Int’l CPs- BRAG Lab- Wave 1
Theory
AT: Int’l Fiat Bad
Counter Interpretation – the neg is entitled to counterplans that fiat governmental
action besides the United States so long as they are grounded in the literature Info processing – key to test decision making between optimal actors – lets us better
understand decision making
Policy analyst – looking at which country and how a plan should be carried out is a key
question –
Limits – key to limit the topic down to affs with US key warrants – checks an infinite
number of small affs especially for such a large topic
Neg flex and resolution basis to test the affirmatives burden – key to test the US key
warrant to the resolution and test the aff from multiple angles
Aff side bias – the topic is inherently biased against the neg no good DAs or process
counterplans
If anything reject arg not team
Debating from the international perspective is a critical part of learning and education
Best Delegate 11, Best Delegate, 3/15/11, Best Delegate is an organization that promotes learnings
through international debate over the United Nations, “The Educational Benefits of Model UN,”
http://bestdelegate.com/the-educational-benefits-of-model-un/, NN
No matter how many Model UN conferences I attend, I’m always a little amazed. These are students
who could be hanging out at home, watching TV, or playing video games, and instead they want to put
on a suit, work on a weekend, and develop solutions to the world’s most important problems. What
makes them want to do MUN? And what makes Model UN worth teaching? Model UN motivates
students to learn. On an emotional level, Model UN is a motivational experience. It’s fun to pretend
being a world leader solving the world’s most important problems in 48 hours or less. Model UN
activates students’ imagination and creativity – activities that students are naturally inclined to do.
Students enjoy exploring new places, sharing common experiences with teammates and friends, and
making new friends with smart and interesting students from other schools – which includes the best
and the brightest from other countries. Students joke that “MUN is F-U-N,” but it’s true – that’s why it
works so well. Students attend Model UN conferences because it’s fun – they just happen to learn
something along the way. And when students have fun while learning, what they learn is more likely to
stick. Model UN reinforces what students learn in the classroom. In the classroom, students learn from
their teacher. At conferences, students learn from each other. The conference does not replace the
classroom – the conference complements the classroom. Students have to internalize what they learn in
class and deliver that information through speeches, caucusing, and resolutions. The role of the teacher
in Model UN is to guide this “student-led” learning by ensuring information quality (e.g. proper research,
position papers) and giving students the tools to teach one another (e.g. public speaking, resolution
writing). Model UN teaches students about the world. In this era of globalization, learning about the
world is more important than ever. No matter what field or profession students enter, they will interact
with people from different countries and diverse backgrounds. Problems taking place halfway around
the globe impact our lives, our country, and our communities. Students learn about the world as they
prepare for Model UN conferences, represent countries other than their own, and present possible
solutions to global problems in committee. Students also learn by meeting people from other countries
and travel to places they’ve never been before. Model UN builds confidence and leadership skills. I know
so many students who were so scared to speak at their first conference that went on to become active
participants in committee and in the classroom. In his speech on “What Model UN Means to Me,” KFC
shares his story of how he went from a scared high school delegate to Secretary-General of GCIMUN
delivering the opening speech at the UN to over 3,000 people, including Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon:
Students develop confidence and leadership skills through experience. Model UN conferences are
opportunities to practice research, public speaking, teamwork, negotiation, and writing skills in a safe
and structured environment. What many people don’t realize is that Model UN also teaches business
skills – running a conference is like running a small business that involves finding “customers”
(delegates), developing a “product” (the conference), and managing peers. It also serves as a fundraiser,
with many high school conferences raising thousands of dollars at a time when schools are slashing
budgets and cutting programs. Model UN helps students get into college. Model UN provides students
with the learning and leadership experiences that admissions officers look for. The depth of these
experiences serves as possible material for personal essays and interviews. Model UN is also an
extensive network of alumni at top colleges.
International fiat is crucial to learning about other perspectives other than those of
the USFG
Garcia 13, Ana Gil Garcia, nearest date given is 2013, Garcia is a professor of international relations at
Northeastern University, “International best practices of higher education institutions: The good news!”
http://www.academia.edu/2781211/International_best_practices_of_higher_education_institutions_The_good_n
ews_, NN
The international experiences are among the most profound and defining influences on our sense of self
and our view of the world. There are many ways for higher educationofficials to internationalize a
campus. On the one hand, most faculties seek to acquirenew professional skills related to the
management, leadership, development,implementation, on the other, delivering of international
educational programs. Whenfaculty get involved in the planning of an international experience, there
are numberlessof new professional skills in the field of international development and education
thatwould help strengthen the international dimension in research, teaching and service;facilitate future
development and design internationally oriented programs; help set uplinkages with schools and
universities outside the U.S; assist on obtaining externalfunding needed for internationalizing an
institution; train on recruitment strategies particularly for minorities; increase advising skills for
international students; strengthennegotiation skills on institutional partnerships and exchange
programs; prepare on facilitymanagement and budget for international affairs; and finally coach on how
to disseminateknowledge of international resources to interested constituencies. Background
Information After 9/11, the face of the internationalization of higher education institutions in the
USAand the rest of the world was transformed. The joys of new learning and the acquisitionof new skills
and knowledge on international affairs and exchanges became a slow anduncomfortable process. The
federal regulations based on the safety and security on allliving aspects of the national territory
demanded from all educational institutions drasticchanges in the way of conducting business with
overseas institutions. Those stipulationsrequired the creation of new areas of learning, as for example
utilization of masses of information, new regulations for obtaining visas, acquisition of
interculturalcompetencies, attainment of innovative technical skills, proficiency on
untraditionallanguages, reframing of conventional exchange programs, and adoption of new
professional language among others. In order to comply with the Department of 1 Homeland Security,
higher education institutions changed and restructured the facade of international offices. Many of
them renamed the units in charge of internationaleducation and exchanges (i.e., Office of International
Programs, The InternationalEducation Office, The Office of International Affairs, Center for International
Studies,International Outreach, etc). Regardless of the name change, they preserved
theinternationalization as the process of integrating an international/intercultural dimensioninto the
teaching, research and service, fundamental university missions.For the purpose of this study, the term
“International Program” is used. It isoperationalized as“the unit, department, and or division of a higher
learning institutionthat deals with the management, leadership, development, implementation and
deliveringof programs which meet international educational demand and standards as well
asinternational aspirations of U.S faculty and students”. Based on the enforced federalchanges and the
characteristics of institution which is classified as a Hispanic ServingInstitution, the researcher proposed
a sabbatical plan related to the academicallyacceptable category of “acquiring new professional skills”
with the solely purpose of becoming knowledgeable and skillful on the daily operations of international
programdepartments that would help ensure that any minority institution is effectively competingon an
international stage for the best students and faculty and for resources in support of internationalizing
their academic programming, global partnerships, and any other initiatives on campus and around the
world.The acquisition of new professional skills is broadly supported by many on the field of
organizational development. For instance, Gary Benjamin (2006) mentions three reasonsorganizations
are prepared to sacrifice time by endorsing the acquisition of new skills andknowledge: (1) keeping
employees interested in the job, (2) having employees with skillsthat are up to date and (3) cutting back
expenses and time on learning new skills than it isto train an employee replacement. In the global era,
and in particular times of financialconstraints, educational institutions also seek radical methods of
retaining andencouraging experienced faculty by providing innovative opportunities that would notonly
ensure their enduring and long-term residency, but gaining different demonstratedskills. The schools of
higher learning are attentive to new societal demands, changes indemographic, rapid technological
advances and use them as indicators for faculty renewalof knowledge and skills. The literature revealed
different approaches and strategies thatwould be used by an experienced faculty to learn fresh skills
(Bachner, 1993; Benjamin,2006; Dwan, 2003; Stier, 2003): joining an academic team and learn from
others; using personal time to study for on-the-job training, and using established relationships.
EU = Good CP
Learning about international organizations like the EU is key to education
European Commission 14, European Commission, February 2014, the European Commission is a section
of the EU that focuses on education in world affairs, “Working with young people: the value of youth work in
the European Union,” http://ec.europa.eu/youth/library/study/youth-work-report_en.pdf, NN
The history of providing youth work for young people varies depending on the Member State, but youth
work is not a new concept in the EU and the landscape of youth work continues to evolve. Although
youth work has greater recognition and visibility today in comparison to the past, there is still much to
be done as there is a need to recognise youth work for the contribution and value it has in the lives of
young people. In consideration of the fact that sources of data on youth work are currently scarce, this
study strives to bring together existing evidence in order to facilitate the understanding and
appreciation of youth work. It draws on literature in the area, a mapping of national contexts,
consultation amongst stakeholders and an analysis of successful practice. The latter was conducted
during the course of the study in order to gain a deeper understanding of youth work in the EU and the
contribution that it makes for young people of the EU. The report highlights the diversity of youth work
practice, the variety of actors involved, the observable trends in the sector, features of successful youth
work and the range of outcomes associated with that success. Furthermore, it presents a comparative
overview of the frameworks which support youth work at the national level across the EU. Whilst youth
work practice will take place regardless of whether countries provide a policy framework of support for
the sector or not, EU and national level policies and funding provisions have the potential to frame and
shape the practice of youth work. These should be designed so as to further strengthen the capacity of
the sector to provide meaningful activities for young people in their leisure time that lead to identifiable
successful outcomes for youth in the EU.
AT: Perm Do Both (EU)
Perm do both fails – the United States and the EU working over implementation of the
plan kills certainty and creates internal feuds that can’t be resolved
Still links to the net benefit – that’s a disad
No impact to ‘double solvency’ – that was sufficiency framing above – also can’t
‘shield the link’ to the net benefit – still triggers the link
Perm fails – the United States and European Union cannot cooperate over climate
change
Antholis 09, William J. Antholis, 6/10/09, William Antholis is managing director of the Brookings Institution
and a senior fellow in Governance Studies, “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: EU-U.S. Cooperation on Climate
Change,” http://www.brookings.edu/research/speeches/2009/06/10-climate-antholis, NN
When it comes to the international effort to address climate change, there is little doubt that a
transatlantic bridge is needed. The question remains, however, to what end? I think that a quick review
of the good, the bad, and the ugly of the current transatlantic relationship will show that, among other
things, the old bridge has had structural flaws in how politics, political culture, and political systems in
the U.S. and EU structured their negotiations with one another. That has contributed to how the sides
have viewed the challenge, and viewed one another. As a result, a new bridge—that is, a new climate
regime—is in order that takes into account those different political cultures and systems. Starting with
the EU, it’s easy to start with the good. All students of institutions will tell you that a long-lasting
institution requires a mission and a founder. With apologies to Al Gore, the EU’s moral mission and their
founding spirit has been driving force in building a global climate regime. That was the case before
Kyoto, and it certainly has been the case during the Bush Administration. This extends from establishing
the soundness of climate science to showing the way in policy action. Importantly, Europe took on an
ambitious policy target at Kyoto, and appears close to meeting that target. Why? One key factor in this
success story is that the European political system allowed this to happen by empowering minority
parties. In a parliamentary system, if a minority party such as the Greens captures 10% of the vote and
then joins with a winning coalition, they will then make up 20% of the coalition’s votes. That will usually
win them a cabinet position or two, and an ability to make a priority of their signature issue. This is
exactly what happened in climate change, where Green parties throughout the continent—especially
here in Germany, but also in the Low Countries, Scandinavia, and elsewhere—have prioritized this issue,
coordinated amongst themselves and with other countries, and have scored major successes. In the
United States, 10% of the vote would be a laughable also-ran. In Europe, 10% is a mandate to change
the world. Political systems don’t account for all the difference between the United States and Europe.
European private citizens, NGOs, and corporations also have moved the needle. These Europeans have
not viewed climate change as a technological or an economic issue. They have viewed it as a matter of
basic common sense morality, politics, economics and culture. So, that combination of political
institutions and political culture has made the issue a priority across the continent, easy for the media
and the general public to understand. Now, as someone with nearly fifteen years spent in Europe and
with Europeans trying to build a global climate regime, I think all of us would recognize that there has
been some bad. I would characterize that "bad" as a series of bad assumptions about how European
diplomatic and institutional culture applies to global diplomatic culture and institutions. The first bad
assumption Europeans often make is that other industrial countries would respond as quickly and as
ambitiously to the same set of data. Perhaps European leaders assumed this because ambitious targets
at Kyoto came relatively easy for Europe, thanks in part to early actions in Germany, France and the UK.
While Europe’s big three took policy efforts in the 1980s and 1990s that reduced their greenhouse
gases, these reductions were not made with the intention to fight climate change. They were done for
an entirely different set of motives—the shutting of the inefficient East German economy, the effort to
develop nuclear power in France, and Margaret Thatcher’s effort to shut down the coal mines. This
pride in exogenous motives reinforced a second bad assumption: that Europe’s own post-war
experience in inter-governmentalism could be applied globally. That is, since WWII, members of the EU
have negotiated their integration with one another first, and then have legislated it later domestically.
When Europe’s various national publics protested, the common refrain of the member-states was “the
EU made me do it.” Indeed, European governments have come to treat the negotiations themselves as
legislation. Needless to say, that approach to governance does not easily apply in other countries. In
other words, Europe has a unique post-World War II view of “sovereignty-as-a-problem” that much of
the rest of the world simply does not share. Sovereignty hawks still dominate, from Washington to
Beijing to Delhi to Moscow to Mexico City. Finally, European diplomatic culture also has a different
understanding of what it means to join a “binding” agreement, again based on this post-war experience.
Rules in the European system are much like traffic speed limits: there is an expectation of some noncompliance. That is ok. Flexibility in international regimes is a good thing, so long as most states comply
most of the time. Speed limits provide a good analogy. Having driven in from the Frankfurt airport
yesterday at speeds of up to 190 km/hour in 120 km/hour zones, I can say that the European effort on
climate is a much higher level of compliance. But that climate compliance is also not as strict as traffic
enforcement in the small southern town where I live—Charlottesville, Virginia—where going five miles
per hour over the speed limit will earn you a $100 ticket.
Independent EU action key to broader credibility gains
Ludlow ‘1 Peter Ludlow, founding director of the Center for European Policy Studies, “Wanted: A
Global Partner,” The Washington Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 3, Summer 2001, muse, NN
If the United States needs to work with the EU, it needs an effective EU with which to work. Jean-Marie Soutou, former secretary general of the
Quai d'Orsay, rightly observed that "Europe tends to get the U.S. partner that it deserves." If
the EU wants the United States to
take it seriously, it must itself be serious. The record of achievement during the last 50 years is remarkable. Europe has been
transformed. An enormous amount is yet to be done. If the EU looks to the United States to embrace multilateralism and global governance,
it must itself assume a more significant global role, the details for which lie beyond the scope of this
article. Although its role as the regional hegemonist obviously constitutes a large element of its claim to be treated as an important partner,
the EU's credibility and therefore its powers of persuasion will suffer unless and until it makes a
constructive and, where necessary, independent contribution to the development of the global
system, in crisis management as much as trade and in creative diplomacy as well as aid. The lonely superpower needs global
partners for it to heed the limits of superpowerdom and to appreciate the advantages of global governance. By raising its ambitions and
reaching out on its own terms to other regional actors, the EU is arguably better placed than any other international player to facilitate the
emergence of the United States that it and the world needs: a strong U.S. partner in a multilateral world order
EU key to fight U.S reluctance and galvanize international action against warming, they
have the largest market, commitment to multilateralism, and leadership by example –
means the perm fails
Parker ’10 [August 12 2010, Charles F Parker is a faculty member of the Department of Government at
Uppsala University,
“Climate Change and the European Union's Leadership Moment: An Inconvenient Truth?”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02080.x/full]
The EU's goal, as it states in its own words, is nothing short of ‘[l]eading global action’ against climate
change ‘to 2020 and beyond’ with the aim of limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius above
pre-industrial levels (Council, 2007, pp. 10–11). The Union, in its quest to play a leading role in
international climate protection, has provided high-profile support for the Kyoto Protocol and is
now vigorously throwing its diplomatic weight behind the effort to successfully negotiate a
comprehensive successor arrangement. In the late 1980s, the US began to disengage from
international environmental governance and under George W. Bush's administration the US
completely abdicated its leadership role, particularly in the area of climate change. The EU has stepped
into this void and has attempted to shoulder the mantle of leadership. How exactly has the EU attempted to lead the global efforts to
combat climate change? An
examination of the EU's actions reveals that it has deployed all three modes
of leadership in important ways, but it has primarily relied on directional leadership. In terms of
structural leadership the EU – the world's largest market, largest exporter, most generous aid
donor and largest foreign investor – is well endowed to offer economic, technological and
diplomatic incentives. The EU's vast internal market underpins all Union action, provides it with a
powerful bargaining chip and gives it an excellent potential to create and alter incentives. The
ability to act as a gatekeeper for those who want access to the EU market and the ability to
enforce EU standards on trading partners is an extremely valuable power resource. The sheer
scale of the internal market also means that the EU can offer and take actions that will have a
dramatic environmental impact. Despite these advantages, the EU has struggled to translate its material resources into
influence. This difficulty can in part be attributed to the EU's unique characteristics – its status as an intergovernmental actor and the
challenges this presents for truly acting as a Union – and highlights how its leadership efforts are enabled and constrained by its
complex agency-structure dynamics. As others have demonstrated, the EU's leadership impact has not been commensurate with its
structural power (Elgström, 2007). Nonetheless, it was the
EU's ability to leverage its structural leadership that
played an integral role in its successful mission to salvage the Kyoto Protocol. In 2001 President
Bush attempted to scuttle the Kyoto Protocol by announcing that the US was withdrawing from
further involvement with it. The EU responded to Bush's gambit by taking on the mission to save
the Protocol. In the face of US hostility and opposition, the EU successfully rounded up enough
followers for the Protocol to enter into force. It was the EU's support for Russian WTO
membership that was the final carrot that induced Russia to ratify the Protocol, which paved the
way for Kyoto to enter into force (Vogler, 2005). An EU–Russian energy deal that would nearly
double the price of Russian natural gas by 2010 was also a vital sweetener. As President Putin noted
at the time: ‘The European Union has made concessions on some points during the negotiations on
the WTO. This will inevitably have an impact on our positive attitude to the Kyoto process. We will
speed up Russia's movement towards ratifying the Kyoto Protocol’.1 In the run-up to the 2009 Copenhagen
conference, the EU once again displayed a willingness to exercise its structural leadership. On the inducement side, it promised
funding to developing countries for actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change if a satisfactory post-2012 agreement was reached
(Council, 2008b, pp. 6–7). Conversely, the spectre of imposing border tax adjustments on goods from countries with less stringent
climate regulations has been raised by the French as well as Commission President Barroso (BBC News, 2008a). The Union's power
resources also play a role in the second and historically most important leadership mode: directional leadership or leading by example.
The EU, drawing on its capacity and potential to act, has attempted to demonstrate its commitment to fighting climate change by
adopting a number of binding measures to reduce its emissions without corresponding reductions in other countries.
The EU has
also taken unilateral action by making the first move in putting future commitments on the table
and putting into place policy instruments, such as the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS).
