy burdens of poverty and social insecurity. "All these factors taken
together," Ms. Figueres concluded, "mean that climate change, especially if left unabated, threatens to increase
poverty and overwhelm the capacity of governments to meet the basic needs of their people, which could
well contribute to the emergence, spread and longevity of conflict."
Left unchecked, global warming eliminates all agricultural land
Mendelsohn 94 (Robert Mendelsohn, American environmental economist. He is currently the Edwin Weyerhaeuser Davis Professor
of the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University, Professor of Economics in Economics Department at Yale University and
Professor in the School of Management at Yale University. Professor Mendelsohn is a major figure in the economics of global warming, being
for example a contributor to the first Copenhagen Consensus report. Mendelsohn received a BA in economics from Harvard University in 1973
and obtained his Ph.D. in economics from Yale University in 1978, The Impact of Global Warming on Agriculture: A Ricardian Analysis, Vol. 84
No. 4, The American Economic Review, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2118029?seq=1)
Over the last decade, scientists have extensively studied the greenhouse effect, which holds that the
accumulation of carbon dioxide (C02) and other greenhouse gases (GHG's) is expected to produce global warming
and other significant climatic changes over the next century. Numerous studies indicate major
impacts on agriculture , especially if there is significant mid-continental drying and warming in the U.S. heartland.1 Virtually every
estimate of economic impacts relies on a technique we denote the production-function approach. This
study compares the traditional production-function approach to estimating the impacts of climate
change with a new "Ricardian" approach that examines the impact of climate and other variables on
land values and farm revenues. The traditional approach to estimating the impact of climate change
relies upon empirical or experimental production functions to predict environmental damage (hence its
label in this study as the production-function approach).2 This approach takes an underlying production function and estimates impacts by
varying one or a few input variables, such as temperature, precipitation, and carbon dioxide levels. The estimates
might rely on
extremely carefully calibrated crop-yield models (such as CERES or SOY- GRO) to determine the impact upon
yields; the results often predict severe yield reductions as a result of global warming.
The agriculture industry is getting threatened by global warming
Cline 07 (William R. Cline, American economist. He graduated from Princeton University in 1963 and received a PhD in 1969 from Yale.
Cline was deputy director of development and trade research at the office of the assistant secretary for international affairs at the United
States Department of the Treasury, “Global Warming and Agriculture Impact Estimates by Country,” Peterson Institute, July 2007,
http://www.iie.com/publications/briefs/cline4037.pdf)
Unabated global
warming will reduce global agricultural capacity at least modestly by late in this century,
contrary to some estimates that it will benefit global agriculture over that period. The damages will be the most
severe and begin the soonest where they can least be afforded: in the developing countries. The
losses will be much larger if carbon
fertilization
benefits fail to materialize, especially if water scarcity limits irrigation. Temperatures in developing
countries, which are predominantly located in lower latitudes, are already closer to or beyond thresholds at which
further warming will reduce rather than increase agricultural capacity , and these countries tend to have less
capacity to adapt. Moreover, agriculture accounts for a much larger share of GDP in developing countries than
in industrial countries, so a given percentage loss in agricultural potential would impose a larger
income loss in a developing country than in an industrial country. This study starkly confirms the asymmetry between
potentially severe agricultural damages in many poor countries and milder effects in rich countries.
And its modeled globally – gets countries like China and India on board
Cline 07 (William R. Cline, American economist. He graduated from Princeton University in 1963 and received a PhD in 1969 from Yale.
Cline was deputy director of development and trade research at the office of the assistant secretary for international affairs at the United
States Department of the Treasury, “Global Warming and Agriculture Impact Estimates by Country,” Peterson Institute, July 2007,
http://www.iie.com/publications/briefs/cline4037.pdf)
He estimates global agricultural output capacity (including carbon fertilization) to decline by about 3 percent by
the 2080s. But if the carbon fertilization effect did not materialize, the losses would be at about 16
percent.4 These losses would be disproportionately concentrated in poor countries. On average,
developing countries would suffer losses of 9 percent. Damages would be severe in Africa (17 percent
average loss), Latin America (13 percent average loss), and South Asia (30 percent average loss in India and 20 percent
in Pakistan). The losses would be much larger if the benefits from carbon fertilization did not materialize
(averaging about 21 percent for all developing countries, 28 percent for Africa, and 24 percent for Latin America). This study is
particularly important for the cases of China and India . China is already the second-largest emitter of
carbon dioxide (after the United States but ahead of the European Union), and its cooperation will surely be crucial to
effective action against global warming. Although this study finds China a modest gainer in agriculture
under business as usual warming (increase in agricultural capacity by about 7 percent with carbon fertilization), the estimate
turns to a loss (7 percent reduction in agricultural capacity) if carbon fertilization effects do not materialize or arc offset by excluded
damages. For India, prospective losses arc massive (as large as about 40 percent in the absence of carbon fertilization). For
Australia, one of the two steadfast opponents of the Kyoto Protocol, the principal international
initiative against global warming, the study suggests that a more positive position on global warming
abatement would be in its long-term interests. The estimates for Australia indicate losses of around
16 percent even with carbon fertilization (with much larger losses suggested by the Ricardian estimates). As for the United
States, the other principal opponent, although the estimates show an aggregate gain of 8 percent in the case with carbon fertilization, the)'
indicate a comparable loss (6 percent) if carbon fertilization is excluded. Moreover,
regional losses arc pronounced: by
about 30 to 35 percent in the Southeast and in the Southwest Plains, if carbon fertilization is excluded
(and about 20 to 25 percent even if it is included). The
findings of this study strongly suggest that policymakers in
both industrial and developing countries should ensure that international action begins in earnest to
curb global warming from its "business as usual" path. Moreover, illustrative summary calculations suggest it
would be a serious mistake to downplay the risks of future agricultural losses from global warming on
grounds that technological change, for example in new seed varieties, will swamp any negative climate effects. The pace of global
agricultural yield increases already decelerated from 1961—83 to 1984—2005, and a sizable portion of agricultural land will likely be diverted
to the production of ethanol for fuel by late in this century.
And leads to an increase in food prices
Southgate 11 (Douglas Southgate, specializes in the study of natural resource issues in the United States and around the world. He has
written numerous books, chapters and journal articles on public policies contributing to tropical deforestation, hydrocarbon development, the
economics of watershed management, and related topics, “Weathering Global Warming in Agriculture,” Reason, November 2011,
http://reason.org/files/weathering_global_warming_agriculture_food_population.pdf)
This study investigates the
potential consequences of climate change for global agricultural output and
identifies policies that would reduce any negative impacts. Some researchers have estimated that
climate change resulting from manmade global warming could reduce agricultural output significantly
(compared to baseline assumptions), especially in tropical countries. As a result, food prices would rise and
malnutrition worsen. However, these estimates assume minimal or no adaptation to changes in the
climate. In particular, they assume that farmers will fail to switch crops, modify their use of water and other
inputs, and adopt new technology. This view is unrealistic: faced with changing conditions, farmers will adapt – unless prohibited.
Even a 20C change in climate will have serious effects on the agriculture industry
Southgate 11 (Douglas Southgate, specializes in the study of natural resource issues in the United States and around the world. He has
written numerous books, chapters and journal articles on public policies contributing to tropical deforestation, hydrocarbon development, the
economics of watershed management, and related topics, “Weathering Global Warming in Agriculture,” Reason, November 2011,
http://reason.org/files/weathering_global_warming_agriculture_food_population.pdf)
The consequences of higher global temperatures, which the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
anticipates will come about because of increased atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and
other greenhouse gasses, have been the subject of much investigation. These consequences defy precise
measurement due to the difficulties of predicting what the climate will be in the future as well as the
impacts on agricultural yields of changing temperatures, shifting patterns of precipitation, increased
carbon-fertilization (which as a rule accelerates plant growth) and sea-level rise. Moreover, economic evaluation
requires factoring in adaptation, which in the agricultural sector involves changing from one crop to
another, combining inputs in different ways, and developing and using new technology. The earliest
assessments of the impacts of climate change on crop and livestock production focused largely on
affluent and temperate settings, such as the United States. 10 One reason for this emphasis is that
breadbaskets in temperate latitudes—including the American Midwest, the Ukrainian countryside, and the Argentine Pampas—
produce much of the world’s grain (aside from rice) and are the source of most cereals traded in
international markets. Furthermore, higher temperatures might create drier conditions in the interiors
of North America and the Eurasian landmass, thereby reducing harvests. 11 To assess the agricultural
impacts of climate change, in temperate latitudes and elsewhere, many economists have concentrated on rural land values, since
these ought to rise if farmers adapt successfully to environmental flux and fall if agricultural productivity suffers. In one study, modest warming
was projected to have limited effects on the prices of agricultural real estate in the United States. 12 A more recent study focused on the
eastern two-thirds of the U.S., where agriculture is mainly rain-fed. Schlenker et al. determined that rural land values would be lower in most of
the region, given that rain-fed yields would decline and that commodity prices would not be greatly affected by global climate change.13 The
IPCC, which has assessed impacts on the food economy as well, expects temperature increases in the range of 1 to 3°C later this century to
have small yet beneficial effects on agricultural productivity and crop yields in temperate settings as well as the high latitudes, including Canada
the equator, especially in dry areas, productivity and yields are expected to fall
even if temperatures increase by just 1 to 2°C in a few decades. 14 This is consistent with the observation made by
and Siberia. But closer to
Kane et al. that, due to elevated evapotranspiration, substantial crop-stress can result in the tropics and subtropics from a minor rise in
temperatures.15 Other investigators agree that global warming will probably do more harm in the low
latitudes than in settings farther from the equator. In one recent assessment, yields of various crops in different parts of the developing world
have been estimated for 2050, assuming that warming occurs and also based on different projections of precipitation and carbon-fertilization
(Table 1). In East Asia and Latin America, where wheat is raised mainly in temperate environments with adequate rainfall, per-hectare output of
that crop is expected to rise. In
contrast, global warming will reduce wheat yields in the Middle East and North
Africa, South Asia, as well as south of the Sahara. In addition, rice and corn yields are expected to fall
due to climate change throughout the developing world, dramatically so in some regions.
Global warming is causing famine is many parts of the world
PSR 12 (Physicians for Social Responsibility, “Climate Change and Famine,” PSR, August 30, 2012, http://www.psr.org/environment-andhealth/climate-change/climate-change-and-famine.pdf)
Climate change is already threatening the Earth’s ability to produce food. These effects are expected
to worsen as climate change worsens. Estimates vary, but for every 1.8°F increase in global average
surface temperature, we can expect about a 10% decline in yields of the world’s major grain crops—
corn, soybean, rice and wheat1,2 Climate experts predict that global temperature may rise as much as
5.4°F to 9°F if we continue burning fossil fuels at our current rate.3 This could lead to 30% to 50%
declines in crop production.1 Already, one in seven people, including many living in the U.S., is hungry every
day.4 Most models only consider the effect of rising temperatures and carbon dioxide (CO2) levels on crop
growth, and thus represent relatively conservative scenarios. Climate change will disrupt food production and
distribution in other ways that are hard to quantify and include in prediction models, such as: More
droughts causing large-scale crop loss Increasing frequent, severe, and longer-lasting heat waves
killing crops Thriving plant pests and diseases destroying crops Heavy rains and storms flooding fields,
eroding soils and washing away crops Melting glaciers and changing river flows reducing water
availability for irrigation Rising sea levels and storm surges flooding crops and salting soils, Higher
ozone levels damaging plants and reducing crop yields
Warming affects the marine environment and agriculture industries in the status quo
Rodgers 14 (Paul Rodgers, contributor of general sciences for Forbes, “Climate Change: We Can Adapt, Says IPCC,” Forbes, March 31,
2014, http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrodgers/2014/03/31/climate-change-is-real-but-its-not-the-end-of-the-world-says-ipcc/)
It predicts that the seas will become more acidic, killing coral reefs and damaging shellfish, and that
many sea creatures will move as temperatures rise. In Antarctica and some tropical waters, catches
could be halved. Yields for corn, rice and wheat will decline between now and 2050, with the worst
projections showing them falling by a quarter. “Going into the future, the risks only increase, and these
are about people, the impacts on crops, on the availability of water and particularly, the extreme events on
people’s lives and livelihoods,” said Professor Neil Adger of the University of Exeter. “People are going to become more vulnerable
to sinking deeper into poverty,” said Dr Maggie Opondo of the University of Nairobi.
ECON
Climate change devastates the economy
Ross 11 (Lindsey Ross, Professor at Institute of Aquaculture University of Stirling Scotland, “The Economics of Climate Change,” American
Security Project, April 19, 2011, http://www.americansecurityproject.org/the-economics-of-climate-change/)
Climate change is real, it is happening, and it will be costly. If we do nothing to mitigate the effects of
climate change there will be costs to our economy, security, competitiveness, and public health. That’s what a new study,
Pay Now, Pay Later (PNPL), out today from the American Security Project has found. Severe weather events, rising sea levels, and increasingly
frequent and harsh wildfires – to name a few – will hamper American economic activity. Our
water security is already
jeopardized by receding lake levels, and less snowfall will further impact our access to drinking and irrigation water. The
American shipping industry will suffer as the Great Lake levels fall and increasingly severe storms
harm our ports. And warmer temperatures and higher pollution levels threaten to increase morbidity
– especially in urban America – and contaminate the fresh waters of our lakes, rivers, and streams. Inaction on
climate change outweighs the cost of transforming our old energy economy into a green one. For
example: In western Kansas, higher temperatures and less rainfall could cost over $300 million and hundreds of jobs as a result of crop losses by
2035. Lake Mead could dry up as early as 2021, leaving 12-36 million people across the Southwest without a dependable water supply. Illinois’
manufacturing industry, which employs 680,000 people, is threatened by falling water levels and necessitated dredging along the Great LakesSt. Lawrence shipping route. By 2030, costs are expected to reach $92 – 154 million each year. And in Michigan, a 25% reduction in Great Lakes
system connectivity could cost over $4 billion in import and export losses within the next few decades. Some states could realize benefits –
warmer temperatures, more precipitation, and higher atmospheric carbon mean Pennsylvania could see increased productivity in wooded
areas. But research
shows, many positives are likely to be hindered – or negated completely – by other
climate change effects. The Pennsylvanian forestry industry could suffer as a result of higher ozone levels
coupled with warmer temperatures. There are inevitable changes occurring in our environment that
will have costly effects on our state and national economies. We can either pay it now to invest in transforming our
energy economy (one Congressional Budget Office study priced a climate legislation proposal at $175/household by 2020), or we can pay
significantly higher economic and social costs in the future, as we play catch-up and try to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
PROLIF
Global warming is existent
Schwartz and Randall 03 (Peter Schwartz, Senior Vice President for Global Government Relations and Strategic Planning, Doug
Randall, Research Analyst in the Finance and Private Sector Development Team of the Development Economics Research Group, “An Abrupt
Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” Kelber, October 2003, http://www.ulrichkelber.de/medien/doks/Pentagon-Studie%20Klimawandel.pdf)
The research
suggests that once temperature rises above some threshold, adverse weather conditions could
develop relatively abruptly, with persistent changes in the atmospheric circulation causing drops in
some regions of 5-10 degrees Fahrenheit in a single decade. Paleoclimatic evidence suggests that
altered climatic patterns could last for as much as a century, as they did when the ocean conveyor collapsed 8,200
years ago, or, at the extreme, could last as long as 1,000 years as they did during the Younger Dryas, which began about 12,700 years ago. In
this report, as
an alternative to the scenarios of gradual climatic warming that are so common, we outline
an abrupt climate change scenario patterned after the 100-year event that occurred about 8,200 years
ago. This abrupt change scenario is characterized by the following conditions: Annual average
temperatures drop by up to 5 degrees Fahrenheit over Asia and North America and 6 degrees Fahrenheit in northern Europe
Annual average temperatures increase by up to 4 degrees Fahrenheit in key areas throughout Australia, South America, and southern Africa.
Drought persists for most of the decade in critical agricultural regions and in the water resource
regions for major population centers in Europe and eastern North America. Winter storms and winds intensify, amplifying the
impacts of the changes. Western Europe and the North Pacific experience enhanced winds.
Warming leads to nuclear proliferation
Schwartz and Randall 03 (Peter Schwartz, Senior Vice President for Global Government Relations and Strategic Planning, Doug
Randall, Research Analyst in the Finance and Private Sector Development Team of the Development Economics Research Group, “An Abrupt
Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” Kelber, October 2003, http://www.ulrichkelber.de/medien/doks/Pentagon-Studie%20Klimawandel.pdf)
As global and local carrying capacities are reduced, tensions could mount around the world, leading to
two fundamental strategies: defensive and offensive. Nations with the resources to do so may build
virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves. Less fortunate nations especially those with
ancient enmities with their neighbors, may initiate in struggles for access to food, clean water, or energy. Unlikely alliances could be
formed as defense priorities shift and the goal is resources for survival rather than religion, ideology,
or national honor. This scenario poses new challenges for the United States, and suggests several
steps to be taken: Improve predictive climate models to allow investigation of a wider range of
scenarios and to anticipate how and where changes could occur Assemble comprehensive predictive models of the
potential impacts of abrupt climate change to improve projections of how climate could influence food, water, and
energy Create vulnerability metrics to anticipate which countries are most vulnerable to climate
change and therefore, could contribute materially to an increasingly disorderly and potentially violent world.
Identify no-regrets strategies such as enhancing capabilities for water management Rehearse adaptive responses Explore local implications
Explore geo-engineering options that control the climate.
MIDDLE EAST WAR
Leads to Middle East conflict over resources
Broder 11 (John M. Broder, reports on energy and environment issues for the Washington bureau of The New York Times, “Climate
Change Drives Instability, U.N. Official Warns,” New York Times, February 15, 2011, http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/climatechange-drives-instability-u-n-official-warns/)
The United Nations' top climate change official said on Tuesday that food shortages and rising prices
caused by climate disruptions were among the chief contributors to the civil unrest coursing through North
Africa and the Middle East. In a speech to Spanish lawmakers and military leaders, Christiana Figueres. executive secretary of the United
Nations climate office, said that climate change-driven drought, falling crop yields and competition for water
were fueling conflict throughout Africa and elsewhere in the developing world. She warned that unless nations
took aggressive action to reduce emissions causing global warming such conflicts would spread, toppling governments and driving up military
spending around the world. It is alarming to admit that 11 the community of nations is unable to fully stabilize climate change, it will
threaten where we can live, where and how we grow food and where we can find water," said Ms. Figueres,
a veteran Costa Rican diplomat and environmental advocate. "In other words, it will threaten the basic foundation - the very stability on which
humanity has built its existence." Rising food prices were a factor in the January riots that unseated Tunisia's longtime president, Zine elAbidine Ben Ali, although decades of repression and high unemployment also fed the revolution. The
link between food and
resource shortages and Egypt's revolution is less clear. But Ms. Figueres said that long-term trends in arid regions did not
look promising unless the world took decisive action on climate change. She said that a third of all Africans now lived in drought- prone regions
and that by 2050 as many as 600 million Africans would face water shortages. "On
a global level, increasingly unpredictable
weather patterns will lead to falling agricultural production and higher food prices, leading to food
insecurity," she said in her address. "In Africa, crop yields could decline by as much as 50 percent by 2020.
Recent experiences around the world clearly show how such situations can cause political instability
and undermine the performance of already fragile states." She said that rising sea levels, more frequent
and severe natural disasters, pandemics, heat waves and widespread drought could lead to extensive
migrations with ithin countries and across national borders. Military leaders around the world, including those in the
United States, have warned that such effects of a changing climate can serve as "threat multipliers ."
adding stresses to nations and regions that already face heavy burdens of poverty and social insecurity. "All these factors taken
together," Ms. Figueres concluded, "mean that climate change, especially if left unabated, threatens to increase
poverty and overwhelm the capacity of governments to meet the basic needs of their people, which could
well contribute to the emergence, spread and longevity of conflict."
ASIA WAR
Effects of global warming devastate the Asian countries. Star this card and flow the
warrants.
Elliot 09 (Dr. Lorraine Elliot, Senior Fellow in International Relations, “Climate change, threat multiplier and internal conflicts in Northeast
Asia and Southeast Asia,” RSIS (S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies), August 2009,
http://www.rsis.edu.sg/nts/Events/climate_change/session4/concept%20paper-Lorraine%20Elliot%20Session%20IV.pdf)
No part of the world will be unaffected by climate change.19 The specific impacts of climate change in
the region will be explored in other presentations at this conference. Suffice it to say here that the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports a worrying litany of likely climate change impacts for
the Asia Pacific region : a decline in crop yield, an increase in climate-induced disease, an increased
risk of hunger and water resource scarcity, an increase in the number and severity of glacier meltrelated floods, significant loss of coastal ecosystems, many millions of people in coastal communities
at high risk from flooding, and an increased risk of extinction for many species of fauna and flora.
As
noted above, the expectation is that climate triggers are more likely to lead to conflict and instability in those parts of the world that are
already ecologically stressed, economically vulnerable and characterised by weak or stretched state capacity. Many
countries in the
region fit this ‘profile’ that allegedly makes them more vulnerable to internal conflict and unrest
sparked by the environmental, economic and social impacts of climate change – low levels of economic
development, social disparities of various kinds, and an existing history of internal conflict and dispute between identity-groups or between
competing users of resources. International
Alert suggests that there are 46 countries – home to 2.7 billion people – in
which ‘the effects of climate change interacting with economic, social and political problems will
create a high risk of violent conflict’ and another 56 countries (home to 1.2 billion people) where ‘the
institutions of government will have great difficulty taking the strain of climate change on top of all
their other current challenges’. In this latter group, they argue, ‘the risk of armed conflict As shown in Figure 3, a significant number
of countries in the region are thought to fall into these vulnerabilities categories. The first category – those countries within which there
is a high risk of armed conflict – includes Burma, Indonesia and the Philippines. Those with a high risk of
political instability include Cambodia, Laos, North Korea, Thailand and Timor-Leste. Even then, there
are some quite notable differences of opinion. While China, for example, is not identified in this particular report
by International Alert as a country in which climate-related conflict is likely, the UK Department of Defence suggested in its 2007 Strategic
Trends that along with a range of other social and economic factors, ‘changing
patterns of land use, the failure to deliver
per capita prosperity and environmental stresses caused by climate change and pollution, 21 Smith and
Vivekananda, A climate of conflict, p. 3. 22 Source: Smith and Vivekananda, A climate of conflict: the links between climate change, peace and
war (International Alert, 2007).
INDIA-PAKISTAN WAR
Water scarcity leads to India-Pakistan war
Wheeler 11 (William Wheeler, reporter for National Geographic, “India and Pakistan at Odds Over Shrinking Indus River,” National
Geographic, October 12, 2011, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/10/111012-india-pakistan-indus-river-water/)
Nearly 30 percent of the world's cotton supply comes from India and Pakistan, much of that from the Indus River Valley. On
average,
about 737 billion gallons are withdrawn from the Indus River annually to grow cotton—enough to provide
Delhi residents with household water for more than two years. (See a map of the region.) "Pakistan's entire economy is driven
by the textile industry," said Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "The
problem with Pakistan's economy is that most of the major industries use a ton of water—textiles, sugar,
wheat—and there's a tremendous amount of water that's not only used, but wasted," he added. The
same is true for India. That impact is an important part of a complex water equation in countries
already under strain from booming populations. More people means more demand for water to
irrigate crops, cool machinery, and power cities. The Indus River, which begins in Indian-controlled Kashmir and flows
through Pakistan on its way to the sea, is Pakistan's primary freshwater source—on which 90 percent of its
agriculture depends—and a critical outlet of hydropower generation for both countries. (Related: "See the Global Water Footprint of
Key Crops") Downstream provinces are already feeling the strain, with some dried-out areas being abandoned by
fishermen and farmers forced to move to cities. That increases competition between urban and rural communities
for water. "In areas where you used to have raging rivers, you have, essentially, streams or even
puddles and not much else," said Kugelman. In years past, the coastal districts that lost their shares of the Indus' flows have become
"economically orphaned," the poorest districts in the country, according to Pakistani water activist Mustafa Talpur. Because Pakistani
civil society is weak, he says, corruption and deteriorating water distribution tend to go hand in hand.
In the port city of Karachi, which depends for its water on the Indus, water theft—in which public water is stolen from the pipes
and sold from tankers in slums and around the city—may be a $500-million annual industry. In the balance is the fate
not only of people, but important aquatic species like the Indus River dolphin, which is now threatened to extinction by
agricultural pollution and dams, among other pressures. Scientists estimate that fewer than 100 individuals remain. Threat to
Peace? One of the potentially catastrophic consequences of the region's fragile water balance is the
effect on political tensions. In India, competition for water has a history of provoking conflict between
communities. In Pakistan, water shortages have triggered food and energy crises that ignited riots and
protests in some cities. Most troubling, Islamabad's diversions of water to upstream communities with ties to the government are inflaming
sectarian loyalties and stoking unrest in the lower downstream region of Sindh. But the issue also threatens the fragile peace
that holds between the nations of India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed rivals. Water has long been
seen as a core strategic interest in the dispute over the Kashmir region, home to the Indus' headwaters. Since
1960, a delicate political accord called the Indus Waters Treaty has governed the sharing of the river's
resources. But dwindling river flows will be harder to share as the populations in both countries grow and the percapita water supply plummets. Some growth models predict that by 2025, India's population will grow to triple what it
was—and Pakistan's population to six times what it was—when the Indus treaty was signed. Lurking in
the background are fears that climate change is speeding up the melting of the glaciers that feed the river. Mountain glaciers in Kashmir play a
central role in regulating the river's flows, acting as a natural water storage tank that freezes precipitation in winter and releases it as meltwater
in the summer. The Indus is dependent on glacial melting for as much as half of its flow. So its fate is uniquely tied to the health of the
Himalayas. In the short term, higher glacial melt is expected to bring more intense flooding, like last year's devastating deluge. Both countries
are also racing to complete large hydroelectric dams along their respective stretches of the Kashmir river system, elevating tensions. India's
projects are of a size and scope that many Pakistanis fear could be used to disrupt their hydropower efforts, as well as the timing of the flows
on which Pakistani crops rely. (Related: "Seven Simple Ways to Save Water") "Many
in Pakistan are worried that, being in
control of upstream waters, India can easily run Pakistan dry either by diverting the flow of water by
building storage dams or using up all the water through hydroelectric power schemes," said Pakistani security analyst Rifaat
Hussain. For years, Pakistani politicians have claimed India is responsible for Pakistan's water troubles.
More recently, militant groups have picked up their rhetoric. Hafiz Saeed, the founder of the Pakistani
militant group allegedly responsible for the 2008 terror attack in Mumbai, even accused India of "water terrorism."
Solvency
Integration Solvency
The only way to solve warming is by gathering more information-Integration key
Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior
Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the
Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a
New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf)
Many national security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a national security
challenge, perhaps even a defining security challenge of the 21st century. Climate change could dramatically reshape the
future security environment by driving migration, undermining community development and weakening state governance.
America's political leaders are just beginning to grapple with the implications of climate change for
U.S. policy, including how the nation can best reduce or mitigate future greenhouse gas emissions and
prepare for or adapt to climate changes that unfold in the United States and abroad. Despite this
recognition, national security leaders do not yet have the scientific information they need to make the
best possible policy decisions about climate change - policy decisions that will entail large financial commitments to
address a range of potential national security risks. "From an intelligence perspective, the present level of scientific
understanding of future climate change lacks the resolution and specificity we would like for detailed analysis at the (country]
level." said Dr. Thomas Fingar, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council (NIC).' 'though there has been a significant
improvement in the scope and quality of scientific information available in recent years, a gap persists
between available scientific information and decision makers' needs. It is unclear, however, to what degree this gap
is caused by a true lack of usable information (i.e.. data that policy makers can understand and base decisions on) or to what degree it is caused
by a lack of communication and understanding between climate change analysts and decision makers. Regardless,
closing the gap
between the policy makers who need information and the scientists who produce it is essential for
the nation to deal effectively with the challenges of global climate change.
IOOS Key
IOOS key to climate data gathering
IOOC 11 (Interagency Ocean Observation Committee, “Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IOOC, 2011, http://www.iooc.us/oceanobservations/integrated-ocean-observing-system/)
The U.S. IOOS
is a coordinated national and international network of observations with associated data
transmission, data management and communications (DMAC), and data analyses and modeling that
acquires information on past, present and future states of the oceans and U.S. coastal waters to the head
of tide. “Coastal” includes the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and territorial sea, Great Lakes, and semi-enclosed
bodies of water and tidal wetlands connected to the coastal ocean.[1] U. S. IOOS is a “user driven” system that is a collaborative project
between academia, federal
agencies, industry, local and state governments and non-profits working to address the
following seven societal goals: (1) Improve predictions of climate change and weather and their effects
on coastal communities and the nation; (2) Improve the safety and efficiency of maritime operations;
(3) More effectively mitigate the effects of natural hazards; (4) Improve national and homeland
security (5) Reduce public health risks (6) More effectively protect and restore healthy coastal
ecosystems; and (7) Enable the sustained use of ocean and coastal resources[1]
Ocean Mapping
Ocean mapping fill in key gaps
Cowen 95 (Robert C. Cowen, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor, “Mapping Ocean's Surface Yields Data on Global Warming,”
Christian Science Monitor, January 31, 1995,
http://www.lexisnexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=7945&sr=HEADLINE(Mapping+ocean%27s+sur
face+yields+data+on+global+warming)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B1995)
FOR the past 2-1/2 years, a radar-ranging satellite has performed a minor miracle for oceanographers. For the first time in the history of their
science, they have a continuing global overview of the ocean's surface. It's
hard to chart the bumps and hollows in the sea
surface caused by winds and currents using data from ships and instrumented buoys. And tide gauges are an uncertain guide
to rising sea level. Now oceanographers can follow what happens to the ocean surface over most of
the world as it changes from season to season and from year to year. Among other things, this gives them a handle
on how fast sea level is rising -- a key question in the debate over whether or not man-made global
warming is already changing the climate. It also reveals circulation patterns that may threaten offshore installations.
Effective mapping lets us find carbon storage tanks underwater
Smith 13 (K. Annabelle Smith, freelance writer based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, where she covers all things interesting and strange for
Smithsonian.com’s “Food and Think” blog, “A Temporary Solution to Global Warming,” Outside, December 5, 2013,
http://www.outsideonline.com/news-from-the-field/A-Temporary-Solution-to-Global-Warming.html)
Like deep-water gas detectives, researchers
from the University of Southampton were able to pinpoint parts of
the ocean crust where a boat-load of carbon dioxide might be stored. If their calculations are correct,
fossil fuels found in this amount—many centuries worth— might forestall further increases in global
warming, Science Recorder reports. But wait, how? According to the University of Southampton, the burning of fossil
fuels like coal, oil and natural gas has resulted in dramatic increases in CO2 concentrations in the
atmosphere which cause climate change and ocean acidification. If the newly-discovered pieces of the ocean crust
actually exist, scientists hope they might capture CO2 and put it there for, um, safe keeping. The study,
which was originally published in Geophysical Research Letters found five potential locations beneath the
ocean's crust ranging in size from 2,000 square miles to nearly 1.5 million square miles. But how do
they know it might be there? Chiara Marieni, a PhD student based at the National Oceanography
Centre in Southampton figured out that in high pressures and low temperatures like those found in the darkest
depths of the big blue, CO2 is denser and heavier than seawater and exists in liquid form. The basalt rock
which makes up a large portion of the Earth's crust, may also react with CO2, effectively trapping the
gas into a solid calcium carbonate beneath the surface and preventing the carbon dioxide's release into the oceans or atmosphere. With
this new understanding of the properties of CO2, Marieni and her colleagues were able to generate a
global map of the Earth’s ocean floor that otherwise wouldn’t have been made. That’s some deep research.
NOAA scientists prove that we can fight warming through underwater sonar waves
NOAA no date (NOAA, “Teaching Activity: Using Sound Waves to Study Climate Change,” NOAA,
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/infodata/lesson_plans/Using%20Sound%20Waves%20to%20Study%20Climate%20Change.pdf)
Climatologists and oceanographers know that if global warming actually happens, the warming effect
in the Arctic region will probably be 2-4 times greater than at lower latitudes. This would cause the
polar ice packs to melt, adding water to the ocean basins and raising global sea levels significantly.
One way to estimate if and how much global warming is actually occurring is to monitor the temperature in
the northern ocean. The basic idea is simple and based on the fact that sound travels faster in warm water
than in cold water. The travel time of a sound signal from a ship to a land based receiver will decrease
if the ocean water in between warms up, and increase if the ocean cools down. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists have designed and implemented an acoustic monitoring scheme
between the Atlantic Ocean and the Arctic Ocean through the From Strait, where about 80% of the heat flux
into the Arctic Ocean occurs. Fram Strait is located in the North Atlantic between the coast of
Greenland and Spitzbergen Island. Low frequency, "whale safe" sound is transmitted across the Strait
to measure the average temperature of ocean water to a depth of about 3.5 m. The travel time is a direct
measure of the average temperature between the source and the receiver. It is hoped that
measurements of this region of the ocean will provide important information for reducing the
uncertainty in global climate models and answers to many questions, especially those regarding
global warming as a result of the enhanced greenhouse effect.
Global warming can be effectively combated by studying the ocean floor
Radford 13 (Tim Radford, freelance journalist. He worked for The Guardian for 32 years, becoming - among other things - letters editor,
arts editor, literary editor and science editor, “Deep ocean could hold key to global warming,” RTCC, December 2, 2013,
http://www.rtcc.org/2013/12/02/deep-ocean-could-hold-key-to-global-warming/)
U.S. and British researchers may have identified the fingerprint of global warming in one of the darkest,
coldest, most mysterious places on the planet. Four thousand metres below the sea surface, at the
bottom of the north-east Pacific abyss, they have found changes in the food supply to some of the
planet’s least known creatures. And these changes track changes to temperatures at the surface.
Kenneth Smith of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute and colleagues from the University of Southampton in the UK, and the Scripps
Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on a 24-year exploration of one of
life’s deepfest puzzles. The
research is important because it provides yet another indicator of the carbon cycle
at work; it is important because it provides another level of understanding of the climate system ; and
because it provides yet another way to check on global warming.
Studies prove mapping can help
Curran 07 (Peggy Curran, writer for the Montreal Gazette, “On the front line of global warming; Scientists will spend 15 months aboard
icebreaker studying changes in Arctic,” Edmonton Journal, September 16, 2007, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/)
One deck below, engineer Ian Church is impressed by what he sees. As the vessel moves, dazzling topographical images morph
across his computer screen from the bottom-mapping experiment here at the outer edge of the continental shelf between Labrador and
Greenland. The sonar
casts light beams to 135 depth positions on the seabed 1,800 to 2,500 metres below,
uncovering an unknown Canadian landscape. Ancient river channels, valleys and hills that soar 300 metres
high and stretch kilometres long lie on the floor of these previously uncharted waters. "I had no idea this stuff
existed out here. I thought it would just be all flat," says Church, a geomatic engineer with the Ocean Mapping Group at the University of
New Brunswick. "There is so much going on down there, it is unbelievable." Shedding fresh light on Canada's great
northern frontier -- its contours, resources, wildlife and people -- is high on the agenda as the ArcticNet 2007 expedition embarks on a 15month mission aboard the coast guard's Amundsen, the country's premier floating science laboratory. Fuelled and funded by International
Polar Year, dozens of scientists have begun their journey up the rugged coasts of Quebec and Labrador, into Hudson Bay and up to Foxe Basin
and Baffin Island, before heading west, bound for the Beaufort Sea next month, in quest of a better understanding of this mystical, foreboding,
treacherous -- and now perhaps endangered -- world. Researchers aboard the 98-metre Amundsen, refitted as a science vessel in 2004 at a
cost of $27 million, are
seeking clues to the implications of global warming on land, water and sky. Everything from
particles to the thickness of the ice to the health and welfare of northern communities already battered and
bruised by decades of upheaval will come under their microscopes or be stored in their -80 C freezers. Over the past few
years, devastating floods and searing heat waves have pushed climate change to the top of the world's
to-do list. Polar regions are widely seen as extremely vulnerable -- and integral to the struggle to gauge the extent of the
damage and put a finger in the dike. The stakes are huge. Arctic and sub-Arctic terrain -- the three northern territories as well as other
the tiniest algae
regions north of the tree line -- make up more than half of Canada's land mass. Hudson Bay alone supplies more than 40 per cent of the fresh
water that flows from Canada into the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans. "Climate
change is affecting the bay itself, so the seaice cycle in the bay is changing. And hydroelectric development around the bay has been altering the
distribution of fresh water into the bay," said David Barber, chief scientist aboard the Amundsen.
Biodiversity Advantage
1AC
1AC Environment
IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection
Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South
Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s
Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of
Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of
Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote
Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing
Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf
Abstract—Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global
Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System ( IOOS ),
required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible
resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for
mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better
understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data
are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are
several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are
indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical
variables to
support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and
transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain
the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the
globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal
and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government,
and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will
define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required
to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations.
Ocean observation causes effective management policies
Dr. Andrew Rosenberg 11, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at
the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries
Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform,”
http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/
U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we know that while humans
are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained — by vast oceans.¶ In addition to
supporting incredible biodiversity, oceans provide benefits to people in the form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places
to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and wind
power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for technology developers,
manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and develop new economic opportunities around the globe.
America can lead this global innovation.¶ Unfortunately, the health of our oceans is in serious
decline ; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are stressed, habitats for ocean life are
degraded and endangered marine species are struggling to recover. Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants,
which in turn has stressed the communities and industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To turn the tide , our national, state and local leaders must make a
commitment to more coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on
sound science, and scientific work must be a funding priority
in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide. ¶ The Joint Ocean Commission
Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and
established by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy
has the potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced
Great Lakes — which was
monitoring, assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and
are affected by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental,
social and economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more
effectively manage these resources
and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to
monitoring what is happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how
the physical, biological, chemical and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact. The Joint Initiative report
recommends fully supporting an ocean observation system that would integrate data from sensors at
the bottom of the ocean, from buoys on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing
technology high above the Earth.¶ The report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to
have a better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in
order to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal
communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including
the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, I believe that
communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy infrastructure near the coast.” ¶ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound investment in improving
our economy. The
data and information collected from research activities will be used to inform coastal
development , promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant marine-based
recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation.
Ocean ecosystems are collapsing – only the aff can mobilize international solutions
Sherman ‘11 (Kenneth, 2011, “The application of satellite remote sensing for assessing productivity in relation to fisheries yields of the
world’s large marine ecosystems,” ICES Journal of Marine Science, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ph.D, Director of U.S. LME Program, Director of the Narragansett Laboratory and Office of
Marine Ecosystem Studies at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Oceanography at the
University of Rhode Island)
In 1992, world
leaders at the historical UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized that the
exploitation of resources in coastal oceans was becoming increasingly unsustainable, resulting in an
international effort to assess, recover, and manage goods and services of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). More than $3 billion in support
to 110 economically developing nations have been dedicated to operationalizing a five-module approach supporting LME assessment and
management practices. An
important component of this effort focuses on the effects of climate change
on fisheries biomass yields of LMEs, using satellite remote sensing and in situ sampling of key indicators
of changing ecological conditions. Warming appears to be reducing primary productivity in the lower
latitudes, where stratification of the water column has intensified. Fishery biomass yields in the Subpolar LMEs of the Northeast Atlantic
are also increasing as zooplankton levels increase with warming. During the current period of climate warming, it is especially important for
space agency programmes in Asia, Europe, and the United States to continue to provide satellite-borne
radiometry data to the global networks of LME assessment scientists. Overfishing, pollution,
habitat loss, and climate change are causing serious degradation in the world’s coastal oceans and
a downward spiral in economic benefits from marine goods and services. Prompt and large-scale
changes in the use of ocean resources are needed to overcome this downward spiral. In 1992, the world
community of nations convened the first global conference of world leaders in Rio de Janeiro to address ways and means to improve the
degraded condition of the global environment (Robinson et al., 1992). Ten years later (2002), at a follow-up World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg (Sherman, 2006), world leaders agreed to a Plan of Implementation for several marine-related targets
including achievement of: (i) “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; (ii) introduction of the ecosystems
approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; (iii) designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and
(iv) maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. More recently, in Copenhagen in 2009,
world leaders agreed to non-binding actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate the effects of global climate change. For
the period 2010–2020, the international
community of maritime nations is pursuing solutions for
recovering depleted marine fish stocks, restoring degraded habitats, controlling pollution, nutrient
overenrichment, and ocean acidification, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to climate change.
This effort at improving the ecological condition of the world’s 64 large marine ecosystems (LMEs) is
global in scope and ecosystems-orientated in approach (Sherman et al., 2005). LMEs are regions of 200 000 km2 or more, encompassing
coastal areas from estuaries to the continental slope and the seaward extent of well-defined current systems along coasts lacking
continental shelves (Figure 1). They are defined by ecological criteria including bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophically
linked populations (Sherman, 1994). The LMEs
produce 80% of the world’s marine fisheries yields annually and are
growing sinks of coastal pollution and nutrient overenrichment. They also harbour degraded habitats (e.g. corals, seagrasses,
mangroves, and oxygen-depleted dead zones). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a financial group located in Washington, DC,
supports developing countries committed to the recovery and sustainability of coastal ocean areas, by providing financial and catalytic
support to projects that use LMEs as the geographic focus for ecosystem-based strategies to reduce coastal pollution, control nutrient
overenrichment, restore damaged habitats, recover depleted fisheries, protect biodiversity, and adapt to climate change (Duda and
Sherman, 2002).
Accelerating ocean loss causes extinction
Alex David Rogers 6/20/11, Ph.D. in marine invertebrate systematics and genetics from the University of Liverpool is a Professor in
Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford AND Dan Laffoley, PhD on marine ecology at the University of Exeter,
and Senior Advisor, Marine Science and Conservation Global Marine and Polar Programme (IPSO Oxford, “International earth system expert
workshop on ocean stresses and impacts”, July 20, 2011, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf)
The workshop enabled leading experts to take a global view on how all the different effects we are having on the ocean are compromising its
ability to support us. This examination of synergistic threats leads to the conclusion that we have underestimated the overall risks and that the
whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts, and that degradation is now
happening at a faster rate than predicted. It is clear that the traditional economic and consumer
values that formerly served society well, when coupled with current rates of population increase, are
not sustainable. The ocean is the largest ecosystem on Earth, supports us and maintains our world in
a habitable condition. To maintain the goods and services it has provided to humankind for millennia demands change in how we
view, manage, govern and use marine ecosystems. The scale of the stresses on the ocean means that deferring action will increase costs in the
future leading to even greater losses of benefits. The key points needed to drive a common sense rethink are: • Human actions have resulted
in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increased hypoxia. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are three
symptoms that indicate disturbances of the carbon cycle associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth (e.g. Erwin, 2008;
Veron, 2008a,b; Veron et al., 2009; Barnosky et al., 2011). • The
speeds of many negative changes to the ocean are near
to or are tracking the worstcase scenarios from IPCC and other predictions. Some are as predicted,
but many are faster than anticipated, and many are still accelerating. Consequences of current rates
of change already matching those predicted under the “worst case scenario” include: the rate of decrease in
Arctic Sea Ice (Stroeve et al., 2007; Wang & Overland, 2009) and in the accelerated melting of both the Greenland icesheet (Velicogna, 2009;
Khan et al., 2010; Rignot et al., 2011) and Antarctic ice sheets (Chen et al., 2009; Rignot et al., 2008, 2011; Velicogna, 2009);
sea level rise
(Rahmstorf 2007a,b; Rahmstorf et al., 2007; Nicholls et al., 2011); and release of trapped methane from the seabed
(Westbrook et al., 2009; Shakova et al., 2010; although not yet globally significant Dlugokencky et al., 2009). The ‘worst
case’ effects are compounding other changes more consistent with predictions including: changes in
the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand & Reid, 2003; Beaugrand 2004, 2009; Beaugrand et al., 2003;
2010; Cheung et al. 2009, 2010, Reid et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2011; Philippart et al., 2011; Schiel, 2011; Wassmann et al., 2011; Wernberg
et al., 2011); changes in primary production (Behrenfeld et al., 2006; Chavez et al., 2011); changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms
(Heisler et al., 2008; Bauman et al., 2010); increases in health hazards in the oceans (e.g. ciguatera, pathogens; Van Dolah, 2000; Lipp et al.,
2002; Dickey & Plakas, 2009); and
loss of both large, longklived and small fish species causing widespread
impacts on marine ecosystems, including direct impacts on predator and prey species, the
simplification and destabilization of food webs, reduction of resilience to the effects of climate
change (e.g. Jackson et al. 2001; Pauly et al., 1998; Worm & Myers, 2003; Baum & Myers, 2004; Rosenberg et al., 2005; Worm et al., 2006;
Myers et al., 2007; Jackson, 2008; Baum & Worm, 2009; Ferretti et al., 2010; Hutchings et al., 2010; WardkPaige et al., 2010; Pinskya et al.,
2011). • The magnitude of the cumulative impacts on the ocean is greater than previously understood Interactions between different impacts
can be negatively synergistic (negative impact greater than sum of individual stressors) or they can be antagonistic (lowering the effects of
individual impacts). Examples
of such interactions include: combinations of overfishing, physical
disturbance, climate change effects, nutrient runoff and introductions of nonknative species leading
to explosions of these invasive species, including harmful algal blooms, and dead zones (Rabalais et al.,
2001, 2002; Daskalov et al., 2007; Purcell et al., 2007; Boero et al., 2008; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Bauman et al., 2010;
VaquerkSunur & Duarte, 2010); increased temperature and acidification increasing the susceptibility of corals to bleaching (Anthony et al.,
2008) and acting synergistically to impact the reproduction and development of other marine invertebrates (Parker et al., 2009); changes in the
behavior, fate and toxicity of heavy metals with acidification (Millero et al., 2009; Pascal et al., 2010); acidification may reduce the limiting
effect of iron availability on primary production in some parts of the ocean (Shi et al., 2010; King et al., 2011); increased uptake of plastics by
fauna (Andrady 2011, Hirai & Takada et al. 2011, Murray & Cowie, 2011), and increased bioavailability of pollutants through adsorption onto
the surface of microplastic particles (Graham & Thompson 2009, Moore 2008, Thomson, et al., 2009); and feedbacks of climate change impacts
on the oceans (temperature rise, sea level rise, loss of ice cover, acidification, increased storm intensity, methane release) on their rate of CO2
uptake and global warming (Lenton et al., 2008; Reid et al 2009). • Timelines
for action are shrinking. The longer the
delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the
financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts
and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures. • Resilience of the ocean to climate change impacts is severely
compromised by the other stressors from human activities, including fisheries, pollution and habitat destruction. Examples include the
overfishing of reef grazers, nutrient runoff, and other forms of pollution (presence of pathogens or endocrine disrupting chemicals (Porte et al.,
2006; OSPAR 2010)) reducing the recovery ability of reefs from temperaturekinduced mass coral bleaching (Hoeghk Guldberg et al., 2007;
Mumby et al., 2007; Hughes et al., 2010; Jackson, 2010; Mumby & Harborne, 2010) . These multiple stressors promote the phase shift of reef
ecosystems from being coralkdominated to algal dominated. The loss of genetic diversity from overfishing reduces ability to adapt to stressors.
• Ecosystem collapse is occurring as a result of both current and emerging stressors. Stressors include chemical pollutants, agriculture runkoff,
sediment loads and overkextraction of many components of food webs which singly and together severely impair the functioning of
ecosystems. Consequences include the potential increase of harmful algal blooms in recent decades (Van Dolah, 2000; Landsberg, 2002;
Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Wang & Wu, 2009); the spread of oxygen depleted or dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2002; Diaz &
Rosenberg, 2008; VaquerkSunyer & Duarte, 2008); the disturbance of the structure and functioning of marine food webs, to the benefit of
planktonic organisms of low nutritional value, such as jellyfish or other gelatinousklike organisms (Broduer et al., 1999; Mills, 2001; Pauly et al.
2009; Boero et al., 2008; Moore et al., 2008); dramatic changes in the microbial communities with negative impacts at the ecosystem scale
(Dinsdale et al., 2008; Jackson, 2010); and the impact of emerging chemical contaminants in ecosystems (la Farré et al., 2008).
This
impairment damages or eliminates the ability of ecosystems to support humans. • The extinction
threat to marine species is rapidly increasing. The main causes of extinctions of marine species to date
are overexploitation and habitat loss (Dulvy et al., 2009). However climate change is increasingly adding to
this, as evidenced by the recent IUCN Red List Assessment of reforming corals (Carpenter et al., 2008). Some
other species ranges have already extended or shifted polekwards and into deeper cooler waters (Reid et al., 2009); this may not be possible
for some species to achieve, potentially leading to reduced habitats and more extinctions. Shifts
in currents and temperatures
will affect the food supply of animals, including at critical early stages, potentially testing their ability
to survive. The participants concluded that not only are we already experiencing severe declines in many species to the point of
commercial extinction in some cases, and an unparalleled rate of regional extinctions of habitat types (eg mangroves and seagrass meadows),
but we now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. Unless action is taken
now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, overexploitation,
pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean. It is notable that the occurrence of multiple high intensity
stressors has been a prerequisite for all the five global extinction events of the past 600 million years (Barnosky et al., 2009).
Scenario 1 is coral:
Ocean observation through IOOS is key to preserve coral reef ecosystems
Dr .Rusty Brainard 9, PhD in Physical Oceanography from the US Naval Postgraduate School, Chief of
the Coral Reef Ecosystem Division at the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Pacific Islands Fisheries
Science Center; Dr Kevin Wong, PhD in Biological and Agricultural Engineering from UC Davis; Ron Karl
Hoeke, oceanographer for the Joint Institute of Marine and Atmospheric Research, M.S. in coastal
oceanography from the Florida Institute of Technology and Doctoral candidate at James Cook University;
Jamison Grove, E Smith, P Fisher-Pool, M Lammers, D Merritt, OJ Vetter, CW Young; “Coral reef
ecosystem integrated observing system: In-situ oceanographic observations at the US Pacific islands and
atolls,” Journal of Operational Oceanography Vol. 2 No. 2,
http://www.pifsc.noaa.gov/library/pubs/Hoeke_etal_JOO_2009.pdf
Coral reef ecosystems are among the most biologically diverse and productive ecosystems on earth. They
provide economic and environmental services to hundreds of millions of people in terms of shoreline protection; areas of natural beauty and
recreation; and sources of food, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, jobs, and revenue.1 At
are deteriorating at alarming rates
present, coral reef ecosystems worldwide
due to local anthropogenic stressors, such as overexploitation, habitat destruction, disease,
invasive species, land-based runoff, pollution, and marine debris; and to stressors associated with global cli-mate change, especially increased
ocean temperatures and ocean acidification.2,3 A
thorough understanding of coral reef ecosystem dynamics is
required if these valuable natural resources are to be conserved and, in some cases, re-stored. In addition to
basic research, an increased level of assessment and monitoring is required for the sustainable
management and resilience of coral reefs, echoing calls for increased coastal monitoring at all
latitudes .4,5,6¶ Overview of CREIOS ¶ In response to calls for increased assessment, monitoring, and mapping to facilitate improved
management and con-servation of coral reef ecosystems, the United States Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) was established in
1998 byPresidential Executive Order. Through the coordinated ef-forts of its members, composed of federal agencies as wellas state, territorial,
and freely associated state governments,the task force coordinates
US efforts to protect, restore, and promote the sustainable
use of the nation’s coral reef eco-systems. As part of this national effort, and in conjunction with ongoing efforts to
establish an Integrated Ocean Ob-serving System ( IOOS ), the NOAA Coral Reef Conserva-tion Program initiated the development of
CREIOS to provide a diverse suite of long-term ecological and environ-mental observations and
information products over a broad range of spatial and temporal scales. The goal of CREIOS is to better understand the
condition of and processes influencing the health of the nation’s coral reef ecosystems and to provide
this information to resource managers and policymakers to assist them in making timely, science-based
management decisions to conserve coral reefs.
Satellite monitoring essential- key to overall ecosystem health
Robinson ‘10 (Ian, 2010, Discovering the Ocean from Space [electronic resource] The unique applications of satellite oceanography / by
Ian S. Robinson., BA and MA Mechanical Sciences, Cambridge University, PhD Engineering Magneto-hydrodynamics, University of Warwick,
1973, Higher and Senior Scientific Officer, Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Bidston, Lecturer, senior lecturer and reader, University of
Southampton Department of Oceanography, Head of Department of Oceanography, Professor, University of Southampton School of Ocean and
Earth Science, Professorial Fellow, Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton)
However, there
is one aspect of reef biology in which the wider overview provided by satellite oceanography
techniques has become essential, and important enough to require this subsection to itself. This is the issue of coral
bleaching, and the role that satellite monitoring of sea surface temperature (SST) plays in identifying regions
where reefs are at risk of bleaching. Corals are underwater animals that attach themselves to stony substrates. The order of
corals known as stony corals, or scleractinians, are found as large colonies of individual coral polyps, each of which produces limestone
deposits. Over the years these deposits have created the large reef systems found in shallow tropical and temperate seas, which provide a
unique habitat for rich and complex ecosystems (see, e.g., pp. 117–141 in Barnes and Hughes, 1999). Corals thrive by hosting within their cells
symbiotic algae called Zooxanthellae, which provide the coral with oxygen and organic compounds resulting from photosynthesis, while
themselves obtaining from the coral carbon dioxide and other chemical compounds needed for photosynthesis. The algae give coral reefs their
rich coloration and the symbiotic relationship is essential for the health of the whole reef ecosystem. Coral
bleaching is the name
given to the situation when corals are subject to physiological stress and respond by ejecting the
zooxanthellae. The departure of the algae is visually evident because corals lose the pigments that give them their yellow or brown coloration.
In this case the white limestone substrate that the corals have deposited shows through the translucent cells of the polyps which then appear
pale or even white. If
the stress is quickly removed the algae return within a few weeks and the corals recover,
but if the stress is prolonged for many weeks the corals will die and continue to appear stark white. The loss of live
corals eventually causes damage to the whole reef ecosystem. Consequently coral-bleaching events pose a
serious threat that is taken seriously by marine environmental managers.
Independently prevents extinction
Philippine Daily Inquirer ‘2
[“REEFS UNDER STRESS”, 12-10, L/N]
The artificial replacement of corals is a good start. Coral
reefs are the marine equivalent of rainforests that are also
being destroyed at an alarming rate not only in the Philippines but all over the world. The World Conservation Union says reefs
are one of the "essential life support systems" necessary for human survival, homes to huge numbers of animals
and plants. Dr. Helen T. Yap of the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines said that the
country's coral
reefs, together with those of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, contain the biggest number of species of
plants and animals. "They lie at the center of biodiversity in our planet," she said.
Scenario 2 is ocean acidification
IOOS observations stop ocean acidification
Iglesias-Rodriguez et al. 2010
M. Debora, School of Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, TOWARDS AN
INTEGRATED GLOBAL OCEAN ACIDIFICATION OBSERVATION NETWORK
http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/176715/1/FCXNL-09A02b-2113336-1-IglesiasRodriguez_OceanObs09_PlenaryPaper_Acidification_formatted.pdf
One of the biggest challenges facing the community is to unveil the mechanisms behind biological
adaptation over realistic time frames and thereby determine which species do or do not have the
ability to adapt to future ocean acidification. Most experimental approaches used to date only address
physiological responses to environmental selection pressure rather than long-term adaptation. There is
an urgent need to conduct manipulations involving time-scales of multiple generations (cell division,
generation of organisms) and environmental change at rates representative of those experienced by
biota in the open ocean (Boyd et al., 2008). Monitoring potential adaptation in real time in the field,
particularly in those areas of high susceptibility to ocean acidification (polar latitudes, upwelling zones)
will provide information central to representing and forecasting the repercussions of ocean
acidification on biota. Information from these platforms will be used to calibrate the findings in the
laboratory experiments/mesocosms with strains/populations and to inform policy makers and marine
resource managers. Data repositories of detailed carbonate chemistry, biological performance and
molecular adaptation to environmental selection pressure will not only provide first hand information
about natural selection processes in real time but will also answer fundamental questions of how
changes in carbon chemistry alter the abundance and physiology of functional groups. While work with
single strains/species provides valuable information about regulation of processes, it does not account
for the complexity of natural populations, physical transport effect, interactions between bacteria and
viruses and eukaryotic phytoplankton, mortality, etc. Many countries are presently engaged in ocean
acidification research and monitoring activities, for example, the EU projects EPOCA, MEECE and
MedSeA, the German BIOACID project, the UK Ocean Acidification Research Programme, US (emerging
program supported by NSF, NOAA, NASA, USGS) , and Japan MoE and MEXT Ocean Acidification
Research Programmes. The proposed activities will require a coordinated international research effort
that is closely linked with other international carbon research programs, such as the CLIVAR/CO2 Repeat
Hydrography Program. The SOLAS-IMBER Working Group on Ocean Acidification
(http://www.imber.info/C_WG_SubGroup3.html) and the IOCCP could play roles to coordinate and
integrate, at the international level, the research, training and outreach activities. The Global Ocean
Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and interface with the data synthesis activities,
data archiving and international data management activities of the carbon and ocean acidification
programs. The main role of the Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network is to gain a robust
understanding of the chemical and biological impacts of ocean acidification by conducting (1) timeseries measurements in open ocean and coastal observatories at several levels of organization from
molecular to ecosystem level; (2) in-situ manipulations and mesocosm experiments, and autonomous
measurements aboard voluntary observing ships; and (3) global and regional monitoring using satellite
data. Cooperation with well established international programs such as the IODP, and forming a global
network with good spatial and temporal coverage will be central to its success. The application of
genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic approaches to studying oceanic ecosystem may open new
opportunities for understanding the organisms control on elemental cycles though time. Robotic in-situ
devices deployed on moorings can be powerful tools and are now available as autonomous samplers, to
report on genomic data of microbial community composition (Greenfield et al., 2006; 2008; Scholin et al,
2008). Building this global time series to assess changes in ocean chemistry and biology will improve
coupling between biogeochemistry, physiology, and modelling and play a major role in providing sound
scientific evidence to society and decision makers on the consequences of future acidification of
oceans, seas and coastal waters and on the time scales required for CO2 emissions reduction to
reduce the risks from acidification.9. CONCLUDING REMARKS The rate of change in ocean pH and
carbon chemistry is expected to accelerate over this century unless societal decisions reduce CO2
emissions dramatically. Quantifying how these changes are going to affect ecosystem functioning,
ocean biogeochemistry and human society is a priority. Emerging technology in the oceanographic
community is revolutionizing the way we sample the oceans. An integrated international
interdisciplinary program of ship-based hydrography, time-series moorings, floats and gliders with
carbon system, pH and oxygen sensors, and ecological surveys is already underway. This network will
incorporate new technology to investigate changes at many levels of organization (from molecular to
ecosystem level to global) to determine the extent of the large-scale changes in the carbon chemistry of
seawater and the associated biological responses to ocean acidification in open ocean as well as coastal
environments. Many countries have endorsed these activities, and it will be the responsibility of
leading countries and institutions to ensure continuity of these efforts in ocean acidification research
and monitoring activities. The Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and
interface with the data synthesis activities, data archiving and international data management activities
of the carbon and ocean acidification programs.