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 38 industrialized countries are required to reduce their emissions
by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. The EU-15 agreed to an even larger target, committing to a collective
GHG emissions reduction of 8 per cent. Prior to the start of serious international negotiations for the post-2012 arrangements the
Union took autonomous action to drastically reduce its emissions. At its 2007 spring summit the EU launched its 20-20-20 by 2020 plan
(Council of the European Union, 2007, pp. 10–23). The EU committed to reduce its emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020 and it
dangled the carrot of increasing that cut up to 30 per cent if a satisfactory global agreement was reached. The
EU also
committed to increasing its share of renewable energy to 20 per cent and improving its energy
efficiency by 20 per cent by 2020. In January 2008 the Commission released a blueprint for
implementing and achieving these goals. Eleven months later the work carried out under the codecision procedure produced a first-reading agreement on an energy and climate package. The EU has
also developed and, in 2005, launched the EU-ETS. This established the world's largest companylevel market for trading CO2 emissions. The EU, which sees itself as the world leader in this
emerging market wants the EU-ETS to serve as the ‘pillar of a global carbon trading network’
(Commission, 2007, p. 2). It further envisions a future framework that enables comparable
emission trading arrangements in different regions to be linked together. The EU, which sees the ETS as a
vital tool for developed countries to reach GHG reductions in a cost-effective manner, believes the efficacy of the ETS will be further
enhanced by the revisions enacted by the 2008 climate package. The revised ETS directive, which will apply from 2013 to 2020, brings
new industries into the ETS, covers two additional GHGs, reduces the Community-wide quantity of allowances issued each year,
introduces full auctioning
from 2013 in the power sector and will phase in auctioning for the
manufacturing sector (with exceptions for sectors at risk of ‘carbon leakage’). The EU's promotion
of the revised ETS as a model that is ‘fit to go global’ and serve as the ‘nucleus’ for building a
global carbon market (Commission, 2008) provides a good example of how the EU's directional
leadership dovetails with its policy entrepreneurship activities. Although the idea for emissions trading was
originally a US idea initially resisted by the Europeans, the EU has now fully embraced the concept and
repackaged it as its own. In fact, the ETS has become a political pet that the EU has aggressively
implemented and promoted. The EU's directional leadership in this area has already had an impact as the positive and
negative lessons of the EU-ETS have been studied by emission trading initiatives being set up in the US and other countries. By
taking the lead in committing to sharp unilateral GHG reductions, adopting an aggressive climate
and energy plan, with binding targets for renewable energies and launching the EU-ETS, the EU is
attempting to spotlight that building a low-carbon economy is compatible with energy security,
economic growth and competitiveness. Finally, it is the Union's view that by taking action itself,
demonstrating the utility of that action and by promising to take even more aggressive action in
the future, it can credibly ask others to act as well. The hoped for demonstration effects from
leading by example are also linked to idea-based leadership. The Union has been an active policy
entrepreneur for climate protection. It worked hard to make its voice heard on problem
definition, agenda setting, goal setting and promoting policy solutions regarding the climate
threat. The Union has embraced the scientific conclusions from the IPCC; already in 1996 the
European Council endorsed the goal that global warming must be limited to no more than 2
degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. In addition to defining the nature of the problem, the EU has
conducted its own analysis and put forward its own proposals for what must be done (Council, 2008a). According to the EU
Commission's analysis, GHG emissions must be stabilized by 2020 and then reduced to 50 per cent of 1990 levels by 2050 if the world
is to avert a 2 degrees temperature rise. The Union has also laid out its vision for meeting these goals and how the burden should be
shared among the developed and developing countries. The Union argues that the developed countries must shoulder the lion's share
of the burden over the coming decades. The Union has called for the EU and other developed countries to enter into a new
international agreement requiring collective emission cuts of at least 30 per cent below the 1990 level by 2020. According to the EU,
the developed countries should aim for cuts of 60 to 80 per cent by 2050 (Council of the European Union, 2007, p. 12). The Union
wants these goals and commitments to be enshrined in a post-2012 international agreement containing binding rules with welldeveloped monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The Union also has a timeline in mind and it attempted to get the international
community to accept a 2009 deadline for a new agreement. This
review of the Union's climate leadership actions
and climate protection goals has revealed that the EU has laid out an extensive leadership agenda
for itself. It has also demonstrated that the Union's own actions are an integral part of these
plans. The EU aspires to show leadership by ‘setting a convincing example’ and demonstrating
that actions to reduce GHG emissions are ‘economically and technologically feasible’, which raises
the issue of performance
Science leadership is a zero sum game, EU and U.S compete over patents, skills, and
International tech market share
Shelton ’04[ Febrauary 2004, Duane Shelton leads small business startups that provide research and
administrative services to the Federal Government. His own research is on scientometrics and science
policy, “The US-EU Race for Leadership of Science and Technology:Qualitative and Quantitative
Indicators” http://itri2.org/s/USEU/paper.pdf]
Table I summarizes the most important output qualitative indicators, including the sources and dates of the data. Each row will be
discussed in turn. The indicator that shows the most dramatic shift from the U.S. to the EU is the number of technical publications in
the world's leading journals (Row 1). As late as 1991, the U.S. led in 17 of 20 fields of science as measured by its success in placing its
papers in the some 2500 of the world's leading journals in the ISI database. The EU then led only in three fields, but by 2001 their
positions had reversed. The EU now leads in 1 fields, while the U.S. leads in only seven. (The Asia Pacific Region leads in one field.)
Extrapolations of trends (and addition of ten more EU countries) predict that the EU will take the lead away from the U.S. in at least
three more fields by 2004. An analysis of the causes of this sharp decline in the U.S. position was made in (NSB, 2001, pp 5-39), but the
conclusion was, "The reasons for this development remain unknown." On the other hand, the U.S. led the EU as a whole in relative
impacts (Row 2). These normalized citation counts are a rough measure of the quality of technical papers. Compared to others, U.S.
researchers have an extraordinary propensity to cite mostly papers from their own country, which may distort this measure
substantially. Even so, some individual EU members led the U.S. in up to eight of 20 technical fields in the ISI database. Incidentally,
non-member Switzerland has led the world in relative impacts since the early 1980s. Inventions
are mainly patented in
the home country of the inventors, which provides a "home court advantage" that makes it
difficult to use this key output measure to compare the position of countries. Triadic patents (Row 3) are
inventions that are patented in all three locations: the U.S., EU, and Japan, thus reducing the home country bias for patenting, among
these three anyway. The U.S. has only a small lead over the EU in this indicator. In recent years it has increased this lead slightly, but it
would not take much for the EU to take the lead. Policies that merely encourage researchers to file more patent applications could
make the difference.
While the total number of working scientists and engineers is an input resource to
the R&D process, the production of new scientific personnel can be considered to be an output of
the scientific establishment, particularly PhDs. In any event the EU has a clear lead in production
of scientific human resources (Rows 4 and 5), and will strengthen this lead with the addition of new countries like the Czech
Republic, Hungary, and Poland. Nobel prizes are the gold standard of quality in scientific achievement in the fields where they are
given. In 2001 the Japanese set a goal for increasing the number of their laureates by 30 over the next 50 years, which would require a
huge R&D investment to achieve. The U.S. has dominated this indicator over the last 50 years (Row 6). However, brain drain
exaggerates this leadership somewhat. The
career path of many Nobelists starts with a European education
and early research there, but by the time the award is made, they are working in a U.S. lab or
have retired in the U.S. For example if Table I counted the countries of origin instead, the U.S.
totals would go down by six, and the EU total would go up by five -- in just the last three years of
data. If the EU were to reverse its brain drain by encouraging a few scientific superstars to move
to the south of France for their senior years, they could probably increase their count of Nobel
prizes at very little cost. Braun and colleagues (2003) have recently examined various ways of tabulating the counts. For
example for the whole 20th Century (1901-2001), the countries of the EU would lead the U.S., even counting nationality by residence
at award time. Selling innovative products in the international market place is one bottom line of the innovation process. High
technology market share is a particularly relevant indicator of the overall success of a country's
S&T policies, although there are many other factors involved. Row 7 lists the international market
share in five sectors. The U.S. leads in four of them and the EU in one (pharmaceuticals). The trend curves show the EU gaining
in one more sector (aerospace), but the most dramatic phenomenon is the sharp loss of Japanese market share in all five sectors. In
2002 U.S. international trade in high technology products ran a deficit ($17.5 billion) for the first
time ever. Overall international trade is often used as an indicator of a nation's business and
technological prowess in competing in the marketplace. (Row 8.) By this measure the U.S. is leading
the world, but in the enormous and increasing size of its trade deficit. The U.S. deficit in goods
and services in 2002 was $435 billion, greater than the total GDP of all but a few nations. The EU has a
positive surplus greater than that of Japan, which is thought to be an export powerhouse. It also has an $82 billion trade surplus with
the U.S. Space does not permit trend graphs of all these indicators, but a couple of the more interesting ones are included here. Fig. 1
shows the percent share of papers published in the world's leading journals as compiled by ISI (2002). The surge of the EU is quite
remarkable, while the decline in U.S. "market share" of these slots in refereed journals is puzzling. Fig. 2 shows the EU well ahead of
the U. S. in production of PhDs in science and engineering, and again we see the U.S. declining. Other trend graphs are posted at
http://itri2.org/s/USEU/. In some cases the U.S. leads, but EU position in output indicators is strong and getting stronger. III.
Qualitative Indicators Qualitative assessments also raise questions about whether the U.S. or EU leads in S&T. While relatively few
fields have been analyzed by this comprehensive, but expensive approach, expert review of the main competitors frequently finds
European centers of excellence that equal or lead the best work in the U.S. Two U.S. So who is leading the world in S&T: the U.S. or the
EU? While no single nation rivals the U.S. for the lead, it is becoming clear that the
European Union as a whole is
mounting a serious challenge. It has set strategic leadership goals and has committed itself to
substantial funding increases to meet those goals. The 15-nation EU already leads the US in
important metrics, and the EU's addition of ten more countries in 2004 will strengthen its
position. As the EU becomes more tightly integrated into a European Research Area, it will be
more reasonable to compare its overall performance to that of the U.S. And that performance is
likely to lead that of the U.S. by any reasonable composite of measures, unless U.S. policies
toward science change.
EU Counterplan
Sample Text
Counterplan: The European Union should implement <insert plan here> and share all
relevant data with the United States
Solvency- Advs and Plan Mechs
Aquaculture
EU Can solve for aquaculture – new developments
European Commission 14, European Commission, 5/13/14, the European Commission is an organization
that reports on news coming out of the EU, “Aquaculture,”
http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/aquaculture/index_en.htm, NN
Farming finfish, shellfish and aquatic plants is one of the world's fastest growing food sectors, it already
provides the planet with about half of all the fish we eat. A fifth of EU fish production by volume comes
from aquaculture. © Lionel Flageul In Europe, aquaculture accounts for about 20% of fish production
and directly employs some 80 000 people. EU aquaculture is renowned for its high quality, sustainability
and consumer protection standards. EU overall output has been more or less constant in volume since
2000 whereas global production has been growing at nearly 7% per year. The Commission intends to
boost aquaculture through the Common Fisheries Policy reform, and has published Strategic Guidelines
presenting common priorities and general objectives at EU level. Four priority areas have been identified
in consultation with all relevant stakeholders: reducing administrative burdens improving access to
space and water increasing competitiveness exploiting competitive advantages due to high quality,
health and environmental standards. On the basis of the guidelines, the Commission and EU countries
will collaborate to help increasing the sector's production and competitiveness. EU countries are asked
to set up multiannual plans to promote aquaculture. The Commission will help with the coordination
and exchange of best practices.
EU is leading in aquaculture development – programs such as aquaexcel
AQUATT 13, AQUATT, 5/2/13, AQUATT is a leading program in scientific research specifically in regards to
ocean development, “Europe's Leading Aquaculture Researchers Gather in Brussels for AQUAEXCEL Meeting,”
http://www.aquatt.ie/2013-03-14-09-29-31/full-news-list/679-europe-s-leading-aquaculture-researchers-gatherin-brussels-for-aquaexcel-meeting, NN
Many of Europe’s leading aquaculture researchers gathered in Brussels on 9 - 11 April 2013 for the
second annual meeting of the AQUAEXCEL (Aquaculture Infrastructures for Excellence in European Fish
Research) project. Launched in March 2011, AQUAEXCEL aims to integrate key aquaculture research
infrastructures across Europe in order to promote their coordinated use and development. The project’s
focus is on further improving the efficiency of aquaculture production and the many activities to support
this. The meeting, which was attended by EC representatives, provided the project's partners with the
opportunity to analyse the achievements and results of AQUAEXCEL to date, which include: conducting a
comprehensive mapping of aquaculture research infrastructure capacity across Europe; developing and
sharing unique methodologies; and facilitating transnational access to aquaculture research facilities
throughout Europe. AQUAEXCEL press release April 2013 Brussels Meeting PhotographMarc Vandeputte
is the coordinator of AQUAEXCEL: "This meeting presents us with a platform to discuss and analyse the
work achieved so far. It's important that we take this opportunity to assess the level of progress we have
made. It also affords us the opportunity to identify how we can improve as we continue to deliver on
our targets for the remainder of the project." The project has published the first in a series of booklets
aimed at a general public audience, which will outline AQUAEXCEL's key achievements. The first booklet,
AQUAEXCEL Key Achievements 2011 - 2013, is available in hard copy format and is downloadable from
www.aquaexcel.eu. "As consumers become more concerned about where their food comes from, the
European aquaculture sector faces complex challenges. AQUAEXCEL is actively working to address these
challenges through our transnational access activities, which enable scientists and researchers to freely
access aquaculture research not available in their own countries; through our networking activities,
which foster a culture of cooperation between AQUAEXCEL and other scientific communities; and
through our joint research activities, which aim to improve the quality and quantity of services provided
by aquaculture research infrastructures," explained Marc Vandeputte.
The EU is leading technology in the aquaculture field – only one with substantial
investments and reforms coming up in the near future
EEA 14, European Environmental Agency, nearest date given is 2014, the EEA is a leading source of education
on the EU’s differing environmental policies, “Fisheries and Aquaculture,”
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental_assessment_report_2003_10/kiev_chapt_02_5.pdf, NN
Greater integration of environmental concerns, and the application of the ‘precautionary principle’ to
fisheries and aquaculture management are key elements of EU fisheries policy and are specifically
mentioned in the EU’s plans for the reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP) (European Commission,
2002b). Most of these elements are reiterated in other national, bilateral and regional agreements and
conventions. Commitments are increasingly being made, at national, international and EU levels to a
more ecosystem-based approach to fisheries and aquaculture management. Management regimes are
normally designed to control pressures (e.g. fishing capacity) and impacts through a combination of
quotas, gear controls, closed areas, and vessel restrictions. Controls on the economic driving forces (e.g.
capping prices, sales or salaries) are rarely considered - indeed, subsidies are often available which may
undermine other management initiatives. Membership of international fisheries organisations (IFOs)
(see Figure 2.5.1) gives a rough indication of a country’s commitment to fisheries management.
Membership of IFOs is high in western European (WE) and central and eastern European (CEE) countries
but low among the countries of eastern Europe, the Caucasus and central Asia (EECCA). Many of the
fisheries in EECCA are in large transboundary inland lakes or seas (e.g. Caspian Sea, Aral Sea, Lake
Peipus). It is not necessary to form an IFO in these situations, but coordinated management is required.
This is becoming more common, which is encouraging. The role of IFOs in the management of
international fisheries is expected to expand with increasing monitoring and the application of sanctions
in cases of non-compliance. Fisheries and aquaculture production index Notes: The economic fisheries
production index provides a signal of income levels derived from fishing. Under the circumstances of a
falling index fishermen and vessel owners are more likely to seek to increase income from further fishing
activity, while others may choose to leave the industry. The reverse is likely in a rising index. The index
has been calculated using the first-hand value of fish catch expressed in terms of value per full-time
fisherman, modified by the strength of the local economy, and the technological scale (power) of the
local fleet, indexed against a base year of 1994. Includes only Belgium, France, Greece, Netherlands and
United Kingdom as all required data were only available for these. 1999 data point should be
approached with caution as not all data are available for all countries. Sources: Anon, 2000 and 2001b;
FAO, 2002; OECD, 2001; Eurostat New Cronos database, 2002; Pacific Exchange Rate Service, no date;
Anon, 2001b; World Bank, 2001 Number of members Possible membership Membership Figure 2.5.1.
European membership of international fisheries organisations with a European area of operation 2002
Notes: EIFAC: European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission. ICCAT: International Convention for the
Conservation of Atlantic Tuna. GFCM: General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (responsible
for the Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea and connecting waters). Georgia, the Russian Federation and
Ukraine are not members of GFCM, but experts participate at GFCM meetings concerning the Black Sea.
NEAFC: North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission. NASCO: North Atlantic Salmon Conservation
Organization. IBSFC: International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission. Possible membership: the number of
countries with fisheries relevant to the international fisheries organisations’ area of operation.
Membership: the number of countries that are members of the international organisation. Some EU
countries are not represented on international organisations individually but by the European Union.
Countries represented by the EU are included in the number of countries counted as being ‘members’.
Some countries are also members of other international fisheries organisations, which have a remit for
fisheries in other areas of the world, e.g. the North West Atlantic, the Antarctic. Sources: EIFAC, GFCM,
IBSFC, NEAFC, NASCO, ICCAT 2.5.2. Fisheries 2.5.2.1. Economic drivers and pressures Most of the
fisheries in Europe are overexploited and declining catches have not reduced fishing pressures. In some
cases, the profitability of fisheries has decreased and those with significant committed investment have
had little choice but to fish harder to pay off their investment. This type of influence is represented in
the fisheries economic production index shown in Figure 2.5.2, which suggests that income has declined
in recent years following a peak in the mid- 1990s. This may elicit a variety of responses from fishermen:
to fish harder in order to maintain income; to circumvent legal constraints on fishing activity; to leave
the industry if suitable alternatives exist; or to shift to other fisheries, such as shellfisheries. Subsidies,
and especially capital subsidies, have exacerbated the problem. On a more positive note, technical
advances and improved labour productivity have, to some extent, compensated for declining catches.
Further, rising prices associated with declining catches have tended to stabilise earnings, but these same
factors can also facilitate and encourage substantial increases in effort and levels of exploitation.
Profitability, tradition and, in some places, lack of alternatives remain the main incentives to invest in
fishing enterprises and continue fishing.
Countries such as spain put the EU ahead in terms of aquaculture technology
Murias 14, Analia Murias, 6/17/14, Murias is a staff writer for FIS, specifically in energy production, “Spanish
aquaculture maintains its EU leadership,”
http://www.fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?monthyear=&day=17&id=69258&l=e&country=0&special=&nd
b=1&df=0, NN
Spanish aquaculture continues leading production in the European Union (EU), stated the head of the
General Department of Fisheries of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment (MAGRAMA),
Carlos Dominguez. According to the figures released by the official, who is also president of the Spanish
Aquaculture Observatory Foundation (OESA), in 2012 the country produced more than 265,000 tonnes
of aquaculture resources. In socioeconomic terms, aquaculture provides direct employment in the
country to more than 20,000 workers in 5,130 establishments. Dominguez made these statements at
the opening of the exhibition 'Aquaculture? Discover it,' organized by OESA with collaboration of the
Secretariat of Culture, Education and University Planning and the Department for Rural and Marine
Affairs of Xunta de Galicia. "Many expectations depend on aquaculture to meet the growing demand for
fish protein," he stressed. The Fisheries Secretary also recalled that in the last 50 years the consumption
of fishery products worldwide doubled, being 19 kilograms per capita per year in 2012. And he said it
was possible thanks to the experienced aquaculture activity, which changed from producing 1.6 million
tonnes in 1960 to 66.6 million tonnes in 2012. According to Dominguez, in the last two years, the
Fisheries General Secretariat, with the autonomous communities, laid the foundation for developing
aquaculture. "We have provided this activity with instruments and tools that allow us, in the area of our
expertise, to strengthen its competitiveness through the Strategic Innovation and Technological
Development in Fisheries and Aquaculture," he added. Furthermore, he indicated that the Secretariat is
working to strengthen and consolidate the control and supervision mechanisms, and consumer
information; and to enhance the activity of the industry organizations. It is about "contributing to
sustainable and sustained Spanish aquaculture growth," he explained. The 2014-2020 Multiannual
Strategic Plan of the Spanish Aquaculture gathers the strategic lines and acts to be implemented in that
period, setting targets for future development, linked to joint funding from the European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund (EMFF). This Plan shall be approved by the National Marine and Continental Aquaculture
Advisory Boards in the coming weeks, and will be submitted to the European Commission (EC), together
with the Operational Programme of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund in October. EMFF
Regulation establishes five major support lines to the aquaculture sector, "which will foster a
competitive, sustainable, innovative, job-creating and efficient aquaculture in the use of resources,"
stated the Secretary of Fisheries. "We must respond to the real needs of businesses, understanding that
they should be the companies themselves, with the collaboration of the investigators, who identify
future priorities," he concluded.
Programs such as AQUABEST show that the EU is paving the way in retard to
aquaculture development
Reeh 14, Line Reeh, 4/22/14, Reeh is a staff writer for the AQUABEST project, “AQUABEST - A LEADER IN
SUSTAINABLE AQUACULTURE,” http://www.aquabestproject.eu/news-and-events/news/aquabest-a-leader-insustainable-aquaculture.aspx, NN
Aquaculture has been the fastest growing food production sector globally during the last two decades.
In opposite to the global trend, aquaculture production in the eastern Baltic Sea region has stagnated. A
new Interreg/EU-project involving partners from eight countries hopes to change that - with a strong
focus on sustainable practices and technologies. "Fish farming is an industry that holds considerable
development and export potential - provided that it is conducted in an environmentally friendly manner
using the latest green technology and know-how, and that is what this project is all about," says Danish
project leader and senior advisory scientist Alfred Jokumsen, National Institute of Aquatic Resources
(DTU Aqua). The EU funded AQUABEST-project involves 14 partners from 8 countries and unites a broad
range of representatives from national and regional authorities, researchers, producer organizations,
feed industry as well as national and international organizations. The first project meeting is to take
place next week at DTU Aqua in Hirtshals, Denmark (from the 18th to the 20th April of 2012). As part of
the meeting the participants will get the opportunity to visit and learn from the cutting-edge farming
technologies of the high-tech and environmentally friendly Model Trout Farms that have been
developed in Denmark in collaboration between DTU Aqua and the Danish industry. The participants will
visit Lerkenfeldt Fish Farm at Farsø and Abild Fish Farm at Videbæk. Environmentally friendly Model
Trout farms The Danish Model Trout farms are an environmental success. "The high-tech and ecofriendly Model Trout Farms use water from boreholes rather than from watercourses. Consequently, the
watercourse is free from obstacles such as dams and sluices, and wild fish can move freely to and from
their breeding grounds and the sea, hugely benefiting the natural populations," says Alfred Jokumsen,
DTU Aqua. Furthermore, Model Trout Farms are based on recirculation technology, meaning that a
Model Trout farm reuses as much as 95 percent of the water, dramatically reducing water consumption.
The farms clean the water internally by means of mechanical and biological filtration. Afterwards the
water is led into a constructed wetland where the remaining nutrients - such as phosphorus, nitrogen,
and organic matter - are removed. "A main goal of AQUABEST is to transfer these technologies to other
regions and further develop them to adapt in brackish water conditions of the Baltic Sea. Furthermore,
although recirculation farms already release much less nutrients in the effluent than conventional farms,
nitrogen release of these farms can be further diminished," explains Alfred Jokumsen. DTU Aqua will
also contribute to AQUABEST with a feasibility study to investigate the possibilities for implementing the
new technologies in the Baltic region. This study will include geography, climate, population structures
and political and economic conditions, water quality, environmental legislation, level of education,
processing conditions, markets etc.