Acidification destroys the ecosystem- management key
Sean D. Connell ’13, Professor of Marine Biology at the University of Adelaide, August 26, 2013, “The
other ocean acidification problem: CO2 as a resource among competitors for ecosystem dominance,"
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1627/20120442
Ocean acidification is often considered in terms of its direct negative effects on the growth and
calcification of organisms with calcareous shells or skeletons. We argue that this focus overlooks the
important role of ocean acidification as a resource, which can enhance the productivity of algae known
to influence the status of kelp forests and coral reefs (i.e. mat-forming algae or mats). We have
highlighted how ocean acidification can indirectly tip the competitive balance towards dominance by
mats through mechanisms that generate new space (e.g. disturbance or storm events), which enables
colonization and persistence of mats rather than the original kelp or coral state.
Ocean acidification, therefore, has the capacity to act as a resource that shifts the status of
subordinates into dominant competitors. Consequently, human activities that alter the availability of
resources have important implications for the relative competitive abilities of major ecosystem
components. We suggest that additional stressors will influence the effect of ocean acidification on
producers, and that many cumulative impacts may reflect multiplicative rather than additive
interactions. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we argue that if these synergies involve local stressors,
then environmentally mediated ecosystem shifts may be greatly ameliorated by managing local
stressors. Nevertheless, there are few assessments of whether management of local processes can
weaken the feedbacks that reinforce altered state and enable the reversibility of phase-shifts.
Importantly, we suggest that in the face of changing climate (e.g. ocean acidification and temperature),
effective management of local stressors (e.g. water pollution and overfishing) may have a greater
contribution in determining ecosystem states than currently anticipated. Thus, we highlight how ocean
acidification has the potential to influence competitive abilities via changes in resource availability,
with implications for the stability and persistence of the system as a whole.
Independently causes extinction
Rogers 2/17 [Alex Rogers, Scientific Director of IPSO and Professor of Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of
Oxford, 2014, “The Ocean’s Death March,” http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/17/the-oceans-death-march/]
This problem is unquestionably serious, and here’s why: The
rate of change of ocean pH (measure of acidity) is 10 times
faster than 55 million years ago. That period of geologic history was directly linked to a mass extinction event as
levels of CO2 mysteriously went off the charts. Ten times larger is big, very big, when a measurement of 0.1
in change of pH is consistent with significant change! According to C.L.Dybas, On a Collision Course: Oceans Plankton and Climate
Change, BioScience, 2006: “This acidification is occurring at a rate [10-to-100] times faster [depending upon the area] than ever recorded.” In
other words, as far as science is concerned, the rate of change of pH in the ocean is “off the charts.”
Therefore, and as a result, nobody knows how this will play out because there is no known example in geologic history of such a rapid change in
pH. This begs the biggest question of modern times, which is: Will ocean acidification cause an extinction event this century, within current
lifetimes? The Extinction Event Already Appears to be Underway According
to the State of the Ocean Report, d/d October 3,
the ocean is unprecedented in the
Earth’s known history. We are entering an unknown territory of marine ecosystem change… The next
2013,International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO): “This [acidification] of
mass extinction may have already begun. ” According to Jane Lubchenco, PhD, who is the former director (2009-13) of the US
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the effects of acidification are already present in some oyster fisheries, like the West Coast
of the U.S. According to Lubchenco: “You can actually see this happening… It’s
not something a long way into the future. It
is a very big problem,” Fiona Harvey, Ocean Acidification due to Carbon Emissions is at Highest for 300M Years, The Guardian October
2, 2013. And, according to Richard Feely, PhD, (Dep. Of Oceanography, University of Washington) and Christopher Sabine, PhD, (Senior Fellow,
University of Washington, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean): “If
the current carbon dioxide emission
trends continue… the ocean will continue to undergo acidification, to an extent and at rates that have not occurred
for tens of millions of years… nearly all marine life forms that build calcium carbonate shells and skeletons studied by scientists thus far have
shown deterioration due to increasing carbon dioxide levels in seawater,” Dr. Richard Feely and Dr. Christopher Sabine, Oceanographers,
Carbon Dioxide and Our Ocean Legacy, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April
2006. And, according to Alex Rogers, PhD, Scientific Director of the International Programme on the State of the Ocean, OneWorld (UK) Video,
Aug. 2011: “I think if we
continue on the current trajectory, we are looking at a mass extinction of marine species
even if only coral reef systems go down, which it looks like they will certainly by the end of the century.”
“Today’s human-induced acidification is a unique event in the geological history of our planet due to
its rapid rate of change. An analysis of ocean acidification over the last 300 million years highlights the unprecedented rate of change
of the current acidification. The most comparable event 55 million years ago was linked to mass extinctions… At that time, though the rate of
change of ocean pH was rapid, it may have been 10 times slower than current change,” IGBP, IOC, SCOR [2013], Ocean Acidification Summary
for Policymakers – Third Symposium on the Ocean in a High- CO2 World, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm, Sweden,
2013. Fifty-five million years ago, during a dark period of time known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), huge quantities of
CO2 were somehow released into the atmosphere, nobody knows from where or how, but temperatures around the world soared by 10
degrees F, and the ocean depths became so corrosive that sea shells simply dissolved rather than pile up on the ocean floor. “Most, if not all,
of the five global mass extinctions in Earth’s history carry the fingerprints of the main symptoms of…
global warming, ocean acidification and anoxia or lack of oxygen. It is these three factors — the ‘deadly trio’ —
which are present in the ocean today. In fact, (the situation) is unprecedented in the Earth’s history because of the high rate and
speed of change,” Rogers, A.D., Laffoley, D. d’A. 2011. International Earth System Expert Workshop on Ocean Stresses and Impacts, Summary
Report, IPSO Oxford, 2011. Zooming in on the Future, circa 2050 – Location: Castello Aragonese Scientists have discovered a real life Petri dish
of seawater conditions similar to what will occur by the year 2050, assuming humans continue to emit CO2 at current rates. This real life Petri
dish is located in the Tyrrhenian Sea at Castello Aragonese, which is a tiny island that rises straight up out of the sea like a tower. The island is
located 17 miles west of Naples. Tourists like to visit Aragonese Castle (est. 474 BC) on the island to see the display of medieval torture devices.
But, the real action is offshore, under the water, where Castello Aragonese holds a very special secret, which is an underwater display that gives
scientists a window 50 years into the future. Here’s the scoop: A quirk of geology is at work whereby volcanic vents on the seafloor surrounding
the island are emitting (bubbling) large quantities of CO2. In turn, this replicates the level of CO2 scientists expect the ocean to absorb over the
course of the next 50 years. “When
you get to the extremely high CO2 almost nothing can tolerate that ,”
according to Jason-Hall Spencer, PhD, professor of marine biology, School of Marine Science and Engineering, Plymouth University (UK), who
studies the seawater around Castello Aragonese (Elizabeth Kolbert, The Acid Sea, National Geographic, April, 2011.) The adverse effects of
excessive CO2 are found everywhere in the immediate surroundings of the tiny island. For example, barnacles, which are one of the toughest of
all sea life, are missing around the base of the island where seawater measurements show the heaviest concentration of CO2. And, within the
water, limpets, which wander into the area seeking food, show severe shell dissolution. As a result, their shells are almost completely
transparent. Also, the underwater sea grass is a vivid green, which is abnormal because tiny organisms usually coat the blades of sea grass and
dull the color, but no such organisms exists. Additionally, sea urchins, which are commonplace further away from the vents, are nowhere to be
seen around the island. The only life forms found around Castello Aragonese are jellyfish, sea grass, and algae; whereas, an abundance of
underwater sea life is found in the more distant surrounding waters. Thus, the Castello Aragonese Petri dish is essentially a dead sea except for
weeds. This explains why Jane Lubchenco, former
head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, refers to
ocean acidification as global warming’s “equally evil twin ,” Ibid. To that end, a slow motion death march is
consuming life in the ocean in real time, and we humans are witnesses to this extinction event.
Extensions-General
Observation/Data Key
Full implementation of IOOS is key to effective ocean management
Dr. Andrew A. Rosenberg 9, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at
the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries
Service, and Dr. Paul A. Sandifer, Ph.D. in Marine Science from the University of Virginia, Chief Science
Advisor for NOAA’s National Ocean Service, “What Do Managers Need?” Chapter 2 in Ecosystem-Based
Management for the Oceans,
http://www.pelagicos.net/MARS6910_spring2013/readings/EBM_for_the_Oceans_ch2.pdf
One ray of hope is provided by the recently released national Ocean Research Priorities Plan and Implementation Strategy developed by the US Joint Subcommittee
on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST 2007). This is the first comprehensive ocean research plan that involves every agency of the US government concerned in
any way with ocean research. The overarching goal of the plan is “to provide the guidance to build the scientific foundation to improve society’s stewardship and
use of, and interaction with, the ocean.” The plan focuses on three central elements of ocean science and technology: (1) capability to forecast ocean and oceaninfluenced processes and phenomena, (2) development of scientific support for EBM, and (3) deployment of an ocean-observing sys-tem. These three--ocean
forecasting, EBM, and ocean observing--permeate the entire document and its twenty national research priori-ties organized within six societal themes. The JSOST
(2007) further recognized the breadth of scientific support and integration that would be needed to implement EBM, stating that a multi-dimensional, multidisciplinary effort to enhance current understanding of ecosystem processes, determine which interactions are most critical, and assess the dynamics of the natural
and human factors affecting those interactions would be necessary (see also box2.4). Full
development and implementation of the
Integrated Ocean Observing System(IOOS) and other ocean and coastal observatories will provide a foundation of
monitoring data that could enable and enhance manage-ment in many ocean sectors. An IOOS that includes not only high-resolution measurements in time and space of the physical and chemical
properties within an ecosystem, but also bio-logical attributes, and that incorporates high-resolution data on human
activities within that ecosystem, would open up an entirely new world of information for management. Such a
system and its related information flows would enable forecasting of ocean processes and phenomena, including
severe storms, currents, status of fishery stocks and other biological resources, and human health
risks. The requi-site tools are rapidly becoming available, with a variety of data collection methods ‰from
mea-surements of waves, temperature, currents,and productivity in real time with buoys, satellites, and radar to the monitoring of fishing activity with vesselmonitoring systems, and shipping with automated identification sys-tems (USCOP 2004), and even development of a wide range of biological sensors (JSOST 2007;
Sandifer et al. 2007). Using
these new tools would allow management to operate on a spatial and temporal
resolution that has never before been possible. However, developing new management strategies and tactics that can take advantage
of such high-resolution in-formation is an important area for growth and research.
IOOS key to ocean management
Muller-Karger 13, (Frank Muller-Karger Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in
Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker,
Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber,
University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an
Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013,
https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf)
The IOOS can play a pivotal role in the co-development of solutions for pressing social and environmental
challenges. It can coordinate activities such as calibration and validation efforts, developing new research
and applications, refining a vision for Earth observation, and distributing science-quality, real-time and
archived products and timely information. The IOOS can help create efficiencies in regional
infrastructure and capitalize on the human knowledge of each region. It can also help ensure that these
systems are secure and properly backed up so that the necessary information is available even during
emergencies.
IOOS key to environmental management
Muller-Karger 13, (Frank Muller-Karger Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in
Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker,
Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber,
University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an
Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013,
https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf)
Satellite imagery and satellite-derived
data comprise a key element of the IOOS observing system in the US. It is a
cornerstone technology for local as well as for large-scale and international environmental assessment, research,
and commercial applications. The US IOOS can play a pivotal role in activities such as calibration and validation
efforts, developing new research and applications, refining a vision for Earth observation, and
distributing science- quality, real-time and archived products and timely information. The IOOS can help
create efficiencies in developing a regional infrastructure and capitalize on the human knowledge of
each region. It can also help ensure viability of systems during emergencies. Ultimately, the IOOS can learn from international programs
and also provide training opportunities to the international community.
Ocean observation key to management
Shih 04 (Hsing-hua Shih, Ph.D NOAA/National Ocean Service, “Current Practices and New Technology in Ocean Observation - An Overview
“ http://ivy3.epa.gov.tw/OMISAR/Data/WOM14/proceedings/1.pdf, October 26th 2004, SM)
Ocean observation serves many useful purposes and provides economical and societal benefits to the public. These
benefits include safe and efficient marine operation, improved marine commerce, coastal hazard
mitigation, sustained marine resources and ecosystem management, reducing public health risk, and
improving national security. A well designed observation system should be meeting users’ needs, providing end-to-end products,
and adaptive to changes of users’ requirements and technology advances. An observation system and any one of its components should go
through several developing phases including R&D, pilot demonstration, pre-operational prior to becoming operational. Observation
data
also support scientists to better understand the ocean processes and numerical modelers to improve the
accuracy of environmental predictions. This paper provides an overview of the status, issues, trends and emerging new technologies
in ocean observation. Focus will be placed on the technological aspects of coastal ocean, operational system, physical oceanographic
parameters, and related activities in the United States, in particular, at the National Ocean Service (NOS) of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
New observing systems key
Price and Rosenfeld 12 (Holly Price and Leslie Rosenfeld, “Synthesis of Regional IOOS Build-out Plans for the Next Decade”
http://www.ioosassociation.org/sites/nfra/files/documents/ioos_documents/regional/BOP%20Synthesis%20Final.pdf, December 2012)
Regional habitats create differences in ocean information needs. For example, shallow coral reefs in the waters of the
Pacific islands, the
Caribbean and coastal Florida are unique high diversity ecosystems, providing valuable economic and environmental
benefits such as food, tourism and buffering from coastal storms. They are increasingly threatened by an array of local and global
pressures: overfishing, pollution, sedimentation, ocean acidification, and warming trends that cause reef
degradation and loss. Regional observing systems in these regions need to provide detailed information on
physical, chemical and biological variables that can help managers evaluate reef health, understand what and why changes are
occurring over time and better manage the wide array of impacts on these fragile habitats.
Data collection key to management
Hoggarth et al 06 (Daniel D. Hoggarth, Member of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Stock Assessment
for Fishery Management: A framework guide to the stock assessment tools of the Fisheries Management Science Programme, page 190)
In relation to minimum data requirements, the finding that single species and aggregate single species models are adequate to describe and
manage multispecies demersal bank and deep reef slope fisheries has important consequences. The
results indicated that it is
sufficient to obtain catch and effort data from the most important species and aggregations of other species without
the need for detailed information on every species. However, due to the importance of technical interactions, catch
and effort data collection must include a number of other details, particularly those relating to
technological changes in fishing methods - vessel and gear characteristics must he recorded. Sampling strategies for catch and
effort data, and species specific length frequency and biological data, also need to capture fishing depth and spatial information to enable
standardization for variation in these factors. For length frequency and biological
data collection, the management
guidelines require that the number of species from which data is collected need only be confined to
the most vulnerable and economically important. For individual species length frequency data and age and growth
assessment were essential. The more costly biological data to provide parameters such as length at maturity,
whilst useful, was not seen as essential for management. An estimate of density dependence in stock
recruitment would be very useful for refining management thresholds. A key deficiency in existing data
collection related to uncertainty in growth parameter estimates from length based methods. This
prompted further studies to investigate the importance of growth parameter estimation (see Section 10).
U-Observation
Ocean is currently under sampled—that’s a call to action
NOC 14 (Noc The National Oceanography Centre (NOC) is a Research Centre wholly owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). It was formed on 1 April 2010, by
merging the NERC-managed parts of the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton with the NERC Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory at Liverpool, enabling the scientific remit of the
Centre to span from coast to deep ocean. Copyright 2014. “Why we need sustained observations” from the NOC. http://noc.ac.uk/ocean-watch/why-we-need-sustained-observations July 3,
2014)
The oceans are grossly under-sampled in space and time, yet many of the fundamental questions of both
scientific and practical importance depend on understanding change and variability at time-scales
from days to decades and from local, to regional, to ocean-basin, and to global scales.¶ No single
measurement technique can provide all the information needed. For example, whilst satellites give good spatial coverage
of the oceans, the time resolution is usually low (many days between satellite passes) and space-borne instruments measure only
the surface skin of the sea. Likewise, instruments moored to the sea-floor and so located at fixed points in space can give very detailed
information about changes in time at these locations – but such instrument moorings are very expensive and so are found in very few
locations in the oceans. Drifting buoys and opportunistic use of commercial ships help fill data gaps.
We can’t protect the ocean because we know don’t know enough about it
Bull 10 (Gareth Bull is from the UK and is the owner of ReefShotz and works for Practical Fishkeeping magazine. One of the most prominent and reputable fishing nad marine life
magazines in the UK. 08/29/10. Deep oceans massively under-explored from Practical Fishkeeping. http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=3165 July 6, 2014)
"The tragedy of studying biodiversity during an extinction crisis is that we
are losing our subject matter faster than we are able to describe it.¶ "This is especially true in the
marine environment where the need to value and conserve taxa and habitats that we know little about has been termed a paradox of marine conservation."¶ Despite
substantial advances made by the likes of the Census for Marine Life in recording marine species, the
pelagic ocean remains grossly under sampled. ¶ The research team, led by Dr Tom Webb, used data from the world’s largest holder of marine species
The study opens rather poignantly with the following:
distribution data, Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS), to plot the locations of around 7 million recorded marine species occurrences to reach their conclusion.¶
Interestingly, the majority of occurrences were recorded from either the seabed, or from surface
water and shallow areas of the ocean (sea bed less than 200 metres in depth).
Ocean data is too limited
Wahle 10 (Dr. Charles Wahle is a marine ecologist working specifically with the science and policy of marine conservation. He is Senior Scientist and the National Marine Protected
Areas center. He is also a member of NOAA. November 2010. Mapping Human Uses of the Ocean
Informing Marine Spatial Planning Through Participatory GIS from National Marine Protected Areas. http://marineprotectedareas.noaa.gov/pdf/helpfulresources/mapping_human_uses_nov2010.pdf July 6, 2014).
Understanding human uses of the ocean is an ¶ essential component to successful marine resource ¶
planning and management. Unfortunately, spatial ¶ data on ocean uses are limited, as use patterns are ¶ often qualitative, subjective and difficult
to capture ¶ consistently over large areas. Further confounding ¶ this problem, knowledge of ocean use patterns is ¶ often held by a small
number of individuals within ¶ each sector who routinely ¶ observe the coastal and ¶ marine environment and ¶ the activities occurring ¶ there. Emerging ¶
technologies in the ¶ arena of participatory ¶ Geographic Information ¶ Systems (GIS) are ¶ providing
new ways to ¶ tap this critical knowledge ¶ and document human ¶ use patterns in a spatial ¶ context. Participatory GIS ¶ techniques offer a unique, ¶ interactive means of
collecting spatial information on ¶ ocean uses that capitalizes on expert knowledge from ¶ local individuals through the application of specialized ¶ GIS mapping tools.
We’ve barely explored the ocean—new tech is the only way to discover more
National Academy 11 (provide a public service by working outside the framework of government to ensure independent advice on matters of science, technology,
¶
and medicine. They enlist committees of the nation’s top scientists, engineers, and other experts— all of whom volunteer their time to study specific concerns. 08/24/2011. Ocean Exploration
from the National Academies. http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf July 6, 2014).
¶
The ocean is the largest biosphere on Earth, covering nearly three- ¶ quarters of our planet’s surface
and occupying a volume of 1.3 billion ¶ cubic kilometers. Despite the major role of the ocean in making
the Earth ¶ habitable—through climate regulation, rainwater supply, petroleum and ¶ natural gas
resources, and a breathtaking diversity of species valued for their ¶ beauty, seafood, and pharmaceutical
potential—humankind has entered the 21st ¶ century having explored only a small fraction of the
ocean. ¶ Some estimates suggest that as much as 95 percent of the world ocean and 99 ¶ percent of
the ocean floor are still unexplored. The vast mid-water—the region ¶ between the ocean’s surface and
the seafloor—may be the least explored, even though ¶ it contains more living things than all of
Earth’s rainforests combined. Similarly, the ocean ¶ floor and sediments encompass an extensive
microbial biosphere that may rival that on the ¶ continents, which is not yet understood and remains
largely unexplored. ¶ The impacts of human activities on the ocean drive a growing urgency for its
exploration ¶ before permanent and potentially harmful changes become widespread. Even events
that oc-¶ cur far inland, such as nutrient runoff from agriculture and pollutants and debris carried by ¶
stormwater, have impacts. The ocean bears a double burden from the burning of fossil fuels and ¶
associated climate change; not only is it warmer, but the additional carbon dioxide dissolves in ¶ the
ocean, making it more acidic.
Mapping Solves
Ocean mapping works to figure out bioD loss—But isn’t sufficient enough
IEPICA 13 (IEPICA is an oil and gas industry that successfully improves its operations and products to meet society’s expectations for environmental and social performance. The
Teak-Samaan-Poui marine ecosystem mapping study. From IEPICA. Copyright 2013. http://www.ipieca.org/topic/biodiversity/repsol-marine-ecosystem-mapping-study July 2, 2014.)
The Repsol TT BMP project was launched in 2006 with a Needs Assessment Study. A comprehensive
literature review identified data and information gaps and defined a scope for the BMP. This study
found that the main threats to biodiversity in the marine environment include sediment, water and
air pollution, unsustainable use of natural resources, alien and introduced species, oil and gas
activities and other socio-economic activities such as fishing. However, the contributory impacts of
each of these ‘stressors’ remained unknown . Thirteen prospective projects were identified based on
the Needs Assessment Study; the TSP Ecosystem Mapping Project was eventually selected as the BMP.
This project intends to develop and continuously build a ‘living map’ of the marine habitats and
species within the TSP Block over the lifetime of its operations; with special focus on the marine
seafloor sediment, water quality, marine mammals (cetaceans) and marine birds of the region
(avifauna).
We can use ocean mapping to explore and protect marine ecosystems
SECOORA 11 (SECOORA is one of 11 Regional Associations established nationwide through the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®). IOOS is a multi-agency, cooperative
effort based on a continuously operating network of buoys, ships, satellites, underwater vehicles, and other platforms that routinely collect real-time data and manage historical information.
These data are needed for rapid detection and timely prediction of changes in our nation's ocean and coastal waters. Coastal Ocean Observing Benefits to Georgia from SECOORA. 2011.
http://secoora.org/about/inmystate/GA July 4, 2014).
Understanding the connectivity between the ocean environment and upland ecosystems is critical for
monitoring water quality and understanding impacts to marine ecosystems such as coral reefs.
Remotely sensed ocean color products provide a mechanism to understand this connection and are
proving to be a critical management tool for NOAA’s Coral Health and Monitoring Program. University of
South Florida's Optical Oceanography Laboratory at the College of Marine Science is working with these
regional ocean managers to generate a glint-free color index (CI) product for the SECOORA region and
provide it via a Web interface. The Integrated Coral Observing Network (ICON) Coral Health and
Monitoring program uses the small-scale eddies observed from these new products to help monitor
the hydrodynamics in the delicate coral ecosystem, such as those found in Gray's Reef National Marine
Sanctuary.
Tipping Point-Marine Environment
Continued declining in Marine environments prove we’re at a tipping point—we must
act now
Harvey 12 (Fiona Harvey is an award-winning environment journalist. She has reported on every major environmental issue, from as far afield as the Arctic
and the Amazon. September 9, 2012. Caribbean coral reefs face collapse from The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/10/caribbean-coral-reefs-collapse-environment July 7, 2014.)
Caribbean coral reefs – which make up one of the world's most colourful, vivid and productive
ecosystems – are on the verge of collapse, with less than 10% of the reef area showing live coral
cover.¶ With so little growth left, the reefs are in danger of utter devastation unless urgent action is
taken, conservationists warned. They said the drastic loss was the result of severe environmental
problems, including over-exploitation, pollution from agricultural run-off and other sources, and
climate change.¶ The decline of the reefs has been rapid: in the 1970s, more than 50% showed live
coral cover, compared with 8% in the newly completed survey. The scientists who carried it out warned
there was no sign of the rate of coral death slowing.
Marine environment is in a horrible state
Revell 2/27/14 (Tom Revell joined Blue & Green Tomorrow as an intern journalist. He graduated with an undergraduate journalism degree and a master's degree in history.
John Kerry: degradation of marine environment ‘doesn’t know borders’ from Blue and Green tomorrow. 02/27/14. http://blueandgreentomorrow.com/2014/02/27/john-kerry-degradation-ofmarine-environment-doesnt-know-borders/ July 7, 2014)
Kerry warned that overfishing, pollution and acidification linked to greenhouse gas emissions were
threatening all marine life, and the billions of people who depend on it for life and livelihood. The UN
Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates than one in five people worldwide rely on fish as their
primary source of protein.¶ “This doesn’t know borders. It’s trans-boundary”, Kerry said in a video
address to a conference hosted by the Economist and National Geographic in California on Tuesday.¶
“And every country on Earth has to do all it can to reduce emissions not just for the future of marine
life but, frankly, for the future of all life.Ӧ A report published last year suggested that oceans were
acidifying at “unprecedented rates” because of manmade carbon dioxide emissions. ¶ Researchers
warn this could have a devastating impact on marine food chains, with coral reefs being destroyed
faster than they can rebuild, and many molluscs, such as mussels and oysters, finding it difficult to
grow and even survive.¶ Marine ecologists also argue that overfishing is the most severe threat to
ocean ecosystems, with some species pushed to the brink of extinction.¶ “If we want to slow down the
rate of acidification of our oceans, protect our coral reefs, and save species from extinction, we have
to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions and pursue cleaner sources of energy”, Kerry added.¶
“Today, less than 3% of the world’s oceans are part of a marine protected area or a marine reserve.
Think of the progress we can make if just 10% of marine areas were protected. I think that is a goal we
should set for ourselves.Ӧ Kerry said the US State Department would hold a two-day summit in the
summer to kickstart efforts working towards such targets.¶ A report published last year found that
setting up 127 marine conservation zones around the UK provide an economic boost worth as much as
£3.39 billion.
AT: SQ Global Conservation Programs
Conservation at a Federal Level doesn’t work—no jurisdiction or enforcement
Levitt 13 (Tom Levitt is a journalist specializing in environmental issues. He has been featured on numerous reputable news sites. He has a masters in science. CNN, 03/27/13.
Overfished and under-protected: Oceans on the brink of catastrophic collapse. http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/22/world/oceans-overfishing-climate-change/ July 3, 2014)
The problem is that most of the world's ocean is located outside of international law and legal control.
Any attempts to implement rules and regulation come with the problem of enforcement, says Rogers,
who is also scientific director of the International Program on State of the Ocean (IPSO).¶ Marine
conservationists estimate that at least 30% of the oceans need to be covered by marine protected
areas, where fishing and the newly emerging deep-sea mining of valuable minerals on the seabed, is
banned or restricted.¶ Callum Roberts, who helped form the first network of marine protected areas in
the high seas in 2010, says on their own they are not enough.¶ "I could sum it up as: we need to fish less
and in less destructive measures, waste less, pollute less and protect more," says Roberts.¶ "This
change of course will see us rebuild the abundance, variety and vitality of life in the sea which will
give the oceans the resilience they need to weather the difficult times ahead. Without such action,
our future is bleak."
Conservation Programs don’t work
Willis 2/5/14 (Dr. Trevor Willis is the Senior Lecturer in Marine Biology at the University of Portsmouth. He is a marine ecologist who completed his BSc, MSc, and PhD. Trevor’s
past research has focused on the effects of marine reserves. Marine conservation efforts are failing to take five key steps from The Conversation. 02/05/14
http://theconversation.com/marine-conservation-efforts-are-failing-to-take-five-key-steps-22728 July 7, 2014)
Some of the world’s most vulnerable marine habitats are being failed by the conservation orders put
in place to protect them. As the Environmental Audit Committee meets to discuss how it will implement
Marine Conservation Zones in the UK, it’s worth paying heed to the latest research into the
effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas around the world.¶ The concept of Marine Protected Areas
(MPAs) as part of marine conservation policy has been gaining traction with governments worldwide.
MPAs may be thought of as underwater national parks – areas granted protections intended to
maintain certain features or habitats in the face of the ever-increasing impact of humans. That marine
conservation is on the political agenda at all is real progress – until very recently the complex
ecosystems under the waves were out of sight, out of mind.¶ In response to first the Convention on
Biological Diversity of 1992 and subsequent legislation such as the European Marine Strategy
Framework Directive, governments worldwide have been designating MPAs, with widely varying
degrees of protection. An MPA can be anything from a no-take zone where all forms of fishing or
disturbance are banned, to an area with a name (and often supporting legislation) but no effective
protection at all – dubbed a “paper park”.¶ Surveying more than 2,000 species of reef fish inside and
outside MPAs in 40 countries, an international team found in a study published this week that marine
fish populations inside many parks or reserves are generally no different to those found in fished
areas.
High Biodiversity helps lessen poverty
PLTA 04/04/14
(The Pennsylvania Land Trust Association was created by land trust volunteers and staff who recognized the need for an association that can focus on the broad needs of the conservation
movement—to take on activities that no one organization could effectively handle or wish to handle on its own. The Association is a nonprofit organization registered with the Pennsylvania Bureau of Charitable Organizations.
Economic Benefits of Biodiversity from Conservation Tools. 04/04/14. http://conservationtools.org/guides/show/95-Economic-Benefits-of-Biodiversity July 8, 2014.)
Biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction are two global challenges that are inextricably linked.
But biodiversity is generally a public good, so it is under-valued, or not valued at all, in national
economies. This paper focuses on the question “which groups of the (differentiated) poor depend, in
which types of ways, on different elements of biological diversity?” It focuses on biodiversity as a
means of subsistence and income to the poor and biodiversity as insurance to prevent the poor from
falling even deeper into poverty.¶ Ten conservation mechanisms that can reduce poverty in the rural
poor are identified: non-timber forest products, community timber enterprises, payments for
environmental services, nature-based tourism, fish spillover, mangrove restoration, protected area
jobs, agroforestry, grasslands management, and agrobiodiversity conservation.¶ There are caveats to
these links. The poor depend disproportionately on biodiversity for their subsistence needs and
biodiversity conservation can be a route out of poverty under some circumstances. However, it is
often the relatively low value or inferior goods that are most significant to the poor, and the more
affluent’s pursuit of the higher commercial value often crowds out the poor. The scale of poverty
reduction may be small; conservation interventions do not necessarily lend themselves to poverty
interventions. A focus on the cash benefits of biodiversity conservation is too limited; it excludes the
ability to meet basic human needs. And biomass may matter more in the short term, biodiversity (as the
foundation for biomass) more in the long term.
US Oceans impact
Preserving US marine ecosystems is key to avoid extinction and global biosphere
collapse
Robin Kundis Craig 3, Associate Professor of Law, focusing on Environmental Law, at Indiana University
School of Law, Winter 2003, “ARTICLE: Taking Steps Toward Marine Wilderness Protection? Fishing and
Coral Reef Marine Reserves in Florida and Hawaii,” 34 McGeorge L. Rev. 155, lexis
Biodiversity and ecosystem function arguments for conserving marine ecosystems also exist, just as they do for terrestrial ecosystems, but these arguments have thus far
rarely been raised in political debates. For example, besides significant tourism values - the most economically valuable ecosystem service coral reefs provide, worldwide - coral reefs protect
against storms and dampen other environmental fluctuations, services worth more than ten times the reefs' value for food production. n856 Waste treatment is another significant, nonextractive ecosystem function that intact coral reef ecosystems provide. n857 More generally, "ocean ecosystems
play a major role in the global
geochemical cycling of all the elements that represent the basic building blocks of living organisms, carbon,
nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulfur, as well as other less abundant but necessary elements." n858 In a very real and direct sense, therefore, human
degradation of marine ecosystems impairs the planet's ability to support life.¶ Maintaining
biodiversity is often critical to maintaining the functions of marine ecosystems. Current evidence shows that, in general, an
ecosystem's ability to keep functioning in the face of disturbance is strongly dependent on its biodiversity, "indicating that more diverse ecosystems are more stable." n859 Coral reef
ecosystems are particularly dependent on their biodiversity.¶ [*265] ¶ Most ecologists agree that the complexity of interactions and degree of interrelatedness among component species is
higher on coral reefs than in any other marine environment. This implies that the ecosystem functioning that produces the most highly valued components is also complex and that many
maintaining and restoring the biodiversity of
marine ecosystems is critical to maintaining and restoring the ecosystem services that they provide. Nonotherwise insignificant species have strong effects on sustaining the rest of the reef system. n860¶ Thus,
use biodiversity values for marine ecosystems have been calculated in the wake of marine disasters, like the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. n861 Similar calculations could derive preservation
values for marine wilderness.¶ However, economic value, or economic value equivalents, should not be "the sole or even primary justification for conservation of ocean ecosystems. Ethical
arguments also have considerable force and merit." n862 At the forefront of such arguments should be a recognition of how little we know about the sea - and about the actual effect of
human activities on marine ecosystems.
The U nited S tates has traditionally failed to protect marine ecosystems
because it was difficult to detect anthropogenic harm to the oceans, but we now know that such harm is occurring - even though
Ecosystems like the NWHI coral reef ecosystem should
inspire lawmakers and policymakers to admit that most of the time we really do not know what we are doing to the sea and hence should be preserving
marine wilderness whenever we can - especially when the United States has within its territory relatively pristine
we are not completely sure about causation or about how to fix every problem.
marine ecosystems that may be unique in the world.¶ We may not know much about the sea, but we
do know this much: if we kill the ocean we kill ourselves , and we will take most of the biosphere with
us. The Black Sea is almost dead, n863 its once-complex and productive ecosystem almost entirely replaced by a monoculture of comb jellies, "starving out fish and dolphins, emptying
fishermen's nets, and converting the web of life into brainless, wraith-like blobs of jelly." n864 More importantly, the Black Sea is not necessarily unique.¶ The Black Sea is a microcosm of what
is happening to the ocean systems at large. The stresses piled up: overfishing, oil spills, industrial discharges, nutrient pollution, wetlands destruction, the introduction of an alien species. The
sea weakened, slowly at first, then collapsed with [*266] shocking suddenness. The lessons of this tragedy should not be lost to the rest of us, because much of what happened here is being
repeated all over the world. The ecological stresses imposed on the Black Sea were not unique to communism. Nor, sadly, was the failure of governments to respond to the emerging crisis.
n865¶ Oxygen-starved "dead zones" appear with increasing frequency off the coasts of major cities and major rivers, forcing marine animals to flee and killing all that cannot. n866 Ethics as
well as
enlightened self-interest
thus
suggest that the U nited S tates should protect fully-functioning
marine ecosystems wherever possible
- even if a few fishers go out of business as a result.
US Coasts Impact
Effective coastal conservation in the US is key to human survival
Jeronimo Pan 13, PhD in Marine and Atmospheric Sciences from Stony Brook University; Dr. M.
Alejandra Marcoval, Research Scientist at the Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata in Argentina; Sergio
M. Bazzini, Micaela V. Vallina, and Silvia G. De Marco, “Coastal Marine Biodiversity Challenges and
Threats,” Chapter 2 in Marine Ecology in a Changing World, p. 44, google books
Coastal areas provide critical ecological services such as nutrient cycling , flood control, shoreline
stability, beach replenishment and genetic resources (Post and Lundin 1996, Scavia et al. 2002). Some estimates by
Boesch (1999), mention that the ocean and coastal systems contribute 63% of the total value of Earth’s
ecosystem services (worth $21 trillion year1). Population growth is a major concern for coastal areas with more than 50% of the world
population concentrated within 60 km of the coast (Post and Lundin 1996); in the United States the expected tendency for
the next decades is that the coastal population will increase by ~25% (Scavia et al. 2002). The continued
growth of human population and of per capita consumption have resulted in unsustainable
exploitation of Earth’s biological diversity, exacerbated by climate change, ocean acidification, and other
anthropogenic environmental impacts. The effective conservation of biodiversity is essential for
human survival and the maintenance of ecosystem processes.
BioD Turns Economy
Biodiversity plays a significant role in the economy
PLTA 04/04/14
(The Pennsylvania Land Trust Association was created by land trust volunteers and staff who recognized the need for an association that can focus on the broad needs of the conservation
movement—to take on activities that no one organization could effectively handle or wish to handle on its own. The Association is a nonprofit organization registered with the Pennsylvania Bureau of Charitable Organizations.
Economic Benefits of Biodiversity from Conservation Tools. 04/04/14. http://conservationtools.org/guides/show/95-Economic-Benefits-of-Biodiversity July 8, 2014.)
Maintaining biodiversity is essential for organic waste disposal, soil formation, biological nitrogen
fixation, crop and livestock genetics, biological pest control, plant pollination, and pharmaceuticals.
Plants and microbes help to degrade chemical pollutants and organic wastes and cycle nutrients through
the ecosystem. For example:¶ Pollinators, including bees and butterflies, provide significant
environmental and economic benefits to agricultural and natural ecosystems, including adding
diversity and productivity to food crops. As many as one-third of the world’s food production relies
directly or indirectly on insect pollination. About 130 of the crops gown in the United States are insect
pollinated. Habitat fragmentation and loss adversely affects pollinator food sources, nesting sites, and
mating sites, causing precipitous declines in the populations of wild pollinators.¶ There are 6 million tons
of food products harvested annually from terrestrial wild biota in the United States including large
and small animals, maple syrup, nuts, blueberries and algae. The 6 billion tons of food are valued at
$57 million and add $3 billion to the country’s economy (1995 calculations).¶ Approximately 75% (by
weight) of the 100,000 chemicals released into the environment can be degraded by biological
organisms and are potential targets of both bioremediation and biotreatment. The savings gained by
using bioremediation instead of the other available techniques; physical, chemical and thermal; to
remediate chemical pollution worldwide give an annual benefit of $135 billion (1997 calculation).
Maintaining biodiversity in soils and water is imperative to the continued and improved effectiveness
of bioremediation and biotreatment.¶ Biodiversity is essential for the sustainable functioning of the
agricultural, forest, and natural ecosystems on which humans depend, but human activities, especially
the development of natural lands, are causing a species extinction rate of 1,000 to 10,000 times the
natural rate.¶ The authors estimate that in the United States, biodiversity provides a total of $319
billion dollars in annual benefits and $2,928 billion in annual benefits worldwide (1997 calculation)
Loss of BioD makes the world a poorer place
Gabriel 07
(Sigmar Gabriel is a German politician, currently serving as Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy. He is also a writer for BBC news. BBC is responsible for the gathering and broadcasting of news and
current affairs. Biodiversity 'fundamental' to economics from BBC News March 9, 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6432217.stm July 8, 2014.)
The loss of global biological diversity is advancing at an unprecedented pace. Up to 150 species are
becoming extinct every day.¶ As well as their uniqueness and beauty, their specific functions within
ecosystems are also irrecoverably lost. The web of life that sustains our global society is getting
weaker and weaker.¶ That is why Germany has chosen both biodiversity and climate change as top
priorities for this year's environment ministers' G8+5 meeting.¶ 'Dramatic decline'¶ The participating
countries have the capabilities needed to move a step closer to solutions to these two fundamental
issues, which are so vital to a sustainable global future.¶ Biological diversity constitutes the
indispensable foundation for our lives and for global economic development.¶ The production of
natural resources in agriculture, forestry and fisheries, stable natural hydrological cycles, fertile soils,
a balanced climate and numerous other vital ecosystem services can only be permanently secured
through the protection and sustainable use of biological diversity.¶ ¶ The 'biodiversity treasure trove'
provides the global economy with an invaluable and extensive potential for innovative products and
processes ¶ Two-thirds of these ecosystem services are already in decline, some dramatically.¶ We are
gradually becoming aware of the fundamental importance of biological diversity for the global
economy.¶ For instance, the annual value of trade in oceanic fisheries is valued at $5.9bn (4.5bn euros;
£3.1bn) - a six-fold increase from 1976 levels. However, catch rates are in continuous decline, and
almost 75% of the world's fish stocks are already fished up to or beyond their sustainable limit.¶
Without sound conservation and management measures, fisheries will quickly become depleted and a
basic component of global food security will be lost.¶ The global value of plant-derived
pharmaceutical products is more than $500bn (380bn euros; £260bn) in industrialised countries. Of the
medicines currently available, 40-50% are derived from natural products.¶ For oncology and antiinfective medicines, it amounts to 70-80%. With every species we lose, we may be losing a remedy for
global health problems.¶ 'Treasure trove'¶ An estimated 40% of world trade is based on biological
products or processes.¶ Road construction through a rainforest (Image: Richard Black)¶ Biodiversity loss
could pave the way to the road to ruin, Mr Gabriel says¶ Biological diversity provides the world's
population, particularly the poor, with foodstuffs, medicines, building materials, bioenergy and
protection against natural disasters.¶ The "biodiversity treasure trove" provides the global economy
with an invaluable and extensive potential for innovative products and processes that is still widely
untapped.¶ But our globalised and steadily growing economy is using up this irreplaceable natural
asset at a terrific speed. The rate of loss of species and habitats is proceeding relentlessly at up to 1,000
times the speed of natural processes.¶ Global biodiversity policy is therefore a fundamental
component of global economic policy. We need a greening of globalisation.¶ To achieve this we need a
comprehensive mix of policies that includes regulatory measures, economic incentives and voluntary
measures and integrates governments, the private sector and consumers.
Extensions-Acidificaton
2AC – Yes Acidification
And we're reaching a tipping point, uncontrolled warming will annihilate human life if
we allow the oceans to continue absorbing CO2.
Reuters 2010 "Oceans Choking on CO2, Face Deadly Changes: Study"
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65H0LI20100618?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNew
s&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2Fenvironment+%
28News+%2F+US+%2F+Environment%29
Oceans were rapidly warming and acidifying, water circulation was being altered and dead zones within
the ocean depths were expanding, said the report. There has also been a decline in major ocean
ecosystems like kelp forests and coral reefs and the marine food chain was breaking down, with fewer
and smaller fish and more frequent diseases and pests among marine organisms. "If we continue down
this pathway we get into conditions which have no analog to anything we've experienced," said
Hoegh-Guldberg, director of the Global Change Institute at The University of Queensland. HoeghGuldberg said oceans were the Earth's "heart and lungs", producing half of the world's oxygen and
absorbing 30 percent of man-made carbon dioxide. "We are entering a period in which the very ocean
services upon which humanity depends are undergoing massive change and in some cases beginning
to fail," said Hoegh-Guldberg. "Quite plainly, the Earth cannot do without its ocean. This is further
evidence that we are well on the way to the next great extinction event." More than 3.5 billion people
depend on the ocean for their primary source of food and in 20 years this number could double, the
report's authors say. The world's climate has remained stable for several thousand years, but climate
change in the past 150 years is now forcing organisms to change rapidly -- changes that through
evolution would normally take a long time, said the report. "We are becoming increasingly certain that
the world's marine ecosystems are approaching tipping points. These tipping points are where change
accelerates and causes unrelated impacts on other systems," said co-author marine scientist John F.
Bruno at the University of North Carolina. Last week, the head of the United Nations Environment
Program, Achim Steiner, said it was crucial the world responded to the loss of coral reefs, forests and
other ecosystems "that generate multi-trillion dollar services that underpin all life-including economic
life-on Earth".
Acidification is increasing rapidly
Levitt 13 (Tom Levitt is a journalist specializing in environmental issues. He has been featured on numerous reputable news sites. He has a masters in science. CNN, 03/27/13.
Overfished and under-protected: Oceans on the brink of catastrophic collapse. http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/22/world/oceans-overfishing-climate-change/ July 3, 2014)
At the same time fisheries and vital marine ecosystems like coral are being decimated, the oceans
continue to provide vital services, absorbing up to one third of human carbon dioxide emissions while producing
50% of all the oxygen we breathe.¶ Hi-res gallery: Extraordinary creatures of the Great Barrier Reef¶ But absorbing increasing quantities
of carbon dioxide (CO2) has come at a cost, increasing the acidity of the water.¶ "The two worst things in my mind happening to
oceans are global warming and ocean acidification," says O'Dor, "They're going to have terrible effects on coral reefs. Because
of acidification essentially, the coral can't grow and it's going to dissolve away."¶ The ocean has become 30%
more acidic since the start of The Industrial Revolution in the 18th century and is predicted to be
150% more acidic by the end of this century, according to a UNESCO report published last year.¶ "There's a coral reef off Norway that was
discovered in 2007 and it's likely to be dead by 2020," says O'Dor. ¶ "The problem is that the acidification is worse near the Poles
because low temperature water dissolves more acid. Starting from the Pole and working south these reefs are going to suffer extensively."¶ Current estimates
suggest 30% of coral reefs will be endangered by 2050, says O'Dor, because of the effects of ocean acidification and global warming.¶ Higher
acidity also
disrupts marine organisms' ability to grow, reproduce and respire. The Census of Marine Life reported that
phytoplankton, the microscopic plants producing most of the oxygen from the oceans, have been
declining by around 1% a year since 1900.¶ "We need to fish less and in less destructive measures, waste less, pollute less and protect
more¶ Callum Roberts, Marine biologist¶ The falling numbers of smaller, but lesser known species and plant life has
significant impact further up the marine food chain. For example, seabirds which used to visit and breed on Spitsbergen -- a
Norwegian island near the Arctic -- are being wiped out because of changes in their previously abundant food sources
Mapping key
Ocean Mapping can help us track acidification
Feely et al 10 (Dr. Richard A Feely is a senior scientist at Texas A&M University under Chemical Oceanogrophy. He specializes in carbon cycling and
ocean acidification. April 2010. NOAA Ocean and Great Lakes Acidification Research Plan. Global Ocean Acidification Observing
Network.file:///Users/debatekado/Desktop/NOAAOceanAndGreatLakesAcidificationResearchPlan.pdf July 2, 2014).
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution¶ in the mid-18th century, the
release of car-¶ bon dioxide (CO2) from our
industrial and agricultural activities, commonly referred to as “anthropogenic CO2” has resulted in an
increase in atmospheric CO2concentrations from approximately 280¶ to 390 parts per million (ppm), with 30% of the in¶ crease occurring in the last three decades . The atmospheric concentration of CO2is now higher than¶ experienced on Earth
for more than 800,000 years.¶ These changes in CO2are projected to cause significant temperature increases in
the atmosphere and the¶ ocean surface in the coming decades. Over the industrial era, the ocean has
absorbed about 30% of anthropogenic carbon emissions. This absorption has¶ benefited humankind by significantly
curtailing the¶ growth of CO2levels in the atmosphere, thereby reducing the global warming realized to date. How-¶ ever, when
anthropogenic CO¶ 2is absorbed by sea-¶ water, thereby increasing dissolved CO¶ 2 concentrations, chemical
reactions occur that reduce both sea-¶ water pH and the concentration of carbonate ions in¶ a process
known as “ocean acidification” (OA). The¶ pH of ocean surface waters has already decreased by¶ about 0.1 units since the
beginning of the industrial¶ revolution (Caldeira and Wickett, 2003; Feelyet al.,¶ 2004; Caldeira and Wickett, 2005), with a decrease of¶
∼0.0018 yr−1observed over the last quarter century¶ at several open ocean time-series sites (Bates, 2007;¶ Bates and Peters, 2007; SantanaCasianoet al., 2007;¶ Doreet al., 2009). By
the middle of this century atmospheric CO2levels could reach more
than 500 ppm,¶ and over 800 ppm by the end of the century (Orret al.,¶ 2005). This would result in an
additional decrease in¶ surface water pH of approximately 0.3 pH units by¶ 2100. As a result, acidity in
the ocean would increase¶ by about 150% relative to the beginning of the industrial era.
Acidification is increasing and only data collection can help solve the issue
Rosenfeld 12 (Dr. Leslie Rosenfeld is currently a Research Associate Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School and an oceanographic consultant. She has a Ph.D. in Physical
Oceanography, and is a recognized expert on the California Current System, specializing in circulation over the continental shelf. December 2012. Synthesis of Regional IOOS Build-out Plans for
the Next Decade from the Integrated Ocean Observing System Association.
http://www.ioosassociation.org/sites/nfra/files/documents/ioos_documents/regional/BOP%20Synthesis%20Final.pdf July 6, 2014.)
¶
As the pH in the ocean decreases, it reduces the availability of calcium carbonate minerals, ¶ which
play an important role in skeleton and shell formation for marine organisms such as ¶ corals, plankton, and shellfish.
Decreased calcification in these species could have negative ¶ impacts on marine ecosystems, with
consequent effects on local marine fisheries and coastal ¶ protection from storms. The abundance of
commercially important shellfish species (e.g., clams, ¶ oysters, sea urchins) could also decline, which could have serious
consequences for marine food ¶ resources. Reduced pH also alters the acoustic properties of water,
increasing transmission of ¶ low-frequency sounds, which may affect species such as marine mammals that rely on acoustic ¶
information. ¶ Users need information on acidification and impacts on ocean life and fisheries to assist
in long-¶ term planning for mitigation and adaptation. Over the shorter term, aquaculture facilities can
¶ take advantage of pH data to move or alter operations to protect product, minimize losses, and ¶
maximize returns. Coastal IOOS products that will help meet these goals include status and ¶ trends of
acidification and related biogeochemical and ecological impacts. This will include ¶ mapping of habitats that are particularly sensitive to acidification
impacts. In addition, a system ¶ will be developed for distributing warnings to businesses and other interested parties when ¶ conditions become unfavorable due to acidification.
.
Impact-Plankton
Acidification kills phytoplankton—an essential part of the food web
Marshall 10 (Dr. Jessica Marshall has her PhD in chemical engineering and has studied science journalism. He reportings can be found in various reputable science newspapers
and magazines. 1/14/10. Rising Ocean Acidity May Deplete Vital Phytoplankton from Discovery News. http://news.discovery.com/earth/oceans/phytoplankton-iron-ocean-acidity.htm July 3,
2014)
Rising acid levels in the world's oceans appear to be robbing the tiny animals that form the bedrock of
the marine food web of a vital nutrient. This shift in the ocean's chemistry could reduce populations
of phytoplankton, which could touch off a cascade of changes to ocean life.¶ Roughly one-third of the oceans
contain phytoplankton that are limited in their growth by the amount of iron available to them. A study published today in Science, suggested
that zone could grow.¶ "The
concept of changes to ocean productivity and ecosystems due to acidification is
a very important one to consider," said Ken Buesseler of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass., who was
not a part of the study. "If half of the photosynthesis on the planet is in the ocean and if you reduce that
because of acidification, that is a big deal."¶ Ocean acidification is a trickle-down effect of climate change. Higher levels
of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere drive more CO2 to dissolve into the ocean, making it more
acidic.¶ In photosynthesis, plants -- including phytoplankton -- convert CO2 from the atmosphere into their
tissues, and produce the oxygen that we breathe. Other animals up the food chain feed off of this
carbon that was pulled out of the atmosphere by the miniscule plants. A lack of iron appears to slow
this process down, which could affect the food supply for other ocean life, and reduce the amount of
heat-trapping carbon dioxide the ocean can soak up.¶ It's still unclear exactly how the new findings will play out in the
complex mixture of organisms in the ocean, with many competing changes caused by acidification and warming.
Loss of phytoplankton result in loss of oxygen ending in extinction
Becker 10 (Markus Becker is the head of Science at Spiegel Online. He is a well known reporter when it comes to animals and their lives. The Spiegel is one of Europe’s largest
publications. 07/29/10 from the Spiegel. Phytoplankton's Dramatic Decline: A Food Chain Crisis in the World's Oceans. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/phytoplankton-s-dramaticdecline-a-food-chain-crisis-in-the-world-s-oceans-a-709135.html July 3, 2014)
That humans have done serious damage to the world's oceans is hardly a new finding. Over-fishing is
an acute problem for several species with beloved types like blue fin tuna being threatened with
extinction. Already, experts are warning that the world's fisheries could collapse by 2050. But the
decline in phytoplankton could make the situation even worse.¶ Franke of the Alfred Wegener Institute
said he fears the decline in phytoplankton will make itself particularly apparent in fisheries. "If the
oceans' total productivity declines by 40 percent, then the yields of the fisheries must also retreat by
the same amount," Franke told SPIEGEL ONLINE.¶ The loss of the oceans as a source of nutrients isn't
the only threat to humans. Half of the oxygen produced by plants comes from phytoplankton. For a
long time, scientists have been measuring an extremely small, but also constant decline in the oxygen
content of the atmosphere. "So far, the use of fossil fuels has been discussed as a reason," said Worm.
But it's possible that the loss of phytoplankton could also be a factor.¶ In addition, phytoplankton
absorbs a huge amount of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide each year. The disappearance of the
microscopic organisms could further accelerate warming.
AND, Loss of phytoplankton results in contraction of the food chain
Becker 10 (Markus Becker is the head of Science at Spiegel Online. He is a well known reporter when it comes to animals and their lives. The Spiegel is one of Europe’s largest
publications. 07/29/10 from the Spiegel. Phytoplankton's Dramatic Decline: A Food Chain Crisis in the World's Oceans. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/phytoplankton-s-dramaticdecline-a-food-chain-crisis-in-the-world-s-oceans-a-709135.html July 3, 2014)
Now, a frightening new study reveals the shocking degree of the die-off. Since 1899, the average
global mass of phytoplankton has shrunk by 1 percent each year, an international research team
reported in the latest issue of the journal Nature. Since 1950, phytoplankton has declined globally by
about 40 percent.¶ "We had suspected this for a long time," Boris Worm, the author of the study for
Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "But these figures still surprised us." At
this point, he said, one can only speculate as to what the repercussions might be. "In principal, though,
we should assume that such a massive decline is already having tangible consequences," said Worm.
He said that the lack of research on the food chain between phytoplankton and larger fish in the open
ocean is a hindrance to knowing the extent of the damage.¶ ¶ In other words, it could be that humans
have not yet been affected. But Worm fears that will not remain the case for long. If the trend
continues and the phytoplankton mass continues to shrink at a rate of 1 percent per year, the "entire
food chain will contract," he predicts.¶ Worm's research has found that the problem is not merely
limited to certain areas of the world's oceans. "This is global phenomenon that cannot be combatted
regionally," Worm said.
Extensions-Coral
Mapping Key-Coral
Ocean Mapping can help with coral reef protection
Wright and Donahue 02 (Wright, Dawn J., Brian T. Donahue, and David F. Dawn J. Wright was recently named Chief Scientist with ESRI, has a BS in Geology, a MS
in Oceanography, and a PhD in Physical Geography & Marine. Brian T. Donahue works at the College of Marine Science. GeologyNaar. "Seafloor mapping and GIS coordination at America’s
remotest national marine sanctuary (American Samoa)." Undersea with GIS (2002): 33-63. http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/basch/uhnpscesu/pdfs/sam/Wright2002FBNMSAS.pdf July 2, 2014)
Coral reefs are a particular concern at several of the sanctuaries as they are now¶ recognized as being
among the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on earth. Reef¶ systems are storehouses of immense
biological wealth and provide economic and¶ ecosystem services to millions of people as shoreline
protection, areas of natural beauty¶ and recreation, and sources of food, pharmaceuticals, jobs, and
revenues (Jones et al.,¶ 1999; Wolanski, 2001). Unfortunately, coral reefs are also recognized as being among the¶ most threatened
marine ecosystems on the planet, having been seriously degraded by¶ human over-exploitation of resources,
destructive fishing practices, coastal development,¶ and runoff from improper land-use practices (Bryant et al., 1998; Wolanski, 2001).3¶ A major
initiative, administered by NOAA, has recently been launched to explore,¶ document, and provide critical scientific data
for the sanctuaries, with the goal of¶ developing a strategy for the restoration and conservation of the nation's marine resources¶ (Bunce et al., 1994; Wilson, 1998). One of the major
catalysts behind this effort is the 5-¶ year Sustainable Seas Expeditions (SSE; http://sustainableseas.noaa.gov), led by marine¶ biologist and
National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence Dr. Sylvia Earle and former¶ National Marine Sanctuary program director Francesca Cava. SSE has been using the 1-¶ personed submersible, DeepWorker, to pioneer the first
. Its mission plan for as many of the National Marine Sanctuaries as possible includes
explorations of the sanctuaries ¶
three¶ phases: (1) to provide the first photo documentation of sanctuary plants, animals, and¶ habitats at depths down to ~610 m; (2) expand on the characterization of habitats,¶ focusing on larger animals such as whales,
) the all-important analysis and¶ interpretation of the
masses of data collected, as well as public outreach and education.
sharks, rays, and turtles, and compare habitat¶ requirements among sanctuaries (Wilson, 1998); and (3
Coral K/T Biodiversity
Coral Reefs are key to sustaining life for various marine populations and BioD is high
now.
NOAA 11 (Coral Reef Conservation Program is a branch under NOAA who supports effective management and sound science to preserve, sustain and restore valuable coral reef
ecosystems for future generations. May 13, 2011. Biodiversity from NOAA Coral Reef Conservation program. http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/biodiversity/ July 6, 2014).