Biodiversity
Europe solves ecosystem management – academic, government, industry partnerships
ESF 2014
European Science Foundation, Arctic 2050: Towards ecosystem-based management in a changing Arctic
Ocean, March 12 2014, http://www.esf.org/media-centre/ext-single-news/article/arctic-2050-towardsecosystem-based-management-in-a-changing-arctic-ocean-1011.html
About 150 scientists, policy makers and members of industry are gathering today at the 4th European Marine
Board Forum in Brussels to discuss how best to manage the consequences of a changing Arctic Ocean for human
health and well-being. The European Marine Board has convened this flagship event in collaboration with the European Polar Board, working in
association with the European Science Foundation, in the knowledge that industry
and science must work together to
achieve sustainable management of resources such as fishing and oil and gas exploration while at the
same time, protecting and conserving the Arctic environment. Dramatic changes, largely attributed to anthropogenic
activity, have taken place in the Arctic in recent decades. These changes include melting of glaciers and sea ice, altered oceanic current
patterns, movement and accumulation of contaminants and range shifts in many species. As a result of these changes the Arctic region is being
transformed, with wide-ranging impacts and opportunities including the potential for ice-free shipping routes in the future, increased activity in
oil and gas exploration, changes to Arctic fisheries and biodiversity, and impacts on residents’ livelihoods. “At present we are unprepared for
the environmental and societal implications of increased human access to the Arctic that will come with the receding ice” explains Professor
Peter Haugan from the University of Bergen and vice-Chair of the European Marine Board. “We
have not fully anticipated the
consequences of an increase in activities like hydrocarbon exploration, mineral extraction,
bioprospecting and pelagic and demersal fisheries”. The 4th EMB Forum, recognized as an official ICARP III event,
promotes the need for an ecosystem-based management approach in the Arctic Ocean, in order to adapt to
and manage rapid environmental change and commercial exploitation, supporting a key recommendation of the
recently published Arctic Biodiversity Assessment.[1] Moderated by David Shukman, BBC Science Editor, forum sessions include, ‘Living with a
Changing Arctic Ocean’, ‘Utilizing and managing Arctic Ocean resources’ and a session on ‘Arctic Ocean Observation’, building on the European
Marine Board call in 2013 for urgent action to increase our observational capacity across the entire Arctic Ocean (EMB, 2013).[2] Speakers will
include industry representatives from Shell, the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers and the International Maritime Organisation.
The forum provides a platform to address ecosystem-based management in the Arctic Ocean by stimulating
dialogue across sectors to aid common understanding, collaborative actions and sustainability targets.
Later today the forum will culminate with an open panel discussion on the roles of industry and science in achieving sustainable management
of the Arctic Ocean.
Cooperation between the US and EU over the environment fails – differing ideologies
Donnan and Chaffin 13, Shawn Donnan and Joshua Chaffin, 10/13/13, Chaffin and Donnan are both staff
writers for the Financial Times, “Green and consumer groups voice fears over EU-US trade agreement,”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1b2942a0-328f-11e3-b3a7-00144feab7de.html, NN
As negotiations get under way for an EU-US trade agreement, European environmental and consumer
groups are mobilising to contest a pact they believe would lower standards for everything from apples
to automobiles. Tariffs on most goods traded across the Atlantic are already low, so advocates argue
that the main potential achievement of any EU-US deal is a reduction in regulatory and other non-tariff
barriers. More ON THIS TOPIC Green goods trade talks set to start France hits out at dollar’s dominance
US warns China over tech trade deal S Korea’s rice farmers fear trade move IN GLOBAL ECONOMY UK
manufacturing output falls sharply ECB pressed to tackle ‘crazy’ euro China takes senior role in trade
talks Argentina bond investors challenge ruling For that reason, say senior officials on both sides of the
Atlantic, negotiations over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), as it is officially
known, are likely to be incredibly complicated. But equally complex may be selling the benefits of a deal
and managing the opposition of consumer and environmental groups in Europe who have started to
mobilise since the negotiations were launched this summer. Before what last week would have been the
first set of talks to be held in Brussels were called off, the green group Friends of the Earth had planned
to greet negotiators with a three-metre high “Trojan horse” representing the putative deal. From the
horse, according to the group, they planned to unload “toxic contents” such as “genetically modified
organisms, tar sands, hazardous chemicals and hormone-injected foods”. That sort of street theatre has
greeted trade negotiations around the world for decades and EU and US officials are also bracing for the
inevitable protests from French farmers and other groups with a history of battling against the lowering
of trade barriers. But the angst over the potential impact of an EU trade agreement is also coming from
mainstream European groups with a traditionally less knee-jerk approach to trade agreements. “We are
not against TTIP as a consumer organisation,” says Monique Goyens, the director-general of the
European Consumer Organisation, which represents some 40 different national groups in Europe. But
she adds: “I would really not see the interest of US business in entering this agreement if there is not a
lowering of some of the [European] standards.” That, she argues, could in some cases put the very
health of European consumers at risk. Ms Goyens, who is among those due to testify at a hearing into
the impact of TTIP in the European Parliament on Monday, cites food safety in particular as an issue of
concern, along with the risk to European producers of an EU-US trade deal opening the door to cheaper
US products manufactured to what she calls lower American regulatory standards – a charge that US
officials dispute. Given its legal and technical complexity, trade policy tends to suffer from a
communications gap with the general public. Its often insular community of practitioners is often wary
of even trying to translate for the outside world.
Clean Tech
EU Success in Clean Tech uniquely key to solve warming, U.S doesn’t have the legitimacy
to encourage global action to solve
Parker ’10 [August 12 2010, Charles F Parker is a faculty member of theDepartment of Government at
Uppsala University,
“Climate Change and the European Union's Leadership Moment: An Inconvenient Truth?”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02080.x/full]
The EU's goal, as it states in its own words, is nothing short of ‘[l]eading global action’ against climate
change ‘to 2020 and beyond’ with the aim of limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius above
pre-industrial levels (Council, 2007, pp. 10–11). The Union, in its quest to play a leading role in
international climate protection, has provided high-profile support for the Kyoto Protocol and is
now vigorously throwing its diplomatic weight behind the effort to successfully negotiate a
comprehensive successor arrangement. In the late 1980s, the US began to disengage from
international environmental governance and under George W. Bush's administration the US
completely abdicated its leadership role, particularly in the area of climate change. The EU has stepped
into this void and has attempted to shoulder the mantle of leadership. How exactly has the EU attempted to lead the global efforts to
combat climate change? An
examination of the EU's actions reveals that it has deployed all three modes
of leadership in important ways, but it has primarily relied on directional leadership. In terms of
structural leadership the EU – the world's largest market, largest exporter, most generous aid
donor and largest foreign investor – is well endowed to offer economic, technological and
diplomatic incentives. The EU's vast internal market underpins all Union action, provides it with a
powerful bargaining chip and gives it an excellent potential to create and alter incentives. The
ability to act as a gatekeeper for those who want access to the EU market and the ability to
enforce EU standards on trading partners is an extremely valuable power resource. The sheer
scale of the internal market also means that the EU can offer and take actions that will have a
dramatic environmental impact. Despite these advantages, the EU has struggled to translate its material resources into
influence. This difficulty can in part be attributed to the EU's unique characteristics – its status as an intergovernmental actor and the
challenges this presents for truly acting as a Union – and highlights how its leadership efforts are enabled and constrained by its
complex agency-structure dynamics. As others have demonstrated, the EU's leadership impact has not been commensurate with its
structural power (Elgström, 2007). Nonetheless, it was the
EU's ability to leverage its structural leadership that
played an integral role in its successful mission to salvage the Kyoto Protocol. In 2001 President
Bush attempted to scuttle the Kyoto Protocol by announcing that the US was withdrawing from
further involvement with it. The EU responded to Bush's gambit by taking on the mission to save
the Protocol. In the face of US hostility and opposition, the EU successfully rounded up enough
followers for the Protocol to enter into force. It was the EU's support for Russian WTO
membership that was the final carrot that induced Russia to ratify the Protocol, which paved the
way for Kyoto to enter into force (Vogler, 2005). An EU–Russian energy deal that would nearly
double the price of Russian natural gas by 2010 was also a vital sweetener. As President Putin noted
at the time: ‘The European Union has made concessions on some points during the negotiations on
the WTO. This will inevitably have an impact on our positive attitude to the Kyoto process. We will
speed up Russia's movement towards ratifying the Kyoto Protocol’.1 In the run-up to the 2009 Copenhagen
conference, the EU once again displayed a willingness to exercise its structural leadership. On the inducement side, it promised
funding to developing countries for actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change if a satisfactory post-2012 agreement was reached
(Council, 2008b, pp. 6–7). Conversely, the spectre of imposing border tax adjustments on goods from countries with less stringent
climate regulations has been raised by the French as well as Commission President Barroso (BBC News, 2008a). The Union's power
resources also play a role in the second and historically most important leadership mode: directional leadership or leading by example.
The EU, drawing on its capacity and potential to act, has attempted to demonstrate its commitment to fighting climate change by
adopting a number of binding measures to reduce its emissions without corresponding reductions in other countries.
The EU has
also taken unilateral action by making the first move in putting future commitments on the table
and putting into place policy instruments, such as the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS).
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 38 industrialized countries are required to reduce their emissions
by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. The EU-15 agreed to an even larger target, committing to a collective
GHG emissions reduction of 8 per cent. Prior to the start of serious international negotiations for the post-2012 arrangements the
Union took autonomous action to drastically reduce its emissions. At its 2007 spring summit the EU launched its 20-20-20 by 2020 plan
(Council of the European Union, 2007, pp. 10–23). The EU committed to reduce its emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020 and it
dangled the carrot of increasing that cut up to 30 per cent if a satisfactory global agreement was reached. The
EU also
committed to increasing its share of renewable energy to 20 per cent and improving its energy
efficiency by 20 per cent by 2020. In January 2008 the Commission released a blueprint for
implementing and achieving these goals. Eleven months later the work carried out under the codecision procedure produced a first-reading agreement on an energy and climate package. The EU has
also developed and, in 2005, launched the EU-ETS. This established the world's largest companylevel market for trading CO2 emissions. The EU, which sees itself as the world leader in this
emerging market wants the EU-ETS to serve as the ‘pillar of a global carbon trading network’
(Commission, 2007, p. 2). It further envisions a future framework that enables comparable
emission trading arrangements in different regions to be linked together. The EU, which sees the ETS as a
vital tool for developed countries to reach GHG reductions in a cost-effective manner, believes the efficacy of the ETS will be further
enhanced by the revisions enacted by the 2008 climate package. The revised ETS directive, which will apply from 2013 to 2020, brings
new industries into the ETS, covers two additional GHGs, reduces the Community-wide quantity of allowances issued each year,
introduces full auctioning
from 2013 in the power sector and will phase in auctioning for the
manufacturing sector (with exceptions for sectors at risk of ‘carbon leakage’). The EU's promotion
of the revised ETS as a model that is ‘fit to go global’ and serve as the ‘nucleus’ for building a
global carbon market (Commission, 2008) provides a good example of how the EU's directional
leadership dovetails with its policy entrepreneurship activities. Although the idea for emissions trading was
originally a US idea initially resisted by the Europeans, the EU has now fully embraced the concept and
repackaged it as its own. In fact, the ETS has become a political pet that the EU has aggressively
implemented and promoted. The EU's directional leadership in this area has already had an impact as the positive and
negative lessons of the EU-ETS have been studied by emission trading initiatives being set up in the US and other countries. By
taking the lead in committing to sharp unilateral GHG reductions, adopting an aggressive climate
and energy plan, with binding targets for renewable energies and launching the EU-ETS, the EU is
attempting to spotlight that building a low-carbon economy is compatible with energy security,
economic growth and competitiveness. Finally, it is the Union's view that by taking action itself,
demonstrating the utility of that action and by promising to take even more aggressive action in
the future, it can credibly ask others to act as well. The hoped for demonstration effects from
leading by example are also linked to idea-based leadership. The Union has been an active policy
entrepreneur for climate protection. It worked hard to make its voice heard on problem
definition, agenda setting, goal setting and promoting policy solutions regarding the climate
threat. The Union has embraced the scientific conclusions from the IPCC; already in 1996 the
European Council endorsed the goal that global warming must be limited to no more than 2
degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. In addition to defining the nature of the problem, the EU has
conducted its own analysis and put forward its own proposals for what must be done (Council, 2008a). According to the EU
Commission's analysis, GHG emissions must be stabilized by 2020 and then reduced to 50 per cent of 1990 levels by 2050 if the world
is to avert a 2 degrees temperature rise. The Union has also laid out its vision for meeting these goals and how the burden should be
shared among the developed and developing countries. The Union argues that the developed countries must shoulder the lion's share
of the burden over the coming decades. The Union has called for the EU and other developed countries to enter into a new
international agreement requiring collective emission cuts of at least 30 per cent below the 1990 level by 2020. According to the EU,
the developed countries should aim for cuts of 60 to 80 per cent by 2050 (Council of the European Union, 2007, p. 12). The Union
wants these goals and commitments to be enshrined in a post-2012 international agreement containing binding rules with welldeveloped monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The Union also has a timeline in mind and it attempted to get the international
community to accept a 2009 deadline for a new agreement. This
review of the Union's climate leadership actions
and climate protection goals has revealed that the EU has laid out an extensive leadership agenda
for itself. It has also demonstrated that the Union's own actions are an integral part of these
plans. The EU aspires to show leadership by ‘setting a convincing example’ and demonstrating
that actions to reduce GHG emissions are ‘economically and technologically feasible’, which raises
the issue of performance
EU has Clean Tech and Low Carbon leadership now, but U.S compete for funding
EC ’11 [January 2011, European commission leads research and analysis for the European Union, Cleantech investment: a key
component for Europe’s sustainable future, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/about-eco-innovation/businessfundings/eu/624_en.htm]
In a report published in December 2010, the EVCA identified the critical role of venture capital in
delivering Europe’s low-carbon goals and supporting the creation of new jobs. It also outlined the
additional support required for entrepreneurial cleantech small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs). Europe has been at the cutting edge on the international stage. From electric vehicles to
software applications for environmental-quality monitoring, Europe is a leading investor in
cleantech. However, maintaining this high level of leadership requires even greater commitment,
given the increasing performance of other players, such as in the USA and China. This is where
venture capital can provide support to commercialise technologies and create jobs in high-tech
growth industries. The EU has set ambitious targets to reduce carbon emissions, increase use of
renewable energy and improve energy efficiency. Meeting these targets requires new businesses
and technologies, and intelligent use of capital. Indeed, venture capital is already investing in
innovative technologies, services and support infrastructure. In 2009 alone, venture and growth
capital investments in Europe totalled more than €1 billion in over 300 European cleantech
companies. Moreover, as the EVCA points out, approximately 85% of the capital required to
provide Europe with low-carbon growth came from the private sector. Europe would benefit even
more from an effective policy framework allowing for increased and accelerated investment
across the full cleantech spectrum. The EVCA report highlights the following priorities: Use of
public-sector finance to launch a multi-annual programme for private sector managed funds of
funds; Adopting measures to harness the power of public procurement for SME research and
development – public procurement in the EU accounts for 17% of EU gross domestic product
(GDP), facilitating the involvement of young entrepreneurial companies would increase their
growth potential; Reducing regulatory uncertainty – for instance, the creation of a robust solarpanel manufacturing industry in Germany has been partly achieved through predictable policy
mechanisms designed to stimulate demand; and Making the EU 2020 smart growth strategy
target for energy efficiency binding – this would help motivate many of Europe’s venture-capitalbacked cleantech companies. Europe’s historical leadership in eco-innovation field gave it an early
lead in cleantech investment. Although the sector has rapidly developed over the last decade,
there are always new challenges and prospects, with venture capital having a central role.
U.S science leadership directly edges European companies for investement and market
share
Norton Fullbright ’10 [ July 2010, norton rose llp is a leading international legal practice. they offer a
full business law service from our offices across europe, the middle east and asia pacific., “Cleantech
investment and private equity: an industry survey”
http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/cleantech-investment-and-private-equity-an-industrysurvey-pdf-5mb-30
016.pdf]
In the near term, however, cleantech
market participants operate in a business environment that is
increasingly competitive along a number of dimensions. This report — our fifth annual — explores the theme of
global competitiveness, for it can be argued that achieving competitiveness — with existing technologies and within the sector — is
the strongest force at work in cleantech today.
First, cleantech must compete with incumbent technologies
on an unsubsidized basis. As we observe in our analysis of pure-play Gil Forer Leader, Global Cleantech Center Ernst & Young
cleantech public companies (see p. 7), the combination of economic recession and diminishing governmental financial support in the
US and Europe is taking a toll on financial results. Yet business leaders in a number of the cleantech verticals are coming to the
seemingly contrarian conclusion that now is the time to develop a roadmap to the end of subsidies rather than ask for more. They
recognize that success depends on driving the efficiencies, innovations and business models needed to compete head-on with
traditional technologies. Then, there is greater competition in the sector than ever before. As
cleantech matures, the field
has become crowded in many of the industry verticals. With the sluggish economy and waning
subsidies, competition has become intense, particularly in wind and solar. While the restructuring
occurring in these two industries is painful, stronger global players will emerge from the process.
And as we note in our article on solar and wind (see p. 25), the resulting fall in prices for renewable generating equipment is hastening
installations and competitive prices for renewable energy in markets around the world. Countries
continue to vie for
competitive advantage through cleantech. Over the past year, we have seen significant new
national commitments to cleantech, such as China’s clean energy and efficiency initiatives under
its 12th Five Year Plan and Saudi Arabia’s US$100 billion solar development plan. In the report, we
focus on Brazil’s efforts to promote wind and biofuels to meet its burgeoning eneokrgy needs, enhance energy security and provide
economic development (see p. 41). Corporations, too, are increasingly treating their energy strategy as a competitive differentiator. As
we highlight in the findings of our global survey of corporate energy executives (see p. 1), the energy mix has become a strategic issue
at the C-suite level of billion-dollar corporations, especially given that a considerable — and growing — share of operating costs is
spent on energy. Energy efficiency measures and the use of renewable energy by corporations are set to rise significantly over the next
five years. In this context, only those corporations with a bcomprehensive and diverse energy strategy will be able to create a
competitive advantage in a more resource-efficient and low-carbon economy. While the
failures sometimes garner
more attention than the successes in times like these, it is important to recognize the rapidly
emerging cleantech market of stronger players with greater scale, who are better able to
compete with industry incumbents on price and performance. In this report, you will find in-depth
articles providing insight into different facets of the cleantech market, interviews with leading
cleantech executives, roundtable discussions among key market participants and perspectives from Ernst & Young’s global
cleantech leaders. We hope that our report proves to be a valuable source of cleantech business insight and a helpful contribution to
the ongoing discussion of how to advance the cleantech agenda globally. /
EU Leadership precarious and Key to climate leadership, U.S surge would steal patents
and innovation
The Climate Group ‘14 [ February 6 2014, The Climate Group is an award-winning, international
non-profit. Our goal is a prosperous, low carbon future. We believe this will be achieved through a ‘clean
revolution’: the rapid scale-up of low carbon energy and technology. “EUROPE RISKS LOSING OUT TO
CHINA AND THE US ON RENEWABLES,” http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-andblogs/europe-risks-losing-out-to-china-and-the-us-on-competitive-renewables-study-warns/ ]
Europe risks losing its foothold as a major competitive renewables market to China and the US if it
doesn't regain leadership on climate and green energy policies, warns a new study. The report by Climate
Strategies, a European economic research institute, says that if Europe doesn't enact policies to tackle climate
change and grow investment in renewables it will miss out on jobs and industry monopoly to
competitors. Authors attest that while the EU was bailing out its banks in the euro crisis, countries such as China, India, the US and
hundreds of others, were busy investing heavily in renewable energy. Michael Grubb, Chair of Energy and Climate Policy at Cambridge
University and Climate Strategies Board member, said: “Europe
cannot compete in the global economy based on
cheap resources. Like Japan in the 1980s, it must compete on innovation and efficiency. Europe
currently has a good position on patents across most low carbon technology sectors, but this risks
being rapidly eroded. Europe is not ahead on energy efficiency, and renewable energy targets now exist in 138 countries. 66
countries, including Australia, South Korea, South Africa, Canada and Brazil have emulated the feed-in-tariffs widely used in Europe.”
The trend of renewables growth being increasingly dominated by countries outside of Europe is evidenced in another report released
today by the Global Wind Energy Council, that reveals 2013's global cumulative installed wind power capacity growth of 12.4% was led
by China and Canada. Today's Climate Strategies study further warns that Europe could lose its position as a pioneer of emission
reduction solutions, which would also damage the region economically. The
study concludes that Europe must stay
competitive on innovation and energy efficiency to attract long-term investment. It states:
"Europe should remain a part of the leading pack. This not only increases its international
credibility in the field of global climate protection, but also has potential to create or maintain
strategic economic advantages in sectors that are growing globally. The security of supply can be
increased by reducing dependence on energy imports. In addition, clear climate change policy can
create an attractive environment for investment in clean technologies, particularly insofar as it
reduces policy uncertainty. Such investments can create new growth sectors and much needed
jobs in Europe and thus also contribute to Europe’s economic recovery." The study comes at a pivotal
moment when Europe is debating its new post-2020 climate and energy policy package. Many clean tech businesses and NGOs agree
the EU must secure ambitious energy and climate policies for 2030 to reap the economic rewards of a low carbon economy.
EU clean tech leadership key to legitimacy and international climate goals
Dechezleprêtre 2014 [February 2014, ,Antoine Dechezleprêtre is a faculty member at Grantham
Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, The London School of Economics and
Political Science
“Staying with the leaders Europe's path to a successful low-carbon economy” http://www.swpberlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/fachpublikationen/Droege_staying_with_the_leaders_AcrobatN
ochmal2.pdf]
Europe is not alone …. A diverse group of countries and regions is now advancing policies to
enhance energy efficiency in building, industry and transport; to increase deployment of and
industrial capacity in renewables; and to price carbon. … and needs to remain part of this leading
group to secure energy supply, attract long-term investments and drive innovation that will
enhance economic performance and unlock underutilised human and private financial resources
to create new jobs. A stable European energy and climate policy environment, consistent with
international climate goals, is crucial to future prosperity and will maintain the credibility of the
European idea and its international legitimacy by accepting responsibility for its emissions. Falling
behind would leave Europe more exposed to the inherent volatility in global fossil fuel markets. By
staying among the countries leading the way in the low-carbon transition, Europe can instead benefit economically
from a low-carbon economy. European economic competitiveness is not determined by energy prices. For 92% of
manufacturing, energy bills are on average less than 1.6% of revenue (based on data for Germany). While it is important to contain
energy costs, they do not determine the international competitiveness of European industry, or of the European economy overall.
Europe spends a similar proportion of its GDP on energy as the United States and other major competitors. Prices stimulate higher
efficiency and countries with higher energy prices are often more energy efficient, which limits the impact of higher energy prices on
bills. … but a few key sectors deserve (and get) special treatment. 8% of manufacturing industries spend more than 6% of their
revenue on energy. For some of their energy intensive processes, energy price differentials to the rest of the world can matter.
Climate Monitoring
The EU is taking initiative in monitoring climate issues – surpassing the US
UWN 14, University World News, 4/16/2014, UWN is a news source that obtains information about issues
that may concern graduate level students, “European Union leads with action on climate,”
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20140512163649412, NN
Preventing dangerous climate change is a strategic priority for the European Union. Europe is working
hard to cut its greenhouse gas emissions substantially while encouraging other nations and regions to do
likewise. In parallel, the European Commission and some member states have developed adaptation
strategies to help strengthen Europe's resilience to the inevitable impacts of climate change. Reining in
climate change carries a cost, but doing nothing would be far more expensive in the long run. Moreover,
investing in the green technologies that cut emissions will also boost the economy, create jobs and
strengthen Europe’s competitiveness. To prevent the most severe impacts of climate change, the
international community has agreed that global warming should be kept below 2ºC compared to the
temperature in pre-industrial times. That means a temperature increase of no more than 1.2°C above
today's level. To stay within this ceiling, the scientific evidence shows that the world must stop the
growth in global greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 at the latest, reduce them by at least half of 1990
levels by the middle of this century and continue cutting them thereafter. Targets up to 2050 European
Union leaders have committed to transforming Europe into a highly energy-efficient, low carbon
economy. The EU has set itself targets for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions progressively up to
2050 and is working successfully towards meeting them. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 15 countries that
were EU members before 2004 committed to reducing their collective emissions to 8% below 1990
levels by the years 2008-12. Emissions monitoring and projections show that the EU-15 over-achieved
on this target. Most member states that have joined the EU since 2004 also had Kyoto reduction targets
of 6% or 8% – or 5% in Croatia's case – which they were on course to achieve. For 2020, the EU has
committed to cutting its emissions to 20% below 1990 levels. This commitment is one of the headline
targets of the Europe 2020 growth strategy and is being implemented through a package of binding
legislation. The EU has offered to increase its emissions reduction to 30% by 2020 if other major
emitting countries in the developed and developing worlds commit to undertake their fair share of a
global emissions reduction effort. In the climate and energy policy framework for 2030, the European
Commission proposes that the EU set itself a target of reducing emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by
2030. But for 2050, EU leaders have endorsed the objective of reducing Europe's greenhouse gas
emissions by 80% to 95% compared to 1990 levels as part of efforts by developed countries as a group
to reduce their emissions by a similar degree. The European Commission has published a roadmap for
building the low-carbon economy that this will require. Taking the initiative EU initiatives to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions include: The European climate change programme, which has led to the
implementation of dozens of new policies and measures. The EU emissions trading system, which has
become the EU's key tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from industry most cost-effectively.
Adopting legislation to raise the share of energy consumption produced by renewable energy sources,
such as wind, solar and biomass, to 20% by 2020. Setting a target to increase Europe's energy efficiency
by 20% by 2020 by improving the energy efficiency of buildings and of a wide array of equipment and
household appliances. Binding targets to reduce CO2. Supporting the development of carbon capture
and storage technologies to trap and store CO2 emitted by power stations and other major industrial
installations. Mainstreaming climate into other policies The fight against climate change concerns is
increasingly being reflected in other policy areas. To further advance this ‘mainstreaming’ process, the
EU has agreed that at least 20% of its €960 billion (US$1.32 trillion) budget for the 2014-20 period
should be spent on climate change-related action. The EU has long been a driving force in international
negotiations on climate change and was instrumental in the development of the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol. Thanks to pressure from the EU and other
progressive countries, UN negotiations are under way to draw up a new global climate agreement
covering all countries and to achieve greater cuts in global emissions over the rest of this decade. The
aim is to keep global warming below 2°C compared to the temperature that prevailed in pre-industrial
times. The new framework is to be finalised by 2015 and implemented from 2020. Europe is pressing for
an agreement that is ambitious, comprehensive and legally binding. As part of the transition to the
future global climate regime the EU is taking part in a second phase of the Kyoto Protocol running from
2013 to 2020. As the world's leading development aid donor, the EU also provides substantial funding to
help developing countries tackle climate change, including the provision of just over €7.3 billion in ‘fast
start financing’ over the 2010-12 period. * This statement is drawn from Climate Action, a European
Commission website describing the EU’s action plans to tackle climate change.
EU is leading the climate monitoring industry – solves best
European Commission 07, The European Commission, nearest date given is 2007, the European
Commission is a branch of the EU, “EU action against climate change,”
http://www.euinjapan.jp/data/current/eu_action_against_climate_change.pdf, NN
The February 2007 science report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)1 shows
that the world has warmed by an average of 0.76º Celsius since pre-industrial times and the
temperature rise is accelerating. Sea levels rose almost twice as fast between 1993 and 2003 as during
the previous three decades. Man-made emissions of greenhouse gases are causing these changes. The
IPPC projects that, without action to limit emissions, the global average temperature is likely to increase
further by 1.8º to 4ºC this century. We cannot allow this to happen. The European Union considers it
vital to prevent global warming of more than 2ºC above the pre-industrial level. There is considerable
scientific evidence that, beyond this threshold, irreversible and potentially catastrophic changes could
occur. In March 2007 EU Heads of State and Government endorsed an integrated climate change and
energy strategy put forward by the European Commission which outlines the EU’s proposals for a global
and comprehensive agreement to combat climate change after 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol targets
will expire. The Commission’s analysis shows that for the world to have a fair chance of keeping the
average temperature rise to no more than 2ºC, global emissions of greenhouse gases will have to be
stabilised by around 2020 and then reduced by up to 50% of 1990 levels by 2050. This ambitious goal is
both technically feasible and economically affordable if major emitters act urgently. The benefits of
doing so will far outweigh the limited economic costs. Climate change is a global challenge that can be
addressed effectively only through a global effort. This brochure presents and explains the EU’s
proposals for global action as well as the measures the EU is taking itself.
Drilling
The EU is looking to regain leadership of the oil drilling industry under new leading
reforms
Pinsent Masons 13, Outlaw: Pinsent Masons, 6/12/13, Pinsent Masons is a legal news source specializing
in international governance, “EU states adopt amended offshore oil and gas safety rules,” http://www.outlaw.com/articles/2013/june/eu-states-adopt-amended-offshore-oil-and-gas-safety-rules/, NN
The agreement was welcomed by the UK Government and oil and gas industry, both of which had
lobbied against the European Commission's original proposals to legislate using a directly-applicable
regulation. Member states will be able to decide for themselves how best to implement the minimum
requirements of the new Offshore Safety Directive (120-page / 371KB PDF) into their national laws.
"Safety and environmental protection are essential to the success of the oil and gas industry and as
Europe's leading oil producer, the UK has been at the cutting edge of lobbying and drafting this new
piece of legislation," said Energy Secretary Ed Davey. "We particularly welcome the fact that the EU has
chosen a directive to implement this legislation. From the outset we have strongly argued that forcing
the UK to rip up decades' worth of legislation and guidance would have been counterproductive to the
EU's objectives," he said. The new rules were also welcomed by industry body Oil and Gas UK, which
said that the new directive complemented "the world-leading health, safety and environmental
standards already in place in the North Sea that were developed from the lessons the industry learned"
as a result of the 1988 Piper Alpha explosion. The European Commission proposed the creation of a
unified offshore safety regime following the Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.
However, control of installations varies widely across the EU, with almost half of the nearly 1,000
offshore oil and gas installations in operation located in UK-controlled waters. Italy, the Netherlands and
Denmark operate a number of facilities, while nine other states have either a minimal offshore drilling
presence or have been awarded licences to do so. The Offshore Safety Directive establishes minimum
conditions for safe offshore exploration and exploitation of oil and gas, and provides for improved
response mechanisms in the event of a major accident. It also intends to reduce the impact of an
accident on the environment by requiring companies to provide evidence that "adequate provision" has
been made to cover their potential liabilities as a precondition to having a licence for an offshore
installation granted. Under the directive, only operators appointed by licensing authorities or license
holders will be able to conduct offshore oil and gas operations. Licensing authorities must be
independent, with a clear separation between regulatory oversight of economic development and that
of offshore safety and environment. Drilling companies will have to provide national authorities with a
copy of their major accident prevention policy before beginning works, and outline potential major
hazards for that particular installation and what special measures they are adopting to protect workers.
National authorities will also have to prepare external emergency response plans covering all offshore
drilling installations within their jurisdiction. Transparency and cooperation provisions contained in the
new rules will allow for the sharing of emergency response plans between member states. The directive
will take effect 20 days after it is published in the Official Journal of the EU. Member states with offshore
waters will have two years to implement the provisions, while landlocked countries will only have to do
so once a relevant company registers there and conducts operations outside the EU. Only a limited
number of the directive's provisions will apply to landlocked states, and those with offshore waters that
have no offshore activities.
Oil reforms prove the EU is ready to take the lead in oil drilling
Reuters 13, Reuters News Agency, 2/21/13, Reuters is an international news agency known for its incredibly
factual information, “Europe to get its first EU-wide offshore oil and gas law,”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/21/us-oil-drilling-safety-eu-idUSBRE91K0X720130221, NN
Member states, governments need to give final endorsement * Environmentalists see progress, but not
enough By Barbara Lewis BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Union on Thursday agreed its first law to
regulate safety in offshore oil and gas drilling across the 27-member bloc and seek to prevent any repeat
of BP's catastrophic Gulf of Mexico spill. Some environmental campaigners said the law, which still
needs final endorsement from member states and the European Parliament, was not robust enough.
Others argued it could help to protect Arctic waters from oil spills. Politicians from Britain, a major EU
offshore producer, were among the first to welcome it. They argue British standards of safety, based on
decades of experience in the tough environment of the North Sea, are already excellent and the new
law would oblige others to follow suit. "These rules will make sure that the highest safety standards
already mostly in place in some member states will be followed at every oil and gas platform across
Europe," EU Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger said in a statement. "Past accidents have shown
the devastating consequences when things go badly wrong offshore. Recent 'near-misses' in EU waters
reminded us of the need for a stringent safety regime." The Commission reviewed existing national
safety rules in the aftermath of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico accident in May 2010 and said it wanted to
guarantee the world's highest safety, health and environmental standards throughout the European
Union. EMERGENCY PLANNING, RISK ASSESSMENT The legislation covers the criteria for awarding
operating licenses and penalties for breaching safety standards, which could lead to loss of license.
Companies will also have to carry out emergency planning and risk assessment and will be fully liable for
any environmental damage up to about 370 km (200 nautical miles) from the coast. Although the new
rules will only apply to EU waters, the Commission says it will work with international partners to
promote such standards across the world. In a statement, Green members of the European Parliament
urged the assembly not to give final approval. Austrian Green politician Eva Lichtenberger said the new
legislation did not close all the gaps in safety regimes. "It also fails to call for a moratorium on drilling in
sensitive or extreme environments (like the Arctic)," she said. But environmental campaigning group
Greenpeace said the preliminary deal was positive and its demand for risk assessment could deter
unscrupulous operators. "This deal on the EU safety law for offshore drilling would go some way to
ensuring that oil companies think long and hard before they embark on a risky adventure in the Arctic,"
Greenpeace EU climate policy director Joris den Blanken said. "Unfortunately, this deal still leaves too
much wiggle-room in its implementation," he added. Britain was among those who campaigned for the
law to be a directive, meaning each member state is left to transcribe it into its own domestic
legislation, rather than an EU regulation that would automatically apply across the 27 members once
approved. British Conservative members of the European Parliament said they had headed off EU
proposals that could have lowered standards in the North Sea. "Instead of leveling safety standards
down, we will be encouraging the rest of Europe to match Britain's high standards," said British
Conservative Vicky Ford. ($1 = 0.6535 British pounds)
The EU is leading the oil drilling sector – more tech and infrastructure being built
Floridis
For instance, the Arctic oil drilling plans are not adequate to face and clean up a major spill in the area,
raising environmental health concerns about the potential consequences of a spill to the ecosystem.
Further, the consequences of the crude oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, on 27 May 2010, after the
explosion of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig, should not be repeated and offshore oil and gas operations
need to be strictly regulated in order to avoid further detrimental impacts. On the other hand, due to
demonstrated negative results of studies on the offshore working conditions and the human impact on
offshore oil activities, EU legislation should implement precautionary measures into the petroleum and
gas industries. The factors promoting sickness present on board the platforms need to be restrained, in
order to ensure healthy environmental working conditions. Major offshore disasters in the last three
decades and the likelihood of accidents in the sector with possible consequences provoking fatalities,
environmental damage and collateral damage to coastal and massive livelihoods, intensified the need
on elaborating an effective and efficient risk management system in offshore oil and gas operations. The
situation requires action to reduce the risks, ensure effective response to major incidents and foresee
quick recovery of the affected regions and businesses. With respect to the safety of offshore oil and gas
operations, the EU faces a threefold problem which consists of a major offshore oil or gas accident risk
occurring in EU waters. The existing regulatory framework, industry practices and operating
arrangements do not provide for all achievable deductions in the risks, as well as to accidents that may
occur throughout the EU. Justification for EU Action In line with the subsidiarity principle, EU action can
be considered only where it can intervene and realize the objectives more effectively that the Member
States. Industry has the primary responsibility and the means to control offshore risks. Nevertheless,
there is urgent need of reducing the risk of a large offshore accident and therefore, a complementary
action by public authorities will have to take place. The regulatory approach should cover not only the
North Sea, but also the Mediterranean, the Black and the Baltic Seas. Further, the principle of
proportionality has been ensured by assessing the effectiveness, costs and benefits of EU action to
achieve the desired outcome. In parallel, EU implication could drive progress and ensure compliance
through the efficient coordination and regulation of Member States’ policies. This could lead to effective
international measures and solutions to be adopted, as the matter regards the sphere’s environmental
balance. Policy Objectives and Options Assessment The EU initiative targets two general objectives;
firstly to prevent a major incident from occurring in EU offshore oil and gas exploitation with a major
emergency in case preventive measures should fail. These general objectives are divided into four
measures: to ensure a consistent use of best practices for major hazards control by oil and gas industry
offshore operations potentially affecting EU waters or shores, to implement best regulatory practices
among EU jurisdictions, to strengthen EU’s preparedness and response capacity to deal with
emergencies affecting EU citizens, economy and environment and improve existing EU liability as well as
compensation provisions. The policy options which can be envisaged and be developed, contain a
package of measures dealing with regular inspections and penalties, formal safety assessments for
acceptance by the regulator, extension of the Major Hazards Report (MHR) to a comprehensive
management model, product safety, financial capacity guarantees, a platform for regulatory dialogue as
well as compensation schemes for traditional damages. Further, the measures foresee a cross border
availability and compatibility of intervention assets, preparedness for effective emergency response to
major offshore accidents, extension of EU practices to overseas operations as well as the establishment
of a competent authority. Existing EU Legislation in the Area of the Proposal The absence of specific
offshore oil and gas legislation in EU level is partially completed by EU legislation covering broader
sectors of the Union. The Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) 2004/35/EC regards liability for
damages to the environment also in connection with offshore oil and gas. The operator of activities
causing significant environmental damage to protected species, natural habitants or water is strictly
liable to prevent and remedy the damage and bear the full cost of it. The regulation proposal expands
the territorial applicability of the Directive to marine waters under the jurisdiction of the Member
States. The Directive 85/337/EEC and its amendments regarding the environmental impact assessment
of certain public and private projects’ effects, introduce general minimum requirements. The Waste
Framework Directive 2008/98/EC applies fully to oil spills, as already upheld by the CJEU. Further, the
Framework Directive 89/391/EEC and 92/91/EEC refer to the protection of offshore workers and their
working environment. The regulation proposal establishes a general system of control as well as a
notification scheme and requires independent verification of critical risk control elements. The Seveso
Directive 96/82/EC does not apply to the offshore sector and can only be used as a good practice
example in the area. Nevertheless, Directive 94/22/EC regarding hydrocarbon prospection, exploration
and production authorizations sets out the principle legal framework for granting licenses for
exploration and production. This strengthens the obligations of the relevant authorities improving this
way the assessment of the technical and financial applicants’ capacities. Last, the EU Civil Protection
mechanism (Council Decision 2007/779/EC), the Monitoring and Information Center (MIC) and the
European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) are the EU tools to be coordinated, in order to strengthen EU
capacities and Member States’ compliance with the new measures regarding offshore oil and gas
operations. Budgetary Implication The budgetary implication of the proposal is approximately €2.5m in
the period 2013-2016 including compensations for committee participation. The European Maritime
Safety Agency’s (EMSA) assistance is primarily related to the use of a satellite surveillance system and
the use of emergency vessels organized by EMSA. Control of Major Hazards A prevention policy for
major accidents will be set out in a document in order to ensure its implementation throughout the
organization of their offshore operating including the setting of appropriate monitoring arrangements to
assure effectiveness of the policy. Operators, on the other hand, shall describe their organizational
arrangements for control of major hazards in a safety management system. The policy and safety
management systems shall be prepared in accordance with EU requirements. Meanwhile, operators
shall establish and regularly consult with the representatives of the relevant Member States, the
industry priorities for preparing and/or revising standards and guidance for best practice in control of
offshore major accident hazards throughout the lifecycle of offshore operations. The competent
authorities shall proceed to the execution of any suitable arrangements in order to ensure the
independence from conflicts of interest between regulation of safety and environmental protection, in
particular licensing of offshore oil and gas activities. The whole established policy and the relevant
notifications demanded for the inspection investigation and enforcement of the major hazard aspects of
the offshore oil and gas operations should comply with the European Regulation. Non compliance with
Regulatory provisions shall lead to the suspension of the operation and the necessary measures shall be
adopted followed by notification of the competent authority. Transparency and Sharing of Information A
new system will be established aiming at the efficient sharing of information among operators and
competent authorities. Further updated records shall be available by both public and private entities. A
company publication format will enable cross-border comparison of data regarding national operations
and regular practices. In case of a major accident, the operator shall notify immediately the competent
authority with relevant information including the circumstances of the accident and its consequences.
Thorough investigations shall be conducted in Member States followed by recommendations of the
competent authority. Coordination and cooperation. The new regulation foresees measures regarding
the effective cooperation between Member States through exchange knowledge, information and
experience. It focuses especially on the functioning of the risk assessment, measures on accident
prevention, compliance verification and emergency response related to offshore oil and gas operations
within the Union, as well as beyond its borders where appropriate. Clear priorities and procedures need
to be established in order to identify and facilitate the implementation of the best practices in the area.
Moreover, the Commission will promote cooperation with third countries that undertake offshore oil
and gas operations in the same marine regions as Member States. In parallel, the Commission will assess
the safety of oil and gas operations in the matters of the third countries adjacent to waters of Member
States and will support a coordinated approach to mutual exchange of experience and the
establishment of preventative measures and regional emergency response plans and high safety
standards at international level. The United Nations, the Regional Seas conventions and organizations,
as well as the European Union, are developing marine environmental policies and monitoring and
reporting procedures in order to confront this major issue.
Exploration/Arctic
The EU is looking to lead new arctic exploration – all that’s needed is implementation
measures
Østhagen 12, Andreas Østhagen, 9/13/12, Østhagen is currently working as a program coordinator/fellow at
the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies (IFS) in Oslo. He also serves as Director for Norway at The Arctic
Institute, having participated since the beginning, “The EU and The Arctic: A Never Ending Story,”
http://www.thearcticinstitute.org/2012/09/091312-eu-and-arctic-never-ending-story.html, NN
The European Commission’s new outline for an EU Arctic policy, released at the end of June, goes a long
way in showing how the EU wishes to be perceived as a serious and balanced Arctic actor. Other parts of
the EU-system, however, have taken a different approach throughout the summer months. Using the
kind of simplified Arctic-rhetoric that has caused many problems for the EU in the past, some Members
of the European Parliament have yet again called for an Arctic drilling moratorium and questioned the
region’s governance structures. The ongoing oil and gas debate in the European Parliament highlights
how the EU is not, at least yet, a coherent actor on this issue, and is still in the early stages of developing
its own comprehensive Arctic Policy. In a summer when Shell started drilling in the Chukchi Sea,
Greenpeace activists hijacked a rig in Russia, and a shifting oil rig in the Barents Sea caused alarm in
Norway, Arctic oil and gas has most definitely been on the agenda, both in and outside of the Arctic [1].