Coral reefs are essential spawning, nursery, breeding, and feeding grounds for numerous organisms. In
terms of biodiversity, the variety of species living on a coral reef is greater than in any other shallowwater marine ecosystems and is one of the most diverse on the planet, yet coral reefs cover less than one tenth of one
percent of the ocean floor. [a] Of the 34 recognised animal Phyla, 32 are found on coral reefs, compared to only nine Phyla in tropical rainforests. [b] In addition to
scores of invertebrate species and macrofauna (sharks, sea turtles, etc .),
coral reefs support more than 800 hard coral species
and more than 4,000 species of fish. [a, c] Over 25 percent of the world's fish biodiversity, and
between nine and 12 percent of the world's total fisheries, are associated with coral reefs. [a] While a portion
of these diverse species are associated with reefs only to hunt or for a portion of their life cycle—such as juveniles utilizing reefs as a nursery and adults during
spawning—others spend their entire lives in reef ecosystems . And this may only be the tip of the iceberg; scientists estimate
that there may be another one to nine million undiscovered species of organisms living in and around
reefs! [d]
U-Coral Vulnerable
Coral Reefs are vulnerable and unsustainable
Grimsditch and Salm 06
(Gabriel D Grimsditch holds the post of Programme Officer for oceans and climate change for the UNEP Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Branch in Nairobi, Kenya.
Before joining UNEP, Gabriel worked for the IUCN Global Marine Programme where he coordinated the IUCN Climate Change and Coral Reefs Working Group. Rod Salm has his dissertation in marine ecology. He has 35 years
experience in international marine conservation and ecotourism. 2006. Coral Reef Resilience and Resistance to Bleaching from The World Conservation Union. http://icriforum.org/sites/default/files/2006-042.pdf July 6, 2014)
Unfortunately, coral reefs are also among the most ¶ vulnerable ecosystems in the world.
Disturbances ¶ such as bleaching, fishing, pollution, waste disposal, coastal development,
sedimentation, ¶ SCUBA diving, anchor damage, predator ¶ outbreaks, invasive species and epidemic
diseases ¶ have all acted synergistically to degrade coral reef ¶ health and resilience. Today, an
estimated 20% of ¶ coral reefs worldwide have been destroyed, while ¶ 24% are in imminent danger
and a further 26% are ¶ under longer term danger of collapse (Wilkinson, ¶ 2004).
Acidification causes depletion of coral reefs and fish populations
NOAA No Date (NOAA Fisheries, in particular, Pacific Island Fisheries Center administers scientific research and monitoring programs that support the domestic and
international conservation and management of living marine resources. No Date. Ocean Acidification from NOAA Fisheries. http://www.pifsc.noaa.gov/cred/ocean_acidification.php July 6,
2014.)
Ocean acidification could disrupt the marine food web by destroying coral reef habitat, reducing
biodiversity, and potentially causing various species to go extinct. Such habitat destruction could affect
fishing, tourism, and any human activity that involves the oceans.¶ It is known that 10% of coral reef fishes rely
specifically on corals; however, studies have shown that the abundance of 75% of species of coral reef
fishes declined following decreases in coral abundance and that 50% of these fish species showed a decline >50% (Wilson et al.
2006).¶ Small juvenile fishes live in or near live corals, making coral reefs important fish habitat.
Decreases in rates of calcification due to ocean acidification could lead to loss of coral reefs and
declines in abundance of fish populations.
AT: Coral Reef Resiliency
Warming reduces Coral Reef resilience—makes the reefs worse
Grimsditch and Obura 09 (Gabriel D Grimsditch holds the post of Programme Officer for oceans and climate change for the UNEP Marine and Coastal Ecosystems
Branch in Nairobi, Kenya. Before joining UNEP, Gabriel worked for the IUCN Global Marine Programme where he coordinated the IUCN Climate Change and Coral Reefs Working Group. Dr.
David Obura research interests focus on the ecology and dynamics of natural systems under the combined influence of climate change and impacts of human interactions with the
environment. 2009. Resilience Assessment of Coral Reefs from IUCN. July 7, 2014)
The amount of damage depends on not only the rate and extent of climate change, but also on the ¶
ability of coral reefs to cope with change. Importantly, the natural resilience of reefs, that maintains ¶
them in a coral dominated state, is being undermined by stresses associated with human activities on
¶ the water and on the land. Unmanaged, these stresses have the potential to act in synergy with ¶
climate change to functionally destroy many coral reefs and shift them to less diverse and productive
¶ states dominated by algae or suspension feeding invertebrates. Coral reefs are under pressure from a
¶ variety of human activities, including catchment uses that result in degraded water quality, ¶
unsustainable and destructive fishing, and coastal development. These local pressures act to reduce ¶
the resilience of the system, undermining its ability to cope with climate change, and lowering the ¶
threshold for the shift from coral-dominated phase to other phases. Increasingly, policy-makers, ¶
conservationists, scientists and the broader community are calling for management actions to restore ¶
and maintain the resilience of coral reefs to climate change, and thus avoid worst-case scenarios.
Overfishing Advantage
1AC
1AC Overfishing
Global fish stocks will collapse by 2050 but it’s not too late to stop overfishing
McDermott 10 (Mat McDermott, Writer about resource consumption for Treehugger, Masters from New York University’s Center for
global affairs on environmental and energy policy “How Bad Is Overfishing & What Can We Do To Stop It?”, http://www.treehugger.com/greenfood/how-bad-is-overfishing-what-can-we-do-to-stop-it.html, August 16th 2010, Date Accessed: 7/3/14, SM)
Global Fish Stocks to Collapse by 2050 at Current Exploitation Rates Perhaps the first thing to wrap your head
around is just how to measure the problem. When the only official global statistics available for fisheries are based on
self-reported data by nations and three- to four-fold underestimations are common, according to independent
scientific assessments, the magnitude is hard to fully gauge. In the worst case, back in 2008, researchers learned that the officially
reported catches for American Samoa were nearly seventeen times lower than the independently
assessed amounts. Not good. Nevertheless, it's estimated that one-third of all fish stocks globally have
collapsed --having less than 10% of their maximum observed population--and that at current fishing rates all fish stocks
worldwide will collapse by mid-century . A full three-quarters of the world's fisheries are now either
collapsed, over-exploited, significantly depleted, or recovering from being over-exploited. Large Corporations
Set to Profit From Bluefin Tuna Extinction Perhaps the most potent example of the competing interests involved here, and the highly politicized
nature of what really is an ecological question, you just have to scan headlines going back to the spring of this year. Even
though entire
cadres of international scientists said Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks are being fished at unsustainable levels-at current rates extinct within three years--and the US and the EU (but not every member state) supported a
ban on international trade in the highly-valuable fish, CITES failed to protect the species. The whole time Japan,
the world's largest consumer of the fish by far, said it would not abide a ban, should one be enacted and exerted behind the scenes pressure to
ensure a ban did not pass. With large industrial players in Japan like Mitsubishi standing to make profits well into the billions of dollars should
the fish go extinct, thanks to controlling some 30-45% of the current frozen stock of bluefin, the reasons finance trumped science here should
become clear.
We've Been Collapsing Fisheries For a Millennia
Before you assume that this is all a modern concern, solely
the result of industrialized fishing techniques (which are indeed part of the problem), it's worthwhile remembering that humans have been
taking more fish from the oceans than are ecological sustainable, and before that from inland waterways, for hundreds and hundreds of years.
Going back 1000 years in Europe, it was declines in freshwater fish thanks to human pressure which first pushed fishermen out into the oceans
in larger numbers. Five hundred years ago, it was the
decline of coastal fish that brought deep-sea trawling into
existence. The key difference between past ages and now is that in the past there was always another
area to move on to. Even if there were effects on fishing in one particular region--sometimes long-lasting, witness
areas of far northern Maine which still haven't recovered from the collapse of the sardine fishery, and likely never will--another fishery
could be opened by exploration. Today this is decidedly not the case. One hundred fifty years ago the
planet was still an open planet. Human populations and their impact were still well within the carrying
capacity of the planet to absorb any harm caused. Today, with the population of China or India alone equal to that of the
entire planet in 1850, human activity has expanded to the point where we are crashing into inflexible
ecological boundaries on a planetary scale. Earth is closed. If there's any sort of silver lining to this cloud it's that we've
got examples of how to stop continued overfishing.
Only ocean observation allows for effective management policies
Rosenberg 11 (Dr. Andrew Rosenberg, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New
Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for
Global Reform,” http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/)
U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we
know that while humans are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained
— by vast oceans.¶ In addition to supporting incredible biodiversity, oceans provide benefits to people in the
form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an
estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and
wind power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our
oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for
technology developers, manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and
develop new economic opportunities around the globe. America can lead this global innovation.¶ Unfortunately, the
health of our oceans is in serious decline; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are
stressed, habitats for ocean life are degraded and endangered marine species are struggling to recover.
Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants, which in turn has stressed the communities and
industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To
turn the tide, our national, state and local leaders must make a commitment
to more coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on sound science,
and scientific work must be a funding priority in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide.¶ The Joint Ocean
Commission Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of
our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and Great Lakes — which was established
by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy has the
potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced monitoring,
assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and are affected
by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental, social and
economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more effectively
manage these resources and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint
Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, I believe that monitoring what is
happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how the physical, biological, chemical and human
elements of ocean ecosystems interact. The Joint Initiative report recommends fully supporting an ocean
observation system that would integrate data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean, from buoys
on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing technology high above the Earth.¶ The
report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to have a
better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in order
to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal
communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure
that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy
infrastructure near the coast.Ӧ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound
investment in improving our economy. The data
and information collected from research activities will be used to
inform coastal development, promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant
marine-based recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us
compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation.
Data is key to fishery management
Koslow 2009 (J. Anthony Koslow, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, “The role of acoustics in ecosystem-based fishery management”,
http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2009/04/08/icesjms.fsp082.full, ICES J. Mar. Sci. 6/15/09)
Although the role of the environment in regulating fish population dynamics has been recognized for a century (Hjort, 1914), conventional
fisheries management has until recently focused on the exploited stocks, with the primary objective of estimating
the maximum sustainable yield or some variant: e.g. optimum sustainable yield or F0.1. However, recent years have witnessed a
significant paradigm shift, with a growing consensus that single-species stock assessment alone is not
sufficient to manage fisheries sustainably (Pikitch et al., 2004). Ecosystem-based fishery management
( EBFM ) is predicated upon the need to assess broader fishery effects on the ecosystem, i.e. on the predators,
competitors, and prey of the exploited species, as well as on bycatch species and the essential habitat. Therefore, the role of exploited species
must be assessed within the ecosystem where they live. The effects of changing environmental conditions on recruitment to exploited
populations must also be understood and, if possible, predicted, so that the exploitation levels can be adjusted to achieve sustainability. Marine
ecosystems change across a range of time-scales, e.g. interannual, ENSO (the El Nino–Southern Oscillation), decadal, etc., and the equilibrium
generally assumed in management models has long been recognized to be a convenient and artificial construct (Isaacs, 1976). However, the
quest for predictive models of fishery recruitment, based on an understanding of the underlying
oceanographic mechanisms, has generally proved disappointing, although Hjort (1914) set out the main hypotheses
that regulate recruitment variability almost a century ago. The broader ecosystem effects of environmental variability, i.e. the effects of natural
and anthropogenic stressors on predators, prey, bycatch, and other affected species, must also be evaluated. Therefore, the
expectation
that fishery management will now be based on ecosystem considerations, as well as on traditional,
single-species assessments, poses a considerable challenge to oceanographers and fishery scientists .
Ocean models are best developed for the physics of ocean circulation. As one adds chemistry and
biology—the phytoplankton initially, then the zooplankton—they become progressively less developed with poorer
predictive power. The so-called “end-to-end” models that extend from the physics to the fish are particularly challenging and generally
poorly developed to date.
Scenario 1-Environment
Overfishing wrecks marine biodiversity
Crowder et al 09 (Larry B. Crowder: Professor of Marine Biology at Duke University. Serves on the Ocean Studies Board, National
Research Council, National Academy of Sciences and on the scientific steering committees for the Global Ocean Observing System and the
Global Oceanic Ecosystem Dynamics Program, Janna Shackeroff, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Elliott L. Hazen:
postdoctoral researcher at the Duke University Marine Laboratory, Ecosystem-Based Management for the Oceans, Pages 35-36)
Direct drivers of change can affect an individual species, a food web, or an entire ecosystem, and processes develop and
respond at a variety of temporal and spatial scales. Examples include fisheries harvest, habitat change and landbased pollution, climate change, and invasive species (box 3.1). One of the most significant direct drivers of change in
ocean ecosystems is fishing (commercial, recreational, and artisanal). In addition to direct extraction of a
target species, nontarget species are often taken as bycatch, which contributes significantly to declines in seabird, marine
biophysical
mammal, sea turtle, and shark populations (Lewison et al. 2004). With declines in populations of target species and shifts to short-lived species,
fishing effort has increased in many fisheries. Because
bycatch is proportional to fishing effort, not landings, long-lived
species taken inadvertently as bycatch are extremely adversely affected by increased fishing effort. Even
small-scale fisheries can have strongly negative impacts (Peckham el al. 2007). Bottom trawling can significantly damage
benthic habitat (Turner et al. 1999: Thrush and Dayton 2002}. and lost gear from fisheries can lead to entanglement. Across the oceans, food
webs have been significantly altered by overfishing (Jackson et al. 2001; Christensen et al. 200JJ, with as many as
90% of all fisheries fished at an unsustainable rate (Myers and Worm 2003). The resulting loss of biodiversity
is substantial and may affect system resilience (Sala and Knowlton 2006: Worm et al. 2006J. Relatively minor disturbances in one species
can catalyze dramatic regime shifts toward less-productive environmental states. By steadily depleting the largest organisms in
the population, fisheries may have evolutionary effects as well. Large-scale fishing for Atlantic cod (Gadus
morhua) in New England has led to the rapid evolution of reduced size at age (Law 2000: Olsen et al. 2004}. In heavily
overfished ecosystems, population-level effects can last well after fishing pressure is reduced, reduced
biodiversity can facilitate the establishment of invasive species, and loss of keystone species can have cascading
effects throughout the food web. Decreased commercial catches have led to financial subsidies for unprofitable fisheries, which
can exacerbate overfishing as well as create an oversaturation of the market and increase costs for consumers (Munro and Sumaila 2002; Paul)
el al. 2002). Additional indirect, exogenous drivers of change associated with fishing include changes in market demand, technological advances
in fishing, and globalization (box 3.1).
Extinction
Davidson, 2003 (Founder – Turtle House Foundation and Award-Winning Journalist, Fire in the Turtle House, p. 47-51)
But surely the Athenians had it backward; it’s the land that rests in the lap of the sea. Thalassa, not Gaia, is the guardian of life on the blue
planet. A simple, albeit apocalyptic, experiment suggests Thalassa’s power. Destroy
all life on land; the ocean creatures will
survive just fine. Given time, they’ll even repopulate the land. But wipe out the organisms that inhabit the oceans and
all life on land is doomed. “Dust to dust,” says the Bible, but “water to water” is more like it, for all life comes from and
returns to the sea. Our ocean origins abid within us, our secret marine history. The chemical makeup of our blood is strikingly similar to
seawater. Every carbon atom in our body has cycled through the ocean many times. Even the human embryo reveals our watery past. Tiny gill
slits form and then fade during our development in the womb. The
ocean is the cradle of life on our planet, and it remains the
axis of existence, the locus of planetary biodiversity, and the engine of the chemical and hydrological
cycles that create and maintain our atmosphere and climate. The astonishing biodiversity is most evident on coral
reefs, often called the “rain forests of the sea.” Occupying less than one-quarter of 1 percent of the global ocean, coral reefs are home to nearly
a third of all marine fish species and to as many as nine million species in all. But life exists in profusion in every corner of the ocean, right down
to the hydrothermal vents on the seafloor (discovered only in 1977), where more than a hundred newly described species thrive around
superheated plumes of sulfurous gasses. The abundance of organisms in the ocean isn’t surprising given that the sea was, as already
mentioned, the crucible of life on Earth. It is the original ecosystem, the environment in which the “primordial soup” of nucleic acids (which can
self-replicate, but are not alive) and other molecules made the inexplicable and miraculous leap into life, probably as simple bacteria, close to
3.9 billion years ago. A spectacular burst of new life forms called the Cambrian explosion took place in the oceans some 500 million years ago,
an evolutionary experiment that produced countless body forms, the prototypes of virtually all organisms alive today. It wasn’t until 100 million
years later that the first primitive plants took up residence on terra firma. Another 30 million years passed before the first amphibians climbed
out of the ocean. After this head start, it’s not surprising that evolution on that newcomer-dry land-has never caught up with the diversity of
the sea. Of the thirty-three higher-level groupings of animals (called phyla), thirty-two are found in the oceans and just twelve on land.
Fishery management prevents extinction
VOA, 10 (Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1, http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/BluefinTuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing--111159869.html)
Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance of marine life in
check. Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller organisms might affect the entire
underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far,
those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on
the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist
who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the sale of bluefin tuna. "Scientists tell us that when
a top
predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say
you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if you let these large fish become depleted because they anchor the
ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change
dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain. Government officials and members of environmental groups met in Paris in midNovember to discuss fishing
regulations that may affect all life on Earth.
Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with
the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says the bluefin is in jeopardy. "The fish is in worse shape
than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's
stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and
Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us to this point. "The
quotas are designed to let
fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but even within quotas, there's consistent lack of
enforcement, fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the
depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to near-extinction followed increased Japanese
demand for fresh sushi starting in the 1970s and 80s. And fishing practices that target the two primary regions in which blue fin spawn: the
Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart," said Sue Lieberman. "If you
want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light on a bigger
problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish it's estimated have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's
happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing
like that," said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale
fishing. Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it." "If
countries really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious about
enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. "Management of fish species on
the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's about the very future of
our planet," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and we can't keep … and governments can't
keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen to the fishing industry; we'll
worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury."
Scenario 2 Food Prices
Continued overfishing pushes causes food price spikes
Cribb 10 (Julian Cribb; Professor in Science Communication at the University of Technology Sydney; principal of JCA, fellow of the
Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering,;“The Coming Famine: The Global Food Crisis and What We Can Do to Avoid It”
SM)
Synergistic effects of habitat destruction, overfishing, introduced species, warming, acidification, toxins, and massive
runoff of nutrients are
transforming once complex ecosystems like coral reefs and kelp forests into monotonous level
bottoms, transforming clear and productive coastal seas into anoxic dead zones, and transforming complex food
webs topped by big animals into simplified, microbially dominated ecosystems with boom and bust cycles of toxic
dinoflagellate blooms, jellyfish, and disease. Rates of change are increasingly fast and nonlinear with sudden phase shifts to
novel alternative community states. Halting and ultimately reversing these trends will require rapid and fundamental
changes in fisheries, agricultural practice, and the emissions of greenhouse gases on a global scale.24 Such catastrophic trends
will first affect the five hundred million people who depend directly or indirectly for their livelihoods on coral
reefs because, when reefs die, the fish disappear too. These people will be forced to obtain their food from
the land. Then it will affect the rest of us, in refugee crises, rising prices, and increased scarcity of fish . The
coastal barriers formed by reefs will crumble, exposing more seaside towns to hurricanes, tidal surges, and
tsunamis. The oceanic food-chain impacts are quite unclear as yet, but will probably mean reduced numbers of certain classes of
phytoplankton—the most numerous form of life on Earth—and their replacement by others, with corresponding effects all up the food chain to
fish.
Food price spikes escalate into global war- it’s the most likely scenario for conflict
Cribb 10 (Julian Cribb; Professor in Science Communication at the University of Technology Sydney; principal of JCA, fellow of the
Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering,;“The Coming Famine: The Global Food Crisis and What We Can Do to Avoid It”
SM)
The character of human conflict has also changed: since the early 1990s, more wars have been triggered by
disputes over food, land, and water than over mere political or ethnic differences. This should not surprise us: people
have fought over the means of survival for most of history. But in the abbreviated reports on the nightly media, and
even in the rarefied realms of government policy, the focus is almost invariably on the players—the warring national, ethnic, or religious
factions—rather than on the play, the deeper subplots building the tensions that ignite conflict. Caught up in these are groups of ordinary,
desperate people fearful that there is no longer sufficient food, land, and water to feed their children—and believing that they must fight "the
others" to secure them. At the same time, the number of refugees in the world doubled, many of them escaping from conflicts and famines
precipitated by food and re- source shortages. Governments in troubled regions tottered and fell. The
coming famine is planetary
because it involves both the immediate effects of hunger on directly affected populations in heavily populated regions of the world in
the next forty years—and also the impacts of war, government failure, refugee crises, shortages, and food
price spikes that will affect all human beings , no matter who they are or where they live. It is an
emergency because unless it is solved, billions will experience great hardship, and not only in the poorer regions. Mike Murphy,
one of the world's most progressive dairy farmers, with operations in Ireland, New Zealand, and North and South America, succinctly summed it
all up: "Global
warming gets all the publicity but the real imminent threat to the human race is
starvation on a massive scale. Taking a 10-30 year view, I believe that food shortages, famine and huge social unrest are
probably the greatest threat the human race has ever faced. I believe future food shortages are a far bigger
world threat than global warming."
Scenario 3 South China Seas
Overfishing is creating tensions in the South China Sea
Westhead, 2012 (Rick, Staff reporter for Pakistan Defence citing UN officials, “South China Sea: Open conflict a real possibility due
tensions over fishing”, Pakistan Defence, 7/25/2012, http://defence.pk/threads/south-china-sea-open-conflict-a-real-possibility-due-tensionsover-fishing.198404/)
Tensions in the South China Sea between China and its neighbours have become so charged that
open conflict in the region is an increasingly likely prospect , a new report says. China, Vietnam, the
Philippines and other countries are battling one another for fishing stocks , and oil and gas deposits in the region.
The disputes come as the countries grapple with growing nationalism at home, which makes it difficult for
leaders to back away from conflicts after they materialize, the International Crisis Group (ICG) says in its report. The risk of escalation
is high , and pressure in the region threatens to boil over,” says the report, “Stirring Up the South China Sea: Regional
Responses. All of the trends are in the wrong direction, and prospects
of resolution are diminishing,” the report states. “The
regional buildup of arms increases the likelihood of unintentional escalation, and the aggressive use
of law enforcement vessels to assert claims leads to more frequent contact with civilian vessels and
other coast guards.” China claims virtually all of the 3.5 million-square-kilometre South China Sea, while the
Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam also claim parts of the sea, which is also considered a vital transport route. Stephanie KleineAhlbrandt, a
former United Nations official in China who wrote the ICG report, said in an interview that the South China Sea
has become a simmering powder keg . There are very worrying signs,” she said. “Countries are aggressively enforcing their
claims, and there is no code of conflict in the region to peacefully settle these disputes.” In recent months, China
and the Philippines faced off over an uninhabited group of islands known as Scarborough Shoal. In April, the Philippine Navy
discovered coral, giant clams and live sharks on a Chinese boat, and the Philippines announced the
Chinese fishermen would be arrested for poaching. The showdown lasted for more than two months before the
Philippines ordered its two ships to withdraw. “There are a series of tit-for-tats in the region and one never knows how far its going to go,
Kleine-Ahlbrandt said. With the Scarborough Shoal dispute, the
Philippines upped the ante by sending ships and China
threw the book at them.” The ICG reports release comes as local media report China has inaugurated Sansha, a city on the disputed
Paracel Islands, elevated in political status to bolster Chinas claims to the island chain. It’s often reported that most disputes in
the region are over gas and oil deposits. The seabed in the South China Sea is believed to contain as much as 225 billion barrels
worth of oil and natural gas . But Kleine-Ahlbrandt said most conflicts in recent months have flared after
fishing-related disputes . Roughly 700 million people live near the South China Sea and depend on the
rich fishing stocks for their livelihoods, as well as 80 per cent of their diets. Vietnam estimates its
population of 87 million will surge by 25 per cent by 2050 and it will need additional food and fish .
“ Vietnam
and China are incentivizing to encourage fishermen to buy larger boats and go farther from
shore into disputed waters ,” she said. “The boats have sophisticated GPS devices so if there is a problem, if they bump into boats
from other countries, they can call for help immediately.
Tensions escalate and draw in the U.S
Eutaw 14 (Christopher Eutaw, editor-in-chief of the Wall Street Daily, Politics/Political intelligence correspondent, “The Newest Bully on
the Block? China”, http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2014/06/25/china-oil-rigs/, Jun 25, 2014, SM)
You see, while ISIS has been conquering Iraq and Moscow has been bullying Kiev, China
has been quietly flexing its muscle in the
South China Sea. Specifically, the Chinese have been moving oil rigs into disputed territories and drilling
for oil… all while ignoring the protests of the surrounding nations. And considering that a minor skirmish in the Gulf of Tonkin launched the
Vietnam War, could China’s aggression possibly spark a new World War ? Neighboring countries such as Vietnam
and the Philippines have cited a 2002 accord between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China that
created a nonbinding code of conduct, in order to “consolidate and develop the friendship and cooperation existing
between their people and governments with the view to promoting a 21st century-oriented partnership of good neighbors and mutual trust.”
But China’s aggressive moves directly violate the spirit of that code, even if it was nonbinding. A Sea of Peace No Longer
In fact, the Chinese announced last Friday that they would be moving a second rig near Vietnam’s coastline,
even though the two countries have yet to resolve a dispute over the first rig that China moved into territory that Vietnam calls
its own. The dispute has sparked deadly riots in Vietnam – with protestors targeting Chinese factories – and has
also created immense friction between the Chinese and Vietnamese navies . However, with China’s clear
military and economic advantage, it’s doubtful that Vietnam could force China to move its rig. Meanwhile, most analysts believe that
China’s aim is not just Vietnam’s territory, but in fact the majority of the South China Sea, a resource-rich area that The New York
Times calls “a vital waterway for international commerce.” In recent years, China has been bolstering its navy in hopes of
becoming a maritime super power, and the country now has three fleets, a class of nuclear
submarines, and one aircraft carrier . In light of that information, the timing of China’s aggressive expansion in
the region is probably not a coincidence. Between its newfound economic prosperity and its budding military, China sees an
opportunity to outmuscle the much smaller countries that also share a border along the South China Sea. U.S. Defense Secretary,
Chuck Hagel, said that “China has called the South China Sea ‘a sea of peace, friendship and co-operation,’ and
that’s what it should be. But in recent months, China has undertaken destabilizing, unilateral actions
asserting its claims in the South China Sea.” In fact, the country has been hard at work moving sand and
rock into the Spratly archipelago – another contested region in the waterway – to create small islands on the
shoals that could support military installations and surveillance equipment. That has caused speculation that China may, in fact,
want to force the U.S. navy out of the South Pacific, a region it has dominated since World War II.
Extensions
Fisheries I/L
Data is key to fishery management
Koslow 2009
J. Anthony, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, The role of acoustics in ecosystem-based fishery
management ICES J. Mar. Sci. (2009)
The potential that acoustics might play in fishery operations and research was recognized before
World War II (Sund, 1935; Balls, 1948), and acoustic technology has continued to co-evolve since then
with fishery research needs. Calibrated acoustic instruments are now standard quantitative tools for
fishery research and stock assessment. Although the role of the environment in regulating fish
population dynamics has been recognized for a century (Hjort, 1914), conventional fisheries
management has until recently focused on the exploited stocks, with the primary objective of
estimating the maximum sustainable yield or some variant: e.g. optimum sustainable yield or F0.1.
However, recent years have witnessed a significant paradigm shift, with a growing consensus that
single-species stock assessment alone is not sufficient to manage fisheries sustainably (Pikitch et al.,
2004). Ecosystem-based fishery management ( EBFM ) is predicated upon the need to assess broader
fishery effects on the ecosystem, i.e. on the predators, competitors, and prey of the exploited species,
as well as on bycatch species and the essential habitat. Therefore, the role of exploited species must be
assessed within the ecosystem where they live. The effects of changing environmental conditions on
recruitment to exploited populations must also be understood and, if possible, predicted, so that the
exploitation levels can be adjusted to achieve sustainability. Marine ecosystems change across a range
of time-scales, e.g. interannual, ENSO (the El Nino–Southern Oscillation), decadal, etc., and the
equilibrium generally assumed in management models has long been recognized to be a convenient and
artificial construct (Isaacs, 1976). However, the quest for predictive models of fishery recruitment,
based on an understanding of the underlying oceanographic mechanisms, has generally proved
disappointing, although Hjort (1914) set out the main hypotheses that regulate recruitment variability
almost a century ago. The broader ecosystem effects of environmental variability, i.e. the effects of
natural and anthropogenic stressors on predators, prey, bycatch, and other affected species, must also
be evaluated. Therefore, the expectation that fishery management will now be based on ecosystem
considerations, as well as on traditional, single-species assessments, poses a considerable challenge to
oceanographers and fishery scientists. Ocean models are best developed for the physics of ocean
circulation. As one adds chemistry and biology—the phytoplankton initially, then the zooplankton—
they become progressively less developed with poorer predictive power. The so-called “end-to-end”
models that extend from the physics to the fish are particularly challenging and generally poorly
developed to date.
2AC – Fishery Impact
Causes violent confrontations over declining fishing stocks
Lt. John Garofolo 98, “Protecting America’s Fisheries,” Coast Guard, May 1998,
http://www.uscg.mil/history/articles/Fisheries.pdf
NMFS estimates 96 species of fish and shellfish are endangered or at risk in the EEZ.¶ The recreational and commercial
fishing industry has an economic impact of more than $20 billion to the United States, employing tens of thousands of people and providing a food source for
millions of Americans. ¶ The
United States has the largest EEZ in the world , 2.25million square miles, containing an estimated
20 percent of the world's fisheries resources.¶
There are also a significant number of marine mam-mals at risk, or endangered,
including the Northern Right Whale, with approximately 300 in existence. ¶ The
United States is the fifth largest fishing nation in
the world, with approximately 110,000 commercial vessels. The capacity of the U.S. fishing fleet alone far exceeds all fish
stocks' capabilities to reproduce. Many U.S. fisheries are threatened by over-capitalization of the industry,
exces-sive incidental by-catch and habitat degradation. Increased effort by U.S. fishers results in a reduction of spawnings tock and
an increase in the harvest of immature fish.¶ Habitat degradation has occurred due to massive water diversions for agricultural projects and the negative impact of
urban development.¶ In recent years on
an international level, competition for declining resources has resulted in a
number of violent confrontations as some of the world's fishers resort to ille-gal activity.¶ Some of these unfortunate
incidents include:¶ • Three Thai fishermen who were killed by Vietnamese maritime authorities. ¶ • Two Spanish fishermen were injured when their vessel was fired
on by a Portuguese patrol boat within Por-tuguese waters. ¶ • The Canadian patrol vessel fired at a Spanish boat ille­gally fishing in an internationally patrolled area
in theNorth Atlantic.¶ • A Russian Border Guard ship fired on two Japanese ves-sels thought to be poaching ; one
ship was hit, and fish-ers on board were injured. ¶ • An Argentine gunboat fired on and sank a Taiwan fishing vessel. ¶ • A patrol boat from the Falklands chased a
Taiwan fishing vessel more than 4,000 miles. ¶ These, and other similar incidents underscore
the high stakes
being played out across
the
world as declining fish stocks put increasing pressure on fishing nations to under-take more aggressive
action . In the future, fishing treaties will become the source of greater diplomatic attention.
Uniqueness-Overfishing
Overfishing crisis now
Jetson 14 (Krysten Jetson, freelance writer specializing in the construction industry, “Impact of Overfishing On Human Lives”,
http://marinesciencetoday.com/2014/04/09/impact-of-overfishing-on-human-lives/, April 9th 2014)
Millions of people from all over the globe depend on the oceans for their staple food and income. This automatically
implies that thousands of fish and other sea creatures are captured daily from the sea to meet the growing
demand for it. As more and more people make seafood a part of their everyday diet, our oceans continue to face
the threat of depleting supply of edible sea creatures. In the past, fishing was more sustainable because fishermen did not
have the resources or the technology to tread into the deeper waters at far flung locations. Their vessels were small with limited capacities for
stocking fish and the absence of technology like sonar restricted their fish-hunting activities. Today, however, fishing
is a
multimillion dollar industry with well-equipped ships and hi-tech facilities that enable fishermen to
explore new shores and deeper waters to keep up with the increasing demand for seafood. In fact, the United Nations Food
and Agricultural Organization (FAO) describes over 70 percent of the world’s fisheries as either “fully exploited,”
“over exploited” or “significantly depleted.” Such has been the effect of overfishing.
90% of fish stocks are being depleted now
Alter 09 (Bonnie Alter, Writer for Treehugger.com “Is This the End of the Line for Fish?”, http://www.treehugger.com/corporateresponsibility/is-this-the-end-of-the-line-for-fish.html, 6/2/09, SM)
Essentially, there
are not enough fish in the sea any longer. This is because fish are a finite resource and we
have been taking too many out of the ocean--at a much faster rate than they can ever reproduce. Ninety
per cent of the ocean’s large fish have been fished out and global fishing fleets are 250 per cent larger than the oceans can
sustainably support. And there is little or no regulation and lots of big business and big corruption. We've got trouble.
Regulations effective
New regulations would be effective
McDermott 10 (Mat McDermott, Writer about resource consumption for Treehugger, Masters from New York University’s Center for
global affairs on environmental and energy policy “How Bad Is Overfishing & What Can We Do To Stop It?”, http://www.treehugger.com/greenfood/how-bad-is-overfishing-what-can-we-do-to-stop-it.html, August 16th 2010, Date Accessed: 7/3/14, SM)
Conservation Works , Catch Shares Work Just in May, NOAA released the 2009 Status of US Fisheries report,
showing that four US fisheries have been rebuilt to healthy levels after years of overfishing--Atlantic
swordfish, Atlantic scup, Atlantic sea bass, and St Matthew's Island blue king crab, all returned to healthy levels. In US waters, 85% of
fish stocks examined were free from overfishing. Conservation works. NOAA head Jane Lubchenco describes how catch
share systems can work globally to preserve fish for future generations, The shares of the fishery are
allocated to entities--those might be fishermen, or boats, or communities--and let's say that fisherman have a guaranteed
fraction of the catch that is their privilege to catch every year. So the total amount of fish that can be
caught in any year is divided into these fractions. For example you might be allocated 10 percent of the total catch for the year; I might
be allocated 5 percent of the total catch for the year. It's like dividing up a pizza. [...] And the amount that can be caught in any one year is
determined scientifically by what is sustainable for that fishery. This
works by aligning economic and conservation
incentives. Since you are allocated a percentage, if the fishery declines you are entitled to fewer and
fewer fish. It's not a guarantee of conservation, but it certainly can help--and are far less likely to cause a mad dash for fish as present quota
systems do. Alongside that, fisheries closures, either year-round or during crucial times in the season, and establishment of marine reserves so
that fish can have refuges where the can flourish, can both help repopulate failing population levels.
“Catch shares” work
Rand 13 (Matt Rand, March 25th 2013, “A better way to prevent overfishing”,
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2013/0325/A-better-way-to-prevent-overfishing, SM)
WASHINGTON — Some reports make startling predictions about overfishing and the collapse of ocean life .
Fishermen, local fishing communities, and conservation groups like ours are working to identify and implement fishery management tools to
head off these tragic forecasts. Some
tools are proving to be better than others. Over the past few decades, the
primary strategy has been to reduce the amount of fish that can be caught and to cut the duration of
fishing seasons. The idea behind this approach is simple and admirable – but at times the method has been inadequate to the task. While
the fishing season is closed, fishermen can’t earn a living. And shorter seasons can lead to a “race to fish.” Fishermen try to catch as many fish
as they can as quickly as possible. That risks unintentional overfishing, venturing out in dangerous weather, and tossing back fish – often dead –
due to various rules. A
“fishing derby” also produces a market glut, with every boat bringing in its catch at
the same time, depressing prices. But the past decade or so has brought real progress using new and
innovative management tools. One of those approaches, called “catch shares,” uses a total allowable
catch for a species based on numbers that scientists believe allow the fishery to recover. Fishermen
are allotted a share of that catch, and they can harvest their share whenever they want. There’s no rush to
fish in an attempt to outcompete and no need to go fishing in dangerous weather. Constantly changing fishing seasons are replaced by a
predictability that encourages fishermen to commit to sustainability. Compliance with
and there’s a dramatic drop in the amount of unwanted fish that is tossed overboard. This
fishing limits increases significantly,
approach has helped spark a
turnaround for many kinds of fish: red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, Virginia striped bass, mid-Atlantic golden tilefish,
Pacific pollock, whiting and petrale sole, Alaska king crab, and Alaskan pollock – the fish of choice for McDonald’s Filet-o-Fish sandwich.
Co-management can solve overfishing
Wildlife Conservation Society 12 (Wildlife Conservation Society, March 19th 2012, “One Solution to Global Overfishing
Found”, http://www.wcs.org/press/press-releases/one-solution-to-global-overfishing-found.aspx”, SM)
NEW YORK (March 19, 2012)—A
study by the Wildlife Conservation Society, ARC Centre for Excellence for Coral Reef Studies,
on more than 40 coral reefs in the Indian and Pacific Oceans indicates that “co-management”—a
collaborative arrangement between local communities, conservation groups, and governments—provides a solution to a vexing
global problem: overfishing. The finding is the outcome of the largest field investigation of co-managed tropical coral reef fisheries
ever conducted, an effort in which researchers studied 42 managed reef systems in five countries. The team of 17 scientists from
eight nations concluded that ‘co-management’ partnerships were having considerable success in both
meeting the livelihood needs of local communities and protecting fish stocks.
and other groups
Regulations on overfishing key to stop overfishing
Tulloch 09 (James Tulloch, Editor for Allianz, “Climate change and overfishing top threats to oceans”
http://knowledge.allianz.com/environment/climate_change/?513/climate-change-and-overfishing-top-threats-to-oceans, 11/18/09, SM)
More stubborn is the fishing industry. The obvious answer is to fish less. As The Economist magazine points out,
“nothing did so much good for fish stocks in northern Europe in the past 150 years as the Second World War”. Trawlers stuck in port allowed
fisheries to revive. Abolishing
government subsidies for fishing, and for trawler fuel, is one strategy. Individual transferable
worked in Iceland, New Zealand, and the
western United States. “Fishers become very interested in making sure the stock is healthy and
sustainable when their income depends on it,” says Halpern. It could also protect stocks in developing countries from
marauding foreign factory ships. Marine reserves are a proven solution, argues Norris. “We have to move from hunter-gatherer
mode to having the oceans more tightly managed.” Coral reef reserves in Indonesia and Kenya, and kelp forest
reserves in New Zealand and South Africa, have successfully revived biodiversity. They would also maintain the
quotas, or ‘catch shares’, is another, giving partial ownership of a fish stock. This has
seas as effective carbon sinks, says the United Nations, which wants a global ‘Blue Carbon’ regime (like REDD for forests) to protect ecosystems
like mangroves and salt marshes. The
oceans can no longer be a free-for-all. A combination of preservation,
regulation, and ownership—‘marine planning’ or ‘ecosystem management’—is the best bet to save our seas.
Otherwise the places where life started will become lifeless.
And- New regulations are critical to prevent overfishing
Koster 11 (Pepjin Koster, Master’s Degree in Coastal Zone Management and Coastal Conservation and Managemen, “What can I do to
help” http://overfishing.org/pages/what_can_I_do_to_help.php, 2/1/11 Date Acessed: 7/4/14, SM)
The effects of overfishing are still reversible, that is, if we act now and act strongly. When fish stocks decline
and and fisheries become commercially unviable 1 the damaged stock gets some rest and generally
struggles along on a pathetic level compared to it's pre-fishing level, but doesn't go biologically extinct 2. A damaged system
is struggling and shifting, but can still be active (e.g. filled with jellyfish instead of cod). If we want to we can reverse most of the
destruction. In some situations it might only take a decade, in other situations it might take many centuries. Yet in the end
we can have productive and healthy oceans again as is shown in many examples around the world. We do however
need to act on it now, before we cross the point of no return. Every long-term successful and sustainable fishery,
near-shore or high-seas, needs to be managed according to some basic ground rules : Safe catch limits A
constantly reassessed, scientifically determined, limit on the total number of fish caught and landed by a fishery.
Politics and short time economical incentives should have no role in this. Controls on bycatch The use
of techniques or management rules to prevent the unintentional killing and disposal of fish, crustaceans and
other oceanic life not part of the target catch or landed. Protection of pristine and important habitats The key parts in
ecosystems need full protection from destructive fisheries; e.g. the spawning and nursing grounds of fish, delicate sea
floor, unique unexplored habitats, and corals. Monitoring and Enforcement A monitoring system to make sure
fishermen do not land more than they are allowed to, do not fish in closed areas and cheat as less as possible.
Strong monetary enforcement is needed to make it uneconomic to cheat. We need to make sure management systems
based on these rules are implemented everywhere. In combination with the banning of the lavish -hidden- subsidies to
commercially unviable fisheries.
Overfishing-> Food prices
Overfishing increases food prices
FOC 12 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Governmental Agency “Overfishing and Food Security”, http://www.dfompo.gc.ca/international/media/bk_food-eng.htm, 6/8/2012)
The impact of global overfishing is typically measured in environmental and economic terms, but often
overlooked is the threat
depleted fish stocks pose to the millions of people around the world who depend on fish for food. According to
the World Resources Institute, about 1 billion people – largely in developing countries – rely on fish as their primary animal
protein source. Fish is highly nutritious, and it serves as a valuable supplement in diets lacking essential vitamins and minerals. During
much of the last half-century, the growth in demand for animal protein was satisfied in part by the rising output
of oceanic fisheries. Between 1950 and 1990, the oceanic fish catch increased roughly fivefold, from 19 million
to 85 million tonnes. During this period, seafood consumption per person nearly doubled, climbing from 8 to 15
kilograms.[1] Unfortunately, the human appetite for seafood is outgrowing the sustainable yield of oceanic
fisheries. Today, more than 70 per cent of the world’s fisheries are either fully exploited or depleted. Production
levels in many fishing nations have fallen to historically low levels, confirming that some fish stocks are in a fragile
state. Global investments in aquaculture are seen as one way to help bridge the growing demand for fish and seafood. While this may also help
contribute to food security, it is only part of the solution. Action is still needed to create sustainable fish stocks in the high
seas. One of the major factors contributing to the current predicament of global fisheries is illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing.
Illegal fishing undermines efforts to conserve and manage fish stocks. This situation leads to the loss of
both short and long-term social and economic opportunities, and to negative effects on food security . IUU fishing
is especially problematic for developing nations. These States can lose tens of millions of dollars to illegal fishing , and
may not have the governance structures in place to ensure proper fisheries management. [2] The world's oceans, lakes and rivers are harvested
largely by artisanal fishers. Their catches
provide essential nourishment for poor communities, not only in Africa and
Asia, but also in many parts of Latin America and islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Of the 30 countries most
dependent on fish as a protein source, all but four are in the developing world.[3] The rapid growth in demand for fish and
fish products, in combination with shrinking supply, is leading to significant increases in fish prices. As a
result, fisheries investments have become more attractive to both entrepreneurs and governments. This is to the detriment of small-scale
fishing and fishing communities all over the world. Developing countries are also taking a growing share of the international trade in fish and
fishery products. This may have both benefits and drawbacks. While the exports provide valuable foreign exchange, the diversion of fish and
fish products from local communities and developing regions can deprive needy people of a traditionally cheap, but highly nutritious food.
Impact-Biodiversity
Overfishing wrecks marine biodiversity
Nutall 06 (Nick Nuttall, Head of Media Services, United Nations Environment Program, “Overfishing: a threat to marine biodiversity”,
http://www.un.org/events/tenstories/06/story.asp?storyID=800, 2006 ,SM)
Despite its crucial importance for the survival of humanity, marine biodiversity is in ever-greater danger,
with the depletion of fisheries among biggest concerns. Fishing is central to the livelihood and food
security of 200 million people, especially in the developing world, while one of five people on this planet
depends on fish as the primary source of protein. According to UN agencies, aquaculture - the farming and stocking of
aquatic organisms including fish, molluscs, crustaceans and aquatic plants - is growing more rapidly than all other animal food producing
sectors. But amid facts and figures about aquaculture's soaring worldwide production rates, other, more sobering, statistics
reveal that
global main marine fish stocks are in jeopardy, increasingly pressured by overfishing and environmental
degradation. Overfishing cannot continue,” warned Nitin Desai, Secretary General of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable
Development, which took place in Johannesburg. “The depletion of fisheries poses a major threat to the food supply
of millions of people.” The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation calls for the establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), which
many experts believe may hold the key to conserving and boosting fish stocks. Yet, according to the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP)
World Conservation Monitoring Centre, in Cambridge, UK, less than one per cent of the world’s oceans and seas are currently in MPAs. The
magnitude of the problem of overfishing is often overlooked, given the competing claims of
deforestation, desertification, energy resource exploitation and other biodiversity depletion dilemmas.
The rapid growth in demand for fish and fish products is leading to fish prices increasing faster than prices
of meat. As a result, fisheries investments have become more attractive to both entrepreneurs and governments, much to the detriment of
small-scale fishing and fishing communities all over the world. In the last decade, in the north Atlantic region, commercial
fish populations of cod, hake, haddock and flounder have fallen by as much as 95%, prompting calls for urgent
measures. Some are even recommending zero catches to allow for regeneration of stocks, much to the ire of the fishing industry.
Warming doesn’t turn the advantage but the other way around- prefer our quick time
frame
Rodgers 14 (Paul Rodgers, MA in Science Journalism from City University London, wrote for The Economist’s science section, “Solved!
The Mystery Of The Disappearing Coral Reefs”, http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrodgers/2014/07/03/tourism-and-fishing-not-climatechange-caused-coral-deaths/, 7/3/14, SM)
Blaming Caribbean coral reef destruction on global warming is leaving them vulnerable to overfishing ,
tourism, and the Panama Canal. Coral cover has more than halved since the 1970s and the reefs could be
entirely dead within 20 years, warned the report, Status and Trends of Caribbean Coral Reefs: 1970-2012. Although global
warming is expected to add to the problems faced by corals in the future, particularly by raising acidity in the oceans, making
it harder for them to build their exoskeletons, more immediate threats are doing greater damage. “The threats of climate
change and ocean acidification loom increasingly ominously for the future, but local stressors including an explosion in tourism,
overfishing, and the resulting increase in macroalgae [seaweed] have been the major drivers of the catastrophic
decline of Caribbean corals,” says the report, edited by Jeremy Jackson, Mary Donovan, Katie Cramer and Vivian Lam.
Overfishing causes extinction- Any species could be the last
Jetson 14 (Krysten Jetson, freelance writer specializing in the construction industry, “Impact of Overfishing On Human Lives”,
http://marinesciencetoday.com/2014/04/09/impact-of-overfishing-on-human-lives/, April 9th 2014)
Overfishing can have an adverse effect on marine biodiversity. Every single aquatic plant and animal has
a role to play when it comes to balancing the ecology. In order to thrive, marine creatures require a certain kind of environment
and nutrients, for which they may be dependent on other organisms. Overfishing
can wreak havoc and destroy the
environment and marine ecology and completely disrupt the food chain. For example, herring is a vital prey
species for the cod. Therefore, when herring are overfished the cod population suffers as well. And this has a chain
reaction on other species too. For example, seabirds such puffins were dependent on the sandeel for their
food around the Shetland Islands. However, with the overfishing of sandeels, the colonies of seabirds nesting around
Shetland automatically declined. Therefore, it can be understood that if the food chain breaks at any level, it will have a
domino effect on all living organisms in the chain
Impact-Fishing Industry
Overfishing collapses the fishing industry
Jetson 14 (Krysten Jetson, freelance writer specializing in the construction industry, “Impact of Overfishing On Human Lives”,
http://marinesciencetoday.com/2014/04/09/impact-of-overfishing-on-human-lives/, April 9th 2014)
As mentioned earlier, millions
of people rely on fishing for their livelihood and nutritional needs. For decades, oceans
have provided us with a bounty of seafood for these needs, but there is a limit to everything.
Unsustainable fishing practices and overfishing over the last few decades have pushed our oceans to the limit and
they may now be on the verge of a collapse, thereby affecting the everyday way of life and source of income of those who
depend on them. With no productive fish left in the sea to fish, fishermen and fisheries are bound to go out of
business in no time.
South China Seas
IL-Fishing disputes
Fishing rights are a catalyst for conflict.
Cronin 2012
Patrick, Senior Advisor and Senior Director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program, Center for a New
American Security Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 1-262012
http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS%20Testimony%20Cronin%20012612_1.pdf
The South China Sea is “one of the most biologically diverse marine areas in the world.” 8 Fish stocks
there are a multi-billion-dollar industry and account for as much as one-tenth of the global catch. 9 National policies,
both subsidies and the enforcement of domestic fishing laws, are creating regional tensions. As my colleague Will Rogers has
written, China’s fishing ban during spawning season, while undertaken to protect fish from being overexploited, sets up an annual fight with
Vietnamese fishermen. 10 Fish protein is more than 22 percent of the average Asian diet, significantly higher than the global average of 16
percent. 11 As Asians become both more prosperous and more numerous, the demand on fish increases.
Thus, Asians are consuming more of the world’s fishing stocks, of which roughly one-third is “overexploited, depleted or recovering,” according
to the United Nations. 12 The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization cautions that the production of most fish resources in the
western South China Sea have either been depleted or are in decline. 13 Moreover, as Vietnam’s population increases, perhaps growing 25
percent by 2050, the heightened demand for fish will aggravate existing tensions. 14 A key point is that fishermen
do more than
fish. They are civilian instruments of power that help stake out legal claims and establish national
maritime rights. As Taylor Fravel writes in the CNAS report, “fishermen will often justify operating in disputed
waters through their country’s claims to maritime rights. Chinese fishermen operate in the southern portions of the
South China Sea near Indonesia and Vietnam, for example, while Vietnamese and Philippine vessels operate in the northern portions near the
Paracel Islands.” 15 It is also worth noting that as
fish migration patterns change, it is entirely possible that areas of
maritime contestation will also migrate. For instance, a recent United Nations study observed that cold-water fish
species may decline as warm-water species migrate north because of climate changes . Consequently,
this is likely to be a catalyst for increased confrontation between China and its neighbors over fishing
rights.
Climate change intensifies SCS competition – fisheries, rare earths.
Rogers 2012
Will, Research Associate at the Center for a New American Security, Cooperation from Strength: The US,
China and the South China Sea – Chapter 5 - The Role of Natural Resources in the South China Sea, 1-092012,
http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_CooperationFromStrength_Cronin_1.pdf
Climate change will compound the ongoing resource struggles in the South China Sea region. Security experts
caution that climate change could act as an “accelerant of instability” by exacerbating environmental
trends in ways that may overwhelm civil-society institutions, 35 and this may affect countries’ decisions involving a
broad range of resources – including energy, fisheries and minerals. For instance, droughts in China offer a stark example of how broader
climate trends may undermine the nation’s ability to diversify energy resources and invigorate its efforts to seek fossil fuels in the South China
Sea. Although China generated approximately 16 percent of its electricity from hydroelectric dams in 2009 and plans to nearly double its
hydroelectric capacity by 2020, 36 China’s hydroelectric power is projected to decline by 30 to 40 percent in the last quarter of 2011 because of
a prolonged drought in parts of the country. 37 However, this recent decline is not a unique event; in recent years, drought has reduced
hydroelectric output even as China has been expanding its hydroelectric capacity. 38 Scientific
models suggest that climate
change is likely to exacerbate drought in East and Southeast Asia by affecting precipitation trends. 39
Thus, these conditions are likely to get worse, undermining China’s ability to generate renewable
electricity from hydroelectric power and potentially reinforcing its demand for fossil fuels, including
resources in the South China Sea. Although data remains limited, current evidence suggests that climate change will also
affect fish migration in ways that could exacerbate competition in the South China Sea. According to a recent
U.N. study, warming ocean waters will drive fish species poleward (north, in the South China Sea). 40 As warm-water
species move north, cold-water fish species are likely to decline. Such changes in migration are likely to increase fishing
in contested areas of the South China Sea, which may increase the number of confrontations involving fishing
trawlers and worsen tensions between China and its South China Sea neighbors. Efforts to curb the
greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change will likely increase investments in the clean
energy industry, which, in turn, will increase the strategic importance of minerals and metals in the South
China Sea. Indeed, green technologies – including solar voltaic cells, wind turbines and high-efficiency batteries for electric vehicles – rely
on strategic materials that are vulnerable to supply disruptions. 41 In particular, China’s dominance of the global rare earths
market is leading other countries to diversify their suppliers of these resources to ensure that their
clean energy technologies are not vulnerable to Chinese supply disruptions. As argued previously, this may
exacerbate diplomatic tensions by encouraging countries to extract more minerals from the South
China Sea to protect their alternative energy supplies and to control access to these minerals in order
to gain greater diplomatic leverage. In addition, climate change is likely to affect a wide range of other
issues, from food production to the availability of fresh water, in ways that could affect regional stability. For example,
severe flooding caused by rising sea levels is already affecting the agricultural and aquaculture
communities in the region’s littoral states. In Vietnam, such flooding and the accompanying salt water intrusion are already
harming crucial agricultural and aquaculture production. Vietnamese agriculture relies on a certain amount of flooding each year – between
one-half to three meters of flood waters – to support water-intensive rice production and coastal fish and shrimp harvesting. 42 However,
recent studies have found that flooding of more than four meters has become more frequent and severe over the past several decades,
crippling coastal aquaculture projects and destroying rice crops. 43 For Vietnam, therefore, environmental and climatic trends are already
affecting internal development and stability
Oil Spills
Oil Spills Add on
The plan provides spill response
French-Mcray 8 [Deborah P. French-McCay, PhD 1, Christopher Mueller1 , James Payne, PhD2 , Eric Terrill, PhD3 , Mark Otero3 , Sung Yong Kim3 , Melissa
Carter3 , Walter Nordhausen, PhD4 , Mark Lampinen4 , Brooke Longval1 , Melanie Schroeder1 , Kathy Jayko1 , Carter Ohlmann, PhD5.May 2008, “Dispersed Oil
Transport Modeling Calibrated by Field-Collected Data Measuring Fluorescein Dye Dispersion,”
http://www.asascience.com/about/publications/pdf/2008/393IOSC_FrenchMcCay_dispers-2007.pdf //jweideman]
.
New federal regulations regarding response plan oil removal capacity (Caps) requirements for tank vessels and marine transportation-related
facilities being developed by the US Coast Guard (USCG, 1999) are expected to result in an increased use of chemical dispersants to treat oil
spills in the United States. Othergovernment authorities (US and internationally) are also considering more dispersant use and designating "PreApproval Zones" for dispersant application in the event of oil spills. The application of dispersants in those and other areas may reduce the
impacts to wildlife (e.g., seabirds, sea otters) and shoreline habitats, with the potential tradeoff that the dispersed oil will cause impacts to
water column organisms (French McCay and Payne, 2001; French McCay et al., 2005). Computer simulations (French McCay et al.. 2006) of
large dispersed oil slicks (representing the maximum potential volume that could be dispersed in one location, with area — 1.5 square miles)
indicate that the resulting plumes may persist for several days with hydrocarbon concentrations at levels toxic to aquatic organisms. However,
model inputs for such predictions are uncertain; in particular the transport and dispersion rates of oil
components in the water column that determine exposure and effects on water column biota. Oil-spill
fate and transport modeling may be used to evaluate water column hydrocarbon concentrations,
potential exposure to organisms (zooplankton), and the impacts of oil spills with and without use of dispersants. A
number of such analyses have been performed using SIMAP (French McCay, 2003, 2004), which uses wind data, current data,
and transport and weathering algorithms to calculate the mass of oil components in various
environmental compartments (water surface, shoreline, water column, atmosphere, sediments, etc.), oil pathways over time
(trajectories), surface oil distributions, and concentrations of the oil components in water and sediments. SIMAP's biological efleets model was
then used to evaluate exposure, toxicity, and effects on each habitat and species (or species group) in the area of the spill. Often,
currents that transport oil components and organisms are estimated by a hydrodynamic model;
however, observational current data, such as from high- frequency-radar (HF-Radar) systems, drifters, or
current meters, may also be used. The transport models for such analyses are highly sensitive to the
current velocities and turbulent dispersion coefficients input to the models, as are further calculations
utilizing the transport results. In this study, we evaluate the usefulness of field- collected data from a set of
fluorescein dye studies off San Diego, California, to document movement and dispersion of subsurface dissolved
components (dye or dissolved hydrocarbons) over time. We analyzed HF Radar and driller measurements of near-surface currents,
dispersion coefficients based on dye spreading measurements, modeling of wind-forced surface water drift as a function of wind speed and
direction (based on published results of fluid dynamics studies), and water density profiles to determine their efficacy and accuracy as inputs
for modeling transport of near-surface constituents (such as dissolved hydrocarbons from naturally entrained or chemically dispersed oil).
Details of these studies are in Payne et al. (2007a, b) and French-McCay et al. (2007). Payne et al. (2008, these proceedings) provide an
overview of the objectives, methods, and field results.