Certain members of the European Parliament have consequently used the Commission’s proposal on
new safety rules for offshore oil and gas as an opportunity to address issues concerning such activities.
As before, however, some of the proposals in the Parliament highlight a greater desire to be seen doing
something about the Arctic rather than actually understanding the matter at hand. An Improved Outline
for an EU Arctic Policy After a long wait (the European Commission’s first and only Arctic communication
came in 2008) and numerous delays (the follow-up was initially due in June 2011), the High
Representative for Foreign Affairs and the European Commission jointly published its ‘Arctic Policy 2.0’
in late June this year. As already outlined in a previous article by Andreas Raspotnik and Kathrin Keil, the
communication sets out multiple goals for EU-participation in the region, while also reinforcing its
objective to take part in regional cooperation (read Arctic Council) [2]. The communication itself is a
balanced and concrete statement, making headway towards a policy that comprises more than just
overarching concepts and ideals. In many of the paragraphs, the Commission actually points to specific
contributions that the EU is already making, or could possibly make in the future, as the Arctic continues
to become a region of global interest. Especially interregional cooperation and research in the European
parts of the Arctic stands out. It therefore makes a significant contribution to addressing the outspoken
negativity towards the EU from some of the Arctic littoral states, although a lot of progress still remains
to be done. As Raspotnik and Keil highlight, “the Communication clearly shows the EU’s unwillingness to
step on the toes of any of the Arctic states by remaining largely unspecific, pushing back against the
perception of the EU as a “super-regulator” and concentrating on environmental, climate change and
research issues, supporting any effort to ensure the effective stewardship of the Arctic environment.”
[3] In parallel to the publication of this Arctic policy statement, the European Parliament and the Council
of Ministers have been addressing the Commissioner for Energy Günther Oettinger’s proposal to create
a mandatory, EU-wide set of rules for offshore oil and gas safety [4]. The Commission’s proposal,
developed as a consequence of the 2010 Macondo accident, sets out a grandiose plan in the form of a
regulation that would basically replace national legislation on the matter. Given that only a handful of
EU-member states actually produce offshore oil and gas, EU-countries like the United Kingdom,
Denmark and EEA-member Norway have been critical of the idea that EU-wide regulation is needed.
Before Norway ‘decided’ that this proposal would not be relevant for its economic agreement with the
EU, it had proposed that the regulation became a directive such that countries would have more leeway
in interpretation, in accordance with national legislation [5]. The Commission has also included some
brief paragraphs about the Arctic, although this is by no means the main focus of the proposal. Given
the EU’s dependence on gas imports from the Arctic part of Russia and the probability that petroleum
activities in other parts of the Arctic will increase, the Commission has stated that: The serious
environmental concerns relating to the Arctic waters, a neighbouring marine environment of particular
importance for the Community, require special attention to ensure the environmental protection of the
Arctic in relation to any offshore activities, including exploration [6]. and The Commission shall promote
high safety standards for offshore oil and gas operations at international level at appropriate global and
regional fora, including those related to Arctic waters [7]. These points, in the context of a
comprehensive and detailed proposal, are neither shocking nor particularly new to the EU-Arctic debate;
rather, they reflect that the Commission acknowledges the debate concerning Arctic drilling, while also
trying to strike a balance between preservation and exploitation. The proposal from the Commission
seems to have triggered Arctic action amongst some Members of the European Parliament. Taking the
proposals stated above, some MEPs in the environment committee suggested calling for a moratorium
on Arctic drilling and developing stronger international governance regimes for the region. This was
proposed during the summer months, as the committee started its work on the matter and produced
amendments to the Commission’s original proposal. Another amendment put forward was that
“Member states should not issue drilling licenses for these waters” [8]. Seeing that no EU member state
has any jurisdiction over Arctic waters, this might be a tricky one to fulfil. Altogether, many of the
amendments proposed by the environment committee seem to be aimed at ‘doing something’ about
the Arctic, instead of considering the factual realities of the situation and devising appropriate solutions.
As drilling commences in more southern Arctic waters, differentiation between the various parts of the
Arctic might be of value to the European debate, especially since many EU member states receive much
of their gas from the Arctic territories. Talking about what governance regimes are lacking, and how to
amend it, might be another useful contribution. The final vote on these amendments is scheduled for
the 19th of September in the environment committee, before the industry and energy committee
adopts the final version and passes it over to the full plenary in Strasbourg. In the end, the Council of
Ministers will throw in their recommendations, and it is then up to the Commission to draw up a revised
version acceptable to all parties. The amendments concerning an Arctic moratorium will most likely shed
away long before that stage. They do, however, highlight a lack of cohesion in the EU with regards to the
Arctic, and that the EU still has a long way to go before a comprehensive Arctic policy is in place.
The EU is increasing its exploration in the oceans – the race for the Artic proves
GES 14, Global Economic Symposium, nearest date given is 2014, Global Economic Symposium is an online
journal specializing in various economic and political systems around the globe, “Exploring Energy Resources in
the Arctic Ocean,” http://www.global-economic-symposium.org/knowledgebase/the-globalenvironment/exploring-energy-resources-in-the-arctic-ocean, NN
As temperatures rise with a changing climate, Arctic sea ice melts. As a consequence, the once icecovered Arctic Ocean becomes increasingly accessible, with implications for various economic sectors. In
particular, the oil and gas resources below the seafloor have whetted the appetite of the littoral states—
Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the United States—as well as outsiders, such as China and the
European Union, which are developing or rethinking their Arctic strategies. A race to claim large parts of
the Arctic Ocean’s seafloor has begun. But the special conditions in the Arctic—low temperatures, ice
and icebergs, lack of infrastructure and environmental risks—influence the extraction of resources,
making it more expensive and risky. How will energy from the Arctic Ocean affect global markets for oil
and natural gas? What role can energy from the Arctic play in the energy security of the littoral states
and their potential buyers? Is it realistic to produce hydrocarbons without unforeseeable risks to Arctic
ecosystems, which are already under great stress from climate change and receding sea ice? What rules
are needed to prevent environmental catastrophes and how can they be enforced? In contrast with the
Arctic Search and Rescue Agreement, there is, as yet, no comparable agreement on emergency
prevention, preparedness and response. How can the effective treatment of catastrophes, such as oil
spills in the Arctic, be secured? How should the responsibility, liability and burden of emergency
preparedness programs be distributed, both among states and among stakeholders? Is the present
framework of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea fit to deal with territorial claims from states
littoral to the Arctic Ocean and how will it have to be reformed?
The EU is ready to start exploration in the arctic – recent rejection of drilling ban
proves
Nelsen 12, Arthur Nelsen, 10/10/12, Nelsen is a staff writer for EurActiv, a news source conerened primarily
with European Union political developments, “Europe rejects ban on Arctic oil drilling,”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/oct/10/europe-rejects-ban-arctic-oil-drilling, NN
The European parliament's industry committee has rejected attempts to introduce a moratorium on
offshore oil and gas drilling in the Arctic, overruling a contrary vote by its environment committee last
month. The key vote in the industry committee yesterday (9 October) instead proposed a new directive
to ensure that companies have "adequate financial security" to cover the liabilities that could be
incurred by any accidents. Drilling companies would also have to submit to national authorities a safety
hazard and emergency response report at least 24 weeks before the planned start of operations. A
plenary vote in December will now consider one surviving amendment from the environment
committee vote, which would impel member states to refrain from licencing drills unless an effective
accident response can be guaranteed. The European Commission had initially proposed a binding EUwide regulation, but the industry committee's vote instead plumped for a directive, which member
states can choose how to enforce according to their regional standards. "Questions have been raised
about the significant revocation and amendments of existing equivalent national legislation and
guidance [a regulation] might entail," said the parliamentary rapporteur, Ivo Belet (European People's
Party). "Such redrafting would divert scarce resources from the safety assessments and inspections on
the field," he added. British oil industry representatives used similar arguments, according to minutes of
a stakeholder peer review meeting at the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. "Implementing
the Regulation would tie-up considerable resources in both industry and regulators … taking them away
from the 'front line' where the hazards are," representatives of Oil and Gas UK said. After that meeting,
the head of the European Commission's coal and oil unit, Jan Panek, invited the Oil and Gas UK
representatives to a separate bilateral meeting on the legal instrument and requirements in the
regulation, which took place in April 2012. Tip of the iceberg Environmentalists suspect that this was the
tip of a lobby iceberg. "This vote had the fingerprints of oil lobby all over it," Greenpeace spokesman
Joris den Blanken told EurActiv. Amid intense industry lobbying, EurActiv has learned that the oil giant
Chevron offered MEPs on the committee a free trip to its offshore Alba platform on 12-14 July, involving
two nights stay in an Aberdeen hotel, helicopter trips to the platform, and several briefings. But a
Chevron representative informed EurActiv that the trip had not in fact gone ahead, due to
"organisational reasons" on which she declined to elaborate. Ivo Belet's office said that he had "had the
intention" of going on the package, but instead visited a platform in the Netherlands on a paid-for trip to
GDF Suez's K12B gas-producing platform which utilises carbon capture and storage techniques. In March
2011, another shadow rapporteur on the committee, Vicky Ford (European Conservatives and
Reformists), who tabled more than half of the 642 amendments on the report, visited a rig off the coast
of Aberdeen paid for by the oil company ConocoPhillips. Such trips are considered necessary and
educational for legislators, and may not be luxurious, but environmentalists are wary of undue influence
when MEPs adopt positions close to the industry's interests. A spokesperson at Ford's office said that
she had registered her trip on her European Parliament online declaration of interests but it was not
mentioned there at the time of writing. Camel operations in the Sahara Oil producing countries such as
Norway also pushed hard for the proposed regulation to be transmuted into a directive, because of the
"massive administrative burden" and "complicated legal questions" it could raise, according to a
Norwegian position paper, seen by EurActiv. Norway's deputy oil and energy minister, Per Rune
Henriksen, went further, arguing that for the EU to claim jurisdiction over the Arctic by banning drills
there "would almost be like us commenting on a camel operations in the Sahara." The EU sees itself as
an actor in the Arctic because three EU countries have territory in the Arctic – Denmark, Finland and
Sweden – while Iceland is an EU candidate. The EU has in return applied for an enhanced observer seat
on the Arctic Council, partly because climate change is a transboundary issue, affecting European
weather patterns and fish stocks alike. Gustaf Lind, the Arctic Council's current chair, told EurActiv that
"of course, as we have EU members, we can all say that we're positive, very positive [towards the EU's
application] but we try to avoid reviewing specific applications in the media." Arctic resource race The
EU's application comes as the continent's ice has melted to its lowest level ever, carving the pristine
region open for a resource race. The US Geological Survey says that the region could be home to 13% of
the world's undiscovered oil reserves and 30% of its undiscovered gases, and gold and diamond mining
companies also view its prospects with relish. Arctic nations often bemoan a perceived southern
hypocrisy that would prevent them from enjoying the same economic benefits from fossil fuel
production that others have done. Oil extracted from the Arctic emits no more greenhouse gas than that
produced anywhere else but the region's remote and hostile terrain could make rescue operations
treacherous in the event of an accident. Arctic futures Gunnar Wiegand, a director at the EU's External
Affairs Action Service, told an Arctic Futures Symposium in Brussels on 4 October that he hoped EU
legislation could inspire Arctic nations to firmer environmental legislation. "The acquis [accumulated
legislation] in the Arctic Council doesn't go as far as any of the environmental legislation of the EU," he
said. Maria Damanaki, the EU's maritime commissioner, told the same conference that as the
continent's ice thawed, new opportunities could arise. "Offshore drilling in the Arctic now becomes a
viable option for big oil companies," she said. "Arctic reserves could hold enough oil and gas to meet
global demand for several years. This is a need the world economy has." "Though we may be greening
the world economy, oil and gas remain vital for us and will do for some years," she added. Scientists are
more concerned that the Arctic ice melt could raise sea levels, accelerate global warming by reducing
the region's ice reflectivity of solar heat, and change Gulf Stream currents. If the Arctic's summer ice
melts completely, some scientists fear that methane hydrates currently frozen on the seabed could be
released, causing a runaway and unstoppable greenhouse effect.
Conservation efforts in the Arctic prove the EU is ready to expand their exploration
circle of the Arctic
Hance 14, Jeremy Hance, 3/13/14, Hance is a staff writer for Mangabay environmental protection website,
“Europe votes for an Arctic Sanctuary,” http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0313-hance-arctic-sanctuary-eu.html,
NN
Yesterday, the European Parliament passed a resolution supporting the creation of an Arctic Sanctuary
covering the vast high Arctic around the North Pole, giving official status to an idea that has been
pushed by activists for years. Still, the sanctuary has a long road to go before becoming a reality: as
Arctic sea ice rapidly declines due to climate change, there has been rising interest from governments
and industries to exploit the once inaccessible wilderness for fish and fossil fuels. The proposed
sanctuary, lying outside of Exclusive Economic Zones, would cover "one of the largest and least
exploited areas on Earth: a 2.8 million square kilometer zone of the global commons," writes Neil
Hamilton, Senior Political Advisor Polar with Greenpeace Norway, in a blog. "That would be the biggest
conservation zone in existence, protecting fish stocks, ice-dependent species, and a huge variety of cold
water species." Greenpeace has been campaigning for a global Arctic Sanctuary for several years,
including gathering some 5 million signatures from around the world. In addition to supporting an Arctic
Sanctuary, the European Parliament's resolution would ban fisheries in the high Arctic seas "until the
establishment of appropriate regulatory mechanisms and protection." Similarly, the resolution calls for
"strict precautionary regulatory standards" when it comes to fossil fuel exploration and extraction in the
region, but leaves the door open for the ongoing energy race at the top of the world. Last December,
Russian company Gazprom become the first energy company to begin pumping oil out of the Arctic
seabed. In response to this the European Parliament expresses "strong concern regarding the rush for
oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic without adequate standards being enforced." Finally, the
resolution notes that the consequences of a rapidly-changing Arctic will ripple through Europe: "climate
changes in the Arctic will have a major impact on coastal regions globally, including coastal regions in
the European Union, and on climate-dependent sectors in Europe such as agriculture and fisheries,
energy, reindeer herding, hunting, tourism and transport." The Arctic is warming faster than anywhere
in the world due to climate change. In fact, according to a recent paper in Quarterly Journal of the Royal
Meteorological Society the region is warming eight times faster than the rest of the planet, leading to
vast ecological upheaval. Still, according to Greenpeace, the establishment of an Arctic Sanctuary is
likely to be opposed by a number of Arctic nations, such as Canada, Russia, Denmark, and Norway. At
least one Arctic country, Finland, officially approves the idea, however. "[The resolution] is a direct
challenge to the small group of countries who are rushing to open up the fragile Arctic for oil drilling and
industrial fishing. The status quo is starting to crack, and this now demands a real response from those
who see the melting Arctic simply as a new source of profit," said Greenpeace activist Sini Saarela of
Finland. Saarela was one of the "Arctic 30," a group of activists and journalists who were arrested by
Russian military while protesting oil exploitation in the region. After being detained for two months, the
activists were granted amnesty by Russian President, Vladimir Putin.
Gas Export Terminals
EU is getting rid of reliance on US LNG – building tech for gas export terminals
Lewis 14, Jeff Lewis, 3/20/14, Lewis is a staff writer for the Financial Times, “GDF Suez mulls plans for natural
gas export terminal on B.C. coast,” http://business.financialpost.com/2014/03/20/gdf-suez-mulls-plans-fornatural-gas-export-terminal-on-b-c-coast/, NN
CALGARY — GDF Suez UK, Europe’s biggest importer of liquefied natural gas, is assessing plans for a
possible export terminal on Canada’s West Coast, the Financial Post has learned. Sinopec talks show
Petronas’ LNG project in B.C. attracting increasing interest Asian buyers of liquefied natural gas are
gravitating to a proposed Canadian export plant led by Malaysia’s Petronas as competition intensifies
among proponents of the massive projects. Continue reading GDF told Canadian regulators this week it
is examining the feasibility of a natural gas-export project on British Columbia’s northern coast, joining
more than a dozen companies studying the region as a potential staging ground for shipments of the
liquid fuel to higher-priced markets overseas. GDF is “talking to multiple companies” as it evaluates a
possible entry point in Western Canada, said Irina George, whose LinkedIn profile describes her as vicepresident, business development LNG at the company. Ms. George, who is identified in a regulatory
filing, declined to describe her role with the company when reached by phone Wednesday.
Representatives with GDF’s U.K. unit did not respond to several requests for comment. Separately, a
GDF spokeswoman in Houston said the company’s Canadian affiliate is looking at opportunities to power
the massive coastal plants, either directly or through BC Hydro, to bolster its portfolio of generation
projects in Canada. Those plans are at a “very preliminary stage,” Julie Vitek said in an interview. The
company’s Canadian unit operates wind and solar projects in several provinces, as well as a 112megawatt gas-fired power plant in Windsor, Ont.
The EU is starting to take a lead in gas export terminals – South Hook proves
Total 14, Total: Committed to Better Energy, nearest date given is 2014, Total is a company committed to
energy in the EU, “South hook, cutting-edge technology for a fast-growing lng market,”
http://www.total.com/en/energies-expertise/oil-gas/trading-shipping/projects-achievements/south-hook-cuttingedge-technology-fast-growing-lng-market, NN
The Challenge: Securing Markets for Qatar's Production and Supplying Europe The liquefied natural gas,
or LNG, industry transports natural gas by ship. Free of the geographical and geopolitical constraints of
gas pipelines, it can match resources and local demand that are often located at great distances from
one another. Liquefied for easy shipment, LNG has to be regasified at a facility close to consumer
markets so that it can fed into the transmission network for delivery to end users. The South Hook
regasification terminal is a key component of the world's first fully integrated LNG project, Qatargas 2,
which includes: Natural gas liquefaction plants in Qatar. Purpose-designed LNG carriers to ship the LNG
to the United Kingdom. The South Hook regasification terminal in Milford Haven, Wales to store,
regasify and then distribute the gas to end consumers. South Hook guarantees both secure markets for
Qatar's production and a secure natural gas supply for Europe, at a time when the North Sea gas
reserves are beginning to dwindle. Technology: An Impressive Storage Capacity Built between 2004 and
2010, the South Hook terminal has a jetty and two berths large enough to accommodate the world's
biggest LNG carriers (260,000 cubic meters). Able to regasify nearly 15.6 million tons of LNG and
distribute 21 billion cubic meters of gas a year, South Hook is the biggest terminal in Europe. It has five
storage tanks 40 meters high and 100 meters in diameter, each with a capacity of 155,000 cubic meters.
Insulated by a double concrete containment, they are kept at a temperature of -160 °C to maintain the
gas in a liquid state. In addition, 15 regasifiers reheat the LNG to return it to a gas, so that it can be piped
to customers via the national transmission system. Uncompromising Safety and Environmental
Standards The South Hook terminal's operator does everything possible to meet the highest safety
standards and limit impacts on the environment and neighboring communities: Regulatory compliance.
Application of and strict compliance with safety and environmental standards. Uncompromising
implementation of safety procedures. Regular training in safety and environmental protection for
employees. Selection and use of the most efficient equipment during the terminal's design and
construction phases, per design and building codes. A large section of the land — over 100 acres — to
the west of the terminal is allocated as a conservation area that forms part of the Pembrokeshire Coast
National Park. Numerous marine life surveys have been conducted on and around the site and stringent
measures have been taken to prevent spills. Working with the Local Community The South Hook
terminal has created a hundred permanent jobs and acts as a catalyst for other businesses in the
Pembrokeshire region to develop. It aims to develop and support the local community by investing in
projects and initiatives that promote areas of safety, environment, education and wellbeing. In 2011,
South Hook lent its support to over 170 local organizations from the local community. Partners: Total
8.35%; Qatar Petroleum 67.5%; ExxonMobil 24.15%. Volumes: 100 deliveries unloaded (10.4 million
metric tons of LNG) and 157 terawatt-hours of gas distributed (about 13% of demand in the United
Kingdom) in 2011. The South Hook terminal meets 20% of the demand for gas in the United Kingdom.
Project cost: £1.097 billion.
The EU is pursuing leadership of LNG terminals
Schuppe 13, Thomas Elmar Schuppe, 11/19/13, Schuppe is a staff writer for the Observer Research
Foundation, “Flexibility turns out to be trump in stumbling European LNG market,”
http://www.orfonline.org/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/enm-analysis/ENMANALYSISDetail.html?cmaid=59861&mmacmaid=59862, NN
The European gas industry has traditionally been characterised by international gas trade based on longterm (pipeline) import contracts. Nevertheless, with the first unload of an LNG cargo about 25 years ago
the upcoming LNG technology has opened a new opportunity in terms of supply diversification and
flexibility as well as potential gap filler for the continuously dwindling indigenous gas production.
However, indigenous production remained still the largest gas source for EU27 with about one third of
the total net gas supplies in 2012. Besides pipeline supply from outside the EU (particularly from Russia,
Norway and Algeria) about ten countries delivered the balance of more than 10% as LNG. In 2012 Qatar
has been by far the largest source of LNG for Europe (mainly via long-term contracts into UK).