Spills devastate biodiversity-extinction
Ingoldsby 10 [Joseph Emmanuel Ingoldsby writes and exhibits on issues relating to biodiversity. Recent publications include Vanishing Landscapes and
Endangered Species, The Science Exhibition: Curation and Design, Museum Press, UK, 2010; Vanishing Landscapes: The Atlantic Salt Marsh, Leonardo Journal, 422-2009, MIT Press; and Requiem for a Drowning Landscape, Orion Magazine, 4-2009. Environmental articles are compiled within Joseph Ingoldsby’s blog site,
Earth Elegies. 7/21/10, “Silent Summer: How Oil Disaster Impacts Biodiversity,” https://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/21-4 //jweideman]
Residents from the Gulf of Mexico report that schools of fish, manta rays, sharks, dolphins and sea
turtles are fleeing the plumes of oil and solvents to the shallow waters off of the coasts of Alabama
and Florida. Marine biologists from Duke University state that that the animals sense the change in
water chemistry and try to escape the contaminated water dead zones by swimming toward the
oxygen rich shallows. Here, they could be trapped between the approaching plumes of oil and the
shoreline. Scientists warn of a mass die off. Death comes in the spawning and nesting season within the Gulf of Mexico's biodiverse ecosystems. We have witnessed the immediate impact of oil on the threatened brown pelican,
the egrets, the laughing gulls and other shore and migratory birds, grounded with oiled plumage as
they try to rear their spring nestlings. This is also the time when the endangered Kemp Ridley turtles migrate through the Gulf of Mexico to
spawn, and when loggerhead turtles drag themselves up on the Gulf sands to lay their eggs. Their hatchlings face an uncertain future as they return to the polluted
Gulf of Mexico to begin their life's journey. This is also the time when the endangered manatees leave their winter gathering spots in warm springs to migrate to
their summer range along the Gulf coast and the time when Gulf sturgeon congregate in coastal waters for upstream migration exposing them to harm. We do not
readily see the impact to the diverse marine fisheries of the Gulf and Atlantic. The Gulf of Mexico is the nursery for a host of marine species, including the embattled
western Atlantic blue fin tuna. The Gulf of Mexico is the principal spawning ground of the migratory Western Atlantic tuna. Their spawning coincided with the
Horizon oil disaster. The
larval and juvenile fish are most vulnerable to the toxic effects of oil and dispersants
documented within their spawning ground. Scientific analysis of the viability of the 2010 spawning is necessary to determine the future
health of the tuna population. According to the World Wildlife Fund, the Atlantic blue fin tuna population has fallen 90% since
the 1970s and the species faces a serious risk of extinction. With the loss of the fisheries and the shrimp and oyster operations,
go the fishing communities and a way of life on the bayou. Fishing is often familial and multigenerational. The Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and sinking may
have broken the familial transferal of working knowledge between father and son and from son to grandson. No one knows how many years it will take for the Gulf
of Mexico to heal from the deadly infusion of oil, methane and toxic dispersants. The tragedy on the Gulf Coast galvanizes public attention as images of the slow
demise of brown pelicans, sea turtles, dolphins, sperm whales and sea birds covered in oil flood our television screens. We are looking at the expansion of eutrophic
dead zones; the contamination of the entire water column in the Gulf of Mexico- killing deep-water corals and giant squid to the black skimmers feeding on the
surface; the tragic loss of species and biodiversity; and the potential disappearance of the fishing cultures of the Gulf. This will be the "Silent Summer" that could
last for years. The
poisonous mix of oil, methane and dispersants will be the final nail in the coffin of these
vanishing landscapes and endangered species. We know from past oil spills that the toxic effects
continue decades later. Long time residents of New England may remember the grounding of the oil tanker, Florida, which broke up on the rocky
shoals off Old Silver Beach, West Falmouth on 16 September 1969 spewing 189,000 gallons of #2 fuel into Buzzards Bay. Scientists from the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution documented the damages to the marine ecosystem and coastline over the ensuing years. Their observations are helpful to codify the
environmental damages to sensitive coastal wetlands by oil contamination. To this day, toxic oil remains in the sediment layers of the marshlands ringing the
Falmouth shore and oil continues to inhibit growth and colonization of the subsoil by the marsh grass roots, fiddler crabs and other organisms. The vertical burrows
of the fiddler crabs veer horizontally avoiding the oil stained layer of soil. The marsh grass roots stop above the oil and spread horizontally, 41 years after the
Buzzards Bay oil spill. Retired Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Marine biologist, George Hampson has observed the daily impact of oil on the sensitive estuary
since that unprecedented day in 1969. He spoke of animals coming out of the sediments because the oil was saturating the flats and marshlands All of the clams
rose to the surface and extended their long necks trying to escape the oil along with invertebrates which floated to the surface. Soon the tide pools were filled with
life, where they slowly died. This was called the "Silent Fall" because all of the birds and animals were gone. Now
along the coastline of the
Gulf of Mexico we see the "Silent Summer" of dead and dying animals trying to escape the poisonous
mix of oil and the dispersant Corexit combined with the oxygen depleting methane gas. Video footage documents crabs climbing out of the water as a toxic
sheen approaches the shore. In the morning the crabs are floating belly up in the water. The air is laden with chemicals wafting up from the
water, which has become poisonous to marine life and the fumes dangerous to the long term health of those who breath it. According to scientific studies, the
Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 resulted in profound physiological effects to fish and wildlife. These
included reproductive failure, genetic
damage, curved spines, lowered growth and body weights, altered feeding habits, reduced egg
volume, liver damage, eye tumors, and debilitating brain lesions. Reports document that oil cleanup workers exposed to hot
water beach washing of the toxic oil and dispersant mix in 1989 filed compensation claims for respiratory system damage, according to the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health. Many have debilitating medical complications 21 years later. These ailments include respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and
blood disorders. History
repeats itself. The only hope is that this unnatural disaster will galvanize the public's
attention and give the President and members of Congress the courage to protect Nature's
biodiversity; and to promote and substantively fund alternative energy sources and clean, green technologies for our future. We are at the
tipping point of peak oil and technological change. Now is not the time for equivocation. We must embrace the future or be
damned by the next generation.
XT-IOOC solves
IOOS is needed for spill clean up
Price and Rosenfeld 12 [Prepared for the National Federation of Regional Associations for Coastal and Ocean Observing by Holly Price and Leslie
Rosenfeld. “Synthesis of Regional IOOS Build Out Plans for the Next Decade” November 2012,
http://www.usnfra.org/documents/Build%20out%202011/BOPSynthesisNov2012.pdf //jweideman]
Spills of oil, hazardous materials and debris have the potential to cause widespread ecological damage
and broad economic impacts, and threaten human health. Spill response personnel (including from
federal, state, and local agencies) require up-to-date and reliable information that will allow rapid
response to minimize adverse effects and assist in monitoring spill impact. Effective response involves
decisions regarding type and location of containment efforts, clean up and wildlife rescue. Evaluations may
also be needed to determine where the spill, tar balls, or debris originated, to assist with diagnosis and containment. Archived information that
can describe historical background and ambient conditions is important for damage assessment to
determine the extent of impacts. Key regional partners in spill response include the Emergency
Response Division (ERD) of NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R), the USCG, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and state environmental protection agencies. These managers need
information on spill location, size and extent in three dimensions (surface and subsurface), direction and speed of oil or
other spill movement, and predictions of drift and dispersion to limit the damage by a spill and facilitate cleanup efforts. U.S. IOOS products to
assist in meeting these needs include hindcasts, nowcasts and forecasts of winds, waves, currents and
water density. In the Gulf of Mexico Deep Horizon oil spill, a variety of IOOS monitoring assets
provided information to assist in development of these products. Appropriate packaging and delivery mechanisms for these
basic products depends on the type and extent of the spill. During major oil spills, the USCG serves as the Federal On Scene Coordinator for spill response, NOAA
is designated to provide the Scientific Support Coordinator (SSC) and NOAA’s OR&R staffs the SSCs with oceanographers, modelers, chemists, and biologists
available 24 hours a day. During an oil spill, the primary Decision Support Tool for evaluating potential trajectories is currently the General NOAA Oil Modeling
Environment (GNOME), although other models are under development. GNOME forecasts spill trajectories based upon the best wind and ocean circulation
forecasts available at the time of the response. For major spills, RCOOS data should be formatted and delivered for use by OR&R modelers.
IOOS proven to be able to solve for oil spill clean up—multiple studies
Harlan et al 10(December, jack Harlan¶ NOAA IOOS Program¶ Eric Terrill,¶ Lisa Hazard--¶ Stripps institution of
Oceanography¶ Coastal Observing R&D Center¶ Carolyn Keen--¶ Sqipps institution of Ocmnography¶ institute of
Geophysics and¶ Plaliemry Physics¶ Donald Barrick,¶ Chad Wiielm--¶ CODAR Ocean Scnsoxs, Ltd.¶ Stephan Howden--¶
Slennis Space Center, University¶ of Southern Mississippi¶ ]osi1 Kohut--¶ Rutgers Univcrsiry, The Integrated Ocean
Observation System High Frequency Radar Network,
https://cordc.ucsd.edu/projects/mapping/documents/IOOS_HFRadar_MTS.pdf)
Although the main impetus for cre-¶ ating the NOAA CODAR system in¶ the 19705 was For oil spill
response, it¶ was not until 2006 HF radar was used¶ by oFficial government spill respond-¶ ers. In
August of 2006, the National¶ Ocean Service and the USCG led an¶ interagency field exercise, Safe
Sea:¶ 2006, in the San Francisco Bay area¶ to enhance the preparedness of oil¶ spill responders. As part
ofthar exer-¶ cise, the IOOS program Collahorated¶ with the NOS Office of Response¶ and
Restoration (OR&£R) ro create¶ hourly gap-filled maps OFHF radar-¶ derived surface currents.
The IOOS¶ partners at the San Francisco State¶ University and the Naval Postgraduate¶ School
created ncw data handling sofi-¶ ware and implemented a real-time¶ open-boundary modal analysis
suite¶ of algorithms (Kaplan and Lekien,¶ 200?). These nowcasrs were then for-¶ matted inro files that
were readily in-¶ gested by the General NOAA Oil¶ Modeling Environment. Eleven HF radars,
spanning n1-are than 160 km¶ ofcoastline and having 1- to 2-km res-¶ olution, provided continuous
coverage¶ during the S-clay exercise. This pre-¶ parcdness exercise provided a Founda-¶ tion For the
use ofHF radar data by¶ the NOAA OR8£R spill response tra-¶ jectory modeling team (Figure 5).¶
When the container vessel Casm¶ Bumn collided with the base of the¶ Bay Bridge in San Francisco
Bay in¶ November of 2007, spilling more¶ than 53,000 gallons of fitcl oil, man-¶ agers used surFace
current maps from¶ HF radar data to monitor the spill na-¶ jectory. predicting movement as Far¶
north as Angel Island and westward along the San Francisco waterfront.¶ This closely matched
visual reports¶ of oil on the shorelines of Alcatraz.¶ Angel island, and San Francisco and¶ on a map
produced by the NOAA¶ OREIR. Once the oil moved into the¶ Gulfiwf the Farallones. the HF
radar¶ data accurately predicted that the oil¶ would not beach there. As HF radar ca-¶ pabilities are
integrated into California¶ oil spill response, spills like thc Cam:¶ B:mm's (which occurred in dense
fog)¶ can be more effectively tracked. with¶ mitigation eflbrts unimpeded by lack¶ ofvisual dara.¶ The
earlier Safi star excrcisc and¶ use ofl-ll: radar data during the Cam)¶ Bumn spill allowed ORSCR to
make a¶ seamless tmnsillfln to utilizing Gulfof¶ Mexico HF Radar data soon after the¶ Deepwater
Horizon platform in the¶ northern Gulf of Mexico exploded¶ and sank in April of 2010. As of this¶
writing in August 2010, lhc HF radar¶ data are still being uscd daily. Partners¶ From the University of
Southern Mis-¶ sissippi and the University of South¶ Florida have monitored their radar sys-¶ tems
constantly to ensure that they arc¶ operating while the Deepwatcr Hori-¶ zon spill continued and that
Ilh: darn¶ were delivered to the lU( )5 national HF radar data sewers at Sctipps In-¶ stitutinn of
Oceanography and the¶ NOAA National Data Buoy Center.¶ These Gull-' of Mexico sites have been¶
particularly valuable since they cover a¶ good portion of the continental shelf¶ in the Mississippi
Bight. which is just¶ to the nnrlll and northeast of the site¶ where the Deepwarer Horizon was lo-¶
cated (Figure 6).¶ Similar tn USCG SAR, the op-¶ timally interpolated current velocity¶ fields.
mentioned earlier, will also pro-¶ vide a product that can be ingesned inlJD¶ the NOAA oil spill
response team’s¶ General NOAA Oil Modeling Envi-¶ ronment model For app|icaIiOrl wher-¶ ever
HF radars operate.
Biod impact
Biod loss outweighs your impacts- guarantees extinction and is irreversible
Chen 2k [Professor of Law and Vance K. Opperman Research Scholar, University of Minnesota Law School Jim, “Globalization and Its Losers”, Winter 2000, 9. J.
Global Trade 157, Lexis //jweideman]
Conscious decisions
to allow the extinction of a species or the destruction of an entire ecosystem epitomize the "irreversible
of resources" that NEPA is designed to retard. 312 The original Endangered Species Act gave such decisions no
quarter whatsoever; 313 since 1979, such decisions have rested in the hands of a solemnly convened "God Squad." 314 In its permanence and gravity, natural
extinction provides the baseline by which all other types of extinction should be judged. The Endangered Species Act
and irretrievable commitments
explicitly acknowledges the "esthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and scientific value" of endangered species and the biodiversity they
represent. 315 Allied bodies of international law confirm this view: 316 global biological diversity is part of the commonly owned heritage of all humanity and
deserves full legal protection. 317 Rather remarkably, these broad assertions understate the value of biodiversity and the urgency of its protection. A Sand County
Almanac, the eloquent bible of the modern environmental movement, contains only two demonstrable biological errors. It opens with one and closes with another.
We can forgive Aldo Leopold's decision to close with that elegant but erroneous epigram, "ontogeny repeats phylogeny." 318 What concerns [*208] us is his
opening gambit: "There are some who can live without wild things, and some who cannot." 319 Not quite. None
of us can live without wild
things. Insects are so essential to life as we know it that if they "and other land-dwelling anthropods ... were to disappear, humanity
probably could not last more than a few months." 320 "Most of the amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals," along with "the bulk of the
flowering plants and ... the physical structure of most forests and other terrestrial habitats" would disappear in turn. 321 "The land would return to" something
resembling its Cambrian condition, "covered by mats of recumbent wind-pollinated vegetation, sprinkled with clumps of small trees and bushes here and there,
largely devoid of animal life." 322 From this perspective, the mere thought of valuing biodiversity is absurd, much as any attempt to quantify all of earth's planetary
amenities as some trillions of dollars per year is absurd. But the frustration inherent in enforcing the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
(CITES) has shown that conservation cannot work without appeasing Homo economicus, the profit-seeking ape. Efforts to ban the international ivory trade through
CITES have failed to stem the slaughter of African elephants. 323 The preservation of biodiversity must therefore begin with a cold, calculating inventory of its
benefits. Fortunately, defending biodiversity preservation in humanity's self-interest is an easy task. As yet unexploited species might give a hungry world a larger
larder than the storehouse of twenty plant species that provide nine-tenths of humanity's current food supply. 324 "Waiting in the wings are tens of thousands of
unused plant species, many demonstrably superior to those in favor." 325 As genetic warehouses, many plants enhance the productivity of crops already in use. In
the United States alone, the [*209] genes of wild plants have accounted for much of "the explosive growth in farm production since the 1930s." 326 The
contribution is worth $ 1 billion each year. 327 Nature's pharmacy demonstrates even more dramatic gains than nature's farm. 328 Aspirin and penicillin, our star
analgesic and antibiotic, had humble origins in the meadowsweet plant and in cheese mold. 329 Leeches, vampire bats, and pit vipers all contribute anticoagulant
drugs that reduce blood pressure, prevent heart attacks, and facilitate skin transplants. 330 Merck & Co., the multinational pharmaceutical company, is helping
Costa Rica assay its rich biota. 331 A single commercially viable product derived "from, say, any one species among ... 12,000 plants and 300,000 insects ... could
handsomely repay Merck's entire investment" of $ 1 million in 1991 dollars. 332 Wild animals,
plants, and microorganisms also provide ecological
services. 333 The Supreme Court has lauded the pesticidal talents of migratory birds. 334 Numerous organisms process the air we
breathe, the water we drink, the ground we stroll. 335 Other species serve as sentries. Just as canaries warned coal miners of lethal gases, the
decline or disappearance of indicator species provides advance warning against deeper [*210] environmental threats. 336 Species conservation yields the greatest
environmental amenity of all: ecosystem protection. Saving
discrete species indirectly protects the ecosystems in which they
live. 337 Some larger animals may not carry great utilitarian value in themselves, but the human urge to protect these charismatic "flagship species" helps protect
their ecosystems. 338 Indeed, to save any species, we must protect their ecosystems. 339 Defenders of biodiversity can measure the
"tangible economic value" of the pleasure derived from "visiting, photographing, painting, and just looking at wildlife." 340 In the United States alone, wildlife
observation and feeding in 1991 generated $ 18.1 billion in consumer spending, $ 3 billion in tax revenues, and 766,000 jobs. 341 Ecotourism gives tropical
countries, home to most of the world's species, a valuable alternative to subsistence agriculture. Costa Rican rainforests preserved for ecotourism "have become
many times more profitable per hectare than land cleared for pastures and fields," while the endangered gorilla has turned ecotourism into "the third most
important source of income in Rwanda." 342 In a globalized economy where commodities can be cultivated almost anywhere, environmentally [*211] sensitive
locales can maximize their wealth by exploiting the "boutique" uses of their natural bounty. The
value of endangered species and the
biodiversity they embody is "literally ... incalculable." 343 What, if anything, should the law do to preserve it? There are those that invoke the
story of Noah's Ark as a moral basis for biodiversity preservation. 344 Others regard the entire Judeo-Christian tradition, especially the biblical stories of Creation
and the Flood, as the root of the West's deplorable environmental record. 345 To avoid getting bogged down in an environmental exegesis of Judeo-Christian "myth
and legend," we should let Charles Darwin and evolutionary biology determine the imperatives of our moment in natural "history." 346 The
loss of
biological diversity is quite arguably the gravest problem facing humanity. If we cast the question as the contemporary
phenomenon that "our descendants [will] most regret," the "loss of genetic and species diversity by the destruction of natural
habitats" is worse than even "energy depletion, economic collapse, limited nuclear war, or conquest by a totalitarian government."
347 Natural evolution may in due course renew the earth with a diversity of species approximating that of a world unspoiled by Homo sapiens -- in ten million years,
perhaps a hundred million. 348
The environment isn’t resilient- conservation is key to stop extinction
Soule ‘95 [Michael E., Professor and Chair of Environmental Studies, UC-Santa Cruz, REINVITING NATURE? RESPONSES TO POSTMODERN DECONSTRUCTION,
Eds: Michael E. Soule and Gary Lease, p. 159-160//jweideman]
Some of the ecological myths discussed
the idea that nature is self-regulating and capable of caring for itself. This
notion leads to the theory of management known as benign neglect – nature will do fine, thank you, if human beings
just leave it alone. Indeed, a century ago, a hands-off policy was the best policy. Now it is not. Given
natures`s current fragmented and stressed condition, neglect will result[s] in an accelerating spiral of
deterioration. Once people create large gaps in forests, isolate and disturb habitats, pollute, overexploit,
and introduce species from other continents, the viability of many ecosystems and native species is compromised, resiliency
dissipates, and diversity can collapse. When artificial disturbance reaches a certain threshold, even small changes can produce large effects,
Should We Actively Manage Wildlands and Wild Waters? The decision has already been made in most places.
here contain, either explicitly or implicitly,
and these will be compounded by climate change. For example, a storm that would be considered normal and beneficial may, following widespread clearcutting,
Homeostasis,
balance, and Gaia are dangerous models when applied at the wrong spatial and temporal scales. Even fifty
cause disastrous blow-downs, landslides, and erosion. If global warming occurs, tropical storms are predicted to have greater force than now.
years ago, neglect might have been the best medicine, but that was a world with a lot more big, unhumanized, connected spaces, a world with one-third the
The alternative to neglect is
caring – in today`s parlance, an affirmative approach to wildlands: to maintain and restore them, to become
stewards, accepting all the domineering baggage that word carries. Until humans are able to control their numbers and their technologies,
management is the only viable alternative to massive attrition of living nature. But management activities are variable
number of people, and a world largely unaffected by chain saws, bulldozers, pesticides, and exotic, weedy species.
active
in intensity, something that antimanagement purists ignore. In general, the greater the disturbance and the smaller the habitat remnant, the more intense the
management must be. So if we must manage, where do we look for ethical guidance?
Sea Power Advantage
1AC
1AC Sea Power Advantage
US data collection declining—lower data return rate and disconnected sensors
Gagosian 14(Robert, April 25, Testimony of ¶ Robert B. Gagosian ¶ President and CEO of the Consortium for
Ocean Leadership ¶ Before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science , )
Recent hypotheses suggest that the extreme weather events we have had t.his past year may be¶
attributable to a persistent shift in the jet stream due to a rapidly melting polar region as well as a
warmei¶ North Pacific Ocean. If this is t.he case, ice storms in Mobile, Alabama or monsoon-like
rain events in¶ Boulder, Colorado, may become more frequent, along with their significant economic
costs.¶ Unfortunately, as the demand for more and better data and information to understand ocean
and¶ atmospheric trends increases, we are instead losing our capabilities to collect data at sea and
from space¶ to build more capable and accurate long-term forecasts. For instance, the inability to
service the buoys¶ comprising the TAO Array (Tropical Atmosphere Ocean project in the equatorial
Pacific) has resulted in¶ a degradation of the data return rate to just 40 percent capacity from an
optimally operating systeml. Thi:¶ situation greatly reduces our ability to accurately forecast El Nifio
and La Nina strengths and thus risks¶ proper preparation to deal with episodes of droughts and
flooding.¶ Given that the ocean absorbs, stores and transfers most of the heat (and a high percentage
of the carbon)¶ on our planet, the ability to understand, forecast and prepare for extreme weather
events requires¶ investments in basic research to better understand air-ice-sea interactions as well as
observations of the¶ physical environment from space, land and sea. Without this basic knowledge
and prediction capabilities¶ on regional and seasonal scales, we are essentially flying blind in terms
of managing resources (e.g.¶ agriculture, fisheries, freshwater) and protecting public health. There are
many major natural threats¶ facing our nation and significant challenges ahead in understanding,
forecasting and mitigating them, all¶ of which require significant financial resources. We believe that
our appropriations requests would¶ enable our nation to maintain the assets and capabilities
necessary to better understand the physical,¶ chemical, geological and biological changes to the
natural environment and use this information to help¶ Of course, the ocean also impacts life beyond
weather, climate and extreme events.
IOOS key to navy battle space awareness—greater weapon performance and better
reaction time to threats
West 7(Dick, September, Consortium for Ocean Leadership and Retired Rear Admiral USN, EMBRACING THE ¶
FULL SPECTRUM OF ¶ IOOS ENVIRONMENTAL ¶ INFORMATION ¶ FOR MDA,
http://oceanleadership.org/files/MDA_Proceedings_lowres.pdf)
Working toward complete ¶ Maritime Domain Awareness will ¶ require utilizing the Integrated ¶
Ocean Observing System ¶ (IOOS) to provide the data and ¶ operations necessary to perform ¶
assessments such as forecasts and ¶ observations. A fully operable ¶ IOOS will integrate the regional
¶ systems and allow research data to ¶ be fully interoperable for a wide ¶ variety of operational
needs. In ¶ most situations, real-time data and ¶ a fully integrated system allow ¶ for assessments to
have a higher ¶ degree of spatial and temporal ¶ variables, greater impact from ¶ sensor or weapon
performance, ¶ and a better reaction time to threats. ¶ Limiting factors to accomplishing at relatively
low resolutions; provide ¶ boundary and initial conditions ¶ for higher resolution models until ¶
information is given for a specific ¶ local area. Limiting factors to accomplishing ¶ this include the
lack of accessible ¶ data due to security issues, lack ¶ of fully developed databases, ¶ and
compatibility issues with ¶ data collection. Another limiting ¶ factor, and consequently the most ¶
important, is the difficult transition ¶ from research information to an ¶ operational system. Possible ¶
solutions to making such a ¶ transition easier include co-locating ¶ researchers and operations staff
and ¶ keeping inter-agency cooperation a ¶ high priority. Being able to develop ¶ that transition from
research to ¶ usable information will contribute ¶ to building IOOS stronger and more ¶ usable for
the different customers ¶ including the military and assisting ¶ them with what they need to have ¶
Maritime Domain Awareness.
Scenario One is Deterrence
Naval power is key to prevent multiple scenarios for extinction—land forces are
becoming irrelevant
England et al 11(Mr. England is a former secretary of the Navy. Mr. Jones is a former commandant of the Marine
Corps. Mr. Clark is a former chief of naval operations., July 11, The Necessity of U.S. Naval Power, WSJ,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303339904576406163019350934)
All our citizens, and especially our servicemen and women, expect and deserve a thorough review of
critical security decisions. After all, decisions today will affect the nation's strategic position for
future generations.¶ The future security environment underscores two broad security trends. First,
international political realities and the internationally agreed-to sovereign rights of nations will
increasingly limit the sustained involvement of American permanent land-based, heavy forces to the
more extreme crises. This will make offshore options for deterrence and power projection ever more
paramount in support of our national interests.¶ Second, the naval dimensions of American power
will re-emerge as the primary means for assuring our allies and partners, ensuring prosperity in
times of peace, and countering anti-access, area-denial efforts in times of crisis. We do not believe
these trends will require the dismantling of land-based forces, as these forces will remain essential
reservoirs of power. As the United States has learned time and again, once a crisis becomes a
conflict, it is impossible to predict with certainty its depth, duration and cost.¶ That said, the U.S. has
been shrinking its overseas land-based installations, so the ability to project power globally will
make the forward presence of naval forces an even more essential dimension of American influence.¶
What we do believe is that uniquely responsive Navy-Marine Corps capabilities provide the basis on
which our most vital overseas interests are safeguarded. Forward presence and engagement is what
allows the U.S. to maintain awareness, to deter aggression, and to quickly respond to threats as they
arise. Though we clearly must be prepared for the high-end threats, such preparation should be
made in balance with the means necessary to avoid escalation to the high end in the first place.¶ The
versatility of maritime forces provides a truly unmatched advantage. The sea remains a vast space
that provides nearly unlimited freedom of maneuver. Command of the sea allows for the presence of
our naval forces, supported from a network of shore facilities, to be adjusted and scaled with little
external restraint. It permits reliance on proven capabilities such as prepositioned ships.¶ Maritime
capabilities encourage and enable cooperation with other nations to solve common sea-based
problems such as piracy, illegal trafficking, proliferation of W.M.D., and a host of other ills, which if
unchecked can harm our friends and interests abroad, and our own citizenry at home. The flexibility
and responsiveness of naval forces provide our country with a general strategic deterrent in a
potentially violent and unstable world. Most importantly, our naval forces project and sustain power
at sea and ashore at the time, place, duration, and intensity of our choosing.¶ Given these enduring
qualities, tough choices must clearly be made, especially in light of expected tight defense budgets.
The administration and the Congress need to balance the resources allocated to missions such as
strategic deterrence, ballistic missile defense, and cyber warfare with the more traditional ones of sea
control and power projection. The maritime capability and capacity vital to the flexible projection of
U.S. power and influence around the globe must surely be preserved, especially in light of available
technology. Capabilities such as the Joint Strike Fighter will provide strategic deterrence, in addition
to tactical long-range strike, especially when operating from forward-deployed naval vessels.¶
Postured to respond quickly, the Navy-Marine Corps team integrates sea, air, and land power into
adaptive force packages spanning the entire spectrum of operations, from everyday cooperative
security activities to unwelcome—but not impossible—wars between major powers. This is exactly
what we will need to meet the challenges of the future.
No major power in a world of naval power
Allen et al 7(James T. Conway --¶ General, U.S. Marine Corps, ¶ Commandant of the Marine Corps,¶ Gary Roughead
--¶ Admiral, U.S. Navy, ¶ Chief of Naval Operations,¶ Thad W. Allen --¶ Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard ,¶ Commandant of the
Coast Guard, October, A Cooperative Strategy ¶ for ¶ 21st Century Seapower,
http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf)
Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous ¶ to global stability as war
among major powers. Maintenance and ¶ extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower
advantage is a key ¶ component of deterring major power war. While war with another great ¶ power
strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous ¶ effects demands that it be actively
deterred using all elements of national ¶ power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—
our lethality, ¶ global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, ¶ and operational
agility—provide the joint commander with a range ¶ of deterrent options. We will pursue an
approach to deterrence that ¶ includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate against aggressors ¶
conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces. ¶ Win our Nation’s wars. In times of war,
our ability to impose local sea ¶ control, overcome challenges to access, force entry, and project and
¶ sustain power ashore, makes our maritime forces an indispensable ¶ element of the joint or
combined force. This expeditionary advantage ¶ must be maintained because it provides joint and
combined force ¶ commanders with freedom of maneuver. Reinforced by a robust sealift ¶ capability
that can concentrate and sustain forces, sea control and power ¶ projection enable extended
campaigns ashore.
Scenario Two is Taiwan
Naval power is key to prevent China attack on Taiwan
Hultin & Blair 6(Jerry MacArthur HULTIN and Admiral Dennis BLAIR, Naval Power and Globalization: ¶ The
Next Twenty Years in the Pacific, Jerry M. Hultin is former president of Polytechnic Institute of New York University
From 1997 to 2000 Mr. Hultin served as Under Secretary of the Navy., Dennis Cutler Blair is the former United States
Director of National Intelligence and is a retired United States Navy admiral who was the commander of U.S. forces in
the Pacific region, http://engineering.nyu.edu/files/hultin%20naval%20power.pdf)
Even if the interaction of US and Chinese decisions in future avoids a global naval arms ¶ race
centered in the Pacific, China will still have a capable regional navy. World events may put ¶ China
and the United States on opposite sides of an issue or crisis, leading to a maritime ¶ confrontation.
The most likely location for this scenario is Taiwan. Successful deterrence ¶ depends on the United
States having strong naval capability on station or quickly deployable so ¶ that there is no incentive
to China or other adversaries to initiate hostilities. ¶ The second Pacific area in which the United
States must maintain a deterrent capability ¶ based on naval power is around the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea is a failing state, but so long ¶ as Kim Jong II and his successors maintain their position
of power, they will need to be deterred ¶ from military aggression. ¶ ¶ To maintain deterrence,
American naval strategy in the Pacific must preserve its alliance ¶ base, its forward deployed posture
and its ability to reinforce quickly to assert maritime ¶ superiority throughout any crisis situation. ¶ ¶
Taiwan ¶ ¶ The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 remains a sound basis for forming the deterrent aspect ¶
of US naval strategy for Taiwan. It states that any change of Taiwan’s status must be by peaceful ¶
means, and that the United States will make defensive capabilities available for Taiwan and ¶ maintain
American forces to reinforce Taiwan’s defense if China threatens or attacks it. Just as ¶ importantly,
the United States has made it clear that it also opposes any Taiwanese attempts to ¶ change its status
towards independence. ¶ ¶ Currently, Chinese use of force against Taiwan cannot achieve military
success - ¶ Taiwanese forces with American support can defeat Chinese unprovoked aggression at all
levels ¶ from blockade through full-scale invasion. American naval strategy will need to maintain this
¶ balance as regional Chinese maritime and air power grows. This will require a combination of ¶
continued sales of defensive systems.and training assistance to Taiwan along with upgrading the ¶
U.S. navy’s missile defenses and anti-submarine systems and capabilities. There are heavy ¶ economic
and diplomatic penalties to China for using force against Taiwan. U.S. strategy must ¶ be to ensure
that, even if it is willing to accept these economic and diplomatic costs, China ¶ cannot succeed in
seizing and holding Taiwan. ¶ ¶ Copyright, September 2006 195Page 12 of 16 ¶ However, although the
People’s Liberation Army cannot achieve military success against ¶ Taiwan, it can cause extensive
military, human and economic damage. If it is willing to pay the ¶ political, economic and military
costs, China can “teach Taiwan a lesson” for pursuing ¶ independence. For this reason, the current
military balance among Taiwan, China and the United ¶ States is currently stable, offering advantages
to neither side to change the status quo. It is very ¶ clear that there would only be losers from
conflict, not winners. An important objective of the ¶ deterrence and defense objectives of US naval
strategy in the Pacific is to maintain that stable ¶ balance as China increases its military power.
That causes nuclear war
Glaser 11(Charles, April, Will China’s Rise lead to War?, Charles Glaser-- Professor of Political Science and
International Affairs; Director, Institute for Security and Conflict Studies, Foreign Affairs, vol. 90, Issue 2)
A crisis over Taiwan could fairly easily escalate to nuclear war, because each ¶ step along the way
might well seem rational to the actors involved. Current U.S. ¶ policy is designed to reduce the
probability that Taiwan will declare ¶ independence and to make clear that the United States will not
come to Taiwan's ¶ aid if it does. Nevertheless, the United States would find itself under pressure to ¶
protect Taiwan against any sort of attack, no matter how it originated. Given the different interests
and perceptions of the various parties and the limited control ¶ Washington has over Taipei's
behavior, a crisis could unfold in which the United ¶ States found itself following events rather than
leading them. ¶ Such dangers have been around for decades, but ongoing improvements in ¶
China's military capabilities may make Beijing more willing to escalate a Taiwan ¶ crisis. In
addition to its improved conventional capabilities, China is modernizing ¶ its nuclear forces to
increase their ability to survive and retaliate following a ¶ large-scale U.S. attack. Standard
deterrence theory holds that Washington's ¶ current ability to destroy most or all of China's nuclear
force enhances its ¶ bargaining position. China's nuclear modernization might remove that check on ¶
Chinese action, leading Beijing to behave more boldly in future crises than it has ¶ in past ones.
Scenario Three is Trade
Naval power is key to global trade—allows for the safe transport of goods
Eaglen and McGrath 11(Mackenzie and Bryan, May 16, Thinking About a Day Without Sea Power:
Implications for U.S. Defense Policy, Mackenzie Eaglen is Research Fellow for National Security in the Douglas and
Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation. Bryan McGrath is a retired naval officer and the Director of Delex
Consulting, Studies and Analysis, The Heritage Foundation,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/thinking-about-a-day-without-sea-power-implications-for-usdefense-policy)
If the United States slashed its Navy and ended its mission as a guarantor of the free flow of
transoceanic goods and trade, globalized world trade would decrease substantially. As early as 1890,
noted U.S. naval officer and historian Alfred Thayer Mahan described the world’s oceans as a “great
highway…a wide common,” underscoring the long-running importance of the seas to trade.[12]¶
Geographically organized trading blocs develop as the maritime highways suffer from insecurity and
rising fuel prices. Asia prospers thanks to internal trade and Middle Eastern oil, Europe muddles
along on the largesse of Russia and Iran, and the Western Hemisphere declines to a “new normal”
with the exception of energy-independent Brazil.¶ For America, Venezuelan oil grows in importance
as other supplies decline. Mexico runs out of oil—as predicted—when it fails to take advantage of
Western oil technology and investment. Nigerian output, which for five years had been secured
through a partnership of the U.S. Navy and Nigerian maritime forces, is decimated by the bloody
civil war of 2021. Canadian exports, which a decade earlier had been strong as a result of the oil
shale industry, decline as a result of environmental concerns in Canada and elsewhere about the
“fracking” (hydraulic fracturing) process used to free oil from shale.¶ State and non-state actors
increase the hazards to seaborne shipping, which are compounded by the necessity of traversing key
chokepoints that are easily targeted by those who wish to restrict trade. These chokepoints include
the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran could quickly close to trade if it wishes. More than half of the
world’s oil is transported by sea. “From 1970 to 2006, the amount of goods transported via the
oceans of the world…increased from 2.6 billion tons to 7.4 billion tons, an increase of over
284%.”[13] In 2010, “$40 billion dollars [sic] worth of oil passes through the world’s geographic
‘chokepoints’ on a daily basis…not to mention $3.2 trillion…annually in commerce that moves
underwater on transoceanic cables.”[14] These quantities of goods simply cannot be moved by any
other means. Thus, a reduction of sea trade reduces overall international trade.¶ U.S. consumers face
a greatly diminished selection of goods because domestic production largely disappeared in the
decades before the global depression. As countries increasingly focus on regional rather than global
trade, costs rise and Americans are forced to accept a much lower standard of living. Some domestic
manufacturing improves, but at significant cost.¶ In addition, shippers avoid U.S. ports due to the
onerous container inspection regime implemented after investigators discover that the second dirty
bomb was smuggled into the U.S. in a shipping container on an innocuous Panamanian-flagged
freighter. As a result, American consumers bear higher shipping costs. The market also constrains
the variety of goods available to the U.S. consumer and increases their cost.¶ A Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) report makes this abundantly clear. A one-week shutdown of the Los Angeles and
Long Beach ports would lead to production losses of $65 million to $150 million (in 2006 dollars) per
day. A three-year closure would cost $45 billion to $70 billion per year ($125 million to $200 million
per day). Perhaps even more shocking, the simulation estimated that employment would shrink by
approximately 1 million jobs.[15] These estimates demonstrate the effects of closing only the Los
Angeles and Long Beach ports.¶ On a national scale, such a shutdown would be catastrophic. The
Government Accountability Office notes that:¶ [O]ver 95 percent of U.S. international trade is
transported by water[;] thus, the safety and economic security of the United States depends in large
part on the secure use of the world’s seaports and waterways. A successful attack on a major seaport
could potentially result in a dramatic slowdown in the international supply chain with impacts in the
billions of dollars.[16]¶ As of 2008, “U.S. ports move 99 percent of the nation’s overseas cargo,
handle more than 2.5 billion tons of trade annually, and move $5.5 billion worth of goods in and out
every day.” Further, “approximately 95 percent of U.S. military forces and supplies that are sent
overseas, including those for Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, pass through U.S.
ports.”[17]
Trade collapse causes war
Griswold 7(Daniel, April 20, Trade, Democracy and Peace: The Virtuous Cycle, Daniel T. Griswold is director of
the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies., http://www.cato.org/publications/speeches/trade-democracypeace-virtuous-cycle)
The world has somehow become a more peaceful place.¶ A little-noticed headline on an Associated Press
story a while back reported, “War declining worldwide, studies say.” In 2006, a survey by the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute found that the number of armed conflicts around the world has
been in decline for the past half-century. Since the early 1990s, ongoing conflicts have dropped from 33 to
17, with all of them now civil conflicts within countries. The Institute’s latest report found that 2005
marked the second year in a row that no two nations were at war with one another. What a
remarkable and wonderful fact.¶ The death toll from war has also been falling. According to the
Associated Press report, “The number killed in battle has fallen to its lowest point in the post-World War II
period, dipping below 20,000 a year by one measure. Peacemaking missions, meanwhile, are growing in
number.” Current estimates of people killed by war are down sharply from annual tolls ranging from 40,000
to 100,000 in the 1990s, and from a peak of 700,000 in 1951 during the Korean War.¶ Many causes lie behind
the good news—the end of the Cold War and the spread of democracy, among them—but expanding trade
and globalization appear to be playing a major role in promoting world peace. Far from stoking a
“World on Fire,” as one misguided American author argued in a forgettable book, growing commercial ties
between nations have had a dampening effect on armed conflict and war. I would argue that free
trade and globalization have promoted peace in three main ways.¶ First, as I argued a moment ago,
trade and globalization have reinforced the trend toward democracy, and democracies tend not to
pick fights with each other. Thanks in part to globalization, almost two thirds of the world’s
countries today are democracies—a record high. Some studies have cast doubt on the idea that
democracies are less likely to fight wars. While it’s true that democracies rarely if ever war with each other, it
is not such a rare occurrence for democracies to engage in wars with non-democracies. We can still hope that
has more countries turn to democracy, there will be fewer provocations for war by non-democracies.¶ A
second and even more potent way that trade has promoted peace is by promoting more economic
integration. As national economies become more intertwined with each other, those nations have
more to lose should war break out. War in a globalized world not only means human casualties and
bigger government, but also ruptured trade and investment ties that impose lasting damage on the
economy. In short, globalization has dramatically raised the economic cost of war.¶ The 2005 Economic
Freedom of the World Report contains an insightful chapter on “Economic Freedom and Peace” by Dr. Erik
Gartzke, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Dr. Gartzke compares the propensity of
countries to engage in wars and their level of economic freedom and concludes that economic freedom,
including the freedom to trade, significantly decreases the probability that a country will experience a military
dispute with another country. Through econometric analysis, he found that, “Making economies freer
translates into making countries more peaceful. At the extremes, the least free states are about 14
times as conflict prone as the most free.Ӧ Effect of Economic Freedom on Militarized Interstate
Disputes¶ By the way, Dr. Gartzke’s analysis found that economic freedom was a far more important variable
in determining a countries propensity to go to war than democracy.¶ A third reason why free trade
promotes peace is because it allows nations to acquire wealth through production and exchange
rather than conquest of territory and resources. As economies develop, wealth is increasingly
measured in terms of intellectual property, financial assets, and human capital. Such assets cannot
be easily seized by armies. In contrast, hard assets such as minerals and farmland are becoming relatively
less important in a high-tech, service economy. If people need resources outside their national borders,
say oil or timber or farm products, they can acquire them peacefully by trading away what they can
produce best at home. In short, globalization and the development it has spurred have rendered the
spoils of war less valuable.
Extensions
Information Dominance I/L
Oceanographic data key to Naval power
Chu et al 2005
Peter C., Naval Ocean Analysis and Prediction Laboratory, Department of Oceanography, Naval
Postgraduate Schoo, Satellite Data Assimilation for Improvement of Naval Undersea
Capability,https://www.mtsociety.org/pdf/publications/journal/Journals_2005-2003/MTS38-1Color.pdf
Even with all the high technology weapons onboard U.S. Navy ships today, the difference between
success and failure often comes down to our understanding and knowledge of the environment in
which we are operating. Accurately pre- dicting the ocean environment is a criti- cal factor in using our
detection systems to find a target and in setting our weap- ons to prosecute a target (Gottshall. 1997;
Chu et al.. 1998). From the ocean tem- perature and salinity, the sound velocity profiles (SVP) can be
calculated. SVPs are a key input used by U.S. Navy weapons programs to predict weapon performance
in the medium. The trick lies in finding the degree to which the effectiveness of the weapon systems is
tied to the accu- racy of the ocean predictions. The U.S. Navy's Meteorological and Oceanographic
(METOC) community currently uses three different methods to obtain representative SVPs of the
ocean: climatology, in situ measurements, and data (including satellite data) assimilation. The
climatologtcal data provides the back- ground SVP information that might not be current. The
Generalized Digital En- vironmental Model (GDEM) is an ex- ample of a climatological system that provides long-term mean temperature, salin- ity, and sound speed profiles. The in situ measurements from
conductivity-tem- perature-depth (CTD) and expendable bathythermograph (XBT) casts may give
accurate and timely information, but these are not likely to have large spatial and tem- poral coverage
over all regions where U.S. ships are going to be operating. In a data assimilation system, an initial
climatology or forecast is improved by using satellite and in situ data to better estimate synop- tic
SVPs. The Modular Ocean Data As- similation System (MODAS) utilizes sea surface height (SSH) and sea
surface tem- perature (SST) in this way to make nowcasts of the ocean environment (Fox et al., 2002).
The value added by satellite data as- similation for use of undersea weapon sys- tems can be evaluated
using the SVP in- put data from MODAS (with satellite data assimilation) and GDEM (climatology without
satellite data assimilation). The question also arises of how many altim- eters are necessary to generate
an optimal MODAS field. Too few inputs could re- sult in an inaccurate MODAS field, which in turn could
lead to decreased weapon effectiveness. There must also be some point at which the addition of
another altimeter is going to add a negligible in- crease in effectiveness. This superfluous altimeter
would be simply a waste of money that could be spent on a more use- ful system. The purpose of this
study is to quan- tify the advantage gained from the use of data from MODAS assimilation of satel- lite
observations rather than climatology. The study will specifically cover the ben- efits of MODAS data over
climatology when using their respective SVPs to deter- mine torpedo settings. These settings re- sult in
acoustic coverage percentages that will be used as the metric to compare the two types of data.
Undersea Warfare UQ
Navy data is cold war era
Eaglen and Rodeback 2010
Mackenzie Eaglen Research Fellow for National Security Studies, Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies
Jon Rodeback Editor, Research Publications Heritage Submarine Arms Race in the Pacific: The Chinese
Challenge to U.S. Undersea Supremacy http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/02/submarinearms-race-in-the-pacific-the-chinese-challenge-to-us-undersea-supremacy
In addition, "[t]he Navy lacks a modern equivalent of the Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS), the
theater-wide acoustic detection system developed in the 1950s to detect Soviet submarines."[23] This
is emblematic of broader weaknesses. Many systems deployed during the Cold War are of limited
usefulness in today's threat environment. For example, fixed sensors used during the Cold War are not
located in areas where conflict is most likely to occur this century. Furthermore, more countries are
deploying advanced submarines that could threaten U.S. aircraft carriers, raising the stakes of U.S.
military intervention. Navy force structure must adapt to this evolving underwater threat
environment. In July 2008, Navy officials testified before Congress about prioritizing relevant naval
combat capability and recent developments that significantly changed how they view current threats.
Vice Admiral Barry McCullough described the Navy's new perception of the threat environment: Rapidly
evolving traditional and asymmetric threats continue to pose increasing challenges to Combatant
Commanders. State actors and non-state actors who, in the past, have only posed limited threats in the
littoral are expanding their reach beyond their own shores with improved capabilities in blue water
submarine operations, advanced anti-ship cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. A number of countries
who historically have only possessed regional military capabilities are investing in their Navy to extend
their reach and influence as they compete in global markets. Our Navy will need to outpace other
navies in the blue water ocean environment as they extend their reach. This will require us to
continue to improve our blue water anti-submarine and anti-ballistic missile capabilities in order to
counter improving anti-access strategies.[24] The Navy has acknowledged its atrophying ASW
capabilities in the face of "a re-emerging undersea threat" and has set the goal of developing more
advanced sensors and anti-submarine weapons in the coming years.[25] The U.S. Pacific Fleet has
reportedly already increased ASW training.[26] These are critical efforts that must be sustained
alongside a goal to increase the procurement of additional ASW platforms--primarily submarines and
long-range maritime surveillance aircraft.
Undersea Warfare I/Ls
Navy data sets take the mean of past observations, the aff allows them to accurately
make predictions
Heidt 2009
Sarah L., Lieutenent USN, Long-range atmosphere-ocean forecasting in support of undersea warfare
operations in the western north Pacific, Naval postgraduate school thesis,
https://calhoun.nps.edu/public/bitstream/handle/10945/4516/09Sep_Heidt.pdf?sequence=1
Civilian agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate
Prediction Center (CPC), and Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) have surpassed the Department
of Defense in their use of state of the science technology to develop advanced datasets and methods
to analyze and forecast the climate system. In many cases, this technology is freely available to the
public. However, the Navy has adapted and used very little of this technology to advance Navy climate
prediction capabilities. ESRL provides public access to a number of climate datasets through their
interactive, web-based plotting and analysis tools. These tools, and an atmospheric reanalysis dataset
developed by the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) and the National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR), were extensively used in our study and will be further discussed in
Chapter II. In this study, it is important to differentiate between a state of the science reanalysis
dataset and a LTM-based climatology dataset. In our study, we used the NCEP/NCAR atmospheric
reanalysis dataset and the Simple Ocean Data Assimilation (SODA) ocean reanalysis dataset. Unlike LTM
based climatology datasets (e.g., GDEM), reanalysis datasets are constructed by integrating
observations obtained from numerous data sources together within a numerical prediction model,
through a process called data assimilation (CCSP 2008). The result is a continuous and spatially uniform,
reconstructed analysis of past atmospheric and/or oceanic conditions, typically spanning 30 years or
longer. Ocean reanalysis datasets, like SODA, have significant advantages over LTM based datasets,
like GDEM, because of their explicit representation of atmospheric and ocean dynamics, and their
much higher temporal resolution that can capture climate variations and other temporal fluctuations
of the atmosphere and ocean. While GDEM uses statistical analysis methods to fill in data gaps in space
and time, SODA resolves data gaps in a dynamically consistent and more realistic manner (Turek 2008).
More information on SODA and the use of it in our study will be discussed in Chapter II.
NOAA Data Key
Navy and Coast Guard get the NOAA data
Allen 2013
Arthur A., Lead Coast Guard Search and Rescue oceanographer, Modeling the SAR Mission Communities
come together to develop strategies, technologies, Seapower Mag May 2013
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/CG9/images/SARMission_May2013.pdf
How often do you work with the U.S. Navy oceanographer? ALLEN: The Navy runs global oceanographic models for iheir use and they have
been very generous, and kind, to provide to us the surface currents from their models and also the surface winds. We are, if you will, a
customer to the Navy's numerical products. We have recently worked with the Navy very frequently because they switched their global models
in March. We have been in preparation for that switch over for a while, also holding weekly phone calls with NOAA, till- Navy and the Coast
Guard discussing thLs al an operational level. Within
the oceanographic communi- ty, we hope that everything —
currents, winds, etc. — will now be assessed through computers. Talk a little bit about your partnership with NOAA
and IOOS. ALLEN: The main benefit with NOAA and IOOS la tool used for tracking, predicting, managing and
adapting to changes in our ocean, coastal and Great Lakes environ- ments] is we get all these models and
products free of charge . There is no subscription fee. They make it avail- able at their site and all we
have to do is develop the information technology part of it that goes and grabs it. How will your work be
affected by budget cuts? ALLEN: 1 am very much involved in the development of new features in the Coast Guard's Search and Rescue Optimal
Planning System (SAROPS). The hardest part is more on an emotional level, because 1 want to see the continued development of SAROPS and
the rate of that development is very much affected by our fund- ing. So there are things that 1 want to develop into SAROPS — prototype stuff
— but there has to be a contract from a prototype to be available operationally, and that takes funding. Smaller budgets, in a sense it has
affected us. Most of my travel for the remainder of the fiscal vear — until Sept. 50 at the earliest — will be to and from my office and home. 1
will not be getting out to conferences or the field to talk with the communities that we serve. As the Coast Guards expert in these products, it's
useful to get in the field to talk about what's new and coming online, and the direct feedback they provide gives me ideas for new products to
develop. ■
IOOS uses high frequency radar – key to environmental and vessel management
Allen et al 2007
Art Allen USCG, Josh Kohut and Scott Glenn – Rutgers, MDA Decision Support for Disaster Response
IOOS Regional Association Collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard Search and Rescue, HazMat, and
Vessel Tracking http://oceanleadership.org/files/MDA_Proceedings_lowres.pdf
Surface current mapping is very important to achieving the societal goals of the Integrated Ocean
Observing System (IOOS) as well as to achieving the objectives of Marine Domain Awareness (MDA).
The availability and maturity of High-Frequency (HF) radar technology makes reliable surface current
mapping now possible. Rapid detection and accurate predictions of the trajectories of objects at or
near the surface of the ocean are important decision support tools for a variety of MDA activities
including • Search and Rescue (SAR), • HazMat, • Surf zone forecasting, and • Vessel tracking. Real-time
situational awareness includes nowcasts of current environmental conditions and vessel locations as
well as forecasts of the locations of hazardous materials released into the ocean. High Frequency (HF)
radar is proving to be an important technology for these purposes. HF Radar rose to the level of a
transformational technology for coastal ocean research and applications in the late 1990’s. Individual
radars map the radial component of the current towards or away from each radar site. By combining the
radial currents from small networks of 2 to 3 Radars often operated by individual university researchers,
sea surface current fields were produced in real time and distributed over the World Wide Web. The
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Research and Development Center first expressed interest in using the HF
Radar data for SAR based on the time series of current maps collected during the passage of Hurricane
Floyd along the New Jersey coast in September of 1999. They found that current fields from the HF
Radar network during the storm significantly reduced the size of the search area using existing tools
applied in a research mode. However, the USCG concluded that, while the technology did provide
improved guidance, the data footprint available in 1999 was too small to be operationally significant.
Nevertheless, a vision for the future emerged. The vision included the need to (1) expand HF Radar
technologies to enable surface current mapping over larger regions for the entire nation and (2) improve
the Search And Rescue tools to benefit fully from the new data streams.
Navy Impact Extension
Strong navy de-escalates all conflict and deters great power war
Roughead et al., US Chief of Naval Operations, 2007
(Gary, “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower”, October,
www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf, ldg)
This strategy reaffirms the use of seapower to influence actions and activities at sea and ashore. The expeditionary character and versatility
of
maritime forces provide the U.S. the asymmetric advantage of enlarging or contracting its military footprint
in areas where access is denied or limited. Permanent or prolonged basing of our military forces overseas often has unintended economic, social
or political repercussions. The sea is a vast maneuver space, where the presence of maritime forces can be adjusted
as conditions dictate to enable flexible approaches to escalation, de-escalation and deterrence of conflicts.
The speed, flexibility, agility and scalability of maritime forces provide joint or combined force commanders a range
of options for responding to crises. Additionally, integrated maritime operations, either within formal alliance structures (such as the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization) or more informal arrangements (such as the Global Maritime Partnership initiative), send powerful messages to would-be aggressors
that we will act with others to ensure collective security and prosperity. United States seapower will be globally postured to secure our homeland and citizens from
direct attack and to advance our interests around the world. As our security and prosperity are inextricably linked with those of others, U.S.
maritime
forces will be deployed to protect and sustain the peaceful global system comprised of interdependent networks of
trade, finance, information, law, people and governance. We will employ the global reach, persistent presence, and operational flexibility inherent in U.S. seapower
to accomplish six key tasks, or strategic imperatives. Where tensions are high or where we wish to demonstrate to our friends and allies our commitment to security
and stability, U.S.
maritime forces will be characterized by regionally concentrated, forward-deployed task forces with the
combat power to limit regional conflict, deter major power war, and should deterrence fail, win our Nation’s wars as part of a
joint or combined campaign. In addition, persistent, mission-tailored maritime forces will be globally distributed in order to contribute to homeland defense-indepth, foster and sustain cooperative relationships with an expanding set of international partners, and prevent or mitigate disruptions and crises. Credible combat
power will be continuously postured in the Western Pacific and the Arabian Gulf/Indian Ocean to protect our vital interests, assure our friends and allies of our
continuing commitment to regional security, and deter and dissuade potential adversaries and peer competitors. This combat
power can be
selectively and rapidly repositioned to meet contingencies that may arise elsewhere. These forces will be sized
and postured to fulfill the following strategic imperatives: Limit regional conflict with forward deployed, decisive maritime power. Today regional conflict has
ramifications far beyond the area of conflict. Humanitarian
crises, violence spreading across borders, pandemics, and
the interruption of vital resources are all possible when regional crises erupt. While this strategy advocates a wide dispersal of
networked maritime forces, we cannot be everywhere, and we cannot act to mitigate all regional conflict. Where conflict threatens the global
system and our national interests, maritime forces will be ready to respond alongside other elements of national and multi-national
power, to give political leaders a range of options for deterrence, escalation and de-escalation. Maritime
forces that are persistently present and combat-ready provide the Nation’s primary forcible entry option in an era of
declining access, even as they provide the means for this Nation to respond quickly to other crises. Whether over the horizon or powerfully arrayed
in plain sight, maritime forces can deter the ambitions of regional aggressors, assure friends and allies, gain and maintain access, and protect our citizens while
working to sustain the global order. Critical
to this notion is the maintenance of a powerful fleet—ships, aircraft, Marine forces,
and shore-based fleet activities—capable of selectively controlling the seas, projecting power ashore, and protecting friendly forces and civilian
populations from attack. Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous to global stability as war among major powers.
Maintenance and extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower advantage is a key component of deterring
major power war. While war with another great power strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous effects demands that it be actively
deterred using all elements of national power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—our lethality, global
reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, and operational agility—provide the joint
commander with a range of deterrent options. We will pursue an approach to deterrence that includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate
against aggressors conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces.
ACE I/L
Key to Army Corps of Engineers
Grisoli 2011
William T., Major General US Army Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, The Importance of the Integrated Ocean Observing System to the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Marine Technology Society Journal
http://www.plocan.eu/doc/MTS%20Journal_2011_Vol45-No1.pdf
Where we do nor have actual gauge observations, we depend on numerical models (wave, circulation, storm
surge, sediment transport, etc). Models are also used for multiscenario planning and to evaluate different
project de- signs. Models require comprehensive data sets for verification and to quantify model
accuracy. Often we find that suf- ficient data do not exist. To address this issue, our Field Research Facility lo- cated in
Duck, North Carolina, is cur- rently working to develop tools and performance metrics for model/data comparisons and has already demonstrated a real-time system for model evaluation using the Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN) wave model. Much more work in this field is
required. The Corps has developed guidance for incorporating sca-lcvcl changes and is developing guidance for incorporat- ing other climate
change impacts into our existing and future projects. We arc therefore interested in understand- ing, quantifying and refining the esti- mates of
future climate change. This is a major change in the way we do business because our projects are de- signed to provide a level of safety at an
acceptable level of risk. To accom- plish this, our agency requires long- term, climate-quality observations of water level, waves, and storm
intensity and occurrence in the vicinity of our projects and at a broader regional level.
In these days of tight budgets and
limited resources, no single agency or emit)' can collect all the data they re- quire. We must work
together to coor- dinate efforts and to share our expertise, models, and data in readily usable formats. This is how we expect to fully re- alize the potential of IOOS —through access, not only to our
primary variables of interest, but to a much broader range of variables at increased spatial coverage
than is available today. For example, IOOS data on turbidity, salinity, dis- solved oxygen, macro species
popula-lions, and infauna density will all be used to improve Corps projects. Al- ready we arc
benefiting from IOOS data integration through the recently improved online access to IOOS data via
NOAA/National Data Buoy Cen- ter and the adoption or spatial and tem- poral data standards. In fact, we are adopting IOOS data
protocols for use in moving Corps data out of drawers and file cabinets and into online discov- erable
formats. We have also taken a major step to- ward facilitating the Corps' engagement with IOOS by supporting a permanent detail from the
Corps to the National IOOS Program Office. Linda Lillycrop currendy occupies this position and is working to encourage active participa- tion
between the 21 coastal districts of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the 11 IOOS Regional Associations. Continually
collaborating
with IOOS and our other partners ensures that the Corps maintains the data and capabili- ties we
need to prepare for hazards and protect our valuable coastal regions. The Corps would benefit
through a multiagcncy U.S. IOOS program operating at full capability, which in- cludes a sustained
data collection pro- gram with broad spatial data coverage of observations, standardized data architecture and products, and the capa- bility for rapid dissemination of data. These capabilities would
greatly ad- vance the Corps' ability to accomplish our missions, to improve our projects, and to
strengthen management and environmental stewardship across the nation. Building strong!
IOOS K2 BA
IOOS key to enhance regional stability—navy is dependent on environmental
analysis for successful operations
NOPP 10(NOPP was established by the U.S. Congress (Public Law 105-85) in Fiscal Year 1998 for two general
purposes:¶ To promote the national goals of assuring national security, advancing ¶ economic development, protecting
quality of life, and strengthening science¶ education and communication through improved knowledge of the ocean,
Toward a U.S. Plan for an Integrated, Sustained Ocean Observing System, http://www.nopp.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/03/towardintegrated.pdf)
The U.S. has a long tradition of "forward naval presence" in trouble spots around the world to¶
enhance regional stability and global security. To support this national requirement for global¶ reach,
the Navy was an early leader in federal efforts to establish worldwide ocean observations¶ and
research. While the Navy is continuing a broad-based effort to release much of its data for¶ public use, it still
holds—and continues to collect—some of the most comprehensive ocea.n data¶ sets in the world. Today's
high-tech military systems require increasingly sophisticated and¶ timely inputs of ocean data to
ensure safety of the fleet, optimize performance and precision, and¶ avoid damage to non-military
targets. A robust ocean observation system is vital to the success¶ of naval operations.
Understanding the oceans continues to be fundamental to our national¶ security, as well as to global
economic and environmental well being.¶ The U.S. Navy needs analysis a.nd prediction of the traditional
suite of oceanlatmosphere¶ parameters that are needed by all sea-going activities, such as winds, waves,
visibility, currents,¶ bathymehy, sea ice and sea level. In addition, due to the nature of the Navy's mission,¶
infonnation is required on the temperature and salinity variations at the surface and throughout¶ the water
column, as well as ambient (or background) noise and bottom properties in shallow-¶ water areas. The
Navy's observation systems have insufficient information (especially real-time)¶ about most coastal
zones, suggesting this is a priority region for a.n ocean observing system to¶ address.
IOOS key to information dominance—provides most accurate environmental data
Skelley 13(Susan, June 26, IOOS Presentation at Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance Meeting,Deputy
Director, US IOOS Program Office presents at the Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance Meeting,
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/ioos_in_action/stories/ioos_at_isr2013.html)
The good order and security of the global maritime commons and America’s economic zones and
territorial seas are increasingly vulnerable to numerous threats and challenges. These challenges
include those from conventional naval forces, as well as those from less traditional sources.
Understanding the threats of climate change, environmental degradation, ecological disasters, and
overfishing is important to maintaining awareness of factors that affect global and U.S. maritime
security.¶ IOOS’ 17 federal agency partners and 11 regions – which include academic, private sector,
and non-governmental organizations as well as state, tribal, and local governments – are already our
nation’s eye on the ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes. The unique structure of the national IOOS is
poised to do so much more in helping our military evaluate threats against our citizens and our
country. IOOS uses a variety of ocean sensing and observing systems, linked to deliver data in
standard ways so that the data are easier to access and use. ¶ As stated in President Obama’s
Executive Order 13547 concerning our nation’s waters: “The ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes
provide jobs, food, energy resources, ecological services, recreation, and tourism opportunities, and
play critical roles in our Nation’s transportation and trade, as well as the global mobility of our
Armed Forces and the maintenance of international peace and security.Ӧ The U.S. Commission on
Ocean Policy outlined seven societal goals in its 2004 report, An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st
Century. These societal goals are the basis for IOOS and for ocean science ISR. IOOS provides a
coordinated local, regional, national, and international network of ocean and coastal observations,
modeling, and data analysis and communications that helps protect life and property, sustain
economic vitality, safeguard ecosystems, and advance the quality of life for all people living near the
sea and Great Lakes.¶ One of the key IOOS observing assets is its array of high frequency (HF)
radars, which measure surface currents in near real-time and in all types of weather, to serve a
multitude of interests. Among these, the U.S. Coast Guard incorporates HF radar data into its
search and rescue system to get a more precise picture of how currents are likely to move a person
or vessel lost at sea. In fact, the information reduces the size of the search grid by up to 66 percent
after 96 hours, saving rescuers precious time and resources when trying to save lives! Recently, the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funded a project to study the utility of HF radar
systems in tracking vessels of interest. ¶ DHS modified HF radar signal processing to enable the
system to detect and track vessels and to link to the Naval Research Laboratory’s unclassified Open
Mongoose system. The modification allowed fusing of vessel tracks from the HF radar network and
other all-source intelligence to generate a maritime common picture for open dissemination.¶ Like
the Navy, IOOS is dedicated to ensuring accurate information is in hand to support decisions, such
as closing areas threatened by an oil spill, as was done in response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon
spill in the Gulf of Mexico. IOOS information also helps monitor weather systems, as IOOS did
during Superstorm Sandy in the fall of 2012. ¶ The bottom line is that IOOS provides timely
information in easy to use formats to support effective decision-making. To paraphrase ADM James
Watkins, former Chief of Naval Operations: unless we have the capabilities to sense, measure, and
analyze and communicate the results of our analysis, our ability to carry out important decisions will
be in doubt.
IOOS implementation key—allows us to counter submarine and mine warfare
National Research Council 7(Committee on Distributed Remote Sensing for Naval Undersea Warfare, The
National Research Council (NRC) is the working arm of the United States National Academies, which produces reports
that shape policies, inform public opinion, and advance the pursuit of science, engineering, and medicine.,
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11927)
Since the early 20th cent11ry, the United States has been a nation with global responsibility for¶
maritime commerce and power projection. Today the United States is recognized as the sole¶
superpower, with its global reach often dependent on the capability of the U.S. Navy to put¶ ships
with bulk capacity offshore of virtually any country. This global reach is threatened,¶ however, by
the widespread acquisition of quiet, diesel electric submarines and inexpensive¶ mines that can be
very effective weapons ir1 an adversary‘s littoral waters, whether shallow or¶ deep.¶ The question
then becomes: Can the United States, by implementing distributed remote¶ sensing (DRS)
technology, colmter this asymmetric threat? This study, which was requested by¶ the former Chief of
Naval Operations, addresses the state of the art of and the challenges for¶ DRS and related
technologies, assesses current shortfalls, and makes recommendations toward¶ rapidly
implementing DRS systems to colmter the growing submarine threat as well as¶ problems of
countermine warfare.‘ Most concepts for DRS are not mature, and there are many¶ challenges ir1
integrating them for use as a military system; neverthe- less, the National Research Council’s
(NRC’s) Committee on Distributed Remote Sensing for Naval Undersea Warfare believes that, as
described in this report, there are some selective short-term and many long-term opportunities to
develop useful naval systems. The committee emphasizes that much remains to be done—especially
for those systems involving significant automation and networking.
IOOS key to navy success—enviornmental factors have large effects that can not be
calculated properly in the status quo
Chu et al 3(September, Peter C. Michael D. Perry¶ Naval Ocean Analysis and Prediction¶ Laboratory, Department of
Oceanography,¶ Naval Postgraduate School¶ Monterey, CA¶ Eric L. Gottshall-- Space and Naval Warfare System
Command¶ San Diego, CA¶ David S. Cwalina-- Naval Undersea Warfare Center¶ Newport, RI, Satellite data assimilation
for naval undersea capability improvement, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/abstractAuthors.jsp?arnumber=1282623)
Even with all the high technology¶ onboard U.S. Navy ships today,¶ the difierence between success
and failure¶ often comm down to ou.r understanding¶ and knowledge of the environment in¶ whid1
we are operating Accurately pre-¶ dicting the ocean environment is a criti-¶ cal fitctor i.n using our
detection sysnems¶ to find a target and i.n setting ou.r weap-¶ ons to prosecuue a target (Gottshall.
199?;¶ Chu et al., 1993). From the ocean nem-¶ peratu.re and salinity. the sound velocity¶ profiles
[SVP) mn be calculated. SVPs are¶ a key input used by U.S. Navy weapons¶ programs to predict
weapon performance¶ in t.he meditun. The trick lies in finding¶ the degree to which t.he
eE'ect.iveness of¶ the weapon sysnems is tied to the accu-¶ racy of the ocan predictions.
BA K2 Naval Power
Battlespace awareness is the key determiner of naval power—allows naval commanders to make more
knowledgeable decisions
USNIDC 13(US Navy Information Dominance Corps, March, US Navy Dominance Information Dominance
Roadmap 2013-2028,
http://defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/Information_Dominance_Roadmap_March_2013.pdf)
Battlespace Awareness (BA) is the ability to understand the disposition and
intentions of potential adversaries as well as the characteristics and conditions of
the operational environment. This knowledge impacts Navy and joint planning,
operations and decision making at the straoegic, operational, or tactical level. The
Navy's operational environment spans all domains (maritime, air, land, space and
cyberspace) and all frequencies across the EM spectrum. Navy BA relies upon
Navy's Assured C2 capabilities, enables Navy Integrated Fires, and provides naval
commanders with the level of decision superiority required to execute the broad¶ array of Navy
missions. Effective BA within the Navy must leverage all available¶ sources of information, and
requires a profound knowledge of the following¶ maritime-related areas: l) potential adversary
locations, activities, intent and¶ capabilities, including traditional, asymmetric, cyber, and emerging
methods of¶ warfare; 2) joint, coalition, neutral party and own fimrce capacity, capability and¶ status;
and, 3) the physical and virtual environments and their potential impact¶ on mission execution. The
major elements of BA and he corresponding Navy¶ concerns in each of these areas are highlighted
below: askirtg, Planning, and Direction: The ability to synchronize and¶ integrate the activities and
resources of collection, processing, analysis,¶ and dissemination to meet information requirements.
Navy's capabilities¶ in this area are constrained by challenges relating to the tasking of non-¶ organic
sensors and assets, coordinating with all external stakeholders, and¶ measuring the mission impact of
various BA-related activities.¶ ' Collection: The ability to gather and obtain required data to satisfy¶
information needs. Navy’: rapabililies in this area are roaurmined by diflinrlties in integrating and
coordinating organic and non-organic sensor: and platforms, challenges¶ with monitoring noncooperating platforms arms: multiple domains, and gaining¶ sensor access to denied areas.
Battlespace awareness is key to naval effectiveness—commanders are able to weigh the costs and benefits of
actions
Taylor 14(Daniel P., April 8, Daniel is Defense Daily's Virtual Analyst, C4ISR Journal, Government Executive,
Official: Navy Aiming for ¶ Better Battlespace Awareness, Sea Power Magazine,
http://www.seapowermagazine.org/sas/stories/20140408-integrated-fires.html)
The Navy’s ideal end state when it comes to integrated fires is to create a system where the
combatant commander has perfect battlespace awareness and thus can make the right decision at
any time — a daunting challenge, but one worth pursuing, the Navy’s head of the Integrated Fires
Division told Sea-Air-Space Exposition attendees April 8.¶ Maggie Palmieri, director of integrated
fires for the Navy’s information dominance directorate, said the battlespace commander will have
both kinetic and nonkinetic options at his disposal, both with very different consequences, and thus
he needs to make the right decision to handle the enemy in just the right way.¶ “When I think about
the future, my Nirvana is really when the commander in the battlespace has an awareness of the
forces around him, the enemy or their mutual forces, and he knows roughly what the intent of the
enemy will be — perfect battlespace awareness, of course,” Palmieri said. “He has command and
control, and he can talk to his forces and say which action he can take, leveraging that part of the
information envelope, and then he has the ability to make these decision tradeoffs. Should I use
kinetic attack now to ensure a strike there, or maybe I want to do a nonkinetic attack because I don’t
want to escalate the situation yet?Ӧ The path to that end state is to integrate the information the
Navy has at its disposal and “really try to figure out where the trade space is between a nonkinetic or
a kinetic actions,” she said.¶
Information dominance is key to naval power—allows for better tracking of
adverseries
Clark 2(Venn, October, Admiral Vern Clark, Sea Power 21¶ Projecting Decisive Joint Capabilities,
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/proceedings.html)
Projecting decisive combat power has been critical to every commander who ever went into battle,
and this will remain true in decades ahead. Sea Strike operations are how the 21st-century Navy will
exert direct, decisive, and sustained influence in joint campaigns. They will involve the dynamic
application of persistent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; time-sensitive strike; ship-toobjective maneuver; information operations; and covert strike to deliver devastating power and
accuracy in future campaigns. ¶ Information gathering and management are at the heart of this
revolution in striking power. Networked, long-dwell naval sensors will be integrated with national
and joint systems to penetrate all types of cover and weather, assembling vast amounts of
information. Data provided by Navy assets—manned and unmanned—will be vital to establishing a
comprehensive understanding of enemy military, economic, and political vulnerabilities. Rapid
planning processes will then use this knowledge to tailor joint strike packages that deliver calibrated
effects at precise times and places.¶ Sea Strike Impact¶ Amplified, effects-based striking power¶
Increased precision attack and information operations¶ Enhanced warfighting contribution of
Marines and Special Forces¶ "24 / 7" offensive operations¶ Seamless integration with joint strike
packages¶ Sea Strike Capabilities¶ Persistent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance¶ Timesensitive strike¶ Electronic warfare / information operations¶ Ship-to-objective maneuver¶ Covert
strike¶ Future Sea Strike Technologies¶ Autonomous, organic, long-dwell sensors¶ Integrated national,
theater, and force sensors¶ Knowledge-enhancement systems¶ Unmanned combat vehicles¶
Hypersonic missiles¶ Electro-magnetic rail guns¶ Hyper-spectral imaging¶ Sea Strike: Action Steps¶
Accelerate information dominance via ForceNet¶ Develop, acquire, and integrate systems to increase
combat reach, stealth, and lethality¶ Distribute offensive striking capability throughout the entire
force¶ Deploy sea-based, long-dwell, manned and unmanned sensors¶ Develop information
operations as a major warfare area¶ Synergize with Marine Corps transformation efforts¶ Partner with
the other services to accelerate Navy transformation¶ Knowledge dominance provided by persistent
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance will be converted into action by a full array of Sea
Strike options—next-generation missiles capable of in-flight targeting, aircraft with stand-off
precision weapons, extended-range naval gunfire, information operations, stealthy submarines,
unmanned combat vehicles, and Marines and SEALs on the ground. Sovereign naval forces will
exploit their strategic flexibility, operational independence, and speed of command to conduct
sustained operations 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year. ¶ Information superiority
and flexible strike options will result in time-sensitive targeting with far greater speed and accuracy.
Military operations will become more complicated as advanced intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance products proliferate. Expanded situational awareness will put massed forces at risk,
for both friends and adversaries. This will compress timelines and prompt greater use of dispersed,
low-visibility forces. Countering such forces will demand speed, agility, and streamlined information
processing tied to precision attack. Sea Strike will meet that challenge.¶ The importance of
information operations will grow in the years ahead as high-technology weapons and systems
become more widely available. Information operations will mature into a major warfare area, to
include electronic warfare, psychological operations, computer network attack, computer network
defense, operations security, and military deception. Information operations will play a key role in
controlling crisis escalation and preparing the battlefield for subsequent attack.
Battlespace awareness key to continued naval superiority—allows for better
knowledge of the location of the enemy
Allen et al 7(James T. Conway --¶ General, U.S. Marine Corps, ¶ Commandant of the Marine Corps,¶ Gary Roughead
--¶ Admiral, U.S. Navy, ¶ Chief of Naval Operations,¶ Thad W. Allen --¶ Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard ,¶ Commandant of the
Coast Guard, October, A Cooperative Strategy ¶ for ¶ 21st Century Seapower,
http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf)
Enhance Awareness. To be effective, there must be a significantly ¶ increased commitment to
advance maritime domain awareness (MDA) ¶ and expand intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (ISR) capability ¶ and capacity. New partnerships with the world’s maritime commercial
¶ interests and the maritime forces of participating nations will reduce ¶ the dangerous anonymity of sea borne
transport of people and cargoes. ¶ Great strides have already been taken in that direction, and the National ¶
Strategy for Maritime Security has mandated an even higher level of ¶ interagency cooperation in pursuit of
effective MDA. Maritime forces ¶ will contribute to enhance information sharing, underpinning and ¶
energizing our capability to neutralize threats to our Nation as far from ¶ our shores as possible. Critical to
realizing the benefits of increased awareness is our ability ¶ to protect information from compromise through
robust information 211 cooporative strategy for a 21st century seapower 15¶ assurance measures. Such
measures will increase international partner ¶ confidence that information provided will be shared only with
those ¶ entities for which it is intended.¶ Adversaries are unlikely to attempt conventional force-on-force
conflict ¶ and, to the extent that maritime forces could be openly challenged, ¶ their plans will
almost certainly rely on asymmetric attack and surprise, ¶ achieved through stealth, deception, or
ambiguity. Our ISR capabilities ¶ must include innovative ways to penetrate the designs of
adversaries, ¶ and discern their capabilities and vulnerabilities while supporting the ¶ full range of
military operations. We must remove the possibility of an ¶ adversary gaining the initiative over
forward-deployed forces and ensure ¶ we provide decision makers with the information they need to
deter ¶ aggression and consider escalatory measures in advance of such gambits.
Battle space awareness is key to naval effectiveness—decision making
USNIDC 13(US Navy Information Dominance Corps, March, US Navy Dominance Information Dominance
Roadmap 2013-2028,
http://defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/Information_Dominance_Roadmap_March_2013.pdf)
Enable Informed, Decisive Action: Navy commanders must maintain ¶ sufficient decision space to
operate within an adversary’s decision cycle and must ¶ continually decide upon available
warfighting options as the environment evolves. ¶ Functional Descriptions: 16 17¶ U.S. Navy
Information Dominance Roadmap, 2013–2028 ¶ To enable informed, decisive action within A2/AD
environments, the Navy ¶ will be required to enhance operational and tactical decision support to
increase ¶ warfighting options.
Naval power is dependent on IOOS—allows commanders to react to dangerous
situations
USNIDC 13(US Navy Information Dominance Corps, March, US Navy Dominance Information Dominance
Roadmap 2013-2028,
http://defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/Information_Dominance_Roadmap_March_2013.pdf)
Fuse Essential Combat Information: Navy commanders require immediate ¶ and continual access
to essential combat information in order to maneuver ¶ the force and execute the full range of
missions under a broad spectrum of ¶ operating conditions. To sustain the flow of combat
information within A2/¶ AD environments, the Navy will be required to streamline tasking,
planning ¶ and direction; advance sensor development across all domains; and, automate ¶
processing, fusion and product delivery.
Information dominance is to naval power—decision making
USNIDC 13(US Navy Information Dominance Corps, March, US Navy Dominance Information Dominance
Roadmap 2013-2028,
http://defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/Information_Dominance_Roadmap_March_2013.pdf)
Understand the Operating Environment: Navy commanders base their ¶ operational decisions on a
continually evolving understanding of the operating ¶ environment which relies on the accuracy and
completeness of information ¶ available at any given point in time. To optimize the utility and value
of essential ¶ information, the Navy will be required to develop a shared, relevant real-time ¶ COP;
comprehend and predict the physical and virtual environments; and ¶ understand the capabilities
and intentions of allies, adversaries and neutrals.
K2 Detterrence
Naval power is key to deterrence—rapid response times and manuverability
Hultin & Blair 6(Jerry MacArthur HULTIN and Admiral Dennis BLAIR, Naval Power and Globalization: ¶ The
Next Twenty Years in the Pacific, Jerry M. Hultin is former president of Polytechnic Institute of New York University
From 1997 to 2000 Mr. Hultin served as Under Secretary of the Navy., Dennis Cutler Blair is the former United States
Director of National Intelligence and is a retired United States Navy admiral who was the commander of U.S. forces in
the Pacific region, http://engineering.nyu.edu/files/hultin%20naval%20power.pdf)
Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous ¶ to global stability as war
among major powers. Maintenance and ¶ extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower
advantage is a key ¶ component of deterring major power war. While war with another great ¶ power
strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous ¶ effects demands that it be actively
deterred using all elements of national ¶ power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—
our lethality, ¶ global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, ¶ and
operational agility—provide the joint commander with a range ¶ of deterrent options. We will pursue
an approach to deterrence that ¶ includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate against
aggressors ¶ conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces. ¶ Win our Nation’s wars. In
times of war, our ability to impose local sea ¶ control, overcome challenges to access, force entry,
and project and ¶ sustain power ashore, makes our maritime forces an indispensable ¶ element of
the joint or combined force. This expeditionary advantage ¶ must be maintained because it provides
joint and combined force ¶ commanders with freedom of maneuver. Reinforced by a robust sealift ¶
capability that can concentrate and sustain forces, sea control and power ¶ projection enable
extended campaigns ashore.
The navy is key to deterrence—it can be rapidly positioned in response to global
crises
Allen et al 7(James T. Conway --¶ General, U.S. Marine Corps, ¶ Commandant of the Marine Corps,¶ Gary Roughead
--¶ Admiral, U.S. Navy, ¶ Chief of Naval Operations,¶ Thad W. Allen --¶ Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard ,¶ Commandant of the
Coast Guard, October, A Cooperative Strategy ¶ for ¶ 21st Century Seapower,
http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf)
Credible combat power will be continuously postured in the Western ¶ Pacific and the Arabian
Gulf/Indian Ocean to protect our vital ¶ interests, assure our friends and allies of our continuing
commitment ¶ to regional security, and deter and dissuade potential adversaries and ¶ peer
competitors. This combat power can be selectively and rapidly ¶ repositioned to meet contingencies
that may arise elsewhere. These forces ¶ will be sized and postured to fulfill the following strategic
imperatives:¶ Limit regional conflict with forward deployed, decisive maritime ¶ power. Today
regional conflict has ramifications far beyond the area ¶ of conflict. Humanitarian crises, violence
spreading across borders, ¶ pandemics, and the interruption of vital resources are all possible when ¶
regional crises erupt. While this strategy advocates a wide dispersal of ¶ networked maritime forces,
we cannot be everywhere, and we cannot ¶ act to mitigate all regional conflict. ¶ Where conflict
threatens the global system and our national interests, ¶ maritime forces will be ready to respond
alongside other elements of ¶ national and multi-national power, to give political leaders a range of ¶
options for deterrence, escalation and de-escalation. Maritime forces ¶ that are persistently present
and combat-ready provide the Nation’s ¶ primary forcible entry option in an era of declining access,
even as they ¶ provide the means for this Nation to respond quickly to other crises. ¶ Whether over
the horizon or powerfully arrayed in plain sight, maritime ¶ forces can deter the ambitions of
regional aggressors, assure friends and ¶ allies, gain and maintain access, and protect our citizens
while working ¶ to sustain the global order.
Naval power is key to avoid war--empirics
Gerson and Russell 11(Michael and Allison Lawler, Michael Gerson is a nationally syndicated columnist who
appears twice weekly in the Washington Post. Michael Gerson is the Hastert Fellow at the J. Dennis Hastert Center for
Economics, Government, and Public Policy at Wheaton College in Illinois., Russell is also an assistant professor of
Political Science and International Studies at Merrimack College in North Andover, Massachusetts. Russell holds a Ph.D.
from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, an M.A. in International Relations from American
University in Washington, D.C., and a B.A. in Political Science from Boston College., Quoting Dr. Seth Cropsey,
American Grand Strategy and Sea Power,
https://cna.org/sites/default/files/research/American%20Grand%20Strategy%20and%20Seapower%202011%20Conf
erence%20Report%20CNA.pdf)
Dr. Seth Cropsey noted that the famous naval strategist Alfred T. Mahan said that seapower is¶ the
key to greatness because trade is conducted on the waterways. Dr. Cropsey noted that the¶ ovelall
global stability since the Second World War has convinced us that the oceans are safe¶ — but ifa
competitor rendered them unsafe and unstable, the U.S. economy would suffer. He¶ argued that it is
difficult to quantify seapower’s many benefits, as they lie beyond economic¶ forecast models and
create general conditions for stable commercial relations on the¶ waterways. Yet, because many of
seapower's most important contributions cannot be readily¶ quantified and the causal mechanisms by
which seapower contributes to security prosperity¶ cannot be easily observed, Navy budgets are a
ready target during times of financial pressure.¶ Dr. Cropsey argued that seapower is significant both
in peacetime and in war. Mobile force¶ can be deployed anywhere in the world; it is an efificient
means of indirectly diverting the¶ resources of other states; and it can shape other states in ways that
fit in with our strategic¶ interests. U.S. seapower, in his view, is a preventative force that assures
allies of commitment,¶ containment, and dissuasion, and encourages other countries to develop
commercially.¶ Ground forces, by contrast, cannot achieve these objectives in practicable or
desirable ways.¶ Dr. Cropsey said that if U.S. security declines, conflicts will increase, not diminish.
While¶ replacing British with American seapower had little effect on the maintenance of¶ international
order, a replacement of the United States by China would have more serious¶ consequences. From a
financial perspective, if the current debt crisis leads to a reduction in L'.S. seapower, the cure for our
financial woes will be short lived. Commerce provides nations¶ with well-being, comfort, and
security. In Dr. Cropsey’s view, commercial supremacy is an¶ important part of overall supremacy.¶
Future capability requirements¶ Admiral Michael McDevitt, U.S. Navy (Ret.) noted that Professor
Samuel Huntington's 1954¶ article, “The Transoceanic Navy,” articulated the essential logic of the
transoceanic era: there¶ are no more rival navies left to sink, the remaining navies are our friends, and
therefore we¶ must focus on power projection on the littorals, power projection ashore, peacetime
forward¶ naval presence, and alliances. RADM McDevitt said that these arguments, made in 1954,¶
continue to be central elements of U.S. grand and naval strategies today.¶ RADM McDevitt argued
that forward naval presence overseas provides presence and¶ proximity without large ground forces,
and it yields influence and provides decision-makers¶ with a wide range of scalable options. Being
proximate is a central driver of U.S. strategy, as¶ the objectives of reassuring allies, sustaining regional
stability and security, rapidly¶ responding to threats and contingencies, maintaining the SLOCs, and
deterring threats all¶ require being relatively close to allies and to current or potential adversaries.
Carrier-¶ centered naval power is especially important because airpower is the centerpiece of the¶
American way of war and is a key way in which the United States seeks to influence events¶ ashore
— and carriers can project a significant amount of airpower. Carriers provide the most¶ options for
the U.S. leadership to demonstrate L'.S. power: by projecting power without boots¶ on the ground;
by putting boots on the ground; or by providing vital airs support to ground¶ troops. In RADM
McDevitt’s view, offshore options and naval forward presence will — and¶ should — continue to be
a central component of U.S. grand strategy.
Naval power key to deterrence
Friedman 7(George, April 10, The Limitations and Necessity of Naval Power, George Friedman is the Chief
Executive Officer and founder of STRATFOR,
http://www.stratfor.com/limitations_and_necessity_naval_power#axzz36ocZEtyI)
The argument for slashing the Navy can be tempting. But consider the counterargument. First, and
most important, we must consider the crises the United States has not experienced. The presence of
the U.S. Navy has shaped the ambitions of primary and secondary powers. The threshold for
challenging the Navy has been so high that few have even initiated serious challenges. Those that
might be trying to do so, like the Chinese, understand that it requires a substantial diversion of
resources. Therefore, the mere existence of U.S. naval power has been effective in averting crises
that likely would have occurred otherwise. Reducing the power of the U.S. Navy, or fine-tuning it,
would not only open the door to challenges but also eliminate a useful, if not essential, element in
U.S. strategy -- the ability to bring relatively rapid force to bear.¶ There are times when the Navy's
use is tactical, and times when it is strategic. At this moment in U.S. history, the role of naval power
is highly strategic. The domination of the world's oceans represents the foundation stone of U.S.
grand strategy. It allows the United States to take risks while minimizing consequences. It facilitates
risk-taking. Above all, it eliminates the threat of sustained conventional attack against the homeland.
U.S. grand strategy has worked so well that this risk appears to be a phantom. The dispersal of U.S.
forces around the world attests to what naval power can achieve. It is illusory to believe that this
situation cannot be reversed, but it is ultimately a generational threat. Just as U.S. maritime
hegemony is measured in generations, the threat to that hegemony will emerge over generations.
The apparent lack of utility of naval forces in secondary campaigns, like Iraq, masks the
fundamentally indispensable role the Navy plays in U.S. national security.
US naval power is key to deterrence—maneuverability and flexibility
Gerson and Russell 11(Michael and Allison Lawler, Michael Gerson is a nationally syndicated columnist who
appears twice weekly in the Washington Post. Michael Gerson is the Hastert Fellow at the J. Dennis Hastert Center for
Economics, Government, and Public Policy at Wheaton College in Illinois., Russell is also an assistant professor of
Political Science and International Studies at Merrimack College in North Andover, Massachusetts. Russell holds a Ph.D.
from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, an M.A. in International Relations from American
University in Washington, D.C., and a B.A. in Political Science from Boston College., Quoting Mr. Ronald O’Rourke,
American Grand Strategy and Sea Power,
https://cna.org/sites/default/files/research/American%20Grand%20Strategy%20and%20Seapower%202011%20Conf
erence%20Report%20CNA.pdf)
Mr. Ronald O’Rourke presented a series of arguments that he believed might be offered by ¶ those
who see naval forces as being important tools of U.S. policy. For example, he argued ¶ that such
naval supporters might assert that a key element of U.S. national strategy is to ¶ prevent a hegemon
from rising in the Eurasian hemisphere, which is home to most of the ¶ world’s resources and
people. In fact, preventing the emergence of a regional hegemon is ¶ the primary reason for buying
and maintaining long-range capabilities. Mr. O’Rourke argued ¶ that those naval supporters could
claim that we are designed for something unique – we are ¶ the only country whose military is
designed to move to another hemisphere and conduct ¶ operations there. While some foreign
analysts and commentators frequently note that the ¶ U.S. Navy is significantly larger than other
navies, Mr. O’Rourke pointed out that supporters ¶ of naval forces might say that the other navies
are in the other hemisphere and so they don’t ¶ need to travel as far to project power. Mr. O’Rourke
argued that naval supporters might also ¶ claim that perhaps the size differential means that allies
invest too little, not that the United ¶ States invests too much, in naval power. ¶ Two-thirds of the
world is water, much of which is international waters. As a result, a ¶ significant part of the world’s
surface is a potential space for maneuver and projection of ¶ interests. Mr. O’Rourke continued his
arguments that he believed naval supporters might ¶ make by noting that U.S. naval forces are one of
the greatest asymmetrical capabilities in the ¶ world and should be protected because they are an
investment that provides a lot of payoff ¶ for world leaders. While a future conflict with China may
be unlikely, Mr. O’Rourke argued ¶ that naval supporters might point out that this does not mean
that the military balance in the Pacific is not important. An argument might be presented that in
order to maintain peace ¶ and stability in the Pacific, the United States must demonstrate that we
are prepared to win a ¶ war there. Mr. O’Rourke noted that other countries constantly observe that
balance of power ¶ in the region and factor it into decisions regarding policy vis-à-vis the United
States and other ¶ countries. Consequently, supporters of U.S. naval forces might argue that a
favorable military ¶ balance allows us to pursue various non-military policy goals in the Pacific and
in general. ¶ In concluding his arguments that he believed supporters of naval forces might make,
Mr. ¶ O’Rourke stressed the continued importance of forward naval presence in U.S. grand and ¶
naval strategies. Forward presence provides many important benefits, including intelligence ¶
gathering, foreign military cooperation, and familiarization with foreign areas, strengthened ¶ ties
with military leaders, improved interoperability, and the rapid execution of humanitarian ¶ relief and
disaster response operations. In addition, presence helps limit regional conflict ¶ and control
escalation. Mr. O’Rourke presented the argument that forward-deployed naval ¶ forces provide
operational and diplomatic benefits that other forces cannot provide, ¶ including the ability to
operate without a “permission slip” from other countries. Mr. ¶ O’Rourke noted that as access to
overseas bases becomes more limited in the future, ¶ modular, flexible U.S. naval forces will be at a
premium.
K2 Trade
Naval power is key to global trade—no other force is able to effectively protect
merchant ships
Till 10(Geoffrey, July 10, Asia Rising and the Maritime Decline of the West¶ A Review of the Issues, Geoffrey Till is
the Professor of Maritime Studies at the Joint Services Command and
Staff College and a member of the Defence Studies Department, part of the War
Studies Group of Kjng‘s College London. He is the Director of the Corbett Centre for
Maritime Policy Studies., RSIS, http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/WorkingPapers/WP205.pdf)
From this perspective, transitions of power from the West to the East will be¶ represented as more
gradual and much less confrontational in process, extent or¶ consequence than is sometimes claimed.
After all, China, the United States and all the¶ other countries to a greater or lesser extent face the
same range of problems—such as the financial crisis, orga.nized crime, mass migration, global
wa.rming, pa.ndemics and
international terrorism which can only be addressed by serious collective action. More
states have a significant share in the global economy and, in consequence, an interest
in advancing solutions to global challenges. China, the United States, Europe and¶ India have
common interests and consequently a huge stake in global governance and¶ international security. To
the extent that this is tnle, the rising power of one state relative to another¶ will, as the argument
goes, matter much less than it used to in the pre-globalized¶ world. The real issue for concern and
debate, instead, would clearly be about threats¶ to the prosperity and security of the entire
international community and about how¶ that community works to head off common challenges.
Such problems demand strong¶ and effective governance and international consent rather than
dominion, but a degree¶ of leadership, rather in the manner of a chairman of the board, is still likely
to be¶ required. At the moment, many will argue, while only the United States can provide¶ this sort
of consensus-building leadership, it must do so in partnerships with others,¶ including China.'°°
Today, this kind of leadership is indeed exemplified in the critical maritime¶ domain. The absolute
dependence of today's globalized sea-based trading system on¶ good order at sea and the safe and
timely sailing of the world‘s merchant shipping¶ means that the world‘s navies and coastguards
need to cooperate against anything that¶ threatens maritime security, whether that takes the form of
pirates a.nd other forms of¶ maritime crime, direct attack by forces hostile to the system or from the
incidental¶ effects of inter-state and intra-state conflict. This is the burden of the U.S. Navy's¶ recent
doctrinal statement A Cooperative Strategy for 21'" Century Seapower with its¶ avowed aim of
helping to set up a “global maritime partnership”. The fact that this has¶ generally been welcomed
around the world suggests a general acknowledgement of¶ the fact that for the moment at least, in
Kishore Mahbubani’s words,¶ “The real reason why most intemational waterways remain safe and
open—¶ and thereby facilitate the huge explosion of global trade we have seen—is that¶ the
American Navy acts as the guarantor of last resort to keep them open.
Trade K2 Peace
Trade prevents war—best statistics prove
O’Driscoll and Fitzgerald 3(Gerald P., Sara J., Febuary 11, Trade Brings Security, Orange County Register,
Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr. is senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Sara Fitzgerald is a trade policy analyst at the Heritage
Foundation. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/trade-brings-security)
And, according to research by Edward Mansfield of the University of Pennsylvania and Jon Pevehouse of the
University of Wisconsin, that’s a recipe for trouble. Mansfield and Pevehouse have demonstrated that trade
between nations makes them less likely to wage war on each other — and keeps internecine spats
from spiraling out of control. They also found these trends are more pronounced among democratic
countries with a strong tradition of respect for the rule of law.¶ Countries that trade with each other are far
less likely to confront each other on the battlefield than are countries with no trade relationship. And
the size of the economies involved doesn’t affect this relationship, which means small, weak countries
can enhance their defense capabilities simply by increasing trade with the world’s economic giants.¶
Experts, including Mansfield and Pevehouse, say intensive trade integration, perhaps more than any other
factor, has led to an unprecedented five decades of peace in Western Europe.¶ The countries of North and
South America, they determined, generally have sought to integrate their economies in a variety of trade
alliances, and international disputes on both continents tend to have been resolved without war. Conversely,
countries of the Middle East and Africa, as well as Eastern Europe, historically have been less active in
establishing trade relationships — and more active on the battlefield.¶ Trade is no substitute for a strong
national defense, but the latter can’t guarantee security on its own. Free trade, free markets, and free
peoples bring not only prosperity, but also peace. And that’s a goal shared by those who believe in
globalization — and those who don’t.
Trade is key to peace--empirics
Boudreaux 6(Donald J., November 20, Want world peace? Support free trade., Professor Donald J. Boudreaux is
the Chairman of the Department of Economics at George Mason University, The Christian Science Monitor,
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p09s02-coop.html)
Plenty of empirical evidence confirms the wisdom of Montesquieu's insight: Trade does indeed promote
peace.¶ During the past 30 years, Solomon Polachek, an economist at the State University of New York at
Binghamton, has researched the relationship between trade and peace. In his most recent paper on the topic,
he and co-author Carlos Seiglie of Rutgers University review the massive amount of research on trade, war,
and peace.¶ They find that "the overwhelming evidence indicates that trade reduces conflict." Likewise
for foreign investment. The greater the amounts that foreigners invest in the United States, or the more
that Americans invest abroad, the lower is the likelihood of war between America and those countries
with which it has investment relationships.¶ Professors Polachek and Seiglie conclude that, "The policy
implication of our finding is that further international cooperation in reducing barriers to both trade and
capital flows can promote a more peaceful world."
K2 Taiwan
Naval power is key to avoid conflict over Taiwan—military modernization efforts
O’Rourke 13(Ronald, September 5, China Naval Modernization: Implications for ¶ U.S. Navy Capabilities—
Background and ¶ Issues for Congress, Congressional Research Service, Ronald O’Rourke ¶ Specialist in National
Defense ¶ Congressional Research Service, http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/214413.pdf)
The question of how the United States should respond to China’s military modernization effort, ¶
including its naval modernization effort, has emerged as a key issue in U.S. defense planning. The ¶
question is of particular importance to the U.S. Navy, because many U.S. military programs for ¶
countering improved Chinese military forces would fall within the Navy’s budget. ¶ Two DOD strategy
and budget documents released in January 2012 state that U.S. military ¶ strategy will place a renewed
emphasis on the Asia-Pacific region, and that as a result, there will ¶ be a renewed emphasis on air and naval
forces in DOD plans. Administration officials have stated ¶ that notwithstanding reductions in planned levels
of U.S. defense spending, the U.S. military ¶ presence in the Asia-Pacific region will be maintained and
strengthened. ¶ Decisions that Congress and the executive branch make regarding U.S. Navy programs for ¶
countering improved Chinese maritime military capabilities could affect the likelihood or ¶ possible
outcome of a potential U.S.-Chinese military conflict in the Pacific over Taiwan or some ¶ other issue.
Some observers consider such a conflict to be very unlikely, in part because of ¶ significant U.S.-Chinese
economic linkages and the tremendous damage that such a conflict could ¶ cause on both sides. In the
absence of such a conflict, however, the U.S.-Chinese military balance ¶ in the Pacific could nevertheless
influence day-to-day choices made by other Pacific countries, ¶ including choices on whether to align their
policies more closely with China or the United States. ¶ In this sense, decisions that Congress and the
executive branch make regarding U.S. Navy ¶ programs for countering improved Chinese maritime
military forces could influence the political ¶ evolution of the Pacific, which in turn could affect the
ability of the United States to pursue goals ¶ relating to various policy issues, both in the Pacific and
elsewhere. ¶ China’s naval modernization effort, which began in the 1990s, encompasses a broad array of ¶
weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), submarines, and ¶ surface ships.
China’s naval modernization effort also includes reforms and improvements in ¶ maintenance and logistics,
naval doctrine, personnel quality, education, training, and exercises. ¶ Observers believe that the near-term
focus of China’s military modernization effort has been to ¶ develop military options for addressing
the situation with Taiwan. Consistent with this goal, ¶ observers believe that China wants its military
to be capable of acting as a so-called anti-access ¶ force—a force that can deter U.S. intervention in a
conflict involving Taiwan, or failing that, ¶ delay the arrival or reduce the effectiveness of intervening
U.S. naval and air forces. Observers ¶ believe that China’s military modernization effort, including its naval
modernization effort, is ¶ increasingly oriented toward pursuing additional goals, such as asserting or
defending China’s ¶ territorial claims in the South China Sea and East China Sea; enforcing China’s view—a
minority ¶ view among world nations—that it has the right to regulate foreign military activities in its 200-¶
mile maritime exclusive economic zone (EEZ); protecting China’s sea lines of communications; ¶ protecting
and evacuating Chinese nationals in foreign countries; displacing U.S. influence in the ¶ Pacific; and asserting
China’s status as a major world power. ¶ Potential oversight issues for Congress include the following:
whether the U.S. Navy in coming ¶ years will be large enough to adequately counter improved Chinese
maritime anti-access forces ¶ while also adequately performing other missions of interest to U.S. policymakers
around the ¶ world; the Navy’s ability to counter Chinese ASBMs and submarines; and whether the
Navy, in ¶ response to China’s maritime anti-access capabilities, should shift over time to a more
distributed ¶ fleet architecture.
Taiwan Escalates
Taiwan crisis would escalate to nuclear war—Taiwan Relations Act
Thim 12(Michal, August 21, Review of “Will China’s Rise Lead to War?”,Michal Thim-- Taiwan Studies Programme
@ China Policy Institute, University of Nottingham,
https://www.academia.edu/977098/Review_Essay_Glaser_Ch._2011_._Will_Chinas_Rise_Lead_to_War_Foreign_Aff
airs_March_April_2011_90_2_80-91)
A Taiwan Crisis could fairly easily escalate to nuclear war Glaser voices in the first place fear that if
the U.S. decides to comply with provisions of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) that ambiguously
imply U.S. support in case of an unprovoked Chinese attack on Taiwan, such a crisis may very well
escalate to full-scale nuclear war between China and U.S. This isindeed a point that has been
discussed on many occasions by an extensive number of scholars who provided step-by-step
scenarios leading to use of nuclear weapons. Glaser¶ ’s¶ thesis is that since Taiwanis a¶ less-than-vital¶
U.S. interest. the risk of conflict over Taiwan risk is simply not worthy. However,one should
carefully assess such scenarios. Firstly, as capabilities of the¶ People’¶ s Liberation Army(PLA)
increase (which Glaser acknowledges on several occasions) Chinese leadership would be lesstempted
to resort to use of nuclear weapons since its conventional forces will be capable of counteringthose
deployed by the U.S. Secondly, if crisis escalates the U.S. may opt for extending its support for
Taiwanese forces by direct attacks deep inside Chinese territory. Under such circumstances hawks
inthe PLA and Politburo may indeed push for nuclear retaliation. But in this case they would
knowinglyopt for massive reaction at the hands of U.S. strategic forces. A senior Chinese general
once pointedout that in the end the U.S. will care more about Los Angeles than about Taipei,
implying a Chinese attack on L.A. Yet, any Chinese strategist should follow up with the¶ question
“do we care about¶ Taipeimore than we do about Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou, or¶ Chengdu?”
Water Advantage
2AC Water
Clean water scarcity is increasing- major catalyst for conflict
UNFT 12 [The United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT) is an internal United Nations (UN) support
mechanism that assists UN Resident Coordinators (RCs) and UN Country Teams (UNCTs) in developing conflict prevention strategies and programmes. 2012,
“Renewable Resources and Conflict,” http://www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/GN_Renewable_Consultation.pdf //jweideman]
Pressure on limited fresh water resources is mounting, driven by increasing population, economic growth,
industrial pollution, and loss of forested watersheds. The predicted effects of climate change are likely
to aggravate water scarcity even further in some regions. As demand is increasing, some countries are
already reaching the limits of their water resources. As a result, competition for water is intensifying –
whether between countries, urban and rural areas, economic sectors, or different livelihood groups.
This may make water an increasingly politicized issue.19 There are an estimated 263 international rivers, covering 45.3 percent of
the land-surface of the earth (excluding Antarctica).20 However, fewer than 10 countries possess 60 percent of the world’s
available fresh water supply: Brazil, Russia, China, Canada, Indonesia, the United States, India,
Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.21 Water use has been growing at more than twice
the rate of population increase in the last century. Forexample, while the world’s population tripled,
the use of renewable water resources grew six-fold. Over the last 50 years, freshwater withdrawals have tripled. 22
Worldwide agriculture accounts for 70 percent of all water consumption, compared to 20 percent for industry and 10
percent for domestic use.23 Unless agricultural water use is optimized, water demand for agriculture worldwide
would increase by 70 to 90 percent by 2050, creating acute problems for countries that are already
reaching the limits of their water resources.24 Today, four hundred and fifty million people in twenty-nine countries suffer from water
shortages.25 It is predicted that 47 percent of the world population will be living in areas of high water stress by
2030.26 The concept of water stress applies to situations where there is not enough water for all uses, whether agricultural, industrial or domestic. It has
been proposed that when annual per capita renewable freshwater availability is less than 1,700 cubic meters, countries begin to experience periodic or regular
water stress. Below 1,000 cubic meters, water scarcity begins to hamper economic development as well as human health and well-being.27 Based on these
criteria, the UN estimates that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity and two-thirds of the world’s
population could be under conditions of water stress. In
2010, access to clean drinking water became an official basic
human right. A resolution introduced by Bolivia was adopted by the UN General Assembly without
opposition. Although the decision does not make the right to water legally enforceable, it is symbolically important and places
more political obligations on national governments. The combination of rising water scarcity due to
increases in demand and the potential consequences of climate change make the need for
cooperative, equitable and sustainable management of national and transboundary water resources
more important than ever. The main sources of conflict over water include: r Competition between
different water sectors (agriculture, industrial, domestic); r Competition between different livelihood
groups (farming, livestock, fishing);r Degradation ofwater quality caused by pollution (industrial, agriculture,
urban); r Reduction of water supply caused by development/infrastructure projects; r Lost access to water
supplies and/or exhaustion of supply; r Natural variation in water availability and sudden contraction
of supply; r Exclusive control of water resources and access; r Conversion from public to private management and changes in pricing structure; r Unclear
water use and access rights; and, r Uncoordinated transboundary management.
Plan Solves clean water
IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to
Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]
A clean, safe water supply is one of our Nation's great natural resources; maintaining it requires a
well- integrated system of monitoring for changes in temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH,
pathogens, nutrients, and contaminants. Our coastal waters, estuaries, rivers, streams, and Great Lakes are
monitored for protection of the environment as well as to ensure their waters are safe for drinking and
recreation. Each year. Federal and State Government agencies, industry, academia, and private organizations devote
significant
time, energy, and money to monitor, protect, manage, and restore water resources and watersheds.
U.S. IOOS has identified several important variables related to monitoring water quality in our Nation's waters:
temperature, salinity, ocean color, dissolved oxygen, pH, pathogens, dissolved nutrients, optical properties, total suspended matter, colored
dissolved organic matter, and contaminants. Abundance
and type of plant and animal fauna are also important
indicators of water quality conditions. The data collected through monitoring activities can be used to detect trends, identify
emerging concerns, and to evaluate effectiveness of pollution control programs. Monitoring water quality can use a variety
of methods, such as hand collection or monitoring by in situ sensors deployed on buoys or stationary platforms,
and can occur at regular intervals or when a specific need arises. Real-time decisions are often made based on water
quality data supplied by U.S. IOOS partners. As an example, Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS), in partnership with NOAA’s Great
Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, is supporting monitoring activities that provide oxygen levels, water temperature, and wave
heights. The Cleveland Division of Water tracks the data, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding unsafe drinking water and
human health. This information acts
as a warning system to allow the utility to avoid drawing in hypoxic
(low levels of dissolved oxygen) waters orenable it to treat affected water appropriately. Other
municipalities receive similar information from U.S. IOOS partners, which allow them to monitor their
drinking water as well.
Scarcity goes nuclear in every region
NPR 10 [NPR citing Steven Solomon who has written for The New York Times, BusinessWeek, The Economist, Forbes, and Esquire. He has been a regular
commentator on NPR’s Marketplace. 1/3/10, “Will The Next War Be Fought Over Water?” http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122195532
//jweideman]
Just as wars over oil played a major role in 20th-century history, a new book makes a convincing case that many 21st
century conflicts will be
fought over water. In Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power and Civilization, journalist Steven Solomon argues that water is
surpassing oil as the world's scarcest critical resource. Only 2.5 percent of the planet's water supply is
fresh, Solomon writes, much of which is locked away in glaciers. World water use in the past century grew twice as fast as world population. "We've
now reached the limit where that trajectory can no longer continue," Solomon tells NPR's Mary Louise Kelly. "Suddenly
we're going to have to find a way to use the existing water resources in a far, far more productive manner than we ever did before, because there's simply not
enough." One issue, Solomon says, is that water's cost doesn't reflect its true economic value. While a society's transition from oil may be painful, water
is
irreplaceable. Yet water costs far less per gallon — and even less than that for some. "In some cases, where there are large political subsidies, largely in
agriculture, it does not [cost very much]," Solomon says. "In many cases, irrigated agriculture is getting its water for free. And we in the cities are paying a lot,
and industries are also paying an awful lot. That's unfair. It's inefficient to the allocation of water to the most productive economic ends." At the same time,
Solomon says, there's
an increasing feeling in the world that everyone has a basic right to a minimum 13
gallons of water a day for basic human health. He doesn't necessarily have an issue with that. "I think there's plenty of
water in the world, even in the poorest and most water-famished country, for that 13 gallons to be
given for free to individuals — and let them pay beyond that," he says. Solomon says the world is
divided into water haves and have-nots. China, Egypt and Pakistan are just a few countries facing
critical water issues in the 21st century. In his book he writes, "Consider what will happen in waterdistressed, nuclear-armed, terrorist-besieged, overpopulated, heavily irrigation dependent and
already politically unstable Pakistan when its single water lifeline, the Indus river, loses a third of its
flow from the disappearance from its glacial water source." Solomon notes some good water news, too. The United States has
made significant progress in curbing its water use, thanks to market forces and legislation such as the Clean Water Act. "Our water use between 1900 and 1975
actually tripled relative to population growth," he says. "Since 1975 to the present day, it has flat-lined. And we still had a population increase of about 30
percent and our GDP continued to grow. So it's an amazing increase in water productivity."
Water UQ
Warming makes water wars increasingly likely
Rasmussen 11 [Erik, CEO, Monday Morning; Founder, Green Growth Leaders. 4/12/11, “Prepare for the Next Conflict: Water Wars,”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-rasmussen/water-wars_b_844101.html //jweideman]
A very important factor of the growing water scarcity is climate change. Many
leading organizations such as the UN and NASA
agree that climate change is creating additional pressure on the scarce water supplies, due to changes
in temperature that boost evaporation rates, altering rainfall patterns, and the melting of ice. They expect the global
access to fresh water to be even more hampered by future changes in the climate. In 2007 this
dangerous development led the IPCC to conclude that we are to expect an increased strain on water
due to climate changes which alone represents a great threat to the world community: "Water and its availability and
quality will be the main pressures on and issues for, societies and the environment under climate change". A concrete example of the nexus between the water
crisis and the climate epidemic is the melting of glaciers in Asia and South America. In both regions climate change is already causing major water shortages for
millions of people whose supplies come from melting snow and glaciers. With higher temperatures and more rapid melting of ice, fewer water supplies are
available to farms and cities. The
past 30 years rapid melting of the Himalayan glaciers -- which supply
freshwater to a third of the world's population -- due to climate changes have already made fresh
water a scarce in parts of Asia. The worst water-effects of the climate change have yet to emerge. As
the climate epidemic spreads and the global warming accelerates, 38 percent of the world's surface is
expected to desertificate and dry out -- especially the subtropics and mid-latitudes, where much of the world's poorest populations live -leading to a severe increase in the gap between supply and demand, to a vast inequality in access to water and thus an exacerbation of the water crisis. For
years experts have set out warnings of how the earth will be affected by the water crises, with
millions dying and increasing conflicts over dwindling resources. They have proclaimed -- in line with the report from the US
Senate -- that the water scarcity is a security issue, and that it will yield political stress with a risk of
international water wars. This has been reflected in the oft-repeated observation that water will likely replace oil as a future cause of war
between nations. Today the first glimpses of the coming water wars are emerging. Many countries in the
Middle East, Africa, Central and South Asia -- e.g. Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Kenya, Egypt, and
India -- are already feeling the direct consequences of the water scarcity -- with the competition for
water leading to social unrest, conflict and migration. This month the escalating concerns about the possibility of water wars
triggered calls by Zafar Adeel, chair of UN-Water, for the UN to promote "hydro-diplomacy" in the Middle East and North Africa in order to avoid or at least
manage emerging tensions over access to water. The gloomy outlook of our global fresh water resources points in the direction that the current conflicts and
instability in these countries are only glimpses of the water wars expected to unfold in the future. Thus we need to address the water crisis that can quickly
escalate and become a great humanitarian crisis and also a global safety problem.
Solvency
The plan preserves clean water resources
Rowe et al 5 [ All authors have phd’s. Rowe, P.M., M.J. Hameedi, and M.P. Weinstein (eds.). 2006. Linking Elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing
System (IOOS) With the Planned National Water Quality Monitoring Network. Proceedings from the NOAA-Supported Workshop 19-21, 2005.
NOAA/NCCOS/CCMA. Silver Spring, MD. 96 pp. “Linking Elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) With the Planned National Water Quality
Monitoring Network” Proceedings from the NOAA-Supported Workshop 19-21 September, 2005
http://www.ccma.nos.noaa.gov/publications/IOOSTechMemo.pdf //jweideman]
In its hallmark report entitled “An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century,” the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy offered more than 200 recommendations that
focused on ocean management and governance, sustainable uses and stewardship of ocean and coastal resources, understanding of ocean-land-atmosphere
connections, implementing
ecosystem-based management, and achieving a sustained Integrated Ocean
Observing System (IOOS) through technology development and delivery of information and products
to a broad user community. The Commission also recommended the development of a comprehensive and integrated
National Monitoring Network to focus on important resource management issues, including water
quality. The design for a National Water Quality Monitoring Network has been recently advanced
based largely on the recommendation appearing in the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy report, and
subsequently included in the U.S. Ocean Action Plan. The proposed Network would be developed as a
continuum of observations from the watershed to the open ocean, would account for connectivity
with contaminant sources, would be integrated into the IOOS "national backbone", and would assure data
quality and integrity. Implementation of the National Water Quality Monitoring Network will assure access to real- time continuous observations over a broad
geographical area, and will facilitate the acquisition and efficient dissemination of quality-assured data. Only
then will it be possible to
improve the scientific basis and effectiveness of coastal and ocean resource use decisions. It is anticipated
that complementary data from the National Water Quality Monitoring Network and the Integrated Ocean Observing System will be essential for: • Describing
current conditions and detecting
trends in system attributes that might impair sustainable use of coastal and
estuarine resources; • Linking human activities and resource use to changes in coastal and estuarine
water quality, including delivery of freshwater to the estuaries; • Relating contaminant and nutrient flux measurements to
their ecological and human health impacts; • Assessing impacts of habitat losses and modifications on biotic integrity, biodiversity, and ecosystem productivity; and
• Enhancing
numerical modeling and ecological forecasting capabilities to evaluate pollution source
control and mitigation scenarios.To address these considerations, and bring as many stakeholders to
the table as possible, a coordinated Workshop Linking Elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing
System (IOOS) with the Planned National Water Quality Monitoring Network was hosted by NOAA and
the New Jersey Sea Grant College Program, and other partners on 19-21 September 2005 at Rutgers University. The overarching goal of the
effort was to develop a Regional Pilot for water quality monitoring (physical, biological and chemical parameters) that linked IOOS
product development to integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and the health of coastal ecosystems. Parameters of interest included toxic chemicals,
pathogens, "emerging" contaminants of concern, nutrients, dissolved oxygen, harmful algal blooms (HAB), eutrophication. freshwater delivery, habitat
loss/alteration, and biological response indicators. The regional pilot was designed to provide integrated sampling coverage in coastal and estuarine waters as well
as upland ("upstream") areas to promote comparability and transfervalue of monitoring results. Specific outcomes of the workshop are summarized herein
including the identification of: • Key water-quality/quantity and ecosystem health related issues in the region; • Overarching management questions that need to
be addressed by the National Water Quality Monitoring Network (NWQMN) in
concert with the evolution of the regional IOOS
infrastructure; • Current infrastructure and monitoring programs for addressing management issues in the MACOORA sub-region; •
Information "gaps" in the current monitoring framework; • The scope and constituents of the federally-funded backbone of
critical stations and measurements in order to assess long-term trends in water quality and condition of the coastal environment; and
• New technologies and measurement techniques that can improve the quality and timeliness of monitoring data type, acquisition, and delivery.
IOOS provides scientific knowledge to conserve water
Rowe et al 5 [ All authors have phd’s. Rowe, P.M., M.J. Hameedi, and M.P. Weinstein (eds.). 2006. Linking Elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing
System (IOOS) With the Planned National Water Quality Monitoring Network. Proceedings from the NOAA-Supported Workshop 19-21, 2005.
NOAA/NCCOS/CCMA. Silver Spring, MD. 96 pp. “Linking Elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) With the Planned National Water Quality
Monitoring Network” Proceedings from the NOAA-Supported Workshop 19-21 September, 2005
http://www.ccma.nos.noaa.gov/publications/IOOSTechMemo.pdf //jweideman]
Improved scientific understanding of the coastal, oceanic and Great Lakes ecosystems and improved public
understanding of its environmental stewardship responsibilities are both essential for making
effective decisions to protect and restore water quality conditions in the Nation. At the minimum, this would
require coordination of efforts among the principal federal agencies involved in water quality
monitoring, contacts with states, regional organizations and tribes about their specific needs, and an efficient systems of data gathering and dissemination.