Substantial LNG supply has also arrived from African as well as South-American countries and Norway’s
Snovhit field, too (see Graph 2). More than one fifth of the total global LNG regasification capacity is
located on 21 sites in Europe. Spain and UK are the most important LNG players in Europe with a
combined share of almost 60% of Europe’s total LNG regasification capacity (see Graph 1).1 After the
second consecutive year of European gas demand destruction (down 10% from 2010 to 2012), the
region’s future gas demand prospects seems to remain more unreliable than ever. In any case the need
for gas imports will increase more strongly due to broadly falling production across the continent (e.g.
the IEA expects the EU’s gas import requirement to increase by about 140 bcm until 2035).2 LNG
imports are expected to reduce the EU’s dependence on pipeline imports, diversify the sources of its gas
supplies and provide furthermore (arbitrage) opportunities from switching between LNG and pipe
supplies. By all means Europe’s current import capacity is largely sufficient to meet growing midterm
import needs as non-OECD Europe had a total import capacity of 550 bcm per year (thereof about one
third can be attributed to regasification terminals). According to the IEA the global LNG trade has slightly
declined in 2012 for the first time since 2008. Indeed Europe’s LNG imports are in a downward trend
since the second quarter of 2011: they went down by a third from 2011 to 2012 and even the first four
months of 2013 saw a drop of another third relative to the same period in 2012 (Graph 2).3 The
absolute LNG import volumes went down by more than half compared to the peak in early 2011 (and
fall even below the 2009 level). UK’s LNG importers’ have lost more than two thirds of their LNG import
volumes since the peak in 2011. As of 2012, the world’s average utilisation rate of regasification
terminals was as low as 36%.4 Confronted with lower import volumes numerous European LNG players
are more and more economically pressured while the utilisation rate is dropping further on: by about
half since 2011 and almost down to poor 20% in mid 2013, with Spain and UK being actually even below
the European average (see Graph 3).5 On the one hand the sluggish European LNG imports can be partly
attributed to the (contractual and logistical) opportunity to optimize procurement depending on the
relative pricing terms of either LNG or pipe gas. On the other hand a rising number of European LNG
importers are actively seeking to take advantage of emerging arbitrage opportunities by turning their
LNG facilities in a newly experienced export mode due to the drastic demand drop and constantly higher
priced Asian LNG markets at the same time. However, due to contractual obligations they cannot
advantageously divert the cargos directly towards new harbours but have to unload the LNG carriers at
the originally planned destination harbour before re-exporting them. Data from IEA show that re-export
volumes from Belgium and Spain have more than tripled between 2011 and 2012.6 Data for 2013
confirm this trend, e.g. Belgium has reloaded about the half of its imports this year so far. In total almost
half of all working LNG terminals have been involved in re-exporting so far, which sums up to about 10%
of EU gross LNG imports volumes (6% in 2012).7
Ice Breakers
EU Can solve for ice-breakers – new funding in places like Finland prove
YLE 14, YLE, 1/25/15, YLE is a very large Finnish news network and broadcasting service, “EU emissions
directive opens way for Finnish icebreakers,”
http://yle.fi/uutiset/eu_emissions_directive_opens_way_for_finnish_icebreakers/7052183, NN
A new directive aimed at curbing shipping industry sulphur emissions could open up new opportunities
for Finnish icebreakers. The directive, which comes into force in 2015, will reduce the power of freight
vessels, making it more difficult for them to move through ice-packed waters. The shipping industry was
the most ardent critic of the European Union directive aimed at restricting the sulphur content used in
shipping industry fuels. It pointed out that the measure would require vessels to be fitted with costly
“scrubbers” to remove sulphur from emissions before they enter the atmosphere. However the stateowned icebreaker company Arctia Shipping is planning new fleet acquisitions in anticipation of greater
demand for its icebreaking services. “At the moment our fleet comprises seven icebreakers, but in the
future this could reach the double-digits, purely based on the needs of the Baltic,” said Arctia Shipping
chief executive Tero Vauraste. Greater need in the Baltic The Baltic Sea is classified as a Sulphur
Emission Control Area under the directive, which means stricter limits than for waters in southern
Europe. The new limit for the Baltic Sea, set at a tenth of current levels, will come into force in 2015. In
EU waters outside the Sulphur Emission Control Areas, a limit of 0.5 percent will apply from 2020.
Vauraste could not yet say with any certainty when new vessels would be acquired, but believes they
will be needed. “In the future freight vessels will have lower engine power than today, and because of
this more icebreaking equipment will be required as the need for assistance grows,” he added. The
icebreaker CEO noted that Arctia Shipping is debt free and has the funds needed to invest in new fleet
purchases.
The EU is substantially increasing its ice-breaker fleet – that solves – Russia proves
AMSA 09, AMSA, nearest date given is 2009, AMSA is a scientific organization that studies exploration in the
arctic and the effect of infrastructure on ecosystems, “Arctic Icebreakers,” http://www.arctissearch.com/Arctic+Icebreakers, NN
Government and private icebreakers are a key resource in the development of the Arctic. Generally,
icebreakers are able to carry out the following roles: maintenance of shipping tracks in ice-covered
waters, close escort of shipping in ice, provision of ice information, sovereignty support/representation,
search and rescue, environmental response, command platform for emergency response, medical
evacuation in remote areas, harbor breakout, electrical power supply, science platform, constabulary
function (maritime security), transporting cargo (northern re-supply and logistic support) and fisheries
conservation and protection. There are some 50 icebreakers in the world fleet. The Russian fleet is by far
the largest and most powerful, counting icebreakers powered by nuclear power plants, with five of
75,000 shaft horsepower (shp). The Russian Federation recently announced the allocation of some 15
billion rubles to build another 75,000 shp icebreaker. The next largest fleet of Arctic-class icebreakers is
that of the Canadian Coast Guard. The Canadian Government recently announced an investment of
$C720 million to provide an Arctic-class replacement for the CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent. Most other
countries that operate icebreakers own one or two, other countries such as Denmark and Norway have
small fleets of ice-strengthened vessels generally intended for fisheries patrol and interdiction. The
world’s icebreaker fleets are aging and will require significant investment during the coming years to
maintain their effectiveness and capability. For instance, Canadian icebreakers are on the average 30plus years old, while those of the U.S. are 30 years old, with the exception of the USCGC Healy, which
was built in 2000. Of note is the recently issued report, Polar Icebreakers in a Changing World, which is a
needs analysis of U.S. icebreaking requirements in the coming years. In addition, it is also known that a
number of other countries are either building or planning construction of new icebreakers primarily
intended for science research, namely the European Union and South Korea. Icebreaker construction is
very specialized and very expensive. Steel is thicker and stronger than that required for normal cargo
ship construction. In addition, there are other necessary specific features, such as horizontal and vertical
construction members that are deeper and stronger, reinforced icebelts and redundant features. These
details are specified in a number of national regulations governing construction of ice-class ships,
namely those of the Russian Federation, Canada, Finland and Sweden; as well as classification societies
such as the American Bureau of Shipping, Det Norske Veritas, Germanischer Lloyd and Lloyd’s Register.
Recently, the International Association of Classification Societies approved their Polar Class construction
standard as one of a number of “Unified Requirements.” Classification societies have one year to enter
the new requirement in their respective rules. Classification societies have the new requirements in
their respective rules, and some are expected to keep their existing rules.
IOOS
The European Union is the leading force in Ocean Observation satellites – US
interference will just get in the way
ESA 14, ESA, 4/3/14, ESA is a European science research network, “Europe lofts first Copernicus
environmental satellite,” http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel1/Europe_lofts_first_Copernicus_environmental_satellite, NN
The ability of European citizens, policymakers and service providers to access key environmental data on
a routine basis will take a major step forward following the launch today of ESA’s Sentinel-1A satellite.
The 2.3 tonne satellite lifted off on a Soyuz rocket from Europe’s Spaceport in Kourou, French Guiana at
21:02 GMT (23:02 CEST). The first stage separated 118 sec later, followed by the fairing (209 sec), stage
2 (287 sec) and the upper assembly (526 sec). After a 617 sec burn, the Fregat upper stage delivered
Sentinel into a Sun-synchronous orbit at 693 km altitude. The satellite separated from the upper stage
23 min 24 sec after liftoff. “Sentinel-1A opens a new page in the implementation of Copernicus, the
second EU flagship space initiative, after the Galileo positioning system,” said Jean-Jacques Dordain,
Director General of ESA. “The Copernicus programme will provide European citizens with the most
ambitious space-based services in the world for environmental and security applications. “The
cooperation between the EU and ESA Member States in the funding of the space infrastructure, the
combination of competences and expertise between the European Commission and ESA, and the
capabilities of European industry, are putting Europe at the forefront of utilisation of space to benefit
citizens, policymakers and the economy.” Sentinel-1 launch on a Soyuz Access the video The mission is
the first of six families of dedicated missions that will make up the core of Europe’s Copernicus
environmental monitoring network. Copernicus will provide operational information on the world’s land
surfaces, oceans and atmosphere to support environmental and security policymaking and the needs of
individual citizens and service providers. Designed as a two-satellite constellation – Sentinel-1A and -1B
– the C‑band radar mission will provide all-weather day-and-night imagery of land and ocean surfaces of
Europe, Canada and the polar regions in near‑real time. Equipped with a powerful ‘synthetic aperture
radar’, it will ensure continuity with the European Envisat satellite, which stopped working in 2012 after
10 years of service. The technology is based on a long heritage of radar satellites, starting with ERS-1 23
years ago. “The launch of the first Sentinel-1 satellite marks a change in philosophy for our Earth
observation programmes,” said Volker Liebig, ESA’s Director of Earth Observation Programmes. “In
meteorology, satellites have been providing reliable data for weather forecasts for over 35 years. “With
the Copernicus programme, we will now have a similar information source for environmental services as
well as for applications in the security and disaster management domain.” In addition to transmitting
data to a number of ground stations around the world for rapid dissemination, Sentinel-1 is also
equipped with a laser terminal to transmit data via European Data Relay System satellites in
geostationary orbit for continual data delivery. Radar vision The satellite’s solar panels and antenna are
now being deployed in a complex sequence expected to take around 11 hours. The completion of
deployment will be announced at www.esa.int/sentinel-1 and via Twitter @ESA_EO After the initial
‘launch and early orbit phase’, the satellite will go into the commissioning phase, when all instruments
will be checked and calibrated. The mission is expected to begin operations within three months. Thales
Alenia Space Italy is the prime contractor and Airbus DS Germany is responsible for the C‑band radar.
Airbus DS UK supplied the central radar electronics subsystem. Data from the Sentinel satellites will be
provided on a free and open basis. Raw data will be analysed and processed by public and private sector
service providers.
The EU is leading the way in Ocean Observation technology – just needs the final push
to implement them
Al Jazeera 14, Al Jazeera, 4/4/14, Al Jazeera is a large international news network known for being
incredibly un-biased, “Europe launches environment satellite,”
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/04/europe-launches-environment-satellite2014444541424523.html, NN
Europe has launched the first in a constellation of hi-tech satellites designed to monitor Earth for
climate change and environmental damage and help disaster relief operations. Sentinel-1A, a satellite
designed to scan the Earth with cloud-penetrating radar, lifted off on Thursday evening aboard a Soyuz
rocket from Kourou, French Guiana, the European Space Agency (ESA) said. The satellite is the first of
half a dozen orbital monitors that will be built and launched under the $5bn Copernicus project, a joint
undertaking of the ESA and the European Union. It will be followed by a partner, Sentinel-1B, due to be
launched towards the end of next year, according to the AFP news agency. Operating 180 degrees apart,
at an altitude of about 700km, between them the pair will be able to take a radar picture of anywhere
on Earth within six days. Radar scanning has a range of uses, from spotting icebergs and oil slicks to
detecting rogue logging and ground subsidence. The data will be widely accessible to the public and is
likely to have uses that go beyond the environment, such as in construction and transport.
Environmental disasters By mapping areas stricken by flood or earthquake, the monitors will also be
able to help emergency teams identify the worst-hit areas and locate roads, railway lines and bridges
that are still passable, the ESA says. The others in the series are Sentinel-2, which will deliver highresolution optical images of forests and land use; Sentinel-3, providing ocean and land data, and
Sentinels 4 and 5, which will monitor Earth's atmospheric composition the basic component in finetuning understanding about greenhouse gases. The goldmine of data expected to be thrown up by the
satellite constellation will be more accessible to the public than any previous Earth-monitoring
programme. The potential applications go beyond stewardship of the environment. They could help
shipping firms, farmers and construction companies, too. "Copernicus is the most ambitious Earth
observation programme to date," ESA said. "It will provide accurate, timely and easily accessible
information to improve the management of the environment, understand and mitigate the effects of
climate change and ensure civil security." Copernicus replaces Envisat, one of the most successful
environmental satellites in space history, whose mission ended in 2012. It was named last year in
honour of the 16th-century Polish astronomer who determined that the Earth orbited the Sun, and not
the other way round, as convention had it at the time.
Integrated European observation is key to broader data – tech is world class, just a
question of implementation.
EMD 2014
REPORT FROM THE JOINT EUROGOOS/EMODNET/EMB/JRC WORKSHOP AT THE EUROPEAN MARITIME
DAY IN BREMEN,The importance of an integrated end-to-end European Ocean Observing System: key
message of EMD 2014 http://eurogoos.eu/2014/06/09/eoos-at-emd-bremen-2014/
Ocean observations are essential for marine science, operational services and systematic assessment of
the marine environmental status. All types of activities in the marine environment require reliable data
and information on the present and future conditions in which they operate. Many maritime economic sectors (e.g. oil and gas
exploration, maritime transport, fisheries and aquaculture, maritime renewable energy) directly benefit from easily accessible
marine data and information in several ways: improved planning of operations, risk minimization though increased safety, improved
performance and overall reduced cost. Other activities, such as deep sea mining and marine biotechnology, also benefit from specialized deep-
sea observations that were not feasible until recently. The
complexity and high density of human activities in European
seas and oceans result in a high demand for marine knowledge in the form of data, products and
services to support marine and maritime activities in Europe, stressing the need for an integrated
European approach to ocean observation and marine data management (Navigating the Future IV, European Marine
Board 2013). While Europe already has a relatively mature ocean observing and data management
infrastructure capability , this is largely fragmented and currently not addressing the needs of multiple
stakeholders. Mechanisms for coordinating existing and planned ocean observations using a system
approach are needed for more integrated, efficient and sustained observations under the framework of
a “European Ocean Observing System” (EOOS) following international practice (systems developed by USA, Australia and Canada) and the
call of the EurOCEAN 2010 Conference Declaration . The integration of different national and local marine data
systems into a coherent interconnected whole which provides free access to observations and data, as
pursued by the European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet) is of key importance for maritime sectors like
fisheries, the environment, transport, research, enterprise and industry. However, much work still needs to be
done in close collaboration with end-users, in particular industry, to further develop EMODnet into a fully functional, fit for
purpose gateway to European marine data and data products taking into account requirements of multiple users. There is a need for scienceindustry partnerships to stimulate innovation and develop a successful EOOS that will further enhance the contribution of marine observations
to economic activities relevant for Blue Growth in Europe. Innovative
technologies, developed in collaboration between research
scientists and the industry, have given several solutions during the past years for more robust, multi-parametric
and systematic observations. This, in turn, is leading to new and more reliable operational services that
support a wide range of maritime economic activities: fisheries and aquaculture, offshore oil and gas, marine renewable
energy, maritime transport, tourism etc. Other services address the sectors of marine safety, climate and weather
applications, as well as marine environmental assessment. At the end of the marine observations, data to knowledge
cycle, activities and tools are needed to create added value products for specific stakeholders, including the wider public, such as the European
Atlas of the Seas which allows professionals, students and anyone interested to explore Europe’s seas and coasts, their environment, related
human activities and European policies. At the same time, it is critical to evaluate whether we are monitoring/observing what we actually need.
Regional assessments such as performed by the newly established EMODnet sea-basin “checkpoints” could provide relevant information,
among others to advise Member States about requirements for essential and optimal observation capability.
LNG
The EU is transitioning to LNG – leading the industry
Mufson 14, Steven Mufson, 3/28/14, Mufson is a scientific researcher and staff writer for the Washington
Post, “Can Europe wean itself from Russian natural gas?”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/03/28/can-europe-ween-itself-from-russian-naturalgas/, NN
One of the companies most entwined in the natural gas business in Europe is the Italian oil giant ENI –
and that has put it smack in the middle of the crisis between Russia and western nations. ENI is the
biggest seller of natural gas in Europe, providing 22 percent of the market. It is also the biggest customer
of the Russian gas monopoly Gazprom, worth about 10 billion euros a year, and it might join with
Gazprom to build a new pipeline under the Black Sea. It has a deal with Russia’s biggest oil company,
Rosneft, to explore in the Barents Sea. It also has rights to look for shale gas in Ukraine and plans to
propose reworking some old neglected oil and gas fields there to boost output. And it is the largest
natural gas producer in Libya, a key source of natural gas for Europe. Altogether, ENI operates in about
90 countries. On Thursday ENI’s chief executive, Paolo Scaroni, was in Washington to meet with Obama
administration officials at the State Department and National Security Council to discuss natural gas,
Russia and Ukraine. Scaroni was visiting on the heels of hearings in Congress where lawmakers were
calling on the administration to approve more liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals so that LNG
from abundant domestic shale gas reserves could ease European dependence on Russia. But the
committees didn’t get to hear from anyone with Scaroni’s background and distinctive points of view.
The CEO took an hour to talk with The Post. Here are some excerpts from the conversation. On Europe's
need for Russian oil: This Ukrainian crisis showed finally that the king is naked, that Europe is not
independent -- because if you’re not independent on energy you’re not independent. People say Russia
needs Europe, as well. But we need energy every day, and they can skip a year. It’s a different level of
urgency and dependency. What is relevant is that this dependency is going to go up and not down
because domestic European production [including North Africa] is going down. Norwegian production is
not going up. Algerian production is going up, but Algerian domestic consumption is going up, too. And
Libya is Libya. We are the persons in the world who know Libya best, and we know nothing. I was in
Libya last Sunday. We have 3,000 people there and still we don’t know much. Scaroni takes a dim view
of American LNG as a means to liberate Europe from Russian gas, in part because he says that
transporting LNG from the United States to Europe is expensive, Russian gas production costs are very
low and Russia could always decide to undercut American LNG prices.
EU is leading the LNG industry
CEC 13, California Energy Commission, nearest date given is 2013, CEC is a news agency stationed in California
that explores different forms of renewable energy, “Western Europe - Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG),”
http://www.energy.ca.gov/lng/worldwide_western_europe.html, NN
This region of the world is dominated by LNG regasification terminals. The first LNG liquefaction
terminal, Snohvit LNG, has recently begun operating. This facility is located in the Kingdom of Norway,
above the Arctic Circle. According to recent media reports, StatoilHydro, the Norwegian offshore oil and
gas producer, began geological carbon sequestration at the Snohvit field. This greenhouse gas emission
reduction technology is also being considered at LNG liquefaction terminals in the Republic Trinidad and
Tobago and the Commonwealth of Australia. In an effort to reduce Western Europe's reliance on the
Russian Federation's Gazprom, several LNG regasification terminals have been constructed, are under
construction or have been proposed. There are sixteen existing LNG regasification terminals spread
across Portugal (also known as the Portuguese Republic), Kingdom of Spain, France (also known as the
French Republic), Kingdom of Belgium, the United Kingdom, Italy (also known as the Italian Republic),
Greece (also known as the Hellenic Republic) and the Republic of Turkey. map of Western Europe
showing LNG terminals with link to download PDF file of map Fifty two additional LNG regasification
terminal projects are either under consideration or have commenced construction throughout this
region, specifically in the Republic of Albania, the Republic of Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, the Federal
Republic of Germany, Republic of Ireland, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Republic of Poland, Romania,
and Ukraine. Further consideration is being given to LNG by the Republic of Lithuania and in a joint
project between the Republics of Estonia and Finland. One controversial proposed LNG regasification
terminal in Italy, Offshore LNG Toscana, would be located in a whale sanctuary, Cetaceans Sanctuary of
the Mediterranean. The project was approved under the previous Prime Minister's term, but is being
opposed by local government and environmental groups. In addition to this, the Italian government
recently suspended the building permit for the proposed Brindisi LNG regasification terminal. Currently,
Italy only has one operating LNG regasification terminal, Panigaglia LNG. However, the current Industry
minister foresees the need of possibly four additional new regasification terminals by the close of 2010.
The EU solves liquidified natural gas production – the US isn’t key
Baker 14, Dean Baker, 3/24/14, Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research,
“Europe doesn’t need America’s fracked natural gas,” http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/3/europerussia-naturalgasenergy.html, NN
The weaners seem to have the impression that this is yet another case in which the United States has to
come to the rescue of those weak Europeans. After all, while we were drilling everywhere, the
Europeans were fiddling around with wind and solar energy, all the while making themselves vulnerable
to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s machinations. Reality-based fans of arithmetic see matters
differently. The reality is that Europe, especially Germany, has done a huge amount over the last two
decades to reduce its consumption of fossil fuels, including natural gas, from Russia. The reduction in
fossil fuel use swamps the impact of the drill-everywhere strategy in the United States. If Europe had not
been aggressively pushing to reduce its energy use, there is no way that gas from Russia could be
replaced by domestically fracked gas or imports from elsewhere. In addition, Europe’s efforts to reduce
fuel consumption have the advantage of slowing global warming. According to the Energy Information
Agency, Germany’s conservation measures have had the effect of reducing its energy intensity of
production (the amount of energy used per dollar of GDP) by roughly 30 percent over the last two
decades. While the United States has seen a comparable percentage reduction in its energy intensity, its
energy intensity of production is still far higher than Germany’s. In fact, the current level of energy
intensity in the United States is higher than the energy intensity of Germany’s economy in 1991. If
Germany were as energy inefficient as the U.S., it would need over 50 percent more energy to meet its
needs. In addition, Germany now generates almost a quarter of its energy from renewable energy
sources. The vast majority of this energy comes from wind and solar, with hydropower counting for less
than a quarter. If Germany and other European Union countries had not been aggressively promoting
conservation and alternative energy sources, the price of Russia’s natural gas would probably be close to
twice its current levels. The demand for natural gas would be far higher; the only countervailing factor
would be the extent to which dirtier energy sources such as coal might have been used instead. If the
goal is to reduce demand for Russian natural gas, the most cost-effective way is to do much more of
what Germany is already doing: promote conservation and mass transit and further subsidize the cost of
installing solar and wind energy. The idea that the United States can fill any significant portion of
Europe’s need for natural gas with fracked gas and that this gas could available anytime soon, as
hypothesized by some pundits, is simply not realistic. The amount of gas that the European Union
imports from Russia is more than half of total U.S. production. It would take an enormous ramping up of
natural gas production in the United States to be able to export any substantial amount to the EU
without shortages leading to sharp jumps in price in the United States. That seems unlikely even if we
decided to ignore all environmental considerations. Many of the new fields already have declining
production, so it would take a huge increase in drilling to fill the gap and add capacity to allow for largescale exports to the EU. In addition, we would have to increase our ability to liquefy and export natural
gas. This can be done, but it takes time and money. One industry source put the full cost of constructing
an export facility at $30 billion. This is money that could be recovered only through many years of
exporting large volumes of natural gas. And these facilities would take years to build. Even in an
optimistic scenario, large volumes of liquefied natural gas would probably not be heading to Europe
until the end of the decade.
Methane Hydrates
Europe is increasing its methane hydrate infrastructure – further investment is key to
leadership
FCCJ 14, Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan, 4/1/14, FCCJ is an organization that focuses on international
relations based primarily on Japan, “Drilling the Deep: In Search of a New Energy Source,”
http://www.fccj.or.jp/number-1-shimbun/item/329-drilling-the-deep-in-search-of-a-new-energy-source/329drilling-the-deep-in-search-of-a-new-energy-source.html, NN
Marine scientists are fascinated by methane hydrate, too, but as a part of their basic research into the
oceans to discover how its exploration would affect the ecosystem of the deep sea. Environmentalists,
however, criticize the lack of sustainability and point out possible negative effects on the environment.
“It looks like a McShake,” jokes Yuji Morita, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Energy Economics
(IEE) in Tokyo and member of the government commission for methane hydrate, when he’s asked to
explain what Japan’s energy dreams are made of. Methane hydrate only forms at low temperatures of 4
degrees Celsius or less, and between 20 and 40 bar pressure. Under such circumstances the gas is
trapped inside a cage of water molecules that surround the gas-filled core and form an ice-like structure.
It’s the reason why 80 to 90 percent of worldwide methane hydrate reservoirs can only be found in the
“stability zone” between 500 and 2,000 meters under the mud layer of the seabed, and a little closer to
the surface in the polar sea. The rest is thought to be located in the permafrost in polar regions. To be
able to use its energy potential, though, the gas has to be extracted on site from its icy shell. Hot water,
gas or even methanol, an antifreeze agent, can be used to melt the crystal cages. However, the most
promising method appears to be the one applied in the Japanese trial, lowering the pressure so that it
becomes unstable, thereby setting free the natural gas inside. How much of the reserves can be reached
is a different kettle of fish. Methane, a colorless and odorless gas, is created through the degradation
process of organic material like plankton that has sunk to the seabed. As the gas is very light, it usually
rises up from between the sediments deep beneath the ocean floor until it gets trapped in the stability
zone. Fishermen are sometimes surprised to find their nets floating towards the ocean surface after
accidentally releasing methane hydrate from its cool grave. Due to its elusive nature, methane hydrate
remained undiscovered for a long time; in fact, research has only intensified since the turn of the
millennium. Scientists use data from drillings and numerical models based on decay rates of plankton,
but are divided about how much might be hidden under the ocean floor: Professor Klaus Wallmann of
the German GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel thinks that between 1000 to 5000
gigatons of organic carbon might lie in gas hydrate layers, others estimate 500,000 gigatons. Even
conservative estimates are much higher than the reserves of coal, natural gas and oil put together. How
much of that can be reached is a different kettle of fish. chikyu_copy.jpg The Japanese drill ship Chikyu,
which took part in the trial extractions of gas from methane hydrates. Excitement about the potential
new energy source is high in Japan, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, India and South Korea, and all have
invested a lot of money in its research. India is thought to possess its biggest reserves though, according
to Bohrmann, “the icy mass might not be homogenous and concentrated enough.” After figuratively and
literally digging through murky mud for a long time, researchers have found that sandy sediment
consisting of sand of a certain pore size is particularly suited for extraction. Luckily for Japan, there are
many such reservoirs nearby. The governmental energy organization Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National
Corporation (JOGMEC) thinks that about one-tenth of the methane hydrate around Japan is located near
Cape Omaezaki alone. Though European countries are relying on Russian gas fields for the coming
decades, they also have intensified their methane hydrate research. Marum researcher Bohrmann
explains: “70 percent of the surface of our globe consists of ocean, and there is so much we still need to
know about it.” Basic researchers like him are trying to find out how the exploration of methane
hydrate, as well as oil, affects the ecosystem of the deep sea. They also want to prove what most
scientists believe, but have yet to confirm: that methane hydrate stabilizes the continental slopes that
form the border between the shelves and the deep sea. Research is also being conducted on the effects
of global warming on methane hydrate reservoirs and the stability of continental slopes. If too much of
the methane hydrate layer dissolves, it could lead to mudslides and even tsunami. And while scientists
consider this scenario unlikely, it is not altogether impossible. In the “Storegga Slide” 8000 years ago,
underwater landslides near the Norwegian coast triggered megawaves that wreaked havoc across
Northern Europe. To reduce such risks, scientists recommend that, prior to any exploration,
geotechnical tests be conducted and explorations be done only in marginally inclined areas.
Mineral Mining
The EU is increasing deep mineral mining – more funding and better tech
SPC 14, Secretariat of the Pacific Community, 5/9/14, SPC is an organization that studies the implications of
mineral mining; both good and bad, “Deep Sea Minerals Finance Workshop: Making sure the Pacific Islands are
not left short-changed,” http://www.sopac.org/dsm/index.php/news, NN
Deep sea minerals have the potential to be a game changer for the Pacific. Whether they will bring a
change for the good or the bad will be determined by the financial management of governments and
their ability to adopt and enforce sensible environmental safeguards. If revenue is managed
transparently and prudently while protecting the environment, deep sea minerals could greatly improve
the economies and livelihoods of the Pacific Islands countries. To address these issues, the Secretariat of
the Pacific Community (SPC) is holding a regional workshop, the fifth in its technical training series. This
workshop will be held in Cook Islands on 13–16 May and will centre on the ‘Financial Aspects’ of the
upcoming deep sea minerals industry. The workshop will bring together more than 60 Pacific Island
government minerals and finance officials and experts from around the globe for the first regional event
of its kind on managing the potential wealth generated from the extraction of deep sea minerals.
Although deep sea mining is yet to occur world-wide, there is much commercial interest in mineral
formations, such as nodules, crusts and seafloor massive sulphides that have been discovered on the
seabed, thousands of metres below sea-level, particularly in the Pacific Ocean. The event is organised by
SPC’s European Union-funded Deep Sea Minerals (DSM) Project, working with the Pacific Financial
Technical Assistance Centre (PFTAC) – a subsidiary of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). A wide
range of interested stakeholders will attend the workshop, from as far afield as South Sudan, Norway,
and Mauritius as well as Timor Leste, with the aim of sharing their experiences and professional
expertise. The workshop will discuss how to turn those minerals sitting on the deep ocean floor into new
revenue for Pacific Island countries to expand their economies. The workshop will focus on how
countries that choose to proceed to mining can capture a fair ‘deal’, through good governance of
revenue received, and learn from past lessons, both elsewhere and closer to home. This is where the
SPC-EU DSM Project regional training events play an important role. The workshops are designed to
prepare Pacific Island countries for all aspects of regulating their deep sea minerals. Previous workshops
covered other subjects, including environmental, legal, social and geological aspects of DSM. The deep
sea minerals industry has the potential to make a positive impact on the lives of Pacific people;
however, there are issues, risks and uncertainties that need to be addressed. The DSM Project stresses
the importance of engagement and participation among a wide variety of stakeholders, from local
communities all the way up to regional non-governmental organisations, to enable Pacific countries to
make well informed decisions for their economies, their people, and their islands.
EU and SPC have established a bilateral deep sea mining agreement – leading the
world in mining infrastructure
Tawake 11, Akuila Tawake, 12/3/11, Tawake is the secretariat of the Pacific Community, “SPC-EU DEEP SEA
MINERALS PROJECT,” http://www.isa.org.jm/files/documents/EN/Workshops/2011/Abstracts/ATawake.pdf, NN
Deep sea minerals research and exploration in the Pacific Islands region have been ongoing for the last
40 years that led to the discovery of a number of seabed mineral deposits within the Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ) of many Pacific Islands Countries (PICs). Many of these surveys were conducted in
collaboration with national agencies and multinational consortia of which the twenty one year (1985‐
2005) Japan‐SOPAC cooperative study program was notably the most extensive survey in the region.
With renewed interests in deep sea minerals exploration in the region in recent years, some countries
have sought external assistance hence SOPAC was approached to provide appropriate advice and
support. Subsequently, with the endorsement of member countries, SOPAC prepared and submitted a
project proposal entitled “Deep Sea Minerals in the Pacific Islands Region: a Legal and Fiscal Framework
for Sustainable Resource Management” to the European Union (EU). The proposal was accepted by the
EU who agreed to provide financial support under the 10th European Development Fund (EDF10) for the
implementation of the Deep Sea Minerals (DSM) Project in fifteen Pacific ACP States. The DSM Project is
currently being implemented by the new Applied Geoscience and Technology Division (SOPAC) of the
Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC). The overall objective of the DSM Project is to expand the
economic resource base of Pacific ACP States by developing a viable and sustainable marine minerals
industry. The Project is tasked to deliver against these four Key Result Areas: (1) Development of
Regional Legislative and Regulatory Framework(s) (RLRF) for offshore minerals exploration and mining;
(2) Formulation of National policy, legislation and regulations; (3) Building national capacities ‐
supporting active participation of PICs nationals in the offshore mining industry; and (4) Effective
management and monitoring of offshore exploration and mining operations. In June 2011, the DSM
Project inception meeting was held in Nadi Fiji with a broad range of stakeholders within and beyond
the region in attendance. This high level meeting provided the opportunity to have an interactive
dialogue about deep sea mineral issues, and through the DSM Project and other initiatives move
forward together to better understand the challenges and opportunities and ultimately contribute to
improving the livelihoods of Pacific Communities. Some of the key environment related outcomes of the
workshop are: a regional approach to regulate the DSM sector, marine scientific research and
exploration to be encouraged and promoted, the application of the precautionary approach concept for
environmental protection, and consider ESHIA [Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessments] in
addition to EIA. Under Ker Result Area 4, the DSM Project shall contribute to addressing the
environmental management needs for deep sea mineral exploration and exploitation through the
following initiatives: (i) Develop a regional environmental management guidelines; (ii) Identify and
engage suitable local and regional candidates to participate in environmental monitoring of offshore
exploration and mining sites; (iii) Disseminate relevant data and information to key stakeholders; (iv)
Encourage and support local community participation in the environmental monitoring process; and (v)
Conduct a Cost Benefit Analysis (BCA) for deep sea mining in the region.
MH370
The EU can find the plane – new UK submarines committed to the cause prove that it
is willing and able
BBC 14, BBC, 4/1/14, the BBC is a very large news source in the UK and if you don’t know that please don’t
read this card, “MH370: UK submarine joins search for missing plane,” http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26845118,
NN
British submarine HMS Tireless has joined the hunt for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. The
Ministry of Defence said the Trafalgar class submarine had arrived in the southern Indian Ocean and
would help search for the plane's black box recorder. It will soon be joined by Royal Navy coastal survey
ship HMS Echo. The aircraft disappeared with 239 people on board on 8 March while en route from
Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Earlier on Tuesday, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston - the man co-ordinating
the search from Australia - said the hunt was the "most challenging" ever seen and could take weeks.
Several floating objects have been found in recent days, but none is believed to belong to the missing
plane. Search for debris Nuclear-powered submarine HMS Tireless was launched on 17 March 1984 and
holds a crew of 130, plus 18 officers. HMS Echo HMS Echo will help search for debris from the plane on
the water surface An MoD source told the BBC the vessel had "advanced underwater search capabilities,
but the task in hand remains a tall order and the search area immense". "Her deployment is being coordinated closely with our Australian and US colleagues." The submarine will listen for ultrasonic "pings"
from the plane's black box, which continue to be broadcast for about 30 days after take-off. The MoD
source said the submarine was ordered to move from an operational tasking to the search area about a
week ago and arrived on Monday. Defence Secretary Philip Hammond informed his Malaysian
counterpart of the additional British contribution during a phone call on Tuesday evening. Continue
reading the main story HMS TIRELESS launched on 17 March 1984 holds a crew of 130, and 18 officers
top speed of 32 knots or 36.8 mph in 2000, a fault was discovered on board which forced 12 UK nuclear
submarines to undergo intensive inspections. Tireless became stranded in Gibraltar in May of the same
year due to leaking pipe work in 2003, the vessel collided with an object at sea prompting an MoD
inquiry in 2007, two mechanics died on board when a self-contained oxygen generator exploded while
the vessel was at the North Pole in 2012, HMS Tireless returned to Plymouth after a leak in its nuclear
reactor HMS Echo is expected to begin its work on Wednesday, and the MoD said it would "play an
important role in the search for debris on the sea's surface and her advanced environmental assessment
capability will help to optimise search operations". Four RAF personnel on secondment to the Royal
Australian Air Force and Royal New Zealand Air Force are also actively involved in the search. Meanwhile
the personal jet of Oscar-winning film director Peter Jackson has been reported by Radio New Zealand
to have joined the search for the missing Malaysian airliner. Radio New Zealand said that Sir Peter, the
director of the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit movies, personally approved the use of his Gulfstream
G650 in the search. On Monday, Malaysian acting Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said the
search area was 254,000 sq km (98,000 sq miles), according to the Australian authorities. Malaysian
authorities have released the full transcript of communications between flight MH370 and Kuala
Lumpur's air traffic control. They said there was no indication of anything abnormal in the transcript,
although the last words received by ground controllers are different from those previously stated.
Theories They were "good night Malaysian three seven zero", but authorities had previously said that
they were "all right, good night". It is not clear why the account has changed. Officials say that based on
satellite data they have concluded that flight MH370 crashed into the southern Indian Ocean, but many
relatives of those on board have demanded proof and expressed anger at what they perceive as a lack of
information. Various theories about what went wrong have been suggested - including the captain
hijacking his own plane. The speculation was fuelled by reports that files had been deleted on the pilot's
home flight simulator
EU leading the MH370 search because of stolen European Passports
Buncombe 14, Andrew Buncombe, 3/1/14, Buncombe is a staff writer for Independent.co.uk, “Missing
Malaysia Airlines plane: Details emerge of two young Iranians using stolen passports in search for a better life,”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/missing-malaysia-airlines-plane-details-emerge-of-two-youngiranians-using-stolen-passports-in-search-for-a-better-life-9184581.html, NN
They were going in search of a better life. Two young Iranian men, one wearing a short-sleeved blue T
shirt, the other dressed in a long-sleeved black shirt, have been identified as the mystery travellers who
boarded Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 using stolen passports. The authorities say there is no evidence
they were linked to any terror groups; rather they were apparently travelling to Europe to try and secure
work. As the search for the missing aircraft completed its fourth day with still no trace of the missing
aircraft, officials revealed the identities of the two passengers as 29-year-old Delavar Seyed
Mohammadreza and Pouria Nour Mohammad Mehrdad, who was aged either 18 or 19. At a press
conference in Lyons, France, Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said investigators were
increasingly of the belief that the disappearance of the Boeing 777 and its 239 passengers and crew was
not linked to a terrorist incident. “The more information we get, the more we are inclined to conclude it
is not a terrorist incident,” said Mr Noble. “By doing this, eventually, with more and more evidence,
we’ll able to exclude that they were involved in conduct that might have involved the plane to disappear
and focus on eliminating the human trafficking ring that allowed them to travel.” As officials in Malaysia
announced they were again extending the area they were scouring and the country’s military suggested
the missing plane may have actually veered west across the Strait of Malacca, a partial picture emerged
of the journey being undertaken by the two men who until now have been the focus of much of the
work being conducted by Malaysian and foreign intelligence investigators. It appears the two men
boarded a flight in Doha, Qatar, using their Iranian passports and flew to Kuala Lumpur. There, they
were able to pick up two European passports, one belonging to Austrian Christian Kozel and the other to
Luigi Maraldi of Italy. The passports had been stolen in Thailand in 2012 and 2013 respectively and had
been entered into Interpol’s database. “We know that once these individuals arrived in Kuala Lumpur on
the 28th of February they boarded flight 370 using different identities, a stolen Austrian and a stolen
Italian passport,” said Mr Noble.
Ocean Observation
EU has the tech and infrastructure available to monitor environmental problems with
the oceans
EMSA 14, European Maritime Safety Agency, nearest date given is 2014, the EMSA is the developer of
satellites used by the European Union for the purpose of environmental observation, “Earth Observation
Services,” http://emsa.europa.eu/operations/cleanseanet.html, NN
CleanSeaNet is a European satellite-based oil spill and vessel detection service. It offers assistance to
participating States for the following activities: identifying and tracing oil pollution on the sea surface
monitoring accidental pollution during emergencies contributing to the identification of polluters What
it does The CleanSeaNet service is based on radar satellite images, covering all European sea areas,
which are analysed in order to detect possible oil spills on the sea surface. When a possible oil spill is
detected in national waters, an alert message is delivered to the relevant country. Analysed images are
available to national contact points within 30 minutes of the satellite passing overhead. Approximately
2,000 images are ordered and analysed per year. The service, which is integrated into national and
regional pollution response chains, aims to strengthen operational responses to accidental and
deliberate discharges from ships, and assist participating States to locate and identify polluters in areas
under their jurisdiction. Vessel detection is also available through the CleanSeaNet service. When a
vessel is detected on in a satellite image, the identity of the vessel can often be determined through
correlating the satellite data with vessel traffic reports (SafeSeaNet). This increases the likelihood that a
State will be able to determine which vessel is polluting and take action (e.g. verifying the spill,
inspecting the vessel on entry into port). Each coastal State has access to the CleanSeaNet service
through a dedicated user interface, which enables them to view ordered images. Users can also access a
wide range of supplementary information through the interface, such as oil drift modelling (forecasting
and backtracking), optical images, and oceanographic and meteorological information.
Offshore Wind
The EU solves best for offshore wind – best experts and existing support systems
EUR-Lex 14, European Union Law, August 2014, EUR-Lex is an official database used by the European Union
to post official laws and other important documents, “COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Blue Energy Action needed to deliver on the potential of ocean energy in
European seas and oceans by 2020 and beyond,” http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1396419828231&uri=CELEX:52014DC0008, NN
An Ocean Energy Forum will be set up, bringing together stakeholders in a series of workshops in order
to develop a shared understanding of the problems at hand and to collectively devise workable
solutions. It will be instrumental in building capacity and critical mass as well as fostering cooperation
through the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders. The forum will also explore the synergies with
other marine industries, particularly offshore wind, in matters relating to supply chains, grid connection,
operations and maintenance, logistics and spatial planning. Representatives from relevant industries
could be invited to participate as appropriate depending on the issues discussed. The Commission will
play a facilitating and coordinating role in the forum. The forum will be organised into three
workstreams: a) Technology and Resource Workstream The commercialisation of the ocean energy
sector will require additional technological advancement as well as further improvements in grid
connections and other offshore supply chain infrastructure. Improving the affordability, reliability,
survivability, operability and stability of ocean energy devices[18] is essential. There is already some
consensus on the priority areas of technology research including, for example, the need for better
mooring systems or new materials. Possibilities for collaborative working could also be identified in
order to use resources more efficiently and to facilitate technological convergence. A clear timeframe,
including key technological milestones will be set out. This workstream will include a detailed
assessment of ocean energy resources and offshore infrastructures such as ports and vessels, as
improvements in these areas would help to optimise the management of ocean energy devices and thus
trigger corresponding cost reductions. This workstream would also seek to trigger further improvements
in the integration of offshore renewables into the energy system. The industry would have the
opportunity to voice its needs on issues such as the research and development needs related to grid
technology, energy output forecasting and storage technologies could also be explored. The outcomes
will then be transmitted to relevant actors such as regulatory authorities, transmission system operators
and relevant fora such the North Seas Countries’ Offshore Grid Initiative. b) Administrative Issues and
Finance Workstream Long lead times caused by lengthy permitting and licensing procedures and
difficulty of access to finance have been identified as pressing challenges. The aim of this workstream
will be to examine the administrative procedures relevant to ocean energy installations in Member
States and the effects that ocean energy installations may have on shipping. These administrative and
safety issues need to be reviewed collaboratively between Member State authorities and industry in this
workshop, in order to lead to a common understanding of the challenges faced on all sides, and how to
tackle them. The information gathered in the discussions will be used to compile a catalogue of best
practice, complemented with case studies. The issues relating to finance will also be examined. Given
the novelty and the complexity of the technologies, investors may be unaware of the opportunities that
this industry offers. This workstream should involve national authorities, development banks, private
financiers and project developers to discuss how best to trigger the necessary investment. The suitability
of different risk-sharing mechanisms such as soft-loans, co-investment and public guarantees will also be
assessed. The funding opportunities available within EU research and innovation programmes such as
Horizon 2020, the NER300 programme and the European Investment Bank's renewable energy funding
programme will be specifically highlighted. c) Environment Workstream Environmental Impact
Assessments are key to ensure the sustainable development of this emerging industry. Collecting
baseline environmental data, however, places a major burden on individual project developers relative
to the size of single projects. This workstream will encourage collaborative working on the monitoring of
the environmental impacts of existing and planned installations and on innovative ways of mitigating the
impact of ocean energy on the marine environment. The data on environmental impacts and monitoring
need to be fed into national authorities as a matter of routine, under the Water Framework Directive
and Marine Strategy Framework Directives purposes. A comprehensive framework of EU legislation
covering nature conservation, environmental impact assessment and renewable energy already exists,
complemented by the Commission's proposal for a Directive on Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP).