The U.S. Ocean Action Plan (December 2004) called for the design and creation of a coordinated, comprehensive National Water Quality Monitoring Program that
addresses those needs and is also effectively linked with the
Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). In response, two separate but
highly significant national efforts are presently (2006) underway to develop (1) a conceptual design of a National Water Quality Monitoring
Network (NWQMN) and (2) a development plan for the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). The NWQMN, intended as a "network
of networks" shares many attributes with existing water quality monitoring programs but is unique in
that it provides for a multi-disciplinary and multi- institutional approach and offers both continuity of
observations, i.e., from the watershed to the coastal ocean, and connectivity with likely sources of
contaminants, for example, atmospheric deposition, groundwater discharge and coastal rivers and tributaries. The NWQMN design report was completed
in April 2006 and a development plan for IOOS was recently published by the National Office for Integrated and Sustained Ocean Observations (January 2006). In
addition, a contract was recently issued to further develop and refine a (t) conceptual design of IOOS, (ii) an estimate of the cost to produce the system based on
the conceptual design, and (tit) a narrative explanation of the viability of the design. It is anticipated that a recommended "Federally-funded Backbone" of
measurements, consisting of core measurements required by broad spectrum of users and with common protocols for data management and dissemination, will be
shared by both IOOS and NWQMN. Both IOOS and NWQMN consider pilot projects to demonstrate application of exiting observational assets and technologies and
analytical capabilities for addressing water quality issues in a selected region of interest. One outcome of such projects would be an assessment of strengths and
weaknesses of the architecture of a comprehensive monitoring program, for example, the design of the NWQMN. an
evaluation of data
management infra-structure, and demonstration of the efficacy of current monitoring approaches,
procedures and technologies for addressing specific, regional issues that pertain to water quality.
Impacts-Systemic
Lack of clean water kills 1400 children every day- it’s a crisis that disproportionally
affects the poorest countries
UNICEF 14 [All Africa.com. United Nations Children's Fund. 3/21/14, “Africa: World Water Day - World's Poorest Have Least Access to Safe Water – Unicef”
http://allafrica.com/stories/201403210880.html //jweideman]
New York — 1,400
children under five die each day from causes linked to lack of safe water, sanitation, and hygiene
years after the world met the global target set in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
for safe drinking water, and after the UN General Assembly declared that water was a human right, over
three-quarters of a billion people, most of them poor, still do not have this basic necessity, UNICEF said to mark
World Water Day. Estimates from UNICEF and WHO published in 2013 are that a staggering 768 million people do not have
access to safe drinking water, causing hundreds of thousands of children to sicken and die each year.
Most of the people without access are poor and live in remote rural areas or urban slums. UNICEF estimates that
1,400 children under five die every day from diarrhoeal diseases linked to lack of safe water and adequate sanitation and hygiene. "Every child, rich or
poor, has the right to survive, the right to health, the right to a future," said Sanjay Wijesekera, head of UNICEF's global
Almost four
water, sanitation and hygiene programmes. "The world should not rest until every single man, woman and child has the water and sanitation that is theirs as a
human right." The MDG target for drinking water was met and passed in 2010, when 89 per cent of the global population had access to improved sources of
drinking water -- such as piped supplies, boreholes fitted with pumps, and protected wells. Also in 2010, the UN General Assembly recognized safe drinking
water and sanitation as a human right, meaning every person should have access to safe water and basic
sanitation. However, this basic right continues to be denied to the poorest people across the world. "What
continues to be striking, and maybe even shocking, is that even in middle income countries there are millions of poor people who do not
have safe water to drink," Wijesekera added. "We must target the marginalized and often forgotten groups: those
who are the most difficult to reach, the poorest and the most disadvantaged." According to UNICEF and WHO
estimates, 10 countries are home to almost two-thirds of the global population without access to improved
drinking water sources. They are: China (108 million); India (99 million); Nigeria (63 million); Ethiopia (43
million); Indonesia (39 million); Democratic Republic of the Congo (37 million); Bangladesh (26 million);
United Republic of Tanzania (22 million); Kenya (16 million) and Pakistan (16 million). UNICEF says
women and girls are disproportionately affected by lack of access to safe water. An estimated 71 per cent of the
burden of drinking water collection is being shouldered by women and girls.
Impact-Water Wars
Lack of access causes conflict escelation
UNFT 12 [The United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT) is an internal United Nations (UN) support
mechanism that assists UN Resident Coordinators (RCs) and UN Country Teams (UNCTs) in developing conflict prevention strategies and programmes. 2012,
“Renewable Resources and Conflict,” http://www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/GN_Renewable_Consultation.pdf //jweideman]
Freshwater resources are crucial to human and ecosystem health, as well as economic development.
Nearly every sector of human activity depends on water, be it for drinking, agriculture, industrial
production or power generation. Sustainable water management must not only take into account the ecological and socio-economic
dimensions but also the cultural and spiritual meanings of water . Unlike many other resources, there is no direct substitute for
water. The fact that water availability is highly variable and uncertain, depending on meteorology, geography, and seasonality, and often crosses national
boundaries, only compounds the challenges around its sustainable management. At the same time, these characteristics mean that issues involving water can also
bring parties together for discussion and cooperation. Water scarcity is a product of both availability and access. It is important to distinguish absolute scarcity (i.e.
physical limitations), economic scarcity which is a product of investment choices (e.g. technology and infrastructure); and induced scarcity, which is a question of
distribution and hence a political issue. Managing water issues, thus, requires a multi- disciplinary approach that calls on environmental, technical, economic and
political expertise. This requires institutions to promote integrated approaches to optimizing water-related outcomes in different sectors, including for irrigation,
This is becoming increasingly challenging as values come into
competition, and a multitude of actors with competing interests hold major stakes in water quality,
quantity and access. While there appears to be potential for violent conflict over water, water tends
to exacerbate existing tensions rather than act as a direct driver of violence. At the transboundary level, while conflicts
over water resources are common, there is effectively no known case where these have constituted the primary motivation for full- scale war.
Rather, the very centrality of water makes cooperation a more likely response, evidenced in the much stronger record of cooperation. Violent conflicts
are more likely to occur at the local level between competing user groups that are also divided along
ethnic, religious or other lines.In the coming decades, tensions among different users may intensify,
both at the local and transboundary level, as water scarcity increases due to increased demand and climate change. In many cases,
industry, fisheries, domestic consumption, and biodiversity.
freshwater management agreements are not adequately designed for social and ecological changes in the face of extreme events and climate change. The omission
of mechanisms for dealing with natural variation together with the implications of climate changes, in terms of droughts, flooding and increased variability of
rainfall, have serious implications for current and future management in transboundary river basins.
Impact-India/Pakistan
Water exacerbates indo-pak tensions- that goes nuclear
Condon et al 9 [Emma Condon Patrick Hillmann Justin King Katharine Lang Alison Patz Workshop in International Public Affairs Robert M. La Follette School
of Public Affairs University of Wisconsin–Madison. Workshop in International Public Affairs June 1, 2009 “Resource Disputes in South Asia: Water Scarcity and the
Potential for Interstate Conflict” http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/publications/workshops/2009/southasia.pdf //jweideman]
Declines in the flow of the Indus River are likely to create discord between India
and Pakistan as each country seeks to control
the water it needs to meet increasing demand. India is likely to maintain its policy of providing
plentiful, affordable water. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s ongoing political troubles will impede development
of an effective water policy or comprehensive new bilateral agreement with India. A. The Problem:
Sharp Future Declines in the Indus River’s Flow India’s water disputes with Pakistan are likely to be
the region’s most contentious, as well as potentially the most dangerous. As water scarcity intensifies,
each country will have increased incentive to seek a greater portion of the shared water resources in the
Indus River system. Pakistan’s serious projected shortages, India’s trend of damming and diverting waters
destined for Pakistan and global warming’s expected depletion of water in the Indus River system are
a collective source of increasing tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals. Pakistan will likely be the
most water-scarce country in the region well into the 21st century. Pakistan largely depends on the Indus River system for its water
needs, supplemented by limited groundwater and meager rainfall. River water provides 80 percent of all irrigation water for Pakistan’s critical agriculture sector
(Singh & Arora, 2007; Sharma & Sharma, 2008). These water sources are already near their limits, with most water diverted to northern Pakistan’s agricultural
regions at the expense of the south. In fact, so much water is diverted from the Indus before it reaches the ocean that seawater has invaded the river channel
miles inland. Overall, Pakistan’s water management remains passive and its prices low or nonexistent, in spite of expectations of rising demand and falling
supply.
Impact-Middle East
Water scarcity causes massive middle eastern instability
Vidal 11 [John, is the Guardian's environment editor. 2/19/11, “What does the Arab world do when its water runs out?”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/feb/20/arab-nations-water-running-out //jweideman]
Poverty, repression, decades of injustice and mass unemployment have all been cited as causes of the political convulsions in the Middle East and north Africa
these last weeks. But
a less recognised reason for the turmoil in Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Yemen, Jordan and
now Iran has been rising food prices, directly linked to a growing regional water crisis. The diverse
states that make up the Arab world, stretching from the Atlantic coast to Iraq, have some of the
world's greatest oil reserves, but this disguises the fact that they mostly occupy hyper-arid places.
Rivers are few, water demand is increasing as populations grow, underground reserves are shrinking and nearly all depend on imported
staple foods that are now trading at record prices. For a region that expects populations to double to more than 600 million within 40 years, and climate change
to raise temperatures, these
structural problems are political dynamite and already destabilising countries,
say the World Bank, the UN and many independent studies. In recent reports they separately warn that the riots and demonstrations after the three
major food-price rises of the last five years in north Africa and the Middle East might be just a taste of greater troubles to
come unless countries start to share their natural resources, and reduce their profligate energy and
water use. "In the future the main geopolitical resource in the Middle East will be water rather than
oil. The situation is alarming," said Swiss foreign minister Micheline Calmy-Rey last week, as she
launched a Swiss and Swedish government-funded report for the EU. The Blue Peace report examined long-term
prospects for seven countries, including Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, the Palestinian territories and Israel. Five already suffer major structural shortages, it said, and
the amount of water being taken from dwindling sources across the region cannot continue much
longer. "Unless there is a technological breakthrough or a miraculous discovery, the Middle East will
not escape a serious [water] shortage," said Sundeep Waslekar, a researcher from the Strategic Foresight Group who wrote the report.
Autocratic, oil-rich rulers have been able to control their people by controlling nature and have kept
the lid on political turmoil at home by heavily subsidising "virtual" or "embedded" water in the form
of staple grains imported from the US and elsewhere. But, says Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East programme at the
Washington-based Centre for Strategic Studies, existing political relationships are liable to break down when, as now, the price of food hits record levels and the
demand for water and energy soars. "Water
is a fundamental part of the social contract in Middle Eastern
countries. Along with subsidised food and fuel, governments provide cheap or even free water to ensure the consent of the
governed. But when subsidised commodities have been cut, instability has often followed. "Water's own role
in prompting unrest has so far been relatively limited, but that is unlikely to hold. Future water scarcity will be much more
permanent than past shortages, and the techniques governments have used in responding to past
disturbances may not be enough," he says. "The problem will only get worse. Arab countries depend on
other countries for their food security – they're as sensitive to floods in Australia and big freezes in Canada as on the yield in Algeria or
Egypt itself," says political analyst and Middle East author Vicken Cheterian. "In 2008/9, Arab countries' food imports cost $30bn. Then, rising prices caused
waves of rioting and left the unemployed and impoverished millions in Arab countries even more exposed. The paradox of Arab economies is that they depend
on oil prices, while increased energy prices make their food more expensive," says Cheterian. The
region's most food- and water-
insecure country is Yemen, the poorest in the Arab world, which gets less than 200 cubic metres of water per person a year – well below the
international water poverty line of 1,000m3 – and must import 80-90% o f its food. According to Mahmoud Shidiwah, chair of the Yemeni water and
environment protection agency, 19 of the country's 21 main aquifers are no longer being replenished and the
government has considered moving Sana'a, the capital city, with around two million people, which is
expected to run dry within six years. "Water shortages have increased political tensions between
groups. We have a very big problem," he says. Two internal conflicts are already raging in Yemen and the capital has been rocked by riots this month. "There
is an obvious link between high food prices and unrest [in the region]. Drought, population and water scarcity are aggravating
factors. The pressure on natural resources is increasing, and the pressure on the land is great," said Giancarlo Cirri, the UN World Food Programme
representative in Yemen. "If you look at the recent Small Arms Survey [in Yemen], they try to document the increase in what they call social violence due to this
pressure on water and land. This social violence is increasing, and related deaths and casualties are pretty high. The death tolls in the northern conflict and the
southern conflict are a result of these pressures," said Cirri. Other
Arab countries are not faring much better. Jordan, which
expects water demand to double in the next 20 years, faces massive shortages because of population
growth and a longstanding water dispute with Israel. Its per capita water supply will fall from the current 200m3 per person to
91m3 within 30 years, says the World Bank. Palestine and Israel fiercely dispute fragile water resources. Algeria and Tunisia, along with the seven emirates in
the UAE, Morocco, Iraq and Iran are all in "water deficit" – using far more than they receive in rain or snowfall. Only
Turkey has a major
surplus, but it is unwilling to share. Abu Dhabi, the world's most profligate water user, says it will run out of its ancient fossil water reserves
in 40 years; Libya has spent $20bn pumping unreplenishable water from deep wells in the desert but has no idea how long the resource will last; Saudi Arabian
water demand has increased by 500% in 25 years and is expected to double again in 20 years – as power demand surges as much as 10% a year. The Blue Peace
report highlights the rapid decline in many of the region's major water sources. The water level in the Dead Sea has dropped by nearly 150ft since the 1960s. The
marshlands in Iraq have shrunk by 90% and the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret) is at risk of becoming irreversibly salinised by salt water springs below it.
Impact-Economy
Clean water is key to the economy
EPA 12 [Environmental protection agency. December 12, “The Importance of Water to the U.S. Economy”
http://water.epa.gov/action/importanceofwater/upload/IOW_Synthesis_Highlights.pdf //jweideman]
Water is vital to a productive and growing economy in the United States, directly and indirectly
affecting the production of goods and services in many sectors. Current economic literature provides
some insights into the importance of water to various sectors – including agriculture, tourism, fishing,
manufacturing, and energy production – but this information is dispersed and, in many cases, incomplete. EPA is conducting a study on
the importance of water to the U.S. economy to summarize existing knowledge about the role of water in the U.S. economy, provide
information that supports private and public sector decision-making, and identify areas where additional research would be useful. EPA seeks more complete
information on the complex interrelationships between the use of water in one sector of the economy and economic activity in others. EPA also wants to better
understand how water resources contribute to economic activity at a local, regional or national level. EPA hopes
the study will also be a catalyst for a broader discussion water’s role in the U.S. economy. As part of the study, EPA developed a background report that provides a
baseline understanding of how water resources are used in the U.S. and the data and methods available to analyze the economic importance of water. EPA also
supported the writing of a set of papers by experts to supplement existing information and to present current economic analyses. EPA held a technical workshop to
discuss the literature review and the expert papers, and to gather feedback. EPA is producing a draft report that synthesizes all of this information. The following are
some initial highlights from the study.W A T E R I S E S S E N T I A L T O T H E E C O N O M Y Access
to water is critical to production in a
number of economic sectors. It serves as an essential input in agriculture, and is used to extract
energy and mineral resources from the earth, refine petroleum and chemicals, roll steel, mill paper,
and produce uncounted other goods, from semiconductors to the foods and beverages that line
supermarket shelves. It cools the generators and drives the turbines that produce electricity, and
sustains the habitat and fish stocks that are vital to the commercial fishing industry. 3 H I G H L I G H T S Rivers,
lakes and oceans provide a natural highway for commercial navigation, as well as places to swim, fish, and boat, helping to fuel
economic activity in the recreation and tourism industry. Nearly every sector of the economy is influenced in some way by
water. But understanding the overall economic importance of water requires using a conceptual framework to illustrate how the most water-dependent
economic sectors interact with the rest of the economy. The use of water is heavily concentrated in the extraction and
processing mega-sectors of the economy, which includes agriculture, energy, manufacturing and
utilities. These sectors produce output that supports economic activity in the delivery and information mega-sectors, which includes industries such as trade,
transportation, real estate, recreation and tourism. Negative impacts to the quality and quantity of water used by the extraction and processing mega-sectors
therefore have significant ripple effects throughout the economy. T H E E C O N O M I C V A L U E O F W A T E R I S S I G N I F I C A N T B U T E L U S IVE A great deal is
generally known about the economic importance of water. It is known that because water is essential to human life, its total economic value is without measure. It
is also known that many sectors that serve as the foundation for the economy depend on water. But
understanding the economic importance of water is, in many ways, limited to these kinds of general
observations. Some reasons why there is not more detailed information on the value of water include a lack of market transaction data, limited pricing data
because water rights are only infrequently bought and sold, and altered prices because of subsidies. It is also difficult to determine water’s value because it depends
upon multiple dimensions – the volume of water supplied, where the water is supplied, when it is supplied, whether the supply is reliable, and whether the quality
of the water meets the requirements of the intended use.
Trade Advantage
2AC Trade
IOOS key to maritime trade which is key to overall trade
U.S. IOOS Summer Report 13 (The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is a national-regional partnership working to ¶ provide new tools and
forecasts to improve safety, enhance the economy, and protect our environment. August 2013. A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System from the U.S. IOOS Summer Report.
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf July 8, 2014).
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones
are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the
world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The
increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential
gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas. The
awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from
super-storms, which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that
inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except
that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users
in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs
over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion
over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and
around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely
underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power,
aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded,
reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products.
Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide, because of the role of
maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural
disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food
and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will
require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products
on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to
respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data
and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the
budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with
Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic
development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward
pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination;
and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will
need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared
liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications,
knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world,
including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21
st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of
a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy
(Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information
content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this
data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical, however,
especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this
issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the
best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know
when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into
a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem
by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before,
during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm
and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some
fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts
and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes,
and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency
response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is
severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization
products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the
people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product
standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable,
politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Trade independently solves war
Boudreaux 06 (Donald J. Boudreaux was the Chairman of the Department of Economics at GMU. Currently he is the Director of the Centerf or the Study of Public Choice. He
was recently President of the Foundation for Economic Education. “Want World Peace? Support Free Trade” from The Christian Science Monitor. 10/20/06.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p09s02-coop.html July 8, 2014.)
Back in 1748, Baron de Montesquieu observed that "Peace is the natural effect of trade. Two nations
who differ with each other become reciprocally dependent; for if one has an interest in buying, the
other has an interest in selling; and thus their union is founded on their mutual necessities."¶ ¶ If Mr.
Montesquieu is correct that trade promotes peace, then protectionism – a retreat from open trade –
raises the chances of war.¶ Plenty of empirical evidence confirms the wisdom of Montesquieu's
insight: Trade does indeed promote peace.¶ During the past 30 years, Solomon Polachek, an economist
at the State University of New York at Binghamton, has researched the relationship between trade and
peace. In his most recent paper on the topic, he and co-author Carlos Seiglie of Rutgers University
review the massive amount of research on trade, war, and peace.¶ They find that "the overwhelming
evidence indicates that trade reduces conflict." Likewise for foreign investment. The greater the
amounts that foreigners invest in the United States, or the more that Americans invest abroad, the
lower is the likelihood of war between America and those countries with which it has investment
relationships.¶ Professors Polachek and Seiglie conclude that, "The policy implication of our finding is
that further international cooperation in reducing barriers to both trade and capital flows can
promote a more peaceful world."¶ Columbia University political scientist Erik Gartzke reaches a similar
but more general conclusion: Peace is fostered by economic freedom. Economic freedom certainly
includes, but is broader than, the freedom of ordinary people to trade internationally. It includes also
low and transparent rates of taxation, the easy ability of entrepreneurs to start new businesses, the
lightness of regulations on labor, product, and credit markets, ready access to sound money, and other
factors that encourage the allocation of resources by markets rather than by government officials.¶
Professor Gartzke ranks countries on an economic-freedom index from 1 to 10, with 1 being very
unfree and 10 being very free. He then examines military conflicts from 1816 through 2000. His findings
are powerful: Countries that rank lowest on an economic-freedom index – with scores of 2 or less –
are 14 times more likely to be involved in military conflicts than are countries whose people enjoy
significant economic freedom (that is, countries with scores of 8 or higher).¶ Also important, the
findings of Polachek and Gartzke improve our understanding of the long-recognized reluctance of
democratic nations to wage war against one another. These scholars argue that the so-called
democratic peace is really the capitalist peace.¶ Democratic institutions are heavily concentrated in
countries that also have strong protections for private property rights, openness to foreign commerce,
and other features broadly consistent with capitalism. That's why the observation that any two
democracies are quite unlikely to go to war against each other might reflect the consequences of
capitalism more than democracy.¶ And that's just what the data show. Polachek and Seiglie find that
openness to trade is much more effective at encouraging peace than is democracy per se. Similarly,
Gartzke discovered that, "When measures of both economic freedom and democracy are included in a
statistical study, economic freedom is about 50 times more effective than democracy in diminishing
violent conflict."¶ These findings make sense. By promoting prosperity, economic freedom gives
ordinary people a large stake in peace.¶ This prosperity is threatened during wartime. War almost
always gives government more control over resources and imposes the burdens of higher taxes,
higher inflation, and other disruptions of the everyday commercial relationships that support
prosperity.¶ When commerce reaches across political borders, the peace-promoting effects of
economic freedom intensify. Why? It's bad for the bottom line to shoot your customers or your
suppliers, so the more you trade with foreigners the less likely you are to seek, or even to tolerate,
harm to these foreigners. Senators-elect Sherrod Brown (D) of Ohio and Jim Webb (D) of Virginia
probably don't realize it, but by endorsing trade protection, they actually work against the long-run
prospects for peace that they so fervently desire.
IL-Trade
IOOS only way to promise secure ocean trade
Homeland Security 11 (Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. This requires the dedication of
more than 240,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security to emergency response, from cybersecurity analyst to chemical facility inspector. Our duties are wideranging, but our goal is clear - keeping America safe. 2011. "The U.S. Coast Guard¶ Strategy¶ for¶ Maritime Safety, Security, and Stewardship"¶ from 2011 DHS White Paper on the Coast
Guard. http://www.uscg.mil/history/docs/DHS/DHS_CGWP_2011.pdf July 8, 2014.)
As the MTS has grown in global importance, it has ¶ also become more vulnerable. The majority of
freight ¶ moving by sea is shipped for “just-in-time” delivery—a ¶ means for reducing inventory and
lowering operating costs ¶ for industry. As a result, the MTS operates within tight ¶ tolerances and has
limited ability to deal with disruptions. ¶ Global maritime trade moves through a small number ¶ of
major trading nodes, often referred to as mega-ports, ¶ and through a handful of strategic maritime
chokepoints. ¶ Spread across Asia, North America, and Europe are ¶ 30 mega-ports that constitute the
world’s primary, ¶ interdependent trading web. Similar critical shipping nodes ¶ exist within the U.S.
MTS. Out of the some 326 ports ¶ nationwide, ten handle 85% of all ship-borne containerized ¶
cargo.25 These nodes are connected by trade routes that ¶ pass through a few critical international
straits, such as the ¶ Straits of Gibraltar, Bab-el-Mandeb, Hormuz, Malacca, ¶ and Formosa. Perhaps as
much as 75% of the world’s ¶ maritime trade and 50% of the world’s shipped oil passes ¶ through a
handful of critical chokepoints. These critical nodes and chokepoints create opportunities ¶ to disrupt
trade, which can have immediate and significant ¶ economic impacts. By one estimate, the cost to the
U.S. ¶ economy from port closures on the West Coast due to a ¶ labor management dispute in 2003
was approximately ¶ $1 billion per day for the first five days, rising sharply ¶ thereafter.26 Terrorist
attacks at the world’s chokepoints or ¶ mega-ports might trigger a similar disruption. ¶ The key to
limiting the risk of disruption in the MTS is ¶ to ensure security at sea and security and resilience in ¶
major ports. Security at sea and in foreign ports requires ¶ common effort, awareness, and stronger
maritime ¶ governance in many coastal States, including the United ¶ States. Resiliency in the MTS
requires protocols between ¶ government and the private sector on how to handle ¶ disruptions,
minimize impact, and quickly restart the flow ¶ of commerce. In early 2007, these types of protocols or ¶
regimes were limited or nonexistent.
A2: K of Economy
The economic view is a moral view—and non-economic decisions have failed in the
past
IUCN 94 (IUCN is currently the world’s largest professional global network. It is also the oldest environmental organization. IUCN works specifically on the issue of biodiversity. The
Economic Value of Biodiversity from IUCN, First published in 1994.
https://www. cb d.int/ financial/values /g-e conomi cvalue -iucn.pdf
July 8, 2014.)
The idea that the `moral' view is opposed to the `economic' view rests on may confusions. First, ¶ the
economic view is itself a moral view — it takes what is effectively a utilitarian approach to ¶
conservation. What the critics are complaining of is not so much the economics as the underlying ¶
philosophy of normative economics, utilitarianism. Of course, it is quite proper for such a philosophical
¶ debate to take place. The problem is that, in the absence of `metaethical' principles, principles that ¶
enable us to choose between apparently competing philosophies, the debate risks being rather sterile
¶ from the standpoint of getting things done. Put another way, the moral debate has gone on for a very
¶ long time and is as relevant to, say, crime and punishment as it is to biodiversity conservation. The ¶
fact that such debates have not been resolved is not surprising, but, of course, that in turn cannot be
¶ a reason for not continuing to try and resolve it. The problem is that much conservation policy to
date ¶ has been based on non-utilitarian approaches. Yet by many accounts the current situation is
one of ¶ crisis. It would seem fair, then, to choose between the competing philosophies according to
their ¶ potential for saving biodiversity in real world contexts. We argue that this favours the
economic-¶ utilitarian approach. Alternative moral standpoints would also be more tenable if they
confronted the real world ¶ context of making choices. If all biological resources have `rights' to
existence then presumably it is ¶ not possible to choose between the extinction of one set of them
rather than another. All losses ¶ become morally wrong. But biodiversity loss proceeds apace for the
reasons we have cited and for ¶ one other we have not so far mentioned: the competition between
mankind and other species for the ¶ available space. The reality is that little can be done to prevent
huge increases in the world's ¶ population — it is in that respect `too late' for a good deal of the
world's biological diversity. If so, it is ¶ essential to choose between different areas of policy
intervention — not everything can be saved. ¶ This view is reinforced by the fact that the world is
extremely unlikely to devote major resources to ¶ biodiversity conservation. We can argue that it
should, but we know it will not. The issue then ¶ becomes one of using the existing budgets as wisely
as possible. If not everything can be saved then ¶ a ranking procedure is required. And such a ranking
is not consistent with arguing that everything has ¶ a right to exist. ¶ Moreover, if we are right, and
economic `causes' are very important, then, presumably, the ¶ moral view would sanction the
correction of the economic factors giving rise to excess biodiversity ¶ loss. That would be a start at
least. In other words, whatever moral standpoint is taken it does not ¶ affect the design of a practical
agenda for conservation, and that agenda should begin with the ¶ economic factors. ¶ Finally, even if
some do not like the economic-utilitarian approach, it has a major function which ¶ is not served by
any other approach to conservation. It explains why biodiversity is being lost. It tells ¶ us that, since
people very often are utilitarian in their decisions about land use and conservation, a ¶ utilitarian
approach is needed in order to understand the process of loss, and hence the process of ¶ policy
correction.
Trade Good-Democracy
Trade leads to democracy
Griswald 04 (Daniel T. Griswold is director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, where he has authored numerous studies on trade and immigration policy.
Trading Tyranny for Freedom¶ How Open Markets Till the Soil for Democracy from the Cato Institute in January 6, 2004. http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/tpa-026.pdf July 9,
2014)
In the aftermath of September 11, the¶ foreign policy dimension of trade has¶ reasserted itself.
Expanding trade, especially¶ with and among less developed countries, is¶ once again being
recognized as a tool for¶ encouraging democracy and respect for¶ human rights in regions and
countries of¶ the world where those commodities have¶ been the exception rather than the rule.¶
Political scientists have long noted the¶ connection between economic development,¶ political
reform, and democracy. Increased¶ trade and economic integration promote civil¶ and political
freedoms directly by opening a¶ society to new technology, communications,¶ and democratic ideas.
Economic liberalization provides a counterweight to govern-¶ mental power and creates space for
civil society. And by promoting faster growth, trade¶ promotes political freedom indirectly by creating
an economically independent and¶ politically aware middle class.¶ The reality of the world today
broadly¶ reflects those theoretical links between¶ trade, free markets, and political and civil¶ freedom. As
trade and globalization have¶ spread to more and more countries in the¶ past 30 years, so too have
democracy and¶ political and civil freedoms. In particular,¶ the most economically open countries¶
today are more than three times as likely to¶ enjoy full political and civil freedoms as¶ those that are
relatively closed. Those that¶ are closed are nine times more likely to¶ completely suppress civil and
political freedoms than those that are open. Nations¶ that have followed a path of trade reform¶ in
recent decades by progressively opening¶ themselves to the global economy are significantly more likely
to have expanded¶ their citizens’ political and civil freedoms.¶ The powerful connection between
economic openness and political and civil freedom provides yet another argument for¶ pursuing an
expansion of global trade. In¶ the Middle East, China, Cuba, Central¶ America, and other regions, free
trade can¶ buttress U.S. foreign policy by tilling foreign¶ soil for the spread of democracy and
human¶ rights.
Trade allows for civil liberties which liberates human right oppression
Griswald 04 (Daniel T. Griswold is director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, where he has authored numerous studies on trade and immigration policy.
Trading Tyranny for Freedom¶ How Open Markets Till the Soil for Democracy from the Cato Institute in January 6, 2004. http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/tpa-026.pdf July 9,
2014)
Economic openness and the commercial¶ competition and contact it brings can directly¶ and
indirectly promote civil and political freedoms within countries. Trade can influence the¶ political
system directly by increasing the contact a nation’s citizens experience with the rest¶ of the world,
through face-to-face meetings,¶ and electronic communications, including telephone, fax, and the
Internet. Commercial communication can bring a sharing of ideas and¶ exposure to new ways of
thinking, doing business, and organizing civil society. Along with¶ the flow of consumer and industrial
goods¶ often come books, magazines, and other media¶ with political and social content. Foreign¶
investment and services trade create opportunities for foreign travel and study, allowing citizens to
experience first-hand the civil liberties¶ and more representative political institutions of¶ other
nations.
Trade Good-War
Free Trade prevents retaliation against the US
Fletcher 10 (The Mythical Concept of Trade War from the Huffington Post. April 2, 2010. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/the-mythical-concept-of-t_b_523864.html
July 9, 2014)
There is a basic unresolved paradox at the bottom of the very concept of trade war. If, as free traders
insist, free trade is beneficial whether or not one's trading partners reciprocate, then why would any
rational nation start one, no matter how provoked? The only way to explain this is to assume that
major national governments like the Chinese and the U.S.--governments which, whatever bad things
they may have done, have managed to hold nuclear weapons for decades without nuking each other
over trivial spats--are not players of realpolitik, but schoolchildren.¶ When the moneymen in Beijing,
Tokyo, Berlin, and the other nations currently running trade surpluses against the U.S. start to ponder
the financial realpolitik of exaggerated retaliation against the U.S. for any measures we may employ
to bring our trade back into balance, they will discover the advantage is with us, not them. Because
they are the ones with trade surpluses to lose, not us. So our position of weakness is actually a
position of strength.¶ Supposedly, China can suddenly stop buying our Treasury Debt if we rock the
boat. But this would immediately reduce the value of the trillion or so they already hold--not to mention
destroying, by making their hostility overt, the fragile (and desperately-tended) delusion in the U.S. that
America and China are still benign economic "partners" in a win-win economic relationship.¶ At the end
of the day, China cannot force us to do anything economically that we don't choose to. America is still
a nuclear power. We can--an irresponsible but not impossible scenario--repudiate our debt to them
(or stop paying the interest) as the ultimate countermove to anything they might contemplate. More
plausibly, we might simply restore the tax on the interest on foreign-held bonds that was repealed in
1984 thanks to Treasury Secretary Donald Regan.¶ A certain amount of back-and-forth token retaliation
(and loud squealing) is indeed likely if America starts defending its interests in trade as diligently as
our trading partners have been defending theirs, but that's it. After all, the world trading system has
survived their trade barriers long enough without collapsing.
Terrorism Advantage
Port Security Module
Threat of global terrorism increasing-Increase in IOOS integration efforts key to
maximize information delivery and port security
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have
experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data
processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart
phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across
most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The
increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and
potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled
areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage
from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that
inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster
than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of
ocean product needs over the next decade. The
world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by
another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the
United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is
largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship.
Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum
exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal
power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on
expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction
products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of
the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related
natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing
food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking
will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these
platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly
become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will
affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local
jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S.
Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean
observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will
need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and
products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all
over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed,
some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of
water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There
has been an unprecedented boom
in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of
information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is
critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S.
IOOS must address this issue more fully . People need technology and access to the right information
so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most
people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will
need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must
address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after
disasters. The
amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting
we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm
intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning
criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this
information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where
multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by
differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result,
and warnings are improving, but
potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the
most . U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build
a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.
Terrorists are committed to detonating a nuclear weapon on American soil – U.S.
ports will be the trafficking point
Calvan, 2012 (Bobby, Boston Globe Staff and former foreign reporting fellow with the D.C.-based International Center for
Journalists, “US to miss target for tighter port security”, Boston Globe, 6/12/12, http://articles.boston.com/2012-0612/nation/32176427_1_homeland-security-cargo-containers-nuclear-bomb/3)
The Department of Homeland Security will miss an initial deadline of July 12 to comply with a
sweeping federal law meant to thwart terrorist attacks arriving by sea, frustrating border security
advocates who worry that the agency has not done enough to prevent dangerous cargo from coming
through the country’s ocean gateways, including the Port of Boston.¶ Only a small fraction of all metal cargo
containers have been scanned before arriving at US ports, and advocates for tighter port security say
all maritime cargo needs to be scanned or manually inspected to prevent terrorists from using ships
bound for the United States to deliver a nuclear bomb.¶ The scenario might be straight out of a Hollywood script, but the
threat of terrorism is not limited to airplanes, according to Homeland Security critics, including Representative Edward Markey of
Massachusetts. Markey accuses the agency of not making a good-faith effort to comply with a 2007 law he coauthored requiring all US-bound
maritime shipments to be scanned before departing overseas docks.¶ “We’re not just missing the boat, we could be missing the bomb,’’ the
Malden Democrat said.
“The reality is that detonating a nuclear bomb in the United States is at the very top
of Al Qaeda’s terrorist targets. ’’¶ Only about 5 percent of all cargo containers headed to the United
States are screened, according to the government’s own estimate, with some shipments getting only a cursory
paperwork review.¶ Homeland Security officials argue that wider screening would be cost-prohibitive, logistically and technologically difficult,
and diplomatically challenging. While acknowledging the threat as real, they are exercising their right under the 2007 law to postpone for two
years the full implementation of the congressionally mandated scanning program. That would set the new deadline for July 2014.¶ Critics say
Terrorists have long sought to obtain uranium or plutonium to
construct a nuclear bomb, global security analysts say. Government officials, including President Obama and his predecessor, George
W. Bush, have worried that terrorist cells could be plotting further devastation in the United States, perhaps through
radioactive explosives called “dirty bombs.’’¶ Homeland Security “has concluded that 100 percent scanning of incoming
the consequences of delay could be catastrophic.
maritime cargo is neither the most efficient nor cost-effective approach to securing our global supply chain,’’ said Matt Chandler, an agency
spokesman. Homeland Security “continues to work collaboratively with industry, federal partners, and the international community to expand
these programs and our capability to detect, analyze, and report on nuclear and radiological materials,’’ Chandler said, adding that “we are
more secure than ever before.’’¶ The agency has used what it calls a “risk-based approach’’ to shipments. As a result, Homeland Security has
focused on cargo originating from 58 of the world’s busiest seaports, from Hong Kong to Dubai. Last year, US agents stationed at those ports
inspected 45,500 shipments determined to be high risk, according to joint testimony by Homeland Security, Coast Guard, and US Customs
officials in February before the House Homeland Security Committee.¶ Republicans have been wary of forcing the agency to comply with the
scanning mandate because of the presumed cost, perhaps at least $16 billion - a figure disputed by Markey and others who cite estimates that
the program could cost a comparatively modest $200 million.¶ Representative Candice Miller, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House
subcommittee on border and maritime security, was more inclined to accept the estimate from Homeland Security officials. In light of the
country’s budget troubles, “we have to try and prioritize,’’ she said.¶ Scanning cargo “100 percent would be optimal,’’ she conceded, “but it’s
not workable.’’¶ Still, she acknowledged the need to secure the country’s borders, whether by air, land, or sea.¶ There
is no dispute
that a terrorist attack at a major port could be catastrophic to the global economy . Much of the world’s
products - T-shirts sewn in China, designer shoes from Italy, and other foreign-made products - arrives in the United States in large, metal cargo
containers.¶ While some countries have voluntarily improved cargo screening, others have not. Large retailers have opposed measures that
could increase their costs. Without full scanning compliance, it is often difficult to determine if shipments have been inspected because cargo is
sometimes transferred from ship to ship offshore.
Nuclear terrorism causes extinction
Ayson, 2010 (Robert, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria
University of Wellington, “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7,
July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)
But these
two nuclear worlds—a non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear
exchange—are not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and
especially an act of nuclear terrorism, could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive
exchange of nuclear weapons between two or more of the states that possess them. In this context, today’s
and tomorrow’s terrorist groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new state possessors of small nuclear
arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by third parties. These risks were
considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1 problem. It may require a
considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism could lead to such a massive
inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well be wondered just how Russia
and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as the most obvious state
sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort of terrorist behavior
that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example, how
might the
United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear
terrorism had come from Russian stocks,40 and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for nuclear laxity? The
correct attribution of that nuclear material to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the observation by Michael May
et al. that while the debris resulting from a nuclear explosion would be “spread over a wide area in tiny fragments, its radioactivity makes it
detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of the explosion, the
Alternatively, if the act of
nuclear terrorism came as a complete surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a
terrorist group was fully responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state
possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities in
Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea, perhaps Iran if its program
continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out in this high stakes game of
materials used and, most important … some indication of where the nuclear material came from.”41
nuclear Cluedo? In particular, if the act of nuclear terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in Washington’s relations with
Russia and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would officials and political leaders not
be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the
chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the
United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or
if they were confronting each other from a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at
the present time. The reverse might well apply too: should a nuclear terrorist attack occur in Russia or China during a
period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow and
Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible
perpetrator or encourager of the attack?
1AR-U-Port Security
Lack of effective security at ports guarantees WMD smuggling into the United States –
increased port security investment is key
Flynn, 2006 (Stephen, President of the Center for National Policy and CISAC Consulting Professor at Stanford, “Port Security Is Still a
House of Cards” 3/9/2006 http://www.cfr.org/port-security/continued-vulnerability-global-maritime-transportation-system/p10074)
When it comes to port security, the buck essentially stops outside Washington, DC. Since seaports in
the United States are locally run operations where port authorities typically play the role of landlord,
issuing long-term leases to private companies; it falls largely to those companies to provide for the security of the
property they lease. In the case of Los Angeles, this translates into the security of 7500 acres of facilities that run along 49 miles of
waterfront, being provided for by minimum-wage private security guards, and a tiny port police force of under 100 officers. The situation in
Long Beach is even worse with only 12 full-time police officers assigned to its 3000 acres of facilities and a small cadre of private guards
provided by the port authority and its tenants. The command and control equipment to support a new joint operations center for the few
local, state, and federal law enforcement authorities that are assigned to the port will not be in place until 2008. Up to 11,000 independent
truck operators have access to the port terminals yet there still is no credentialing system in place to confirm the backgrounds of the drivers.
West Coast terminal operators have no way of identifying who is in their facilities at any given moment.• In the four years since September 11,
2001, the two cities have received less than $40 million in federal grants to improve the port’s physical security measures. That amount is
But the fallout from a terrorist attack
on any one of the nation’s major commercial seaports would hardly be a local matter. For instance,
should al Qaeda or one of its imitator organizations succeed in sinking a large ship in the Long Beach
channel, the auto-dependent southern California will literally run out of gas within two weeks. This is
equivalent to what American taxpayers spend in a single day on domestic airport security.
because, as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita highlighted, US petroleum refineries are operating at full throttle and their products are consumed
almost as quickly as they are made. If the crude oil shipments stop, so too do the refineries and there is no excess capacity or refined fuels to
But the most serious consequence of a major terrorist attack on America’s
waterfront is if it involved a weapon of mass destruction smuggled into one of the over nine million
40’ cargo containers that entered US seaports in 2005. The September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington,
cope with a long term disruption.
the March 11, 2004 attacks on Madrid, and the July 7, 2005 attacks on London highlight that transport systems have become among the most
Cargo containers have long been exploited to smuggle narcotics,
migrants, and stolen property including luxury automobiles. Their vulnerability is highlighted by the
billions of dollars in cargo losses derived from theft each year. A typical cargo container that is shipped from Asia will
pass through over a dozen transportation waypoints before it is loaded on a ship destined for the United States. Most are “secured”
only with a fifty-cent lead seal passed through the pad-eyes on the container doors. It is just a question of time
favored targets for terrorist organizations.
before terrorists with potentially more destructive weapons breach the superficial security measures
that have been put in place to protect the ports, the ships, and the millions of intermodal containers
that link global producers to consumers. Should that breach involve a “dirty bomb,” the United States and other
states will likely raise the port security alert system to its highest level while investigators sort out what happened
and establish whether or not a follow-on attack is likely. Multiple port closures in the United States and elsewhere
would quickly throw this system into chaos.• Container ships already destined for the United States would be stuck in
anchorages unable to unload their cargo. Ships would be delayed in overseas loading ports as the maritime industry and their customers try to
sort out how to redirect cargo. Marine terminals would have to close their gates to all incoming containers since they would have no place to
Trucks and trains would be stuck outside the terminal with no place to go. If they are carrying
cargo would perish. Also, the trucks and trains would not be able to re-circulate to pick up new shipments until
they could get rid of the old ones. Goods for export would pile at factory loading docks with no place to go.
store them.
perishable goods, the
Imports to support “just-in-time” deliveries would be no shows and soon factories would be idled and retailers’ shelves would go bare. In
short, a
catastrophic terrorist event involving the intermodal transportation system could well lead to
unprecedented disruption to the global trade system. In economic terms, the costs associated with
managing the attack’s aftermath will substantially dwarf the actual destruction from the terrorist
event itself. Those costs will be borne internationally which is why transportation and trade security must be not only a U.S. Homeland
Security priority, but an urgent global priority. As grave as this threat is, in our fifth year since the 9/11 attacks, there
still are no
minimum federal standards for access control, perimeter control, electronic surveillance, guards, and
communications. State and local port authorities have not been able to make any significant progress
towards improving the state of security within their ports. This is largely because ports face a competitive environment
where they must make significant capital investments to improve the commercial operations in order to retain or attract shipping lines. It they
divert funds away from capital improvements to pay for added security they may face a decline in vessel traffic that reduces their revenues. If
they try to pass along increased security costs to their private tenets, those tenets may decide to move to a lower cost neighboring port.
In
short, in the absence of a level national playing field, U.S. port authorities have been reluctant to
make major new investments in security.
Ports ARE the target – gaps in security infrastructure make devastating attacks
imminent
PR Newswire, 2011 (“10 Years After 9/11, Security Still a Top Priority of U.S. Ports”, The Maritime Executive,
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/10-years-after-911-security-still-a-top-priority-of-us-ports-128888213.html)
Among the materials Navy SEALS found in Osama Bin Laden's Pakistan hideout were plans showing
the maritime industry is still a key Al-Qaida target. Given ongoing threats such as these, the seaport
industry is asking Congress and the Administration make port security a top funding priority in current
and future appropriations rather than considering it for funding cuts. AAPA is strongly in favor of reauthorizing the SAFE Port Act to
ensure that U.S. port facilities and cargoes remain secure. One such bill, S. 832, was introduced in April by Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Patty
Murray (D-WA), which would authorize $300 million a year for five years for the Port Security Grant Program and reauthorizes, among other
aspects of the original bill, the Container Security Initiative, C-TPAT and the Automated Targeting System to identify high-risk cargo. Since 9/11,
the Port Security Grant Program has received about $2.6 billion in funding for 11 rounds of grant awards. AAPA commends Congress and the
Administration for these allocations and will continue to recommend the federal government commit $400 million a year for a separate and
dedicated program to help port facilities enhance their physical security. The association supports a risk-based evaluation process that allows all
facilities that are required to meet MTSA regulations to apply. “Clearly, America’s ports have become much more secure since 9/11. In
addition to guarding against cargo theft, drug smuggling, human trafficking and stowaways, ports and their law enforcement partners have
added the protection of people and facilities from terrorism to their security plate,” remarked Mr. Nagle. “There’s
no question that
more investments in security equipment, infrastructure, technology, personnel and training will be needed. All
parties—the ports, terminal operators, the various government agencies, and the Administration and Congress—must do
their part in undertaking and funding these enhancements. Only by continuing to make port security a
top priority will America’s seaports be able to continue serving their vital functions as trade gateways,
catalysts for job creation and economic prosperity, and important partners in our national defense.”
And – Attacks on ports now are more likely than on any other critical infrastructure
assets
Nadler et al, 2012 (Jerrold, Edward J. Markey, Bennie G. Thompson, “Cargo; the Terrorists’ Trojan Horse”, The International
Herald Tribune, June 28, http://www.lexisnexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/)
Over the years, terrorists
have shown themselves to be frighteningly inventive. They have hidden explosives in printer
cartridges transported by air and embedded explosives in the shoes and underwear of airline passengers.¶ The cargo containers
arriving on ships from foreign ports offer terrorists a Trojan horse for a devastating attack on the
United States. As the Harvard political scientist Graham T. Allison has put it, a nuclear attack is ''far more likely to arrive
in a cargo container than on the tip of a missile.''¶ But for the past five years, the Department of Homeland
Security has done little to counter this threat and instead has wasted precious time arguing that it would be too expensive
and too difficult, logistically and diplomatically, to comply with the law. This is unacceptable.¶ An attack on an American
port could cause tens of thousands of deaths and cripple global trade, with losses ranging from $45
billion to more than $1 trillion, according to estimates by the RAND Corporation and the Congressional Research Service. Anyone
who doubts these estimates should recall the labor strike that shut down the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach for 11 days in 2002.
Economic losses were put at $6.3 billion or more.¶
1AR-Terrorism = War
And – Nuclear terrorism causes full-scale escalation – draws in Russia and China
Ayson, 2010 (Robert, Professor of Strategic Studies and directs the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at Victoria University,
“After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack:Envisaging Catalytic Effects” Published in the Studies for Conflict and Terrorism,
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1057610X.2010.483756 p. 583-585)
A terrorist nuclear attack, and even the use of nuclear weapons in response by the country attacked in the first place, would not
necessarily represent the worst of the nuclear worlds imaginable. Indeed, there are reasons to wonder
whether nuclear terrorism should ever be regarded as belonging in the category of truly existential
threats. A contrast can be drawn here with the global catastrophe that would come from a massive nuclear exchange between two or more
of the sovereign states that possess these weapons in significant numbers. Even the worst terrorism that the twenty-first century might bring
would fade into insignificance alongside considerations of what a general nuclear war would have wrought in the Cold War period. And it must
be admitted that as long as the major nuclear weapons states have hundreds and even thousands of nuclear weapons at their disposal, there is
But these two
nuclear worlds—a non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear exchange—are
not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and especially an act of nuclear
terrorism, could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive exchange of nuclear weapons
between two or more of the states that possess them. In this context, today’s and tomorrow’s terrorist
groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new state possessors of
small nuclear arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by third parties.
always the possibility of a truly awful nuclear exchange taking place precipitated entirely by state possessors themselves.
These risks were considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1 problem. It may
require a considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism could lead to such a
massive inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well be wondered just how
Russia and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as the most obvious state
sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort of terrorist behavior
that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example, how
might the
United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear
terrorism had come from Russian stocks, and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for
nuclear laxity? The correct attribution of that nuclear material to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the
observation by Michael May et al. that while the debris resulting from a nuclear explosion would be “spread over a wide area in tiny fragments,
its radioactivity makes it detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of
the explosion, the materials used and, most important … some indication of where the nuclear material came from.”41 Alternatively, if
the
act of nuclear terrorism came as a complete surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a
terrorist group was fully responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state
possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities in
Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea, perhaps Iran if its program continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at
what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out in this high stakes game of nuclear Cluedo? In particular,
if the act of nuclear
terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in Washington’s relations with Russia
and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would officials and political
leaders not be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the
United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or if they were confronting each other from
a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at the present time. The reverse might well apply too: should a nuclear
terrorist attack occur in Russia or China during a period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow
and Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible perpetrator or encourager of the attack?
Washington’s early response to a terrorist nuclear attack on its own soil might also raise the
possibility of an unwanted (and nuclear aided) confrontation with Russia and/or China. For example, in the
noise and confusion during the immediate aftermath of the terrorist nuclear attack, the U.S. president
might be expected to place the country’s armed forces, including its nuclear arsenal, on a higher stage
of alert. In such a tense environment, when careful planning runs up against the friction of reality, it is just possible that Moscow
and/or China might mistakenly read this as a sign of U.S. intentions to use force (and possibly nuclear force)
against them. In that situation, the temptations to preempt such actions might grow, although it must be admitted that any preemption would
As part of its initial response to the act of nuclear terrorism (as
might decide to order a significant conventional (or nuclear) retaliatory or
disarming attack against the leadership of the terrorist group and/or states seen to support that group. Depending on the
identity and especially the location of these targets, Russia and/or China might interpret such action as being far too
close for their comfort, and potentially as an infringement on their spheres of influence and even on their sovereignty. One far-fetched
probably still meet with a devastating response.
discussed earlier) Washington
but perhaps not impossible scenario might stem from a judgment in Washington that some of the main aiders and abetters of the terrorist
action resided somewhere such as Chechnya, perhaps in connection with what Allison claims is the “Chechen insurgents’ … long-standing
interest in all things nuclear.”42 American
pressure on that part of the world would almost certainly raise
alarms in Moscow that might require a degree of advanced consultation from Washington that the latter found itself unable or unwilling
to provide. There is also the question of how other nuclear-armed states respond to the act of nuclear
terrorism on another member of that special club. It could reasonably be expected that following a nuclear terrorist attack
on the United States, both Russia and China would extend immediate sympathy and support to Washington and would work alongside the
United States in the Security Council. But there is just a chance, albeit a slim one, where the support of Russia and/or China is less automatic in
some cases than in others. For example, what
would happen if the United States wished to discuss its right to
retaliate against groups based in their territory? If, for some reason, Washington found the responses of
Russia and China deeply underwhelming, (neither “for us or against us”) might it also suspect that they secretly
were in cahoots with the group, increasing (again perhaps ever so slightly) the chances of a major exchange. If the terrorist group
had some connections to groups in Russia and China, or existed in areas of the world over which Russia and China held sway, and if Washington
felt that Moscow or Beijing were placing a curiously modest level of pressure on them, what conclusions might it then draw about their
culpability? If Washington decided to use, or decided to threaten the use of, nuclear weapons, the responses of Russia and China would be
crucial to the chances of avoiding a more serious nuclear exchange. They might surmise, for example, that while the act of nuclear terrorism
was especially heinous and demanded a strong response, the response simply had to remain below the nuclear threshold. It
would be
one thing for a non-state actor to have broken the nuclear use taboo, but an entirely different thing
for a state actor, and indeed the leading state in the international system, to do so. If Russia and China felt
sufficiently strongly about that prospect, there is then the question of what options would lie open to them to dissuade the United States from
such action: and as has been seen over the last several decades, the central dissuader of the use of nuclear weapons by states has been the
threat of nuclear retaliation. If some readers find this simply too fanciful, and perhaps even offensive to contemplate, it may be informative to
reverse the tables. Russia, which possesses an arsenal of thousands of nuclear warheads and that has been one of the two most important
trustees of the non-use taboo, is subjected to an attack of nuclear terrorism. In response, Moscow places its nuclear forces very visibly on a
higher state of alert and declares that it is considering the use of nuclear retaliation against the group and any of its state supporters. How
would Washington view such a possibility? Would it really be keen to support Russia’s use of nuclear weapons, including outside Russia’s
traditional sphere of influence? And if not, which seems quite plausible, what options would Washington have to communicate that
displeasure? If China had been the victim of the nuclear terrorism and seemed likely to retaliate in kind, would the United States and Russia be
happy to sit back and let this occur? In
the charged atmosphere immediately after a nuclear terrorist attack, how
would the attacked country respond to pressure from other major nuclear powers not to respond in
kind? The phrase “how dare they tell us what to do” immediately springs to mind. Some might even go so far as
to interpret this concern as a tacit form of sympathy or support for the terrorists. This might not help the chances
of nuclear restraint.
1AR-Economy
And – Those attacks will have catastrophic ripple effects throughout the economy
decimating trade, employment, commodity prices, and nearly every sector of
economic activity because ports are the KEY NEXUS POINT through which all goods
travel
Allen, 2008 (Admiral Thad, U.S. Coast Guard, “Friend or Foe? Tough to Tell”, U.S. Naval Institute,
www.pacnwest.org/docs/friendorfoe.pdf)
Some Americans take for granted how the shelves remain stocked at Target, Wal-Mart, and their local grocery store. More
than 80
percent of the world’s trade is transported by merchant vessels.2 The United States Marine
Transportation System (MTS), a complex combination of waterways, ports, terminals, inter-modal connections, vessels, people, and
support services that intertwines the public and private sectors is the lifeblood of our national economy. Since the
United States is the world’s leading maritime trading nation, accounting for nearly 20 percent of the
annual ocean-borne overseas trade, our MTS also fuels the global economy.3 As the MTS has grown in global
importance, its inherent vulnerabilities have also increased. Nearly 700 ships arrive in U.S. ports each day, and nearly 8,000 foreign flag ships,
manned by 200,000 foreign mariners, enter U.S. ports every year.4 Annually, the nation’s 326 ports handle more than $700 billion in
merchandise while the cruise line industry and its passengers contribute another $35 billion in spending.5 Overall, the
MTS supports
a global chain of economic activity that contributes more than $700 billion to our national economy
each year.6 This enormous level of activity results in the MTS operating within extremely tight
tolerances, and with limited ability to deal with disruptions. When the port of Los Angeles/Long Beach closed because
of a labor dispute in 2003, the cost to the American economy was approximately $1 billion per day for the first five days with the price tag rising
sharply thereafter.7 To safeguard the MTS, the Coast Guard has worked with other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) components to
produce the Small Vessel Security Strategy (SVSS). The Small Vessel Security Strategy (SVSS) The SVSS was built on prior research efforts and
combined with private sector input from the 256 attendees at the June 2007 National Small Vessel Security Summit held in Arlington, Virginia. It
uses a risk-based approach by first considering the vulnerabilities, likelihood, and consequences of a small vessel attack in a specific port. Once
the risk is determined, appropriate resources can be allocated and security measures can be implemented. The SVSS engenders a spirit of
international as well as public and private sector cooperation. It also creates a framework to enhance our maritime security posture and
increases our level of awareness to that already achieved by much of the international community. Immediately after 9/11, the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) focused on regulating cargo containers and enhancing the security of large commercial vessels (over 300 gross
tons on international voyages) and port facilities. To meet this challenge, the United States was a major proponent of the International Ship and
Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code that revolutionized maritime security protocols. In 2004 148 nations approved the ISPS Code. Recognizing that
a security gap still existed within the maritime domain, our nation, in conjunction with representatives from the United Kingdom and Japan,
presented a small vessel threat briefing to the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) in 2007. This briefing addressed vessels not covered by
the ISPS. To ensure a robust analysis, the briefing specifically included the private-sector input collected during the Small Vessel Security
Summit. The committee appointed an international Correspondence Group, comprised of 38 voluntary member governments and 8
nongovernmental associations, to study small vessel security and submit proposed guidelines. The unprecedented number of participants
underscored the seriousness of global concern. The Coast Guard has been an integral part of the Correspondence Group, and we expect the
guidelines to be adopted at the MSC’s next session in November 2008. Even though the guidelines are voluntary, they reflect international
consensus on small vessel security practices. Nations that follow the guidelines raise their status as favorable trading partners, so it will
encourage self- correcting behavior. Once the guidelines are approved, the Coast Guard will work with DHS to incorporate them into an
implementation plan for the United States. Not content to wait, some nations have already implemented their own safeguards. Singapore,
home of one of the world’s busiest ports, is adjacent to two of the most heavily trafficked waterways in the world; the Singapore and Malacca
straits. More than 1,000 vessels per day transit these two natural shipping choke points, making them both essential to the global supply chain
and a nearpefect setting for a small vessel attack. To reduce that threat, Singapore has required all non-SOLAS-covered vessels within its port to
carry a low- cost transponder that transmits the vessel’s identification and intended movement. By combining AIS data with information
gleaned from the small vessel transponders, Singapore estimates it will be able to monitor 98 percent of the vessels within its waterways.8
While this type of monitoring heightens privacy concerns, the added situational awareness allows law enforcement agencies to identify highrisk vessels and detect anomalies in shipping patterns, two key aspects of a risk-based approach to maritime security. Based on lessons from
previous incidents and security efforts throughout the international community, the SVSS addresses four key risk scenarios from small vessels: •
Domestic use of WBIEDs; • Conveyance for smuggling weapons (including WMDs); Conveyance for smuggling terrorists; and • Waterborne
platform for conducting a stand-off attack, e.g. man-portable air-defense system (ManPADS). More Eyes and Ears A small vessel attack can
range from a simple improvised explosive device to a weapon of mass destruction. A
WMD would have obvious catastrophic
implications but even a garage-built bomb or a small-arms attack could force a port to shut down and
have long-term economic and security ramifications. A small vessel could also be used to smuggle terrorists into the
country. In 2007, approximately 5,000 illegal immigrants success- fully arrived on our shores and most were transported via small craft. There
are a variety of threats from small vessels to our security, so we need a fresh approach to risk mitigation. Our Economic Lifeblood We rely on
our Marine Transportation System to keep the shelves stocked at Target, Wal-Mart, and our local grocery store. An
attack on a vessel
in one of our ports, such as Los Angeles/Long Beach, could result in the port shutting down and spreading
anxiety throughout the global financial marketplace.
And – Even though recent economic dips have occurred without massive impact, port
attacks would cause a uniquely QUICK and IRRECOVERABLE economic collapse
Flynn, 2003 (Stephen, Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies and Director, Council on Foreign Relations
Independent Task Force on Homeland Security Imperatives, “The Fragile State of Container Security”, Testimony Before the U.S. Senate,
http://www.cfr.org/defensehomeland-security/fragile-state-container-security/p5730)
A year later I joined with former senators Warren Rudman and Gary Hart in preparing our report, “America: Still Unprepared—Still In Danger.”
We observed that “nineteen men wielding box-cutters forced the United States to do to itself what no adversary could ever accomplish: a
successful blockade of the U.S. economy. If
a surprise terrorist attack were to happen tomorrow involving the sea,
response would likely be the
same—a self-imposed global embargo.” Based on that analysis, we identified as second of the six critical mandates that deserve
rail, or truck transportation systems that carry millions of tons of trade to the United States each day, the
the nation’s immediate attention: “Make trade security a global priority; the system for moving goods affordably and reliably around the world
is ripe for exploitation and vulnerable to mass disruption by terrorists.” This is why the topic of today’s hearing is so important. The
stakes
are enormous. U.S. prosperity—and much of its power—relies on its ready access to global markets.
Both the scale and pace at which goods move between markets has exploded in recent years thanks in no small part to the invention and
proliferation of the intermodal container. These ubiquitous boxes—most come in the 40’x8’x8’ size—have transformed the transfer of cargo
from a truck, train, and ship into the transportation equivalent of connecting Lego blocks. The result has been to increasingly diminish the role
of distance for a supplier or a consumer as a constraint in the world marketplace. Ninety
percent of the world’s freight now
moves in a container. Companies like Wal-Mart and General Motors move up to 30 tons of merchandise or parts across the vast Pacific
Ocean from Asia to the West Coast for about $1600. The transatlantic trip runs just over a $1000—which makes the postage stamp seem a bit
overpriced. But the system that underpins the incredibly efficient, reliable, and affordable movement of global
freight has one
glaring shortcoming in the post-9-11 world—it was built without credible safeguards to prevent it
from being exploited or targeted by terrorists and criminals. Prior to September 11, 2001, virtually anyone in the world
could arrange with an international shipper or carrier to have an empty intermodal container delivered to their home or workplace. They then
could load it with tons of material, declare in only the most general terms what the contents were, “seal” it with a 50-cent lead tag, and send it
on its way to any city and town in the United States. The job of transportation providers was to move the box as expeditiously as possible.
Exercising any care to ensure that the integrity of a container’s contents was not compromised may have been a commercial practice, but it
was not a requirement. The responsibility for making sure that goods loaded in a box were legitimate and authorized was shouldered almost
exclusively by the importing jurisdiction. But as the volume of containerized cargo grew exponentially, the number of agents assigned to police
that cargo stayed flat or even declined among most trading nations. The rule of thumb in the inspection business is that it takes five agents
three hours to conduct a thorough physical examination of a single full intermodal container. Last year nearly 20 million containers washed
across America’s borders via a ship, train, and truck. Frontline agencies had only enough inspectors and equipment to examine between 1-2
percent of that cargo. Thus, for would-be terrorists, the global intermodal container system that is responsible for moving the overwhelming
majority of the world’s freight satisfies the age-old criteria of opportunity and motive. “Opportunity” flows from (1) the almost complete
absence of any security oversight in the loading and transporting of a box from its point of origin to its final destination, and (2) the fact that
growing volume and velocity at which containers move around the planet create a daunting “needle-in-the-haystack” problem for inspectors.
“Motive” is derived from the role that the container now plays in underpinning global supply chains and the likely response by the U.S.
government to an attack involving a container. Based on statements by the key officials at U.S. Customs, the Transportation Security
Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Department of Transportation, should
a container be used as a “poor man’s
missile,” the shipment of all containerized cargo into our ports and across our borders would be
halted. As a consequence, a modest investment by a terrorist could yield billions of dollars in losses to
the U.S. economy by shutting down—even temporarily—the system that moves “just-in-time”
shipments of parts and goods. Given the current state of container security, it is hard to imagine how a post-event lock-down on
container shipments could be either prevented or short-lived. One thing we should have learned from the 9-11 attacks involving passenger
airliners, the follow-on anthrax attacks, and even last fall Washington sniper spree is that terrorist incidents pose a special challenge for public
officials. In the case of most disasters, the reaction by the general public is almost always to assume the event is an isolated one. Even if the
post-mortem provides evidence of a systemic vulnerability, it often takes a good deal of effort to mobilize a public policy response to redress it.
But just the opposite happens in the event of a terrorist attack—especially one involving catastrophic consequences. When
these
attacks take place, the assumption by the general public is almost always to presume a general
vulnerability unless there is proof to the contrary. Government officials have to confront head-on this loss of public confidence by
marshalling evidence that they have a credible means to manage the risk highlighted by the terrorist incident. In the interim as recent events
have shown, people will refuse to fly, open their mail, or even leave their homes. If
a terrorist were to use a container as a
weapon-delivery devise, the easiest choice would be high-explosives such as those used in the attack on the Murrah
Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Some form of chemical weapon, perhaps even involving hazardous materials,
is another likely scenario. A bio-weapon is a less attractive choice for a terrorist because of the challenge of dispersing the agent in a
sufficiently concentrated form beyond the area where the explosive devise goes off. A “dirty bomb” is the more likely threat vs.
a nuclear weapon, but all these scenarios are conceivable since the choice of a weapon would not be
constrained by any security measures currently in place in our seaports or within the intermodal transportation
industry. This is why a terrorist attack involving a cargo container could cause such profound economic
disruption. An incident triggered by even a conventional weapon going off in a box could result in a
substantial loss of life. In the immediate aftermath, the general public will want reassurance that one
of the many other thousands of containers arriving on any given day will not pose a similar risk. The
President of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other keys officials responsible for the security of the nation would
have to stand before a traumatized and likely skeptical American people and outline the measures they have in place to prevent another such
attack. In the absence of a convincing security framework to manage the risk of another incident, the
public would likely insist
that all containerized cargo be stopped until adequate safeguards are in place. Even with the most focused
effort, constructing that framework from scratch could take months—even years. Yet, within three weeks, the entire
worldwide intermodal transportation industry would effectively be brought to its knees—as would
much of the freight movements that make up international trade.
And – Economic collapse would cause world-ending global nuclear catastrophe
Bearden, 2000 (Director, Association of Distinguished American Scientists, “The Unnecessary Energy Crisis: How to Solve it Quickly”,
June 24, http://www.seaspower.com/EnergyCrisis-Bearden.htm)
History bears out that desperate
nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress
on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals of
weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an
example, suppose a starving North Korea {[7]} launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including
U.S. forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China — whose long-range nuclear missiles (some) can
reach the United States — attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual treaties involved in such scenarios will
quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies have shown for
decades that, under such extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potential
adversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy of the MAD concept
is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive
at all is to launch immediate full-bore pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and massively
as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs. Today, a great percent of the WMD
arsenals that will be unleashed, are already on site within the United States itself {[8]}. The resulting great Armageddon will
destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for many decades.
1AR Trade
And – It spillsover and collapses all commerce and international trade
Lautenbacher, 2006 (Vice Admiral Conrad C., Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, Delivered at World
Maritime Technology Conference”, March 6, www.pco.noaa.gov/PPTs/IMarEST.ppt)
I would like to start with talking about the importance of Marine Technology in supporting global trade and how we all must work to making
sure the necessary navigation products and services are in place to support the increased use of the intermodal transportation network. We are
continuously improving our ability to providing accurate and timely navigation products and services to the our country’s maritime and
intermodal transportation network. We have a responsibility to both protect economic investment as well as protecting environmental integrity
and peoples lives. So I would also like to talk about how we were recently tested in these responsibilities during and after the recent Hurricanes
The
Marine Transportation System was critical to the start of the United States as a nation and remains
today the backbone of the country’s commerce Our Nation’s ports support nearly $2 trillion dollars in
U.S. waterborne foreign trade. (Source: American Association of Port Authorities) Our Nation’s ports and waterways support the
Rita and Katrina and worked to bring the region back into the Global Economy Economic Importance of Marine Transportation Systems:
annual movement of more than 2.5 billion tons of domestic and international commerce. (Source – Maritime Administration) Our Nation’s
coastal and inland waterways support our commerce, our recreation, and our national security. U.S.
water carriers annually
generate a gross output of $32 billion, purchase $24 billion in goods and services from other
industries, and employ more than 57,000 workers. Public ports generate significant local and regional
economic growth, directly creating jobs for more than 1 million Americans, and indirectly creating
jobs for another 3.8 million. Waterborne commerce also generates more than $16 billion in federal,
state, and local taxes. (Source: IMO) An example of how observations are affecting management decision today, we only have to look
to the Coastal Ocean Observation System, a future component of GEOSS. In addition to providing Hurricane Forecast Models and Warnings
prior to the Hurricanes landing, NOAA also worked to assist in the disaster relief and facilitated the reopening of the area’s Marine
Transportation System. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita recently put NOAA to the test in using all of our technological and human knowledge to
reopen the Gulf Coast area for international commerce. With the Mississippi River mouth closed to international traffic, grain from the Midwest
could not be shipped out to Africa and Europe. Chiquita Bananas had to reroute shipment of bananas and other fresh produce to other areas.
25% of its imports went through Gulfport Mississippi. Half of the Folger’s Brand of coffee comes out of New Orleans The offshore oil and gas
transportation infrastructure at Port Fourchon, including pipelines, processing facilities and tanker traffic were all shut in causing severe spikes
in gasoline prices. Just one Trucking Company, Yellow Roadway lost a million dollars a day with no shipments coming in or out of New Orleans.
NOAA deployed its resources, including response teams, hydrographic survey vessels, and state-of-the-art technologies, as part of a large scale
federally-coordinated response effort. NOAA Navigation Response Teams directly contributed to relief efforts and the resumption of maritime
commerce. NOAA NRTs provided critical information, supporting Coast Guard efforts to rapidly assess and reopen waterways, which allowed
maritime-based relief efforts into impacted communities. The field teams conduct hazardous obstructions surveys and mapping support
through out the Atlantic Seaboard, Pacific Coast, Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico. The field units operate in a 365 day a year environment to
support NOAA's mission of promoting safe maritime navigation. The NRTs stand ready to respond to natural and manmade incidents in our
waterways; their surveys enable authorities to reopen ports and channels to navigation after accidents and weather events. NOAA conducted
damage assessment flights, collecting over 8300 images, covering 1600 miles of linear flight lines. The images captured include the coastal areas
of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, including the ports of Mobile, Pascagoula, Gulfport, New Orleans, and Port Fourchon. Thirty-two tide
stations operated by NOAA’s National Water Level Observation Network along the Gulf Coast disseminated storm tide conditions in real and
near real-time as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita approached and made landfall. These stations were supplemented by thirty-one partner stations
operated to NWLON standards, doubling the storm tide observing capacity in the Gulf, and demonstrating the value of an Integrated Ocean
Observing System. The Houston/Galveston PORTS® provided important navigational information following Rita required by ship masters and
pilots to avoid collisions and groundings. NOAA’s Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) were operating in the area affected by
Katrina, and collected data to support remote sensing missions and other GPS applications such as surveying and mapping activities associated
with the post-hurricane recovery work. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, NOAA is continuing providing invaluable scientific support to the our
Coast Guard and Environmental Protection Agency and the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama in their response efforts. NOAA
Restoration Teams are working with state and federal partners to assess the impacts to natural resources and to plan for restoration, within the
context of the broader recovery efforts. NOAA expertise is critical to mitigate harm, provide critical information for allocation of response
assets, restore adverse effects on natural resources, aid planning and response decision-making, and document damages. We continue to
monitor the ecosystem in the area. We are monitoring water quality and tissue samples from fish and bivalves. In an area known for being a
dead zone, where we thought that due to the massive pollution associated with hazardous spills, we were finding some good news. We were
able to open up the fisheries and that is another step in rebuilding the gulf coast economy. PHOTO Bottom Left: NCCOS Biologist is using a net
tow to test for toxic phytoplankton (HAB). PHOTO Bottom Right: Bert and Emily of NRT 4 at Port Allen Nowhere
is the
interconnections of our globe more evident than in marine commerce and transportations. We are
bridging the gap between economic development and those who use oceans to transport goods to the
global economy. These are global concerns as we expand our economic integration and need to
observe and connect systems to provide information from multiple data sources.
And – Trade solves war
Boudreux, 2006 (Donald J., Chair of the Economics Department at George Mason University, “Want World Peace? Support Free
Trade”, November 20, http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p09s02-coop.html)
During the past 30 years, Solomon Polachek, an economist at the State University of New York at Binghamton, has
researched the relationship between trade and peace. In his most recent paper on the topic, he and co-author Carlos
Seiglie of Rutgers University review the massive amount of research on trade, war, and peace. They find that "the overwhelming
evidence indicates that trade reduces conflict." Likewise for foreign investment. The greater the amounts that
foreigners invest in the United States, or the more that Americans invest abroad, the lower is the
likelihood of war between America and those countries with which it has investment relationships.
Professors Polachek and Seiglie conclude that, "The policy implication of our finding is that further international cooperation in reducing
barriers to both trade and capital flows can promote a more peaceful world." Columbia University political
scientist Erik Gartzke
reaches a similar but more general conclusion: Peace is fostered by economic freedom. Economic freedom
certainly includes, but is broader than, the freedom of ordinary people to trade internationally. It includes also low and transparent rates of
taxation, the easy ability of entrepreneurs to start new businesses, the lightness of regulations on labor, product, and credit markets, ready
access to sound money, and other factors that encourage the allocation of resources by markets rather than by government officials. Professor
Gartzke ranks countries on an economic-freedom index from 1 to 10, with 1 being very unfree and 10 being very free. He then examines
military conflicts from 1816 through 2000. His findings are powerful: Countries
that rank lowest on an economic-freedom
index - with scores of 2 or less - are 14 times more likely to be involved in military conflicts than are
countries whose people enjoy significant economic freedom (that is, countries with scores of 8 or higher). Also
important, the findings of Polachek and Gartzke improve our understanding of the long-recognized reluctance of democratic nations to wage
war against one another. These scholars argue that the so-called democratic peace is really the capitalist peace. Democratic institutions are
heavily concentrated in countries that also have strong protections for private property rights, openness to foreign commerce, and other
features broadly consistent with capitalism. That's why the
observation that any two democracies are quite unlikely to
go to war against each other might reflect the consequences of capitalism more than democracy. And
that's just what the data show. Polachek and Seiglie find that openness to trade is much more effective at encouraging peace than is democracy
per se. Similarly, Gartzke discovered that, "When measures of both economic freedom and democracy are included in a statistical study,
economic freedom is about 50 times more effective than democracy in diminishing violent conflict."
These findings make sense. By promoting prosperity, economic freedom gives ordinary people a large stake in peace. This prosperity is
threatened during wartime. War almost always gives government more control over resources and imposes the burdens of higher taxes, higher
inflation, and other disruptions of the everyday commercial relationships that support prosperity. When commerce reaches across political
borders, the peace-promoting effects of economic freedom intensify. Why? It's
bad for the bottom line to shoot your
customers or your suppliers, so the more you trade with foreigners the less likely you are to seek, or
even to tolerate, harm to these foreigners.
Science Leadership Advantage
1AC Science Leadership
Technology output is key to maintain science leadership – absent that, China will
surpass the United States
Hummel et al. 2012 Robert Hummel, PhD, Vice President of Research at the Potomac Institute for
Policy Studies, Patrick Cheetham & Justin Rossi, Research associates at the Potomac Institute for
Policy Studies, 2012, “US Science and Technology Leadership, and Technology
Grand Challenges”, Synesis Journal, http://www.synesisjournal.com/vol3_g/Hummel_2012_G14-39.pdf
The field of scientometrics is about measuring the quan- tity and quality of scientific research. While it
mostly tracks academic output and the publications of corporate R&D centers that choose to make information public, it can provide a harbinger
of trends within countries. Other scientometric studies turn to statistics concerning patents, since they can reflect research activities in industry.
Here, we integrate assessments"" to provide our own interpreta- tion of trends in S&T quantity and quality. The assessments generally agree
that China is experienc- ing exponential increase in its quantity, and its quality, of S&T output (55).
These studies mostly look at English- language refereed publications, but Chinese-language production is also expanding. The Wanfang database of Chinese
academic publications in Chinese language jour- nals, conferences, and dissertations, contains more than 14 million articles (as of July 2008) (56). While the US
has a number of efforts that scout and assess foreign S&T developments, and perform frequent "net assessments" and technical exchanges as part of the
Technical Coopera- tion Program (57), the techniques used to perform these studies are themselves the topics of research efforts, and such scouting is inevitably
relatively narrow. Innovation
is difficult enough to recognize when it occurs in one's own domain.
Accordingly, it is likely that there are in- novations and high quality research among the large and
rapidly increasing body of S&T output in China. As an example, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission reports that
in at least some certain mod- ern military systems developed by the Chinese, the US underestimated the capabilities and rate of progress of the Chinese militaryindustrial base, and that this un- derestimation was in part related to a failure to take into account China's increased investments in science and technology (58).
Asia more generally is also increasing its quantity of S&T output. Taken together, the Asian na- tions
including China and Japan produced nearly as many top-quality refereed journal articles as the US in
2009, the last year for which data is available. Apart from China, the other BRIC nations appear to be focusing on increasing
research output, albeit they remain far below US production levels. There is evidence that US S&T output is decreasing, al- though
there are various possible explanations, and the rate of decrease is small (59). It is certain that the propor- tion of US output to global S&T is declining, largely
due to the increase in non-US output. There is general agreement that the US retains the most innovative work, albeit China and others are improving. The US
has the best infrastructure for converting S&T results to entrepreneurial businesses, but continues to lose out when it comes to manufacturing commodity
products. There
are questions as to whether American imaginations are as captivated by science, and by
"big ideas," as they were in the past (60). EU-25 is doing very well in total S&T output, comparable or
even above US output. Their quality is also high (61). To the extent that the US retains leadership in
S&T fields over the EU, it is because scientists often migrate to US facili- ties, and because the US does a
better job at transition. Ronald Kostoff points out that if one discounts bio- medical research, then in certain fields China's out- put
is already greater than US total output, such as in nanotechnology (59). In Kostoff's figure (Figure 4), Kostoff uses databases with relatively
fewer biomedical entries, and compares them to the Science Citation Index (SCI) database, which is relatively heavy in biomedical references. Since the metrics are
based on looking at publication counts in high-caliber refereed journals and conferences, and since there are a limited number of such slots available, the suggestion
is that the quality is comparable. Similar trends are seen in counts of citations of nanotechnology articles, and citation indices are most likely a lagging indicator,
since, as reported elsewhere, "it will take some time before the international academic community cites scientific papers from emerging coun- tries to the same
extent they reference publications from traditional leaders (62)."
Ocean exploration leads to a large increase in technology output – exploration will
become the new target of American innovation
Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special
correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”,
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/
In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it
(relatively) affordable and accessible came to an end after 30 years. Those three decades provided numerous
technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag of nearly $200 billion, the program had its champions and its
detractors. It was,
however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing the American spirit of
innovation and leadership. With the iconic space program ending, many people have asked, "What’s
next? What is the next giant leap in scientific and technological innovation?" Today a possible answer to that
question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition
that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what
covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean. You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau
and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean
exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau"
introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential
resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing
need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A
new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help
inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an early
treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy
conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove
of knowledge. In addition, such
discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well
as technologies and goods.
Science leadership solves hard and soft power – technology solves hegemony while
diplomacy created by science leadership solves for soft power
Coletta 2009 Damon Coletta, PhD in political science, September 2009, “Science, Technology, and the
Quest for International Influence”,
http://www.usafa.edu/df/inss/Research%20Papers/2009/09%20Coletta%20Science%20and%20Influenc
eINSS(FINAL).pdf
After the industrial revolution, science
leadership has been associated with increased national capability
through superior commercial and military technology. With the rising importance of soft power and
transnational bargaining, when America‘s hard power cannot be deployed everywhere at once,
maintaining leadership in basic science as the quest to know Nature may be key to curbing legitimate
resistance and sustaining America‘s influence in the international system. The catch is that American
democracy imposes high demands on the relationship between science, state, and society. Case studies of
the Office of Naval Research and U.S. science-based relations with respect to Brazil, as telling examples of U.S. Government science policy
via the mission agency, reveal how difficult it is for a democratic power to strike the right balance between applied activities and
fundamental research that establishes science leadership. To
discover sustainable hegemony in an increasingly
multipolar world, American policy makers will need more than the Kaysen list of advantages from
basic science. Dr. Carl Kaysen served President John Kennedy as deputy national security adviser and over his long career held
distinguished professorships in Political Economy at Harvard and MIT. During the 1960s, Kaysen laid out a framework with four important
reasons why a great power, the United States in particular, should take a strategic interest in the basic sciences. 1. Scientific
discoveries provided the input for applied research, which in turn produced technologies crucial for
wielding economic and military power. 2. Scientific activity educated a cadre of operators for
leadership in industries relevant to government such as health care and defense. 3. Science
proficiency generated the raw elements for mounting focused, applied efforts such as the Manhattan
Project during World War II to build the first atomic bomb. 4. Scientific progress built a basic research
reserve that when necessary could move quickly to shore up national needs.
Primacy ensures peace – deterrence and relations, both hard and soft power are key
Posen and Ross 1997 Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science at MIT and
director of MIT's Security Studies Program Andrew L. Ross, PhD in political science, International
Security, Volume 21, Number 3, Winter 1997, pg. 30, “Competing visions for US Grand Strategy”,
http://www.comw.org/pda/14dec/fulltext/97posen.pdf
Primacy, like selective engagement, is motivated by both power and peace. But the particular
configuration of power is key: this strategy holds that only a preponderance of U.S. power ensures
peace.41 The pre-Cold War practice of aggregating power through coalitions and alliances, which
underlies selective engagement, is viewed as insufficient. Peace is the result of an imbalance of power in
which U.S. capabilities are sufficient, operating on their own, to cow all potential challengers and to
comfort all coalition partners. It is not enough, consequently, to be primus inter pares, a comfortable position for selective
engagement. Even the most clever Bismarckian orchestrator of the balance of power will ultimately fall short. One
must be primus solus. Therefore, both world order and national security require that the United
States maintain the primacy with which it emerged from the Cold War. The collapse of bipolarity
cannot be permitted to allow the emergence of multipolarity; unipolarity is best. Primacy would have been
the strategy of a Dole administration. Primacy is most concerned with the trajectories of present and possible
future great powers. As with selective engagement, Russia, China, Japan, and the most significant members of the European Union
(essentially Germany, France, and Britain), matter most. War among the great powers poses the greatest threat to
U.S. security for advocates of primacy as well as those of selective engagement. But primacy goes
beyond the logic of selective engage- ment and its focus on managing relations among present and
potential future great powers. Advocates of primacy view the rise of a peer competitor from the midst of the great powers to
offer the greatest threat to international order and thus the greatest risk of war. The objective for primacy, therefore, is not merely to
preserve peace among the great powers, but to preserve U.S. suprem- acy by politically, economically, and militarily outdistancing any
global challenger.
S&T Add on
Government science leadership is key to make S&T agreements effective – outdated
policy makes them ineffective now
Augustine and Lane 4/28 Norman R. Augustine, retired chairman and chief executive officer of the
Lockheed Martin Corporation, proponent of science and engineering, member of the President's Council
of Advisors on Science and Technology and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Advisory
Council, Neal F. Lane, former science advisor to the President of the United States, 4/28/2014, “What if
America had a plan for scientific research?”, http://www.insidesources.com/what-if-america-had-aplan-for-scientific-research/
February’s announcement by the National Institutes of Health, the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health, and major pharmaceutical companies of an
ambitious partnership to help accelerate the discovery of new diagnostics and drug treatments is a promising step forward for strengthening America’s scientific
research enterprise. The
partnership among government, universities, and industry is the cornerstone of
research and innovation in this nation. However, securing a prosperous economic future in the face of
increased global competition will require a more cooperative strategic working relationship among
these three sectors than currently exists. Many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle seem to agree. Yet this task is
enormously challenging. It will require two things: (i) strong bipartisan agreement on the importance
of U.S. science and technology (S&T) and the long-term investment in federally funded research,
especially that carried out in our universities; and (ii) policy reform in all sectors, including changes in
America’s federal S&T policy-making apparatus that today focuses on short-term political and
economic considerations rather than on the nation’s future needs in a rapidly changing world. In short, we
need a plan. U.S. leadership in S&T is threatened by policies and policy-making mechanisms that were put
in place during the Cold War, well before the onset of the information revolution and widespread
globalization. This is not because U.S. presidents and Congressional leaders in recent decades have not tried. The problem is systemic, making it difficult to
implement even the most basic reforms on issues ranging from removing needless regulatory barriers to government-university cooperation to raising the limits on
H1-B visas and green cards to updating the Bayh-Dole legislation to aligning the missions of federal agencies and national laboratories to meet today’s challenges. In
fact, we argue that America
has not had an effective national S&T plan for many decades, and that needs to
change. Suppose we had one, what might it look like? First, an effective national plan would include better coordination
of efforts: enhanced federal interagency cooperation on S&T-related activities, including shared
planning and funding; stronger partnerships between the government (federal and state), universities
(public and private), and business and industry; reduced barriers to collaboration across sectors, e.g.,
government regulations and IP sharing; and greater synergy among non-government research
societies and S&T policy organizations, working together to get a compelling message out to the
public, while continuing to offer good advice to policy-makers in all sectors. Second, an effective national plan would
be strategic. America’s research system has served the nation well for more than 60 years and, at a fundamental level, continues to do so. Yet the rapid
changes occurring in government, universities, the private sector, and the world at large require a
more strategic approach to S&T policy, particularly with respect to research, including sustainable funding for research, student fellowships,
modern instrumentation, and world-class facilities as well as policy changes to remove the barriers to international research cooperation. Third, an effective
national plan would be forward-thinking, taking the long view on S&T policy and R&D priorities and
placing greater emphasis on basic research where the “breakthroughs” happen as well as on science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education at all levels. Achieving this goal would require that policy-makers in all sectors
capitalize on abundant independent, expert, non-partisan advice on long-term S&T planning and policy.
Nanotech Impact
S&T agreements solve nanotech
Marburger 2008 John H. Marburger, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Advisor
to the President, PhD in physics, HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND SCIENCE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED
TENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION, 4/2/08, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG110hhrg41470/html/CHRG-110hhrg41470.htm
Science policy is necessarily based on input from the science community which comes to Executive
Branch policy offices through the agencies that fund their work. The function of the OSTP-staffed
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), among other things, is to ensure that this information
is incorporated systematically in agency plans and programs. The OSTP international program balances
this ``bottom up'' practice with ``top down'' coordination of formal multi- agency interactions with
other countries as described in more detail below. Agencies manage their collaborations and fulfill
their commitments under umbrella S&T agreements through their individual international offices.
During the past six years, OSTP has experimented with various arrangements for coordinating agency
international science and technology programs. The most successful approach has been one that draws
together agencies in meetings focused on specific science topics such as nanotechnology or genomics,
or on specific countries such as China or Brazil. The former meetings occur naturally in the NSTC context,
the latter occur on the schedule of high-level bilateral commission meetings to review progress under
the S&T agreements. The agencies are satisfied with this arrangement, which has been very productive.
Nanotechnology provides an excellent example of a successful internationally coordinated program.
Through the NSTC Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology (NSET), OSTP
collaborated with the Department of State to establish a Working Party on Nanotechnology within the
OECD to advise on emerging issues in science, technology and innovation related to nanotechnology.
Today 27 countries participate in this working group. The NSET Subcommittee also facilitates U.S.
participation in the OECD Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials.
Nanotech solves warming by increasing the efficiency of fossil fuels
Nanowerk Spotlight 2010 Nanowerk the leading nanotechnology and nanosciences portal, the
premier nanotechnology portal due to the depth, rich scope and relevance of unique editorial content,
5/4/10, “Nanotechnologies to mitigate global warming”,
http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=16126.php
There are a number of approaches to reduce energy consumption in many major applications and,
thereby, have a direct influence on decreasing greenhouse gas emissions. The major impact of
nanotechnology on the energy sector is likely to be by way of improving the efficiency of present day
technologies to minimize usage of fossil fuels. The transportation sector is one of the major
contributors to CO2 emissions (about 28%, according to a report by the Environmental Protection Agency, USA). Therefore, any effort to
reduce emissions in vehicles by reducing their weight and, in turn, decreasing fuel consumption can
have an immediate and significant global impact. It is estimated that a 10% reduction in weight of the
vehicle corresponds to a 10% reduction in fuel consumption (1), leading to a proportionate fall in
emissions. In recognition of the above, there is growing interest worldwide in exploring means of achieving weight reduction in automobiles through use of
novel materials. For example, use of lighter, stronger and stiffer nano-composite materials is considered to have
the potential to significantly reduce weight. Polymers like thermosets, thermoplastics and elastomers reinforced with colloidal silica,
nanoclay and nanotubes are promising candidate materials. Employing nanocomposites can lead to reduced energy consumption in cars, with the impact of their
use being likely to be even more dramatic in the aerospace sector. It is estimated by The Mitre Corp. that use of CNT reinforced polymer composite airframes in
place of aluminum airframes would result in 14.05% decrease in structural mass of the aircraft, and as a consequence, likely to reduce fuel consumption by about
9.8% ("Impact of nanomaterials in airframes on commercial aviation, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics," – pdf downlaod). A number of key players
like General Motors, Dow Automotive, Sud ChemieAG, Degussa, Hyperion Catalysis International etc. are intensively pursuing the development of nanocomposites
for auto body parts, fenders, exterior panels etc. Another
strategy to improve fuel efficiency is by incorporation of
nanocatalysts. Enercat, a third generation nanocatalyst developed by Energenics, uses the oxygen
storing cerium oxide nanoparticles to promote complete fuel combustion, which helps in reducing fuel
consumption. Recently, the company has demonstrated fuel savings of 8-10% on a mixed fleet of diesel vehicles in Italy.
Reducing friction and improving wear resistance in engine and drive train components is of vital
importance in the automotive sector. Reducing friction can lower the fuel consumption by about 2%
and result in cutting down carbon dioxide emissions by 500 million tons per year from trucks and
other heavy vehicles in Sweden alone, based on the estimates made by a Swedish company, Applied Nano Surfaces. Nano based lubricants
and nanocoatings can significantly reduce coefficient of friction and are being increasingly introduced in the market. ApNano, Israel has developed NanoLub™
lubricant based on inorganic fullerenes’ like WS2, MoS2, NbS2 etc. NanoLub reduces friction and wear significantly and to a much greater extent than conventional
lubricants, especially at higher loads. The company claims that NanoLub saves money, reduces pollution, is cost effective, safe and environmentally-friendly.
Similarly, NanoBoron, UK has developed BORPower® to reduce fuel consumption and extend the lifetime of engines. This is achieved by reducing friction and
abrasion during motion via the hard-coating and miniaturized bearing-ball effect. BORPower® contains two active ingredients, namely Mono Crystal Diamond
Powder (MCDP) and Nano Boron. According to the company, use of BORPower® results in lower fuel consumption (8-15%), improved engine power (7-9%) and
correspondingly lower CO2 emissions (8-15%). Residential
and commercial buildings contribute to 11% of total
greenhouse gas emissions. Space heating and cooling of residential buildings account for 40% of the
total residential energy use. Nanostructured materials, such as aerogels, have potential to greatly
reduce heat transfer through building elements and assist in reducing heating loads placed on airconditioning/heating systems (see p. 21-23 of this issue for an overview of the aerogel technology). Aerogel is a nanoporous super-insulating
material having extremely low density (90-95% air). Silica aerogel is the lightest solid material known (density is less than 0.05 g/cm3) with excellent thermal
insulating properties, high temperature stability, very low dielectric constant and high surface area. Aerogel is a breakthrough material technology for energy
conserving buildings. Use of aerogel interior wall insulation can reduce U-values (U value is a measure of the flow of heat through an insulating or building material;
the lower the U-value, the better is the insulating ability) by 44%, lowers
energy consumption by 900 kW.hr/yr with attendant
reduction in carbon emission of 400kg/yr for apartment buildings. Although, aerogels can make significant contributions to
reduce energy consumption for heating and cooling of buildings, their high cost is one of the inhibiting factors in their widespread adoption.
No adaptation – 4 degree temperature increase will breakdown civilization and cause
every impact
Roberts 2013 David Roberts, citing the World Bank Review’s compilation of climate studies, “If you aren’t
alarmed about climate, you aren’t paying attention” http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-alarmism-the-idea-issurreal
We know we’ve raised global average temperatures around 0.8 degrees C so far. We know that 2
degrees C is where most scientists
predict catastrophic and irreversible impacts. And we know that we are currently on a trajectory that
will push temperatures up 4 degrees or more by the end of the century. What would 4 degrees look like? A recent
World Bank review of the science reminds us. First, it’ll get hot: Projections for a 4°C world show a dramatic increase in the
intensity and frequency of high-temperature extremes. Recent extreme heat waves such as in Russia in 2010 are likely to
become the new normal summer in a 4°C world. Tropical South America, central Africa, and all tropical islands in the
Pacific are likely to regularly experience heat waves of unprecedented magnitude and duration. In this
new high-temperature climate regime, the coolest months are likely to be substantially warmer than the warmest months at the end of the 20th century. In
regions such as the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and the Tibetan plateau, almost all summer months are likely to be warmer than the most
extreme heat waves presently experienced. For example, the warmest July in the Mediterranean region could be 9°C warmer than today’s warmest July.
Extreme heat waves in recent years have had severe impacts, causing heat-related deaths, forest
fires, and harvest losses. The impacts of the extreme heat waves projected for a 4°C world have not been evaluated, but they could be
expected to vastly exceed the consequences experienced to date and potentially exceed the adaptive
capacities of many societies and natural systems. [my emphasis] Warming to 4 degrees would also lead to “an
increase of about 150 percent in acidity of the ocean,” leading to levels of acidity “unparalleled in
Earth’s history.” That’s bad news for, say, coral reefs: The combination of thermally induced bleaching events, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise
threatens large fractions of coral reefs even at 1.5°C global warming. The regional extinction of entire coral reef ecosystems, which could occur well before 4°C
is reached, would have profound consequences for their dependent species and for the people who depend on them for food, income, tourism, and shoreline
protection. It will also “likely lead to a sea-level rise of 0.5 to 1 meter, and possibly more, by 2100, with several meters more to be
realized in the coming centuries.” That rise won’t be spread evenly, even within regions and countries — regions close to the equator will see even higher seas.
There are also indications that it
would “significantly exacerbate existing water scarcity in many regions,
particularly northern and eastern Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia, while additional countries in Africa would be newly
confronted with water scarcity on a national scale due to population growth.” Also, more extreme weather events: Ecosystems
will be affected by more frequent extreme weather events, such as forest loss due to droughts and
wildfire exacerbated by land use and agricultural expansion. In Amazonia, forest fires could as much as double by 2050 with warming of approximately
1.5°C to 2°C above preindustrial levels. Changes would be expected to be even more severe in a 4°C world. Also loss of biodiversity and
ecosystem services: In a 4°C world, climate change seems likely to become the dominant driver of ecosystem
shifts, surpassing habitat destruction as the greatest threat to biodiversity. Recent research suggests
that large-scale loss of biodiversity is likely to occur in a 4°C world, with climate change and high CO2
concentration driving a transition of the Earth’s ecosystems into a state unknown in human
experience. Ecosystem damage would be expected to dramatically reduce the provision of ecosystem services on which society depends (for example,
fisheries and protection of coastline afforded by coral reefs and mangroves.) New research also indicates a “rapidly rising risk of
crop yield reductions as the world warms.” So food will be tough. All this will add up to “large-scale
displacement of populations and have adverse consequences for human security and economic and
trade systems.” Given the uncertainties and long-tail risks involved, “ there is no certainty that adaptation to a 4°C
world is possible .” There’s a
entirely.
small but
non-trivial chance of advanced civilization breaking down
Now ponder the fact that some scenarios show us going up to 6 degrees by the end of the century, a level of devastation we have not studied
and barely know how to conceive. Ponder the fact that somewhere
along the line, though we don’t know exactly where, enough selfreinforcing feedback loops will be running to make climate change unstoppable and irreversible for
centuries to come. That would mean handing our grandchildren and their grandchildren not only a burned, chaotic,
denuded world, but a world that is inexorably more inhospitable with every passing decade.
Catch-all impact
S&T agreements solve a laundry list of impacts – WMDs, instability, support
antiterrorism efforts, green tech in developing countries, indo-pak instability, IP
protection and reduce the chances of conflict with nations involved – S&T agreements
facilitate stable diplomacy and are used as rewards for positive interaction.
Dolan 2012 Bridget M. Dolan PhD, Research Scholar for the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, "Science and Technology Agreements as Tools for Science Diplomacy: A U.S.
Case Study," Science & Diplomacy, Vol. 1, No. 4 (December 2012).
http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/article/2012/science-and-technology-agreements-tools-for- sciencediplomacy.
Protecting U.S. National Security National
security concerns often motivate bilateral engagement, including S&T.
In the early years of the post-Soviet era, science diplomacy focused on demilitarization of science
infrastructure and redirection of former Soviet weapons scientists into careers that were peaceful as
well as meaningful and sustainable. The security concerns of the last decade with Muslim extremism
following 9/11 have motivated S&T engagement with Muslim-majority countries. The United States signed seven
S&T agreements with Muslim-majority nations between 2003 and 2008 as part of the Bush administration’s strategy to fight the “war on terror.” Another
five S&T agreements have been finalized since President Barack Obama’s “New Beginnings” speech,
and one more is awaiting a signature.4 This represents a shift in the S&T engagement strategy from
that prior to 9/11 when only one of the twenty-nine S&T agreements was with a predominantly
Muslim nation (Egypt). This indicates that the U.S. government considers science a strategic asset for national
security and uses S&T agreements as tools for relationship building with the long-term benefits of
mitigating international conflicts. Examples of Contemporary U.S. S&T Agreements While there are
unique circumstances leading up to every S&T agreement, in most cases, one or more of the four
motivations described above contributes to U.S. engagement. The following examples highlight these
motivations and touch upon the role that additional differentiators—such as existing research
capacity, joint commission meetings, and commitment of resources—can play in the realization of the
agreements. Libya In the case of Libya, the signing of an S&T agreement in 2006 signaled the occasion of
a dramatic change in the political relationship. In December 2003, after more than three decades of
tense relations, with the United States designating Libya a state sponsor of terror, Libya announced
plans to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction and long-range ballistic missile programs and
began to cooperate with international partners. With these measures, the United States re- engaged in a stepwise fashion, sensitive to
public concerns over compensation for the families of victims of the Lockerbie airliner and Berlin disco bombings. American diplomats returned
to Tripoli in February 2004, after a twenty-four-year absence. Then in the summer of 2006—one week after the U.S.
Department of State lifted Libya's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism—Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky was on a
plane to Tripoli, accompanied by a senior delegation of U.S. science leaders. Science was at the forefront of this diplomatic trip, which was meant to signal a "new
phase in U.S.- Libyan relations" and demonstrate the U.S. commitment to bilateral cooperation in areas like disease surveillance that would benefit Libyan society.5
In two additional steps toward reconciliation, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice held talks with Libyan Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalqam in Washington,
DC, and later that day he signed the S&T agreement. This was seminal as the first time a senior Libyan official visited Washington in thirty-five years and as the first
bilateral agreement since reinstatement of diplomatic relations. This
marked a dramatic change in U.S. policy toward Libya
and symbolized the shared desire to improve the relationship. This is perhaps best stated in the
preamble to the agreement itself: Recognizing the historic decisions undertaken by the Great Socialist
People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in December 2003 to forswear weapons of mass destruction, and the
resumption of full diplomatic relations between the Parties in June 2006; Realizing that international
cooperation in science and technology will strengthen the bonds of friendship and understanding
between their peoples and will advance the state of science and technology of both countries, as well
as mankind; Sharing responsibilities for contributing to the world’s future prosperity and well-being,
and desiring to make further efforts to strengthen their respective national research and development
policies . . . Moreover, Libya was part of a broader effort to reach out to the Maghreb countries in particular and Muslim-majority countries more broadly, and
to improve international public understanding of “American values, policies and initiatives.”6 From 2004 to 2006, Under Secretary Dobriansky and Assistant
Secretary for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs Claudia McMurray traveled to Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco to sign S&T agreements and
promote regional dialogues on S&T issues. These S&T agreements with nations having predominantly Muslim populations were gestures of goodwill. They did not
establish joint commissions to review progress, nor were they associated with dedicated funding. Nonetheless, following the signing of the Libya agreement, there
was some S&T engagement. For example, a program was launched that brought twenty-four Libyan high school students to space camp in Alabama to spark interest
in math and science and engage the younger generation. (However, since the Arab Spring political unrest, cooperative activities have been put on hold.)
Pakistan Following 9/11, the U.S. relationship with Pakistan changed rapidly. Pakistan had become a
vital ally in antiterrorism efforts that were important for U.S. national security. During state visits to
Washington, DC, in 2002 and 2003, President George W. Bush and President Pervez Musharraf
announced their commitment to friendship and broader bilateral engagement. An S&T agreement
was signed during the second visit, and cooperation was launched in education, health, and S&T
capacity building. In this way, the United States was motivated by the desire to transform a
diplomatic relationship and protect U.S. national security, and they selected projects that would
broadly benefit the public. Cooperation under this S&T agreement continues to this day, in part because of
three features of the agreement. First, options for collaborations in specific areas of S&T were explored prior to signing the agreement. Second, the U.S. and
Pakistani governments committed funds for joint projects.7 This program—implemented by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences—has been an effective model
for S&T collaboration, as it co-funds joint Pakistan-U.S. teams through a competitive and transparent review process in which all funding decisions are made by
consensus. Third, a joint committee was established that has met twice. India
The United States and India have a rich history of
collaboration in scientific research and education. As early as the 1950s, agricultural research
collaboration flourished as U.S. Public Law 480 (PL480, also known as Food for Peace) supported the
Green Revolution in India.8 Over the years, the funding mechanisms and research collaborations
evolved and included an increasingly large number of U.S. technical agencies. The scientist-to-scientist
partnerships continued through the ups and downs of the diplomatic relationship—predominantly
disputes over nuclear nonproliferation and Pakistan—and representatives from the countries discussed an S&T agreement as early
as 1993. In 2000, President Bill Clinton’s visit to India strove to "engage India in developing a qualitatively new and closer relationship across a broad range of global,
regional, and bilateral issues."9 While the two governments envisioned science as a strong pillar of this new partnership, the United States could not enter into a
treaty-level agreement as India was under U.S. sanctions for its 1998 nuclear tests. Instead, during this presidential trip, the Indo- U.S. S&T Forum (IUSSTF) was
established. This co-funded joint program went on to support the interaction of more than twelve thousand U.S. and Indian scientists in over three hundred
technical workshops, forty virtual joint research centers, and thirty advanced training programs. The U.S. side financed its part of IUSSTF by redirecting rupees
leftover from PL480 funding. When additional U.S.-controlled rupees were uncovered a few years later, support for an S&T agreement resurfaced, as some officials
thought a formal framework agreement would make it easier to direct PL480 funds to joint research projects. While
potential availability of
funds was one factor motivating the S&T agreement, the drivers for S&T engagement were much
broader. At this time, the Indo-U.S. relationship was maturing rapidly: the United States lifted
sanctions; India tightened its patent laws; and President Bush launched the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership initiative to expand
cooperation in high-tech trade, civil nuclear power, and civil space exploration. Enthusiasm for bilateral partnership was strong and drove the process to formalize
the S&T relationship in a way previously thwarted by sanctions and disputes over intellectual property rights. S&T engagement between the United States and India
remained robust following the signing of the agreement in 2005. Two joint commission meetings have been held, allowing for the review of implementation of the
agreement-fa addition, these bilateral meetings have provided a venue for discussing obstacles to cooperation. Germany U.S. research institutions and individual
scientists have close ties with their counterparts throughout Europe and especially in Germany. In fact, the tradition of extensive S&T cooperation between the
United States and Germany dates back more than two hundred years, when the German scientist Alexander von Humboldt met with President Thomas Jefferson in
1804. Today it is carried out through more than fifty bilateral cooperation agreements between institutions.10 As the scientific enterprises in both Germany and the
United States are decentralized, these partnerships have thrived without oversight from a central body in the federal governments. While many of its European
neighbors have had umbrella S&T agreements in place, Germany did not have one until 2010. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg signed the German S&T
agreement in the Department of State’s Benjamin Franklin Room when Federal Minister of Education and Research Annette Schavan visited Washington, DC, in
February 2010. This S&T agreement—like those with many other European and advanced scientific nations—served as a diplomatic deliverable for a high-level visit
and was not needed to support bottom-up cooperation. However, this agreement— like the launch of the German Center for Research and Innovation in New York,
which Minister Schavan presided over the day after signing the agreement—was an opportunity to bring positive publicity to the bilateral relationship and raise the
status of science in diplomacy. The agreement established a joint commission, which met for the first time in the fall of 2011. Future of S&T Agreements As this
paper has elaborated, U.S.
decisions to enter into S&T agreements are often motivated by the desire to
transform a diplomatic relationship, promote public diplomacy, enhance a diplomatic visit, and/or
advance U.S. national security. An S&T agreement can be a limited one-time deliverable or it can be a
launching pad for extensive engagement. While the discussions above have focused on drivers for S&T agreements from the U.S.
perspective, for these agreements to be effective tools of science diplomacy, implementation matters. In the last decade, the number of S&T agreements involving
the United States has doubled. At the same time allocation of U.S. federal resources to designated international programs that support engagement in science and
technology has not kept pace.11 Some science diplomacy practitioners and academics in the United States and abroad are concerned that an S&T agreement with
the United States, while once considered an important tool, is no longer taken seriously.12 As these types of formal intergovernmental agreements continue to
expand, however, the
long-term benefit to official and nongovernmental relations between countries
depends upon the ability to foster substantial scientific cooperation. It is essential that these
agreements and science diplomacy more generally—while cognizant of the realities of limited
resources—are ambitious enough to foster meaningful international partnerships.
Current S&T agreements are only with certain nations and last for a short amount of
time, that means a long term commitment to science diplomacy is key to solve, S&T
agreements make conflict less likely with all of these nations
Department of State 2006 Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs,
12/1/06, “List of Umbrella Science and Technology Agreements”, http://20012009.state.gov/g/oes/rls/fs/2006/77212.htm
Following is a current list of umbrella S&T Agreements. The duration of these agreements is 5 years,
unless otherwise noted. Information is provided on dates of Entry-Into-Force (EIF) and current extensions: 1. Algeria Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the
People's Democratic Republic of Algeria on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 01/18/06; EIF 01/18/06; duration 10-years, may be extended for additional 10-year periods) 2. Argentina Agreement for
Scientific and Technical Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Argentine Republic. (Signed 4/7/72; EIF 8/11/72; extended for successive 5-year periods) 3.
Armenia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Armenia on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 2/28/97; EIF 2/28/97; may be extended
for further 10-year periods by written agreement of the parties) 4. Australia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Commonwealth of Australia relating to Scientific and Technical
Cooperation. (Signed 2/28/06) 5. Bangladesh Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the People's Republic of
Bangladesh. (Signed 3/1/03; EIF 5/26/03; initial 10-year period may be extended for such additional periods as may be agreed in writing between the parties) 6. Brazil Agreement between the United States of America and
the Federative Republic of Brazil Relating to Cooperation in Science and Technology. (Signed 2/6/84; EIF 5/15/86; extended by written agreement of the two contracting parties; amended and extended 3/21/94; EIF 1/30/96;
Bulgaria Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria for Scientific and Technological Co-Operation.
(Signed 9/27/96; enters into force upon exchange of diplomatic notes; not in force as of 04/21/06; may be extended by written agreement of the parties) 8. Chile Basic Agreement Relating to Scientific and Technological
automatically renewed for 5-year periods) 7.
Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Chile. (Signed 5/14/92; EIF 1/19/94; extended by mutual written agreement of the parties; extended and EIF 6/22/99;
extended by diplomatic notes until 6/22/05, and again until 6/30/06; extended for five years by diplomatic note until 6/30/11.) 9.
China Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the
Government of the People's Republic of China on Cooperation in Science and Technology. (Signed 1/31/79; EIF 1/31/79; extended for another 5-year period by mutual written agreement of the parties 4/18/06.) 10.
Croatia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Croatia for Scientific and Technological Cooperation. (Signed: 9/27/04 EIF: 9/27/04; Duration: 10 years)
11. Egypt Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 3/20/95; EIF 8/31/95; renewed for
another 5-year period - Signed 1/29/01; EIF 09/01/00; renewed for another 5-year period, signing forthcoming; EIF 09/01/2005 upon renewal.) 12. European Union Agreement for Scientific and Technological
Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community. (Signed 12/5/97; EIF 10/14/98; extended for additional periods of 5 years by mutual written agreement between the parties;
Finland Agreement Relating to Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Finland.
Greece Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Hellenic Republic for Cooperation in
the Economic, Scientific and Technological, and Educational and Cultural Fields. (Signed 4/22/80; EIF 4/22/80; automatically extended for subsequent 5-year periods) 15. Hungary Agreement between the Government of
the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Hungary for Scientific and Technological Cooperation (Signed: 03/15/00; automatically extends for successive periods of 5 years) 16. India Agreement on
most recent extension 10/08/04) 13.
(Signed 5/16/95; EIF 8/27/95; automatically extended for 5-year periods) 14.
Science and Technology Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of India. (Signed 10/17/05; EIF 03/14/06; may be extended for further 10-year periods by written
agreement of the parties) 17.
Italy Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Italian Republic for Scientific and Technological Cooperation. (Signed 4/1/88; EIF 4/1/88; no
Japan Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of
extension clause; amended and extended 10/4/93; EIF 10/4/93; automatically renewed for further 5-year periods) 18.
Japan on Cooperation in Research and Development in Science and Technology. (Signed 6/20/88; EIF 6/20/88; extended by mutual agreement of the parties; amended and extended 7/16/99; EIF 7/20/99, extended for ten years
Korea Agreement Relating to Scientific and Technical Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Korea. (Signed 7/2/99; EIF
Macedonia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Macedonia for
Scientific and Technological Cooperation (Signed 01/26/06; EIF: upon the exchange of diplomatic notes; duration of 10 years) 21. Mexico Agreement between the United States of America and Mexico on Scientific and
Technical Cooperation. (Exchange of notes 6/15/72; EIF 6/15/72; amended and EIF 9/22/94) 22. Mongolia Agreement Relating to Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States
of America and the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic. (Signed 1/23/91; EIF 1/23/91; extended by mutual agreement of the parties; extended and EIF 4/3/01) 23. Morocco Agreement Between the
6/19/04; EIF 6/20/04) 19.
7/2/99; extended by exchange of diplomatic note 6/25/04, EIF 7/2/04) 20.
Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 11/14/06; duration of 10 years; may be extended for further 10-year periods by
New Zealand Agreement for Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of New Zealand. (Signed
5/21/91; EIF 5/21/91) 25. Norway Agreement for Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Kingdom of Norway. (Signed 12/09/05; EIF
12/09/05; unlimited duration) 26. Pakistan Agreement on Science and Technology Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. (Signed
6/25/03; EIF 10/16/03; renewed for further 5-year periods by written agreement of the Parties) 27. Philippines Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines on Cooperation in Science and Technology. (Signed 5/20/03; EIF 11/25/03; extended for further 5-year periods by written agreement of the Parties) 28. Poland Agreement between the
Government of the United States of America and the Republic of Poland on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 02/10/06; EIF: upon the exchange of diplomatic notes; duration of 10 years) 29. Romania
written agreement of the parties.) 24.
Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Romania on Cooperation in Science and Technology. (Signed 7/15/98; EIF 4/5/00; automatically extends for successive periods of 5
years) 30.
Russia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 12/16/93; EIF 12/16/93; 10-year
Slovakia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of
extension effective 12/16/05; may be extended for further 10-year periods by written agreement of the parties.) 31.
the Slovak Republic on Scientific and Technological Cooperation. (Signed 9/12/00; EIF 10/24/00; automatically extends for consecutive periods of 5 years) 32.
Slovenia Agreement between the Government of the United
South Africa
States America and the Government of the Republic of Slovenia for Scientific and Technological Cooperation. (Signed 6/21/99; EIF 12/17/99; automatically extends for consecutive periods of 5 years) 33.
Framework Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of South Africa Concerning Cooperation in the Scientific, Technological and Environmental Fields. (Signed
Spain Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain. (Signed 6/10/94; EIF 1/18/96; automatically renewed for 5-year
periods) 35. Sweden Agreement on Science and Technology Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Kingdom of Sweden. (Signed 6/29/06; EIF: 6/29/06;
duration: indefinite) 36. Tunisia Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Tunisia on Science and Technology Cooperation. (Signed 6/22/04; EIF:
06/22/04; duration 10-years, may be extended for additional 10-year periods) 37. Vietnam Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the
12/5/95; EIF 8/27/01) 34.
Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. (Signed 11/17/00; EIF 3/26/01; automatically extended thereafter for successive periods of 5 years each)
STEM Add on
STEM is failing now, absent that the economy will crash – unemployment, high skilled
jobs and manufacturing
Engler 2012 John Engler, president of Business Roundtable, former governor of Michigan, 6/15/12,
“STEM Education Is the Key to the U.S.'s Economic Future”,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/06/15/stem-education-is-the-key-to-the-uss-economicfuture
A close look at American unemployment statistics reveals a contradiction: Even
with unemployment at historically high levels,
large numbers of jobs are going unfilled. Many of these jobs have one thing in common–the need for
an educational background in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Increasingly, one of
our richest sources of employment and economic growth will be jobs that require skills in these areas,
collectively known as STEM. The question is: Will we be able to educate enough young Americans to fill them? Yes, the unemployment numbers
have been full of bad news for the past few years. But there has been good news too. While the overall unemployment rate has slowly come down to May's stillhigh 8.2 percent, for those in STEM occupations the story is very different. [Check out the U.S. News STEM blog.] According to a recently released study from
Change the Equation, an organization that supports STEM education, there
are 3.6 unemployed workers for every job in the
United States. That compares with only one unemployed STEM worker for two unfilled STEM jobs
throughout the country. Many jobs are going unfilled simply for lack of people with the right skill sets.
Even with more than 13 million Americans unemployed, the manufacturing sector cannot find people
with the skills to take nearly 600,000 unfilled jobs, according to a study last fall by the Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte. The
hardest jobs to fill were skilled positions, including well-compensated blue collar jobs like machinists,
operators, and technicians, as well as engineering technologists and sciences. As Raytheon Chairman and CEO
William Swanson said at a Massachusetts' STEM Summit last fall, "Too many students and adults are training for jobs in which
labor surpluses exist and demand is low, while high-demand jobs, particularly those in STEM fields, go
unfilled." STEM-related skills are not just a source of jobs, they are a source of jobs that pay very well. A report last October from the Georgetown University
Center on Education and the Workforce found that 65 percent of those with Bachelors' degrees in STEM fields earn more than Master's degrees in non-STEM
occupations. In fact, 47 percent of Bachelor's degrees in STEM occupations earn more than PhDs in non-STEM occupations. [Read the U.S. News Debate: Should
Foreign STEM Graduates Get Green Cards?] But despite the lucrative potential, many
young people are reluctant to enter into
fields that require a background in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics. In a recent study by the
Lemselson-MIT Invention Index, which gauges innovation aptitude among young adults, 60 percent of young adults (ages 16 to 25) named at least one factor
that prevented them from pursuing further education or work in the STEM fields. Thirty-four percent said they don't know much about the fields, a third said
they were too challenging, and 28 percent said they were not well-prepared at school to seek further education in these areas. This
is a problem—
for young people and for our country. We need STEM-related talent to compete globally, and we will
need even more in the future. It is not a matter of choice: For the United States to remain the global
innovation leader, we must make the most of all of the potential STEM talent this country has to offer .
Ocean exploration leads to STEM – it creates jobs, spurs excitement and draws
attention to STEM fields
Bidwell 2013 Allie Bidwell, Education Reporter for US News, 9/25/13, “Scientists Release First Plan for
National Ocean Exploration Program”, http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/25/scientistsrelease-first-plan-for-national-ocean-exploration-program
Additionally, Schubel says there
was a consensus among those explorers and stakeholders who gathered in July
that participating organizations need to take advantage of technologies that are available and place a
greater emphasis on public engagement and citizen exploration – utilizing the data that naturalists and nonscientists collect
on their own. "In coastal areas at least, given some of these new low-cost robots that are available, they could actually produce data that would help us
understand the nation's coastal environment," Schubel says. Expanding
the nation's ocean exploration program could lead
to more jobs, he adds, and could also serve as an opportunity to engage children and adults in careers
in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM. [RELATED: STEM Fields Among the Fastest Growing
Occupations, Report Says] "I think what we need to do as a nation is make STEM fields be seen by young people
as exciting career trajectories," Schubel says. "We need to reestablish the excitement of science and
engineering, and I think ocean exploration gives us a way to do that." Schubel says science centers,
museums and aquariums can serve as training grounds to give children and adults the opportunity to
learn more about the ocean and what opportunities exist in STEM fields. "One thing that we can
contribute more than anything else is to let kids and families come to our institutions and play,
explore, make mistakes, and ask silly questions without being burdened down by the kinds of
standards that our formal K-12 and K-14 schools have to live up to," Schubel says.
Manufacturing loss devastates the economy
Pisano and Shih, 12 [September, Producing Prosperity: Why America Needs a Manufacturing
Renaissance [Kindle Edition], Harry E. Figgie Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard
Business School. He has been on the Harvard faculty for 23 years, Professor of Management Practice. He
joined the Technology and Operations Management Unit in January 2007, p. amazon kindle]
The rough and tumble of international competition means we should expect industries to come and go.
Even if this is sometimes painful, it is, in fact, a healthy process by which resources flow to their most
productive uses. When a commons erodes, however, it represents a deeper and more systematic
problem. It means the foundation upon which future innovative sectors can be built is crumbling. When the
semiconductor production business moved to Asia in the 1980s, it brought with it a whole host of capabilities—electronic-materials processing,
deposition and coating, and sophisticated test and assembly capabilities—that formed an industrial commons needed to produce a whole host
of advanced, high-valued-added electronic products such as flat-panel displays, solid-state lighting, and solar PV. In this book, we will examine
the dynamics that underlie both the rise and decline of commons, and the consequence of those declines. Our argument is built around three
core themes. Theme 1:
When a Country Loses the Capability to Manufacture, It Loses the Ability to Innovate
Innovation and manufacturing are often viewed as residing at the opposite ends of the economic spectrum—innovation being all about the
brain (knowledge work) and manufacturing all about brawn (physical work). Innovation requires highly skilled, highly paid workers, and
manufacturing requires low-skilled, low-paid workers; innovation is a high-valued-added specialty, and manufacturing is a low-value-added
commodity; innovation is creative and clean, and manufacturing is dull and dirty. Such a view of manufacturing is a myth and is based on a
profound misunderstanding of how the process of innovation works and the link between R&D and manufacturing. R&D is a critical part of the
innovation process, but it is not the whole thing. Innovation is about moving the idea from concept to the customer’s hands. For some highly
complex products (flat-panel displays, PV cells, and biotechnology drugs, to name a few) the transfer from R&D into production is a messy
affair, requiring extremely tight coordination and the transfer of learning between those who design and those who manufacture. If you do not
understand the production environment, you have a harder time designing the product. In these settings, there
are strong reasons to
co-locate R&D and production. It is a lot easier for an engineer to walk across the street to the plant or drive
down the road than to fly halfway around the world to troubleshoot a problem. This helps to explain why the American
company Applied Materials, a leading maker of equipment for manufacturing semiconductors and solar panels, moved its chief technical officer
from the United States to China.14 Because most of its large customers are now in China, Taiwan, and South Korea, it
makes sense for
the company to do its research close to the factories that use its equipment. Applied Materials is now moving much
of its manufacturing operations to Asia as well. In chapter 4, we will offer a framework for determining when it matters whether R&D and
manufacturing are located near each and when it does not. Theme 2:
The Industrial Commons Is a Platform for Growth
The industrial commons perspective suggests that a
decline of competitiveness of firms in one sector can have
implications for the competitiveness of firms in another. Industries and the suppliers of capabilities to
the industries need each other. Kill a critical industry, and the suppliers probably will not survive for long;
other industries in the region that depend on those suppliers will then be jeopardized. When the auto industry
declines, it causes an atrophy of capabilities (such as casting and precision machining) that are also used in industries such as heavy equipment,
scientific instruments, and advanced materials. The unraveling of a commons is a vicious circle. As
capabilities erode, it is harder
for companies that require access to stay in business . They are forced to move their operations or their supplier base to
the new commons. As they move, it is harder for existing suppliers to sustain themselves. Ultimately, they must either close shop or move their
operations. Even worse, the
loss of a commons may cut off future opportunities for the¶ emergence of new
innovative sectors if they require close access to the same capabilities. Four decades ago, when US consumer
electronics companies decided to move production of these “mature” products to Asia, who would have guessed that this decision would
influence where the most important component for tomorrow’s electric vehicles—the batteries—would be produced? But that is what
happened.15 The offshoring of consumer electronics production (often contracted to then-little-known Japanese companies such as Sony and
Matsushita) led to the migration of R&D in consumer electronics to Japan (and later to South Korea and Taiwan). As consumers demanded
ever-smaller, lighter, and more powerful (and power hungry!) mobile computers and cell phones, electronics companies were pushed to
innovate in batteries. In the process, Asia became the hub for innovation in the design and manufacturing of compact, high-capacity,
rechargeable, lithium ion batteries, a technology that was invented in America. This explains why Asian suppliers have become the dominant
source of the lithium ion battery cells used in electric vehicles.
Economic decline causes war and growth promotes peace, empirically proven
Stauss-Kahn 2009 Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund At the
Global Creative Leadership Summit New York City, September 23, 2009, “Economic Stability, Economic
Cooperation, and Peace—The Role of the IMF”
http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2009/092309.htm
When the nations of the world come together to address common challenges in a spirit of solidarity, we
can attain a virtuous cycle
of peace and prosperity, and avoid a vicious cycle of conflict and stagnation. On first glance, this might seem
incidental to the role of the IMF. But it is not. It underpins our mandate.¶ This becomes clear when we look at the origins of the IMF, and the
lessons of the 20th century. The
nations of the world came together after the first world war. But instead of
promoting economic cooperation, they were motivated by more myopic considerations. In particular,
the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles sowed the seeds of economic ruin in Germany, which in turn
was one of the causes of the second world war.¶ One of the people who saw this clearly was John Maynard Keynes,
one of the founders of the IMF. He strongly condemned “the policy of reducing Germany to servitude for a
generation, of degrading the lives of millions of human beings,” For he saw clearly the implications: “If we aim
deliberately at the impoverishment of central Europe, vengeance, I dare predict, will not limp. Nothing
can then delay for long that final civil war between the forces of reaction and the despairing convulsions
of revolution, before which the horrors of the late German war will fade into nothing”. Keynes instead urged
the people of his day to “base our actions on better expectations, and believe that the prosperity and happiness of one country
promotes that of others, that the solidarity of man is not a fiction.”¶ Keynes’ admonition was ignored. Countries instead
embraced the economics of self-interest, and retreated to isolationism. What followed was the
unprecedented collapse in global economic activity in the 1930s, with dire social and political
consequences. Economic warfare soon led to real warfare. The resulting second war world war left tens
of millions dead and many countries around the world in ruins.¶ After the war, the nations of the world gathered once
more. They vowed never to repeat the errors of the past. They embraced multilateralism and a cooperative approach to economic and financial
policies. Leaders wanted to create a new world.¶ This strategy took many dimensions. The United Nations was founded to “save succeeding
generations from the scourge of war” while promoting “social progress and better standards of life”. In my own continent of Europe, leaders
embarked upon a remarkable process of economic and political integration. They were determined to forever banish the specter of war from
the continent and realize the dream of “perpetual peace”—that great unfilled dream of so many philosophers over the centuries, including
Saint-Pierre, Rousseau, Bentham, and Kant. Remember too that peace
was aided by external financial support from the
Marshall plan and internal financial support from the development of comprehensive social safety nets.
It was economic and social stability that cemented the peace.¶ The IMF was born at this defining moment in history,
forged in the furnace of a multilateral milieu dedicated to peace and cooperation. Its mandate was economic stability—promoting monetary
cooperation and facilitating an expansion of trade and employment that benefited all people. It would oversee the global financial system and
lend to members with balance of payments needs. It was understood that with stability would come peace and security.¶ And as the founding
fathers gathered at Bretton Woods in 1944, peace was foremost on their minds. The pessimism expressed by Keynes a quarter century earlier
now turned to optimism. As the conference ended, Keynes declared that by working together “this nightmare, in which most of us present have
spent too much of our lives, will be over”. And in a sign of the times, he expressed his confidence that “the brotherhood of man will have
become more than a phrase”. United
States Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau shared this conviction, linking
peace to shared prosperity and denouncing the economic policies of the interwar years. He declared that
“Economic aggression can have no other offspring than war. It is as dangerous as it is futile. We know
that economic conflict must develop when nations endeavor separately to deal with economic ills which
are international in scope.” This is our legacy. From this stems our mandate.
AT: Plan doesn’t solve
Ocean mapping solves STEM – education and preparation for further education
Yoder 2012 Jim Yoder, PhD in Oceanography, 8/6/12, “Ocean Observing Systems Stimulating Interest
in STEM”, http://livebettermagazine.com/article/ocean-observing-systems-stimulating-interest-instem/#thur
The U.S. is developing two new ocean observing systems and both include educational applications in
their respective portfolios. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is leading the development of an operational system called the
“Integrated Ocean Observing System” (IOOS). The purpose of IOOS is to provide information and data to increase understanding of U.S. coastal waters so decisionmakers can take action to improve safety, enhance the economy and protect the environment. The National Science Foundation’s Ocean Observatories Initiative
(OOI) is constructing infrastructure to support sensors to measure physical, chemical, geological and biological variables in the ocean and seafloor to support
scientific research. The total national investment in both of these systems will likely exceed $500M by 2015, and the costs to operate will likely exceed more than
$50M per year. The
systems are anticipated to have a major impact on ocean science research and
operations. In addition to research and operational users, educational applications for data from IOOS
and OOI are being developed, including educational uses of data delivered in near real-time. As mentioned
above, the challenge for educators is to package real-time data in a form and context that can be readily used and interpreted by students and their teachers. This is
particularly challenging for K-12 audiences because younger students and their teachers lack experience and tools to produce analytical products, such as simple
statistics and graphs from raw data streams. Putting data products into an oceanographic context is also difficult when students lack basic knowledge of the ocean
environment. For example, a series of graphs showing how ocean water temperature changes with depth, and why those profiles change with season, is not very
interesting in itself. Students need the context, e.g. they also need to understand something about mixing between surface and deeper waters as well as how
seasonal changes in the amount of solar energy reaching surface ocean waters affects ocean mixing, and why this is important. Younger students likely will need to
work with data products produced for them by their teachers or by online educators that display data in very simple ways and then link it to a lesson plan that puts
the observations into the right context (example). With the possible exception of advanced high-school students, real-time data streams from ocean observing
systems are probably not for K-12 students. Nevertheless, younger
students with adequate guidance can still learn about
daily and seasonal changes in the ocean and why they occur by looking at a sequence of graphs
produced for them. They can also learn about organisms that live in the ocean from video streams
associated with ocean observatories, such as Neptune and Venus. Ocean observing data will obviously be most
useful if it can be linked to national and state science standards. The process for how K-12 students and teachers can
effectively use data from observing systems, including real-time data to better train students to participate in the STEM workforce of the future, was described
recently as a process involving four key steps (Hotaling 2007).. It
also needs to be understandable by non-specialists, i.e. it has
to be in context of important and simply described ocean processes. Step two is the data has to be
useable, which means it must be engaging and meaningful, fit within STEM curricula and satisfy
educational standards. Step three is teachers themselves must be adequately trained so they are
comfortable using and discussing ocean observing data in a classroom. This requires effective professional development
via online or face-to-face training or a combination thereof. Step four is the importance of preparation at the K-12 level, so
students entering four-year or community colleges know something about how to apply observatory
data to real-life situations. This would lead to much quicker and effective training of a well-qualified
STEM workforce with the skills to manage and utilize data from sensors and sensor networks, whether
associated with ocean observations or any other sensor network, including those associated with
commercial operations. A top priority for educational uses of data from NSF’s Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) is the focus on special tools and
lessons for undergraduates. Undergraduate class projects and senior theses can obviously take better advantage
of real-time and other observatory data than K-12 students given that undergrads have better skills
and access to better analysis tools as well as more time to analyze and interpret longer records of
observations. The expectation is that undergraduate ocean science or other science majors, non-science majors and community college students can work
with real-time data, if provided the software tools to simplify data streams and to provide context. The first three steps listed above for K-12 are certainly applicable
to undergraduate students and their professors, although college science professors should not need the level of professional development that K-12 teachers will
require. Data analysis tools for undergraduates, and perhaps advanced high-school students, need to be scaled to examine relations between, perhaps, just two
ocean variables – temperature and salinity, for example. Furthermore, there has to be a web-based framework that puts the data into context for undergraduates.
A web interface, for example, could allow an undergraduate interested in undersea earthquakes to examine the real-time record of an undersea seismometer
(basically a chart showing the strength of earth movements) while at the time ingesting and then watching video illustrating different types of undersea lava flows.
The most sophisticated college users, such as ocean science graduate students and ocean science faculty, will likely use commercially available data analysis
packages to study relations between many data sources and from many locations.
Data will be made available to students – that solves the impact
IOOC 2012 Interagency Ocean Observation Committee, Committee overseeing the creation of IOOS,
“INTEGRATED OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT A New Decade for the Integrated
Ocean Observing System”, pg. 21,
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
End-users of U.S. IOOS data and information fall into five main types : • Operational end-users who use
ocean data and products to support decision-making related to safety, emergency response, and economic
efficiency • Science end-users whose research relies on sustained observations of the ocean • Policy endusers who require sustained ocean information to support policy formulation, monitoring of compliance, and
assessment of policy effectiveness • Public end-users interested in products relevant to their safety or leisure
activities • Education end-users who teach ocean science formally (K-16) and informally
AT: EU turn
Cooperation solves clean tech best – ITER spurs cooperation and sets a framework for
future cooperation
Roos 2010 Jerome Roos, Breakthrough fellow, writer and environmental activist, 6/23/10, “The
Promise of Global Cooperation in Clean-Tech Innovation”,
http://thebreakthrough.org/generation_archive/the_promise_of_global_cooperat
ITER - acronym for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, and Latin for 'the way',
'the direction' or 'the path' - is a 30-year, 10 billion euro collaboration bringing together the European
Union, Japan, China, India, Korea, Russia and the United States. The project, an initiative of Soviet
President Mikhail Gorbachev, French President Mitterand, and U.S. President Ronald Reagan, will see
the construction of the world's largest-ever fusion reactor in Cadarache, France somewhere around
2018-2019. According to Norbert Holtkamp, a leading U.S. scientist who will co-lead the construction of the reactor: It wasn't a scientific discussion, but they
[Gorbachev, Mitterand and Reagan] came together and said this was something we should be doing. We should be putting
the world's brain power together, and do it together, and share the results of the research . The
overarching goal of the project is to test the viability of fusion energy as a future part of the
sustainable energy mix. A secondary goal is to improve and disseminate global scientific knowledge
on fusion energy. Towards this end, in 2009, ITER received 11,575 visitors from around the world, many of them scientists, students and business leaders
hoping to learn more about the state of fusion science and technology. The number of international visitors is expected to double in 2010. The U.S. itself
benefits in many ways from its participation in the project. First of all, it only bears 1/11 of the total costs of the program, while it
would reap all the fruits from its potentially lucrative findings. Secondly, American scientists are involved in a unique exchange of
ideas and knowledge with experts from around the world, providing an enormous boost to the U.S.
knowledge economy, regardless of the outcomes of the experiments in France. Thirdly, the
collaboration creates a global network of scientists that is likely to endure even after completion of
the project. In today's globalized network economy, such connections might prove crucial in the
development of other, related or unrelated technologies. Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly from a globalist point of
view, the project brings together a large group of human beings with the shared goal of creating a new
energy future for all of humanity. In this respect, projects like ITER have immense symbolical value
and contribute greatly to the dissemination of a global consciousness that allows us to conceive of the
human race as fundamentally united in the face of global challenges, rather than divided in the face of
national rivalries. Having only just emerged out of a century marked by two destructive World Wars and a near-catastrophic nuclear standoff, such
notions are no longer insignificant from an International Relations point of view.
AT: Biotech turn
US biotech leadership is good, regulations are sufficient, and it solves food yields
without chemicals
Vogt and Parish 1999 Donna U. Vogt, Specialist in Social Sciences, Mickey Parish, Congressional
Science Fellow Domestic Social Policy Division, 6/2/99, US Department of State, “Food Biotechnology in
the United States: Science. Regulation, and Issues”, http://fpc.state.gov/6176.htm
The use of biotechnology to produce genetically engineered foods can potentially provide greater
yields of nutritionally enhanced foods from less land with reduced use of pesticides and herbicides. This
technology has both critics and supporters. Concerns presented to Congress include potential detrimental effects to human and animal health and the environment,
and violation of religious customs. Supporters,
including individual companies, trade organizations, scientific
professional societies, and academic groups, promote benefits such as enhanced crop yields, better
nutritional content in food, less pesticide use, and greater agricultural efficiency. They want Congress to defend the
U.S. competitive position in export trade of food biotechnology products. Calls for "right-to-know" labeling or other federal regulatory requirements, on the other
hand, spark concerns about possibly impeding innovation and adding costs. In the United States, the
regulation of biotechnology food
products does not differ fundamentally from regulation of conventional food products. Three federal
agencies are primarily responsible for the regulation of genetically engineered foods - the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA). Each federal agency is assigned certain regulatory responsibilities. FDA provides voluntary
pre-market consultations with food companies, seed companies, and plant developers to ensure that biotechnology derived foods meet regulatory standards for
safety. USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) licenses field testing of crops prior to commercial release of newly developed plant strains. EPA
registers pesticides in U.S. commerce (including plants engineered to produce pesticides) and establishes levels at which pesticides in foods are permitted. The
White House outlined this multi-agency approach to regulating the products of biotechnology in a 1986 document entitled Coordinated Framework for Regulation
of Biotechnology. Some critics are concerned about genes from genetically modified plants escaping into the environment through cross fertilization. Others fear
the potential overuse of Bt, a natural insecticide, will cause insects to develop resistance to its toxic effects. They want more testing on the long-term environmental
and health impact of crops that are altered to produce it. Industry groups, however, contend that current
regulations more than
adequately ensure human health and safety. The United States is leading the world in privately
funded biotechnological research, genetically modified products, and sales of the technology. Some suggest
that foreign countries' resistance to genetically engineered crops can be traced to their desire to allow their domestic industry time to develop a competitive
position in this trade. U.S. officials resisted an attempt to limit trade in bioengineered products at a meeting in Colombia in February 1999 negotiations over a
"biosafety protocol." Some in Congress would exercise more oversight over the regulation of these food crops, fund more public research, and encourage the
Administration to negotiate the easing of trade barriers and harmonizing standards. Food Biotechnology in the United States: Science, Regulation, and Issues
Introduction Genetic
modification of agricultural crops promises the availability of food products with
more desirable traits, such as higher quantities of vitamins or lowered amounts of saturated fats for
consumers, reduced use of pesticides and other chemicals for environmentalists, and increased yields
for growers. Traditional plant breeding, the conventional method to modify plants' genes, has produced similar benefits. But recent
biotechnological innovations allow scientists to select specific genes from one plant or animal and
introduce them into another to confer desirable traits. This produces the new plant or animal more quickly than conventional
methods, and creates plants and animals with traits not found previously in nature. Proponents argue that advances in genetics and new technologies can produce
foods with greater yields to feed the growing world population in the 21st century. Critics are concerned that this technology produces uncertainties about
potential long-term impacts on public health and the environment, and increases problems related to trade. The 106th Congress will consider issues associated with
food biotechnology because the
federal government under statute and through regulation attempts to ensure
that food manufacturers produce safe products. Congress is being asked to consider whether federal regulations adequately manage
genetic engineering risks to public health and safety, and the environment. This report discusses the science of food biotechnology, and the federal structure by
which it is regulated. Because U. S. farmers are adopting this technology at a rapid rate, some observers advocate a more active role for the federal government to
ensure that farmers have equal access to this technology. Others are concerned that federal officials should play a more active role in protecting the environment,
funding more research, and participating in international trade negotiations to ensure that trade continues to expand for genetically engineered crops. Trading
partners often label food products that have been genetically modified as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many of those partners have labeling
requirements for GMOs to allow consumers the "right to know" their food content. Several
congressional committees oversee federal
governance of genetically engineered foods and biotechnology. In the Senate, food biotechnology
issues are considered by the Committees on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions; Environment and Public Works; and Governmental Affairs. In the House, food
biotechnology issues are considered by the Committees on Agriculture; Commerce; Government
Reform; and Science. The Appropriations Committees of both House and Senate have oversight
responsibility on how the major federal agencies set and enforce policies affecting the safety of
genetically engineered foods.
Absent a shift from chemical based agriculture, environmental destruction will occur
and food production will not meet demands
Peters 2010 – LL.M. expected 2011, University of Arkansas School of Law, Graduate Program in Agricultural and Food Law; J.D. 2010,
University of Oregon School of Law (Kathryn, “Creating a Sustainable Urban Agriculture Revolution” J. ENVTL. LAW AND LITIGATION [Vol. 25,
203, http://law.uoregon.edu/org/jell/docs/251/peters.pdf)
The U.S. agricultural system is becoming increasingly more concentrated, specialized, and industrialized.10 As of this writing, ninety-eight
percent of the food supply in the United States is produced by agribusinesses running industrial farms
that employ mechanically and chemically intensive farming methods for the maximization of profit.11
These farming methods are further encouraged through government subsidies, which operate to affect the supply and price of agricultural
commodities.12 Government subsidies have tended to benefit large agribusinesses13 and have encouraged the use of chemical inputs and
unsound farming practices, which maximize short-term yields and profits at the expense of the environment and small local farmers.14 An
additional consequence of farm subsidies is the overproduction of commodity crops, which requires that the United States supplement its food
supply with fruits and vegetables imported from other countries.15 Industrial agriculture in the United States has only been in place since the
mid-twentieth century.16 Modern agricultural practices began with the Green Revolution, a response to world food shortages in the 1940s that
sought to increase productivity of land by employing science-based technologies in agriculture.17 The Green Revolution was born in the 1950s
and continued developing new farming methods through the 1970s; these methods include the engineering of high-yielding plants and the
establishment of large, monocultural farms heavily reliant on chemical pesticides and fertilizers, mechanization, and irrigation.18 While the
Green Revolution’s techniques were successful in increasing food production for several decades, the
long-term effects of this
method of farming on the environment, economy, and society are now evident: groundwater
contamination from chemical pesticides and fertilizers; soil erosion and depletion of soil nutrients
caused by unsound cropping practices; destruction of necessary insects, such as bees, from pollution
and the indiscriminate use of pesticides; inherent economic risks stemming from reliance on
monocrops; and side effects on humans from agrochemicals.19 Further, these agricultural methods have resulted in
the loss of the family farm20 and many rural farmers have lost their livelihoods as human labor has been replaced by machinery.21 Rapid
population growth will increasingly burden the planet’s food supply system. In 2008, United Nation’s Chief Ban
Ki-moon told world leaders the following: “The world needs to produce more food. Food production needs to rise by 50 per
cent [sic] by the year 2030 to meet the rising demand.”22 Unfortunately, the Green Revolution’s agricultural methods
may have already reached their limits.23 Most fertile land is already cultivated and urban development trends
threaten existing farmland;24 furthermore, the effects of environmental degradation are resulting in
declining crop yields.25 Peak oil26 is yet another threat to the food supply system. Current agricultural practices in the
United States are highly dependent on oil. Chemical fertilizers currently used in industrial agriculture
are produced by an extremely energy-intensive process that combines hydrogen, which comes from
fossil fuels, with nitrogen.27 The current U.S. food supply is also dependent upon fossil fuels for the processing, storage, and
transportation of food.28 As the planet’s oil supply decreases, current fossil-fueled agricultural practices will cease to be viable and sufficient.
Disease Advantage
1AC Disease Advantage
Zoonotic diseases are a large portion of all diseases and increasing
Allen 2011 Heather Anne Allen, B.A. in Government, May 2006, Cornell University, M.P.A. in Science
and Technology Policy, May 2007, Cornell University, Dissertation paper, “Improving Zoonotic Disease
Outbreak Detection Practice in the United States”,
http://media.proquest.com/media/pq/classic/doc/2417077331/fmt/prv/rep/NPDF?_a=ChgyMDE0MDcwODE2MjMyNjEwODo5OTQzMTASBTMzODQ4GgpPTkVfU0VBUkNIIg0xNzIuNTYuMTIuMTU1KgUxODc1MDIJODgxMTA0NDkw
Og9GdWxsVGV4dFByZXZpZXdCATBSBk9ubGluZVoCRlRiA1BSV2oKMjAxMS8wMS8wMXIKMjAxMS8xMi8zMXoAggEdUC0xMDA2NTIzLW51bGwtbnVsbC1udWxsLW51bGySAQZPbmxpbmXKAW1Nb3ppbGxhLzUuMCAoV2luZG93cyBOV
CA2LjE7IFdPVzY0KSBBcHBsZVdlYktpdC81MzcuMzYgKEtIVE1MLCBsaWtlIEdlY2tvKSBDaHJvbWUvMzUuMC4xOTE2LjE1MyBTYWZhcmkvNTM3LjM20gEWRGlzc2VydGF0aW9ucyAmIFRoZXNlc5oCB1ByZVBhaWSqAihPUzpFTVMtUGRmRG
9jVmlld0Jhc2UtZ2V0TWVkaWFVcmxGb3JJdGVtwgICUETKAhNEaXNzZXJ0YXRpb24vVGhlc2lz0gIBWeICK2h0dHA6Ly9ncmFkd29ya3MudW1pLmNvbS8zNC82MS8zNDYxNDQyLmh0bWzqAgDyAgA%3D&_s=605ivBdUrANFgZfwggQKrhUF
a%2F4%3D
Animals, throughout history, have transmitted infectious microbes to human beings. Zoonoses are
those diseases that have their reservoirs in the animal population. Of the 1,700 known pathogens that
infect humans, approximately half are zoonotic (Taylor, Latham, & Woolhouse, 2001; World Health Organization, 2008). Of
emerging infectious diseases, it is estimated that 75% are zoonotic (Chomel, Belotto, & Meslin, 2007; Los Alamos
National Laboratory, 2005; Taylor et al., 2001). Some zoonotic diseases have developed into major public health
problems, such as HIV/AIDS: “Here was an example of a new zoonosis rapidly expanding outward from its animal reservoir in Africa
to infect millions around the world by the twentieth century” (Price-Smith, 2002, p. 4). Today, zoonoses remain a critical and
salient public health concern (U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, World Health Organization, & World Organization for Animal
Health, 2004; Watanabe, 2008). Despite the disproportionate representation of zoonoses as emerging
infections and as diseases that threaten human health, surveillance, detection, and reporting research
has not focused exclusively on zoonoses, and we have little empirical knowledge about the
functioning of outbreak detection and reporting practice with regard to these diseases.
Ocean exploration solves disease: two internal links
First is Hidden Cures – cures to diseases are within species
Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special
correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”,
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/
In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it (relatively) affordable and accessible came to an end after 30
years. Those three decades provided numerous technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag of nearly $200 billion, the program had
With the
iconic space program ending, many people have asked, "What’s next? What is the next giant leap in
scientific and technological innovation?" Today a possible answer to that question has been announced. And it does not entail straining
our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and
opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the
ocean. You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our
toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The
its champions and its detractors. It was, however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing the American spirit of innovation and leadership.
Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau" introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the
ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing
need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A
new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform
everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is
derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to
wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such
discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods.
Second is HABs – IOOS solves HABs and waterborne pathogens
Malone 2011 Tom Malone, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the Horn Point Laboratory,
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PhD in Biology from Stanford University, and
Mary Culver, manager of the Applied Sciences Program at the NOAA Coastal Services Center and Office
of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management in Charleston, SC, Ph.D. in Oceanography from the Univ. of
Washington, “Managing Public Health Risks: Role of Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)” in
Oceans and Public Health: Risks and Remedies from the Sea, p 25-26, google books
The cumulative effects of natural hazards, human activities, and climate change are and will continue to be most pronounced in the coastal zone where people and
ecosystem goods and services are most concentrated, exposure to natural hazards is greatest, and inputs of energy and matter from land, sea, and air converge
(Costanza et al, 1993; McKay and Mulvaney, 2001; Nicholls and Small, 2002; Small and Nicholls, 2003). Changes
occurring in coastal waters
affect public health and well-being, the safety and efficiency of marine operations, and the capacity of ecosystems to support goods and services
(including the sustainability of living marine resources and biodiversity). Although these changes tend to be local in scale, they are occurring in coastal ecosystems
worldwide and are often local expressions of larger scale variability and change, including both natural and anthropogenic drivers or “forcings”:¶ Natural hazards
(Epstein, 1999; Flather, 2000; Michaels et al., 1997) ¶ Global warming and sea level rise (Barry et al., 1995; Levitus et al., 2000; Najjar et al., 1999) ¶ Basin scale
changes in ocean-atmosphere interactions (El Nino Southern Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation, and Pacific Decadal Oscillation) (Barber and Chavez, 1986;
Beaugrand et al., 2003; Koblinsky and Smith, 2001; Wilkinson et al., 1999) ¶ Human alterations of the environment (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of
Marine Pollution [GESAMP], 2001; Heinz Center, 2002; Peierls et al., 1991; Vitousek et al., 1997),¶ Exploitation of living resources (Jackson et al., 2001; Myers and
Worm, 2003)¶ Introductions of nonnative species (Carlton, 1996; Hallegraeff, 1998) ¶ Each of these
drivers of change has been shown to
influence human health risks, from exposure to waterborne human pathogens to the toxins produced by
harmful algae bloom (HAB) organisms (affecting people through direct contact, inhalation of aerosols, and seafood consumption). The clearest and
most direct impacts on the oceans and human health occur in coastal areas that are subject to intense human use (sewage discharge, agriculture and aquaculture
practices, human habitation and recreation, fishing, etc.) and are susceptible to flooding from tsunamis, storm surges, and excessive rainfall associated with tropical
storms and monsoons (National Research Council [NRC], 1999). There is also increasing evidence that global
scale changes in the abundance
and distribution of both waterborne and vector-borne diseases are occurring in response to global warming and
changes in the hydrological cycle (Colwell, 1996; Epstein, 1999; Hains and Parry, 1993; Rogers and Packer, 1993). ¶ Ecosystem-Based Approaches
to Managing Health Risks ¶ The oceans and Great Lakes are conduits for many pathogenic microorganisms and their
toxins (Table CS1-3). Their distributions and exposure risks in aquatic systems are governed by their sources; their behavior once introduced into the aquatic
environment (e.g., rates of growth, mortality, migration, buoyancy, etc.); their place in the food web; and by water motions that transport, disperse, or concentrate
them. The
most effective ways to reduce the immediate cost of lives and human suffering from exposure
to waterborne pathogens and harmful algal blooms is to detect changes in risk more rapidly , provide
timely accurate predictions of changes in risk in both time and space, and control the sources (e.g., reduce
inputs of untreated sewage wastes that transport pathogens, reduce land-based inputs of anthropogenic nutrients that stimulate some HAB organisms, and reduce
the temporal and spatial extent of coastal flooding that can promote events such as cholera epidemics and the growth of HAB organisms).¶ Increases in risk to levels
that lead to beach and shellfish bed closures are typically localized, episodic, and dynamic. Consequently, rapid,
timely, and accurate
assessments of risk are difficult if not impossible based on traditional sampling regimes (e.g. monthly or biweekly
monitoring of sewage outfalls and daily shoreline sampling at a limited number of beach sites). Remote sensing and the development of
species-specific in situ sensors for waterborne pathogens and HABs thus have great potential for
providing the means to address these challenges.¶ For example, satellite-based synthetic aperture radar (SAR) provides high resolution
(<100 m) active microwave observations of sea surface roughness that are independent of cloud cover and time of day. At surface wind speeds between 2 m sec-1
and 7 m sec-1, areas with biogenic or anthropogenic surfactant films that dampen small waves are detected by SAR as patterns of low backscatter return. Studies in
the Southern California Bight illustrate the ability of SAR to detect and track the fate of storm-water runoff and sewage discharge (DiGiacomo et al., 2004;
Svejkovsky and Jones, 2001). In combination with field surveys, land-based high-frequency radar, and numerical models, these studies demonstrate the potential for
rapid detection and timely predictions that can be used to inform management and mitigation decisions
that reduce public health risks and increase the economic and social value of beaches and living resources. The IOOS provides a
platform for achieving these objectives .
HABs cause disease – toxins released cause neurological problems
CDC 2012 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 7/24/12, “Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)”,
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hsb/hab/
Algae are vitally important to marine and fresh-water ecosystems, and most species of algae are not harmful. Algal blooms occur in natural
waters used for drinking and/or recreation when certain types of microscopic algae grow quickly in water, often in response to changes in levels
of chemicals such as nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer, in the water. Algal
blooms can deplete the oxygen and block
the sunlight that other organisms need to live, and some can produce toxins that are harmful to the
health of the environment, plants, animals, and people. Harmful algal blooms have threatened
beaches, drinking water sources, and even the boating venue for the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, China. Cyanobacteria (bluegreen algae) and red tides are examples of algae that can bloom and produce toxins that may be harmful to human and animal health. HABs
can occur in marine, estuarine, and fresh waters, and HABs
appear to be increasing along the coastlines and in the
surface waters of the United States, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). HSB epidemiologists have led a number of studies to investigate the public health impacts of blue-green algae
blooms and Florida red tide. The studies have demonstrated that there is the potential for exposure to potent HAB-related toxins during
recreational and occupational activities on water bodies with ongoing blooms. Although scientists do not yet understand fully how HABs affect
human health, authorities in the United States and abroad are monitoring HABs and developing guidelines for HAB-related public health action.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has added certain algae associated with HABs to its Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate
List. This list identifies organisms and toxins that EPA believes are priorities for investigation. Many states regularly experience harmful algal
blooms (HABs), and state public health departments are often are asked to provide guidance about HAB-associated human and animal illnesses.
HSB subject matter experts help states to develop their public health responses to HAB events, including providing outreach and education
materials and assessing exposure and the potential for health effects.
Cyanobacteria
(blue-green algae) Cyanobacteria, also known as
blue-green algae, grow
in any type of water and are photosynthetic (use sunlight to create food and support life). Cyanobacteria live
brackish, or marine water. They usually are too small to be seen, but sometimes
can form visible colonies, called an algal bloom. Cyanobacteria have been found among the oldest fossils on earth and are
one of the largest groups of bacteria. Cyanobacteria have been linked to human and animal illnesses around the
world, including North and South America, Africa, Australia, Europe, Scandinavia, and China. Cyanobacterial blooms and how they form
in terrestrial, fresh,
Cyanobacterial blooms (a kind of algal bloom) occur when organisms that are normally present grow exuberantly. Within a few days, an bloom
of cyanobacteria can cause clear water to become cloudy. The blooms usually float to the surface and can be many inches thick, especially near
the shoreline. Cyanobacterial
blooms can form in warm, slow-moving waters that are rich in nutrients such
as fertilizer runoff or septic tank overflows. Blooms can occur at any time, but most often occur in late summer or
early fall. They can occur in marine, estuarine, and fresh waters, but the blooms of greatest concern are the ones that occur in fresh water, such
as drinking water reservoirs or recreational waters. What a cyanobacterial bloom looks like Some cyanobacterial blooms can look like foam,
scum, or mats on the surface of fresh water lakes and ponds. The blooms can be blue, bright green, brown, or red and may look like paint
floating on the water. Some blooms may not affect the appearance of the water. As algae in a cyanobacterial bloom die, the water may smell
bad. Harmful Marine Algae Harmful
marine algae, such as those associated with red tides , occur in the ocean and
can produce toxins that may harm or kill fish and marine animals. There are many kinds of marine
algae that produce toxins that can accumulate in shellfish. In the US, one of the illnesses that may
result from eating algal toxin-contaminated shellfish is neurotoxic shellfish poisoning (NSP). NSP is caused
by eating shellfish contaminated with brevetoxins, which are produced by Karenia brevis, the marine algae associated with Florida red tides.
NSP is a short-term illness with neurologic symptoms (such as tingling fingers or toes) and gastrointestinal symptoms. There are very few cases
of NSP in the US because coastal states carefully monitor their shellfish beds and close the beds to harvesting if high concentrations of
brevetoxins are detected in the water or the shellfish. Brevetoxins may
also be in the air along the Gulf coast of
Florida during Florida red tide events and may symptoms such as eye irritation and a sore throat in healthy people. People who
have asthma may have symptoms, such as chest tightness, that last for several days after exposure. Ciguatera tides fish poisoning
is another disease associated with toxins produced by marine algae. The toxin responsible, called
ciguatoxin, accumulates through the food web, and very high levels may exist in reef fish, particularly (but not only) large
carnivorous reef fish. Red Tide Background: Algae are vitally important to marine ecosystems, and most species of algae are not harmful.
However, under certain environmental conditions, microscopic marine algae called Karenia brevis (K.
brevis) grow quickly, creating
blooms that can make the ocean appear red or brown. People often call these blooms “red tide.” K. brevis
produces powerful toxins called brevetoxins, which have killed millions of fish and other marine
organisms. Red tides have damaged the fishing industry, shoreline quality, and local economies in
states such as Texas and Florida. Because K. brevis blooms move based on winds and tides, pinpointing a red tide at
any given moment is difficult. Red tides occur throughout the world, affecting marine ecosystems in
Scandinavia, Japan, the Caribbean, and the South Pacific. Scientists first documented a red tide along Florida’s Gulf Coast
in fall 1947, when residents of Venice, Florida, reported thousands of dead fish and a “stinging gas” in the air, according to Mote Marine
Laboratory. However, Florida residents have reported similar events since the mid-1800s. Assessing the Impact on Public Health In addition to
killing fish, brevetoxins can
become concentrated in the tissues of shellfish that feed on K. brevis. People
who eat these shellfish may suffer from neurotoxic shellfish poisoning, a food poisoning that can cause severe
gastrointestinal and neurologic symptoms, such as tingling fingers or toes. The human health effects associated with eating brevetoxin-tainted
shellfish are well documented. However, scientists know little about how other types of environmental exposures to brevetoxin—such as
breathing the air near red tides or swimming in red tides—may affect humans. Anecdotal evidence suggests that people who swim among
brevetoxins or inhale brevetoxins dispersed in the air may experience irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, as well as coughing, wheezing,
and shortness of breath. Additional evidence suggests that people with existing respiratory illness, such as asthma, may experience these
symptoms more severely. Ciguatera Ciguatera
fish poisoning (or ciguatera) is an illness caused by eating fish that
contain toxins produced by a marine microalgae called Gambierdiscus toxicus. Barracuda, black grouper,
blackfin snapper, cubera snapper, dog snapper, greater amberjack, hogfish, horse-eye jack, king mackerel, and yellowfin grouper have been
known to carry ciguatoxins. People
who have ciguatera may experience nausea, vomiting, and neurologic
symptoms such as tingling fingers or toes. They also may find that cold things feel hot and hot things
feel cold. Ciguatera has no cure. Symptoms usually go away in days or weeks but can last for years . People who have
ciguatera can be treated for their symptoms.
Zoonotic diseases lead to extinction
Casadevall 12 Arturo Casadevall, professor of microbiology and immunology at the Albert Einstein
College of Medicine “The future of biological warfare,” Microbial Biotechnology, p. 584-5
In considering the importance of biological warfare as a subject for concern it
is worthwhile to review the known existential
threats. At this time this writer can identify at three major existential threats to humanity : (i) large-scale
thermonuclear war followed by a nuclear winter, (ii) a planet killing asteroid impact and (iii) infectious disease. To this trio might be
added climate change making the planet uninhabitable. Of the three existential threats the first is deduced from the inferred cataclysmic
effects of nuclear war. For the second there is geological evidence for the association of asteroid impacts with massive extinction (Alvarez,
1987). As
to an existential threat from microbes recent decades have provided unequivocal evidence for
the ability of certain pathogens to cause the extinction of entire species. Although infectious disease
has traditionally not been associated with extinction this view has changed by the finding that a single
chytrid fungus was responsible for the extinction of numerous amphibian species (Daszak et al., 1999;
Mendelson et al., 2006). Previously, the view that infectious diseases were not a cause of extinction was
predicated on the notion that many pathogens required their hosts and that some proportion of the
host population was naturally resistant. However, that calculation does not apply to microbes that are
acquired directly from the environment and have no need for a host, such as the majority of fungal
pathogens. For those types of host–microbe interactions it is possible for the pathogen to kill off every
last member of a species without harm to itself, since it would return to its natural habitat upon
killing its last host. Hence, from the viewpoint of existential threats environmental microbes could potentially pose a
much greater threat to humanity than the known pathogenic microbes, which number somewhere near 1500
species (Cleaveland et al., 2001; Taylor et al., 2001), especially if some of these species acquired the capacity for
pathogenicity as a consequence of natural evolution or bioengineering.
1AR-Disease = Extinction
Disease spread will cause extinction
Leather 10/12/11 (Tony, “The Inevitable Pandemic” http://healthmad.com/conditions-anddiseases/the-inevitable-pandemic/, PZ)
You will have pictured this possible scenario many times, living in a country where people are suddenly
dropping like flies because of some mystery virus. Hospitals full to overflowing, patients laid out in
corridors, because of lack of room, health services frustrated, because they just can’t cope. You feel
panic with no way of knowing who will be the next victim, intimate personal contact with anyone the
death of you, quite possibly. This is no scene from a movie, or even a daydream, but UK reality in 1998,
when the worst influenza epidemic in living memory swept savagely across the country. Whilst this
was just one epidemic in one country, how terrifying is the idea that a global pandemic would see this
horror story repeated many times over around the globe, death toll numbers in the millions.
Humanity is outnumbered many fold by bacteria and viruses, the deadliest of all killers among these
microscopic organisms. Death due to disease is a threat we all live with daily, trusting medical science
combat it, but the fact is, frighteningly, that we have yet to experience the inevitable pandemic that
might conceivably push humanity to the edge of extinction because so many of us become victims.
Devastating viral diseases are nothing new. Bubonic plague killed almost half all Roman Empire citizens
in542AD. Europe lost three quarters of the population to the Black Death in 1334. One fifth of
Londoners succumbed to the 1665 Great Plague, and Russia was the site of the first official influenza
pandemic, in 1729, which quickly spread to Europe and America, at the costs of many thousands of
lives. Another epidemic of so-called Russian flu, originating in 1889 in central Asia spreading rapidly
around the world, European death toll alone 250,000 people. In 1918 so-called Spanish Influenza killed
40million people worldwide, another strain originating Hong Kong in 1969 killed off 700,000, a 1989 UK
epidemic killing 29,000. Small numbers, granted, as compared to the world population of seven billion,
but the truth is that, should a true world pandemic occur, western governments will of course want to
save their own people first, potentially globally disastrous. World Health Organisation laboratories
worldwide constantly monitor and record new strains of virus, ensuring drug companies maintain
stockpiles against most virulent strains known, maintaining a fighting chance of coping with new
pandemics. They do theoretical models of likely effects of new pandemics, their predictions making
chilling reading. Put into perspective, during a pandemic, tanker loads of antiviral agents, which simply
do not exist would be needed so prioritizing vaccination recipients would be inevitable. Such a
pandemic would, in UK alone, be at least 10 times deadlier than previously experienced, likely number
of dead in first two months 72,000 in London alone. Any new virus would need a three to six month
wait for effective vaccine, so the devastation on a global scale, flu virus notoriously indifferent to
international borders, would be truly colossal. Our knowledge of history should be pointing the way to
prepare for that living nightmare of the next, inevitable world pandemic. The microscopic villains of
these scenarios have inhabited this planet far longer than we have, and they too evolve. It would be
comforting to think that humanity was genuinely ready, though it seems doubtful at best.
Pandemics cause extinction
Discover, 00 (“Twenty Ways the World Could End” by Corey Powell in Discover Magazine, October
2000, http://discovermagazine.com/2000/oct/featworld)
If Earth doesn't do us in, our fellow organisms might be up to the task. Germs and people have always
coexisted, but occasionally the balance gets out of whack. The Black Plague killed one European in four
during the 14th century; influenza took at least 20 million lives between 1918 and 1919; the AIDS
epidemic has produced a similar death toll and is still going strong. From 1980 to 1992, reports the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, mortality from infectious disease in the United States rose
58 percent. Old diseases such as cholera and measles have developed new resistance to antibiotics.
Intensive agriculture and land development is bringing humans closer to animal pathogens.
International travel means diseases can spread faster than ever. Michael Osterholm, an infectious
disease expert who recently left the Minnesota Department of Health, described the situation as "like
trying to swim against the current of a raging river." The grimmest possibility would be the emergence
of a strain that spreads so fast we are caught off guard or that resists all chemical means of control,
perhaps as a result of our stirring of the ecological pot. About 12,000 years ago, a sudden wave of
mammal extinctions swept through the Americas. Ross MacPhee of the American Museum of Natural
History argues the culprit was extremely virulent disease, which humans helped transport as they
migrated into the New World.
Disease causes extinction
Yu 9 (Victoria, Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science, 5-22, http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/spring2009/human-extinction-the-uncertainty-of-our-fate, 6-23-11)
A pandemic will kill off all humans. In the past, humans have indeed fallen victim to viruses. Perhaps
the best-known case was the bubonic plague that killed up to one third of the European population in
the mid-14th century (7). While vaccines have been developed for the plague and some other
infectious diseases, new viral strains are constantly emerging — a process that maintains the
possibility of a pandemic-facilitated human extinction. Some surveyed students mentioned AIDS as a
potential pandemic-causing virus. It is true that scientists have been unable thus far to find a
sustainable cure for AIDS, mainly due to HIV’s rapid and constant evolution. Specifically, two factors
account for the virus’s abnormally high mutation rate: 1. HIV’s use of reverse transcriptase, which does
not have a proof-reading mechanism, and 2. the lack of an error-correction mechanism in HIV DNA
polymerase (8). Luckily, though, there are certain characteristics of HIV that make it a poor candidate for
a large-scale global infection: HIV can lie dormant in the human body for years without manifesting
itself, and AIDS itself does not kill directly, but rather through the weakening of the immune system.
However, for more easily transmitted viruses such as influenza, the evolution of new strains could prove
far more consequential. The simultaneous occurrence of antigenic drift (point mutations that lead to
new strains) and antigenic shift (the inter-species transfer of disease) in the influenza virus could
produce a new version of influenza for which scientists may not immediately find a cure. Since
influenza can spread quickly, this lag time could potentially lead to a “global influenza pandemic,”
according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (9). The most recent scare of this variety
came in 1918 when bird flu managed to kill over 50 million people around the world in what is
sometimes referred to as the Spanish flu pandemic. Perhaps even more frightening is the fact that only
25 mutations were required to convert the original viral strain — which could only infect birds — into a
human-viable strain (10).
1AR-Disease = War
Disease causes armed conflict and civil war
Letendre, Fincher, & Thornhill 10 K, CL, & R, U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes
of Health, 4-1, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Letendre %20K%22%5BAuthor%5D, 621-11
Geographic and cross-national variation in the frequency of intrastate armed conflict and civil war is a
subject of great interest. Previous theory on this variation has focused on the influence on human
behaviour of climate, resource competition, national wealth, and cultural characteristics. We present
the parasite-stress model of intrastate conflict, which unites previous work on the correlates of
intrastate conflict by linking frequency of the outbreak of such conflict, including civil war, to the
intensity of infectious disease across countries of the world. High intensity of infectious disease leads
to the emergence of xenophobic and ethnocentric cultural norms. These cultures suffer greater
poverty and deprivation due to the morbidity and mortality caused by disease, and as a result of
decreased investment in public health and welfare. Resource competition among xenophobic and
ethnocentric groups within a nation leads to increased frequency of civil war. We present support for
the parasite-stress model with regression analyses. We find support for a direct effect of infectious
disease on intrastate armed conflict, and support for an indirect effect of infectious disease on the
incidence of civil war via its negative effect on national wealth. We consider the entanglements of
feedback of conflict into further reduced wealth and increased incidence of disease, and discuss
implications for international warfare and global patterns of wealth and imperialism.
2AC-Topicality
2AC Extra-T (Ocenas/States)
1. We meet USFG- the plan text in a vacuum just fiats USFG implementation of the
IOOS- any other inter-governmental collaboration would be a result of the plan,
not a mandate of it
2. We meet “Oceans”- the plan says the phrase “increase ocean exploration by,”
which limits the scope of the plan’s action on the IOOS to the oceans
3. Counter-interpretation- Oceans include other major bodies of water too
Merkels 96 – Merkels Jr., “United States Patent – Method of Increasing Seafood Production in the
Ocean”, 7-16, patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US5535701.pdf
Ocean fertilization according to the present invention would greatly increase the productivity of seafood
from the oceans. (The term “oceans” also includes seas, bays and other large bodies of water). For
example, ocean fertilization along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States could increase the
productivity off these coasts up the level that occurs naturally off the coast of Peru. This could increase
the productivity of seafood along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States by a factor of 30 or
more, and thereby provide thousands of new jobs and revitalize a fishing industry that is in decline in
some areas of the United States, while at the same time generating a high quality protein food for both
domestic consumption and export. Ocean fertilization could also increase the fish catch off the coasts of
other countries with the same benefits.
4. Counter-interpretation- “Federal” includes the states that form a central
government
AHD 92 (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, p. 647)
federal—1. Of, relating to, or being a form of government in which a union of states recognizes the
sovereignty of a central authority while retaining certain residual powers of government.
5. No case meets- any affs could potentially involve state coordination if they
apply to coastal areas of the ocean OR they could involve international
coordination if the aff applies beyond the US EEZ
6. Extra T not a voting issue- don’t vote on potential abuse because we don’t claim
advantages off the allegedly extra topical parts, and it could increase neg
ground because they get new chances to generate offense or things to
counterplan out of.
Exploration
Exploration includes long term observation of the ocean
Gudes 1
[Scott Gudes, Acting Administrator and Deputy Under Secretary of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). JULY 12, 2001
"OCEAN EXPLORATION AND COASTAL AND OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEMS" HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND
STANDARDS,COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES” http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-107hhrg73840/pdf/CHRG107hhrg73840.pdf//jweideman]
Ocean exploration includes the examination of the temporal components of the sea, and that includes
the long-term monitoring of ocean characteristics, and an in\tegrated ocean observation system. NOAH is
engaged in multiple ocean observation programs already, and recognizes that an integrated ocean observation system is worthy of its own identity and will hold
merit to future aspects of scientific inquiry.
Exploration includes data gathering and mapping
NOAA 13 [Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research NOAA “Department of Commerce Fiscal Year 2013 in Review – Exploration”
http://explore.noaa.gov/Exploration/Overview.aspx//jweideman]
The President's Panel Report on Ocean Exploration defined ocean exploration as discovery through
disciplined, diverse observations and recordings of findings. It includes rigorous, systematic observations
and documentation of biological, chemical, physical, geological, and archaeological aspects of the ocean
in the three dimensions of space and in time. The Panel's recommendations gave rise to NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration in 2001 and
helped establish NOAA as the lead agency for a federal ocean exploration program. This leadership continues within OER. There are two paradigms
for exploration: Targeted exploration: The sweeping goals of an exploration program can be met only if
specific ocean regions or problems are tackled. In partnership with academia and other government agencies, the "holes in the sea," are
explored: areas ripe for discovery where there has been little exploration to date. Expeditions based on programmatic and geographic areas of study include (but
are not limited to) marine biodiversity, the Arctic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, exploring the ocean through time, and marine archaeology. Systematic
exploration: OER and partners are advancing a new paradigm for exploration, giving shore-based
explorers of all kinds and ages access to the excitement of real-time discovery on the NOAA Ship
Okeanos Explorer and the Exploration Vessel (E/V) Nautilus. Using high-speed satellite and Internet 2 connections, explorers can
remain on shore at Exploration Command Centers and guide or contribute to exploration plans and observations, communicating real-time with the shipboard
scientists and technicians. Through standard Internet connections, anyone with a computer and web access can watch and listen in on operations aboard ship,
bringing real-time exploration into living rooms, schools, laboratories and businesses across the globe. Great challenges remain to fully exploring and understanding
the ocean. Cutting-edge technologies and methodologies continue to be developed by those dedicated to ocean exploration, and the potential of ocean exploration
has only begun to be met.
2AC-CPs
A2: Process CPs
2AC User Fees
---CP is illegitimate and a voting issue-Funding counterplans shift the focus of the
debate away from core topic issues onto small trivial differences-This undermines
education and ground
---Perm-Do the CP-the plan doesn’t specify how funding is secured
---Doesn’t violate It’s <Insert Commerical activity is T>
---Perm-Do Both-Key to securing adequate funding and solving the case
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System will be a public-private enterprise. Public sector support
will be insufficient to support all applications, while private investment will not tolerate footing the
bill for what should arguably be a tax-payer funded public service . Substantial national public
investment will continue to be needed to ensure support for a core set of measurements of essential
ocean variables. But partnerships of new sorts must emerge, allowing a legal co-mingling of
resources and risk. Individual ('angel') and collective (venture capital, or crowd sourcing) investors will
recognize a meaningful return on investment for the added-value products based on publicly-funded
observations and services. Industry cooperatives will form to support the development of sector-specific
capabilities that can enhance their bottom line. These private investment activities will launch a broad
array of creative business plans, a handful of which will become standard models for the ocean
observation industry. The economic investment and value of ocean observation programs will expand.
Ultimately a commercial enterprise of equity valuation in excess of S10B will emerge. This will require,
as happened in the global telecommunications and information technology industries, the development
of global standards for data acquisition, assimilation, analysis, application, and dissemination.
---And, the solvency deficit is substantial-Commercialization would only focus on small
coastal related projects
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System
http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf
There is also a spatial mismatch between the observing system and many desired applications. U.S.
IOOS was initially built primarily to support large scale global oceanographic models , with kilometer-
scale resolution and the coastal shelf as a boundary condition. Many of the U.S. IOOS user needs are
located much closer to shore and on much smaller spatial scales. While the spatial resolution of the
models continues to improve, and there are some nascent efforts to move the model's boundary
conditions closer to shore, there is still much fundamental technical work to be done before many user
community needs can be addressed.
A2: PICs
Integration of all mechanisms is key
IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to
Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]
Databases currently in use have been developed by disparate organizations, institutions, and
individuals for differing purposes, and result in databases with locally-specific structures, contents,
methods, and policies. In addition, these data and applications are diverse and may change over time. As such, data from one
source might contain different variables depending on when it was collected. These differences can
make retrieving data across databases a time- consuming and ineffective process. This U.S. IOOS BDP
project aims to improve access to data from these diverse sources, such as independent fisheries surveys conducted
by NOAA, local State Fisheries Agencies, USGS, the U.S. Navy, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), and other government agencies.
A2: Security Conditions CP
Data sharing is contingent on law and security requirements- normal means
NOS and NOAA 14 [Federal Agency Name(s): National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of
Commerce Funding Opportunity Title: FY2014 Marine Sensor and Other Advanced Observing Technologies Transition Project. “ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL
FUNDING OPPORTUNITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/funding/fy14ffo_msi_noaa_nos_ioos_2014_2003854.pdf //jweideman]
A. Data Sharing Policy Environmental data and information, collected and/or created under NOAA grants/cooperative
agreements must be made visible, accessible, and independently understandable to general users, free of charge or at minimal cost, in
a timely manner (typically no later than two (2) years after the data are collected or created), except where limited by law,
regulation, policy or by security requirements.
A2: International CPs
US Key
US Key- Data management capabilities
IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to
Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]
Observations are of little value if they cannot be found, accessed, and transformed into useful
products. The U.S. IOOS Data Management and Communications subsystem, or “DMAC,” is the central
operational infrastructure for assessing, disseminating, and integrating existing and future ocean
observations data. As a core functional component for U.S. IOOS, establishing DMAC capabilities
continues to be a principal focus for the program and a primary responsibility of the U.S. IOOS
Program Office in NOAA. Importance and Objectives of DMAC Although DMAC implementation remains a work in
progress, a fully implemented DMAC subsystem will be capable of delivering real-time, delayed-mode,
and historical data. The data will include in situ and remotely sensed physical, chemical, and biological
observations as well as model-generated outputs, including forecasts, to U.S. IOOS users and of
delivering all forms of data to and from secure archive facilities. Achieving this requires a governance
framework for recommending and promoting standards and policies to be implemented by data
providers across the U.S. IOOS enterprise, to provide seamless long-term preservation and reuse of data across regional and
national boundaries and across disciplines. The governance framework includes tools for data access, distribution, discovery, visualization, and
analysis; standards for metadata, vocabularies, and quality control and quality assurance; and procedures for the entire ocean data life cycle.
The DMAC design must be responsive to user needs and it must, at a minimum, make data and products discoverable and accessible, and
provide essential metadata regarding sources, methods, and quality. The overall DMAC objectives are for U.S. IOOS data providers to
develop and maintain capabilities to: • Deliver
accurate and timely ocean observations and model outputs to a
range of consumers; including government, academic, private sector users, and the general public;
using specifications common across all providers • Deploy the information system components
(including infrastructure and relevant personnel) for full life-cycle management of observations, from
collection to product creation, public delivery, system documentation, and archiving • Establish robust data exchange responsive to variable
customer requirements as well as routine feedback, which is not tightly bound to a specific application of the data or particular end-user
decision support tool U.S.
IOOS daia providers therefore are being encouraged lo address the following DMACspecific objectives: • A standards-based foundation for DMAC capabilities: U.S. IOOS partners must clearly
demonstrate how they will ensure the establishment and maintenance of a standards- based
approach for delivering their ocean observations data and associated products to users through local, regional and
global/international data networks • Exposure of and access to coastal ocean observations: U.S. IOOS partners must describe how they
will ensure coastal ocean observations are exposed to users via a service- oriented architecture and
recommended data services that will ensure increased data interoperability including the use of
improved metadata and uniform quality-control methods • Certification and governance of U.S. IOOS data and
products: U.S. IOOS partners must present a description of how they will participate in establishing an effective U.S. IOOS governance process
for data certification standards and compliance procedures. This objective is part of an overall accreditation process which includes the other
U.S. IOOS subsystems (observing, modeling and analysis, and governance)
Data is insufficient-integrated system is key to effective policy-only the perm can solve
U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13
A New Decade for the Integrated