However, this workstream should assess the need for sector-specific implementation guidelines, similar
to those already developed for wind energy, to complement the Habitats and Birds Directives, Article 13
of the Renewable Energy Directive and a possible future Directive on MSP. ii. Ocean Energy Strategic
Roadmap Based on the outcomes of the Ocean Energy Forum, a Strategic Roadmap will be developed
setting out clear targets for the industrial development of the sector as well as a timeframe for their
achievement. In setting technology priorities, it will take into account the key principles and
developments announced by the Communication on Energy Technologies and Innovation[19] and will
provide input and become part of the "Integrated Roadmap".[20] This roadmap will be elaborated
jointly by industry, Member States, interested regional authorities, NGOs and other relevant
stakeholders through a structured and participative process, as outlined above. The roadmap will bring
together findings from all areas relevant to the development of the industry and provide an agreed
blueprint for action in order to help the ocean energy sector move towards industrialisation.
The EU is massively increasing offshore wind investment – becoming a leader in the
industry
EWEA 13, European Wind Energy Association, nearest date given is 2013, EWEA is a European company that
studies the effects of different forms of energy, “Offshore wind,” http://www.ewea.org/policy-issues/offshore/,
NN
Europe's offshore wind potential is enormous and able to meet Europe's demand seven times over, as
estimated by the European Environment Agency's (EEA). The European Commission anticipated, in its
2008 Communication on offshore wind energy (EC, 2008) that "offshore wind can and must make a
substantial contribution to meeting the EU's energy policy objectives through a very significant increase
- in the order of 30-40 times by 2020 and 100 times by 2030 - in installed capacity compared to today."
Key numbers: 5 GW installed end 2012 10% of Europe's annual wind energy installations 40 GW installed
capacity by 2020, equivalent to 4% of EU electricity demand or 148 TWh production 150 GW by 2030,
meeting 14% of EU electricity demand or 562 TWh. The offshore wind sector brings considerable
economic opportunities. The offshore industry contributes to Europe's competitiveness and leadership
in wind energy, provides employment in the EU, reduces Europe's import dependence and reinforces its
security of supply. Key numbers: Around €3.4bn to €4.6bn annual investment (2012) 58,000 FTE (2012)
191,000 FTE in 2020 and 318,000 FTE in 2030 (60% of wind employment) Key texts: EC Communication
(2012): Blue Growth - opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable EWEA (2012) The European
offshore wind industry - key trends and statistics 2012 EWEA (2011) The European offshore wind
industry - key trends and statistics 2011 EWEA (2011) Wind in our Sails - The coming of Europe's
offshore wind energy industry 2011 EWEA (2011) European Offshore Wind Energy Map 2011 EWEA
(2011) Pure Power EEA (2009) Europe's onshore and offshore wind energy potential EWEA (2009)
Oceans of opportunity EC Communication (2008) Offshore Wind Energy: Action needed to deliver on the
Energy Policy Objectives for 2020 and beyond The offshore grid Europe's offshore grid should be built to
integrate the expected 40GW of offshore wind power by 2020 and 150 GW by 2030. EWEA's proposed
offshore grid builds on the 11 offshore grids currently operating and 21 offshore grids currently being
considered by the grid operators in the Baltic and North Seas to give Europe a truly pan-European
electricity super highway. A European transnational offshore grid will: Provide grid access to offshore
wind farms Smooth the variability of their output on the markets Contribute to the development of a
single European electricity market Ensure Europe's energy security Key texts: European Commission
(2011) - Guideline for trans-European energy infrastructure - Proposals for a regulation IEE Project
(2011) OffshoreGrid: Offshore Electricity Infrastructure in Europe The North Seas Countries' Offshore
Grid Initiative - Memorandum of Understanding - (2010) EWEA (2009) - 20 Year Offshore Network
Development Master Plan Stockholm Declaration (2009) Maritime spatial planning Maritime Spatial
Planning (MSP) is key to enhancing offshore wind development. It provides stability and clarity for the
investors and can bring down the costs of wind energy through an optimum integration of the wind
farms into the marine environment. EWEA strongly supports the development of an integrated and
coordinated Maritime Spatial Planning policy across Europe.
OTEC
The European Union solves best for OTEC – current infrastructure and large-scale
funding prove
EU Energy 13, EU Energy Commission, 8/19/13, the EU Energy Commission is a subdivision of the European
Union, “OCEAN ENERGY,” http://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/eu/index_en.cfm?pg=research-ocean, NN
The ocean is an enormous source of energy. It is estimated that 0.1% of the energy in ocean waves could
be capable of supplying the entire world's energy requirements five times over. Currently, a number of
technologies aimed at harnessing this potential have been investigated and are at different stages of
development including tidal and marine energy, wave energy, difference of temperature and salinity
energy. A description of these technologies can be found at the website of European Ocean Energy
Association (EU-OEA). Conversion of tidal energy into electricity has been widely investigated and can be
compared to the technology used in hydroelectric power plants. In fact, electricity is generated by water
flowing into and out of gates and turbines installed along a dam or barrage built across a tidal bay or
estuary. More recently, technologies for exploiting wave and currents energy have been developed and
tested on small-scale and, for a limited number of cases, on a large scale. On the other hand,
technologies related with the difference of temperature and of salinity are at an early stage of
development. With Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), the difference of temperature between
cold, deep seawaters and warm, shallow waters creates a thermodynamic cycle, which can be used for
producing electricity. In the case of salinity gradients, the difference in salinity between seawater and
fresh water creates a pressure difference which can be exploited to extract energy. Due to the urgent
demand for clean renewable energy and given the enormous potential of this source, the European
Commission has supported ocean energy research and development for many years through funding
research projects and promoting cooperation between stakeholders.
EU is building toward stronger OTEC technology – soon to be leading the world
Le Club des argonautes 05, Le Club des argonautes, November 2005, the source is a European journal
dedicated to different forms of alternative energy production, “OTEC : A neglected marine energy renewable,”
http://www.clubdesargonautes.org/energie/promoetmvva.php, NN
For the past 20 years these two countries maintained some momentum in the research for technical
solutions and economical options to render OTEC more and more attractive. They have optimised the
characteristics of components: heat exchangers and turbines, conforted the reliability of the marine
components - especially for the construction and the deployement of Cold Water Pipes, and developed
the concept of "multi-products” OTEC plants up to some tens of MW. This "multi-products" concept
aims to optimizing other usages of Deep Ocean Water (DOW) : for desalinated water and aquaculture
products, and for other products matching the demand from small isolated communities located close
from the resource. Also they have studied extrapolation to large size plants up to several hundreds MW
for the offshore production of liquid synthetic fuels (hydrogen, ammoniac and methanol) to be
transported by tankers and satisfying the demand of industrialized countries located in region far from
the resource. At last, data acquired during the two past decades by running experimental plants enabled
better evaluation of negative and positive environmental impacts caused by the still cold and nutrient
rich Deep Ocean Water effluent. During the same period of time developed the idea that clean and
renewable energy will become more and more necessary for lessening the vulnerability of traditional
fuels supply caused by political embargo or resource depletion, and also for mitigating as much as
possible the severe and durable negative effects their usage causes to our environment . To these
reasons one should add that of the change - in course - of the balance of the energy demands between
rich and poor countries. From the beginning of the Industrial era the richest have been both the most
important consumers and the greatest polluters. Tomorrow the poorest will come first because their
demographic growth and their increasing demand for improving their life standard. Well, note these
countries from the “South” are also those where the OTEC resource is the most easily accessible. Future
Energy Prospects : estimating the demand for OTEC. The 1999 OCDE report : " Energy, the Next Fifty
years " established several scenarios for the evolution of the World primary energy demand, starting
from 1990 data with population of 5,26 billions and a consumption of primary energy of 8,98 Gtoe,
namely 1,7 toe per inhabitant. In the most pessimistic business-as-usual scenario, the power
consumption of primary energy was predicted at 24 Gtoe in 2050, for a population of 10 billions. In the "
ecological " (Green) scenario, in agreement with the Kyoto protocole, the figure for primary energy
raises to 14 Gtoe for a population of 10 billions. This " Green " scenario was also the cheapest with a
capital investment of 24 billion US dollars over fifty years. It was based on the assumption of increasing
fourfold the renewable energy production: from a 1,6 Gtoe (in 1990) to 5 Gtoe (in 2050), with an
intermediary step of 2,3 Gtoe in 2020. Supplying 5 to 10% of these needs thanks to OTEC could be the
aim for an European Union R&D program.
The European Union is on the road to be leading in OTEC technology
EREC 12, European Renewable Energy Council, nearest date given is 2012, EREC is an organization that
provides the public information on energy policies within Europe, “Ocean Energy,”
http://www.erec.org/renewable-energy/ocean-energy.html, NN
The ocean is an enormous source of renewable energy with the potential to satisfy an important
percentage of the European electricity supply. Conversion of the wave energy resource alone could
supply a substantial part of the electricity demand of several European countries, in particular Ireland,
the UK, Denmark, Portugal, Spain and Norway, especially on islands and in remote areas. The best ocean
energy resources within the EU Member States are wave energy and marine currents, which have seen
the most technological development. Salinity gradient systems are being developed in Norway and the
Netherlands. Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) technologies are not yet available in Europe but
can be harvested at latitudes closer to the Equator with technologies developed by European
companies. The technologies used to exploit the different ocean resources (waves, tidal range, tidal
stream/marine currents, salinity gradients and ocean thermal energy conversion) are quite diverse. They
can be categorised according to their basic principles of conversion. The different concepts for wave
energy conversion can be onshore, near-shore and offshore and rely on several working principles (e.g.
oscillating water columns – OWC). Tidal barrage technologies are similar to large hydropower dams, but
adapted to ebb and flood tides. Marine current devices are less diversified than wave energy devices.
They could use a range of working principles and they can either be rigidly mounted in the seabed, piled
mounted, semi-submersible with moorings or attached to a floating structure. The technology to
harness salinity gradient power uses the osmotic pressure differences between salt and fresh water or
between water bodies of different salinity. OTEC relies on using the temperature differences between
shallow and deep sea to drive a turbines. Over the past few years, dedicated infrastructure for wave and
tidal sea trials have been created in several European countries. They facilitate deployment of
technologies from prototype to commercial phase by making cable connection available and / or
simplifying the licensing procedure. At present, several grid connected test areas are under
development, scheduled to be operational with the coming 1 to 3 years.
Renewables
The EU’s development of the ocean is specifically key to future renewable infrastructure
EUR-Lex 14, European Union Law, August 2014, EUR-Lex is an official database used by the European Union
to post official laws and other important documents, “COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Blue Energy Action needed to deliver on the potential of ocean energy in
European seas and oceans by 2020 and beyond,” http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1396419828231&uri=CELEX:52014DC0008, NN
Contribution to Employment, Innovation, Climate and Energy Objectives Our seas and oceans have the
potential to become important sources of clean energy. Marine renewable energy, which includes both
offshore wind and ocean energy[1], presents the EU with an opportunity to generate economic growth
and jobs, enhance the security of its energy supply and boost competitiveness through technological
innovation. Following the 2008 Communication on offshore wind energy[2], this Communication
considers the potential of the ocean energy sector to contribute to the objectives of the Europe 2020
Strategy[3] as well EU's long-term greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. It also looks over the
horizon at this promising new technology and outlines an action plan to help unlock its potential.
Harnessing the economic potential of our seas and oceans in a sustainable manner is a key element in
the EU's maritime policy[4]. The ocean energy sector was recently highlighted in the Commission's Blue
Growth Strategy[5] as one of five developing areas in the ‘blue economy’ that could help drive job
creation in coastal areas. Other Commission initiatives, such as the Communication on Energy
Technologies and Innovation[6] and the Atlantic Action Plan[7], have recognised the importance of
ocean energy and aim to encourage collaborative research and development and cross-border
cooperation to boost its development. Research and consultation work conducted as a part of the
impact assessment accompanying this Communication shows that additional support for this emerging
sector could enable the EU to reap significant economic and environmental benefits. The impact
assessment particularly highlights the following issues: · The ocean energy resource available globally
exceeds our present and projected future energy needs. In the EU, the highest potential for the
development of ocean energy is on the Atlantic seaboard, but is also present in the Mediterranean and
the Baltic basins and in the Outermost Regions. Exploiting this indigenous resource would help to
mitigate EU dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation and enhance energy security. This may
be particularly important for island nations and regions, where ocean energy can contribute to energy
self-sufficiency and replace expensive diesel-generated electricity. · The ocean energy sector can
become an important part of the blue economy, fuelling economic growth in coastal regions, as well as
inland. Pan-European supply chains could develop as the industry expands involving both innovative
SMEs and larger manufacturing companies with relevant capabilities in, for example, shipbuilding,
mechanical, electrical and maritime engineering but also environmental impact assessment or health
and safety management. Increased demand for specialised ships is also to be expected, for instance.
These are likely to be constructed in European shipyards. · The position of European industry in the
global ocean energy market is currently strong. This is evidenced by the fact that most of the technology
developers are based in Europe. Growing competition from China, Canada and other industrialised
nations is, however, expected. The UK's Carbon Trust estimated that the global wave and tidal energy
market could be worth up to €535 billion between 2010 and 2050[8]. Creating the conditions under
which the sector could prosper now would enable the EU to capture a sizable share of the market in the
future. Innovation through research and development can allow the EU to generate export
opportunities for both technology and expertise. It is critical, therefore, to ensure that the EU can
maintain its global industrial leadership. · Ocean energy has the potential to create new, high-quality
jobs in project development, component manufacturing and operations. Indicative job estimates from
the impact assessment show that 10,500-26,500 permanent jobs and up to 14,000 temporary jobs could
be created by 2035. Other, more optimistic sources estimate 20,000 jobs by 2035 in UK alone[9] and
18,000 in France by 2020[10]. A substantial proportion of these employment opportunities will arise in
the Atlantic coastal areas, which currently suffer from high unemployment. · Scaling up the deployment
of ocean energy could contribute to Europe's decarbonisation goals. Developing all sources of lowcarbon energy in a cost-effective manner will be important to deliver on the EU's commitment to reduce
its greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95% by 2050. · Ocean energy electricity output is different to that
derived from other renewable energy sources. This means that ocean energy could help to balance out
the output of other renewable energy sources such as wind energy and solar energy to ensure a steady
aggregate supply of renewable energy to the grid. Ocean energy would therefore be a valuable asset in
the EU's energy portfolio. · Ocean energy devices tend to be entirely or partially submerged and
therefore have a low visual impact. As the scope for expansion of land-based renewable energy
generation becomes constrained, the marine space offers a potential solution to public acceptance
issues related to visual impact, which may hinder renewable energy developments on land.
EU support is critical to sustain offshore renewable revolution
reNews 6/10
Real time news website tracking the renewable energy market, “EU action ‘key to marine success’,”6/10/14, http://renews.biz/68000/euaction-key-to-marine-success/
Europe’s wave and tidal sector will need action from the EU and its member states to help get pilot array
projects in the water, according to the SI Ocean project. The report Market Deployment Strategy, produced by RenewableUK and Ocean
Energy Europe and published today, states that completing these early projects in the short-term is crucial if Europe is to
maintain its frontrunner advantage and capture a new industrial market in the next decade. Researchers present the benefits a strong wave
and tidal sector would create for Europe’s economies and societies while identifying the main barriers to industrialisation. The document also
includes recommendations for policy makers on how to address those barriers, which are placed under four categories; finance, technology,
environmental regulation and grid access. Ocean Energy Europe chief executive and chair of the SI Ocean advisory board Sian George (pictured)
said: “SI Ocean has clearly identified the importance of getting several pilot arrays plugged in and operational in the near future. “It is also clear
that these
arrays are pre-commercial, demonstration projects and need to be supported accordingly, which
wave and tidal sector’s
ability to reduce risk related to finance, technology, project consenting and grid access for ocean energy
projects over the next decade will determine when we start to see industrial roll-out. “The SI Ocean
project has produced a solid strategy for this to happen, which the Ocean Energy Forum will now use as a basis for its strategic
is an important message for policy makers”. RenewableUK chief executive Maria McCaffery said: “The
roadmap”.
European Union Currently Leads Renewable technology
Renssen ’14 [February 2014, Sonja van Renssen is co-founder and Brussels correspondent of Energy
Post, “EU’s global cleantech leadership at risk” http://www.energypost.eu/eus-global-cleantechleadership-risk/]
Renewable energy is no doubt one of the great success stories of the EU. As the European
Commission noted in its recent ‘Energy Economic Developments’ report, the EU has claimed 40%
of all renewable energy patents over the last decade – more than the US. Wind power has shown
the biggest growth in net generating capacity since 2000, according to the Annual Statistics 2013
of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA): 105 Gigawatt (GW), more even than gas-fired
capacity. In 2012, fossil fuel-fired generation for the first time accounted for less than half of total
European electricity generation, Eurelectric – the European association of electricity companies –
noted last December. The European renewables sector today employs 1.2 million people. In short,
renewable energy is a new indigenous source of power that promotes European energy
independence, creates jobs, exemplifies European innovation and technological leadership, and
yes, combats climate change. What’s there not to like? Well there is a price tag. Subsidies have shot up to around €35-45bn
a year in recent years (€46bn in 2012, according to the International Energy Agency) and national governments have created havoc
amongst investors by turning the clock back on subsidies in a bid to claw back precious swathes of the public budget. Renewables have
been a victim of their own success with solar PV leading the pack: as costs dropped by almost two-thirds in five years and subsidy
schemes failed to keep up, the result was massive overcompensation for ever keener investors. Retroactive cuts to subsidies followed
in countries such as Spain, which have shaken the industry to its core. At current levels of deployment, renewables remain a cost to
consumers because the drop in wholesale prices they trigger (35-45% from 2008-12, posits the Commission in its recent energy prices
policy paper) is still outweighed by how much subsidy they require to compete with conventional power production. The cost to
households is exacerbated in countries like Germany where large industrial consumers are exempt from green levies to protect their
international competitiveness. Whopping deficit Yet renewables
have added a new dimension to European
competitiveness: “The expansion of renewables has provided opportunities in terms of industrial
equipment and trade flows,” says the Commission in its important ‘Energy Economic
Developments’ report. The EU shows “strong comparative advantages” in the wind industry with
a trade surplus of €2.45bn in wind components in 2012. Its lead in wind coincides with a large
share of world wind patents since 2000. Indeed, EU export performance is strong in technologies
where it has a strong portfolio of patents, reports the Commission, pointing attention to the
importance of innovation and R&D policies in promoting new green sectors. The EU will spend
35% of its €70bn R&D budget for 2014-20 on meeting its climate and energy goals, EU climate
commissioner Connie Hedegaard said recently in aninterview with viEUws. The Commission is also
drawing up a new energy R&D strategy for the post-2020 period.
Europe leading investment in clean tech leadership now, key to their energy
independence and economic well being
Weitzman ‘2009 [October 8 2009, Works at Solar Feeds and has a masters and bachelor degree from
the University of Vermont, “Europe Ups the Stakes in Global Cleantech Race”
http://www.solarfeeds.com/europe-ups-the-stakes-in-global-cleantech-race]
Europe plans to triple annual funding for energy research to $11.7billion in an effort to compete with
Japan and the United States, whichhave both invested vast sms for new energy and technology
research,according to the Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET Plan) by the European Commission
reported by Reutersyesterday. Ultimately, the EU will add more than 50 billion eurosof new funding for
research over the next 10 years to ensure a widerange of technology emerges to help the EU meet its
goal of reducinggreenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050. Solar energy research is set to receive
16 billion euros over the next decade while as many as 30 ultra energy-efficient “Smart Cities“ are
scheduled be built with a price tag of 11 billion euros. Wind energyresearch should get 6 billion euros
over the next decade, nuclearresearch should get 7 billion euros and energy from biomass and
otherwaste 9 billion. There should also be 13 billion euros for researchon “carbon capture and storage”
systems, which aim to sequester carbon dioxide from power stations in geological formations buried
deep underground. “We can not sit back and wait for such potentially game changingbreakthroughs to
emerge from laboratories and make the often long andarduous journey to market,” the report says. The
strategy is aimed at slashing outputof gases blamed for climate change, but it also is to wean the EU
offits dependency on costly oil and gas for 80 percent of its energyneeds. In the meantime, the spending
will likely be a major boon forcleantech companies in Europe. The report also predicts the investment in
cleantech will create anestimated 250,000 jobs over the next decade as wind power shifts itsfocus to the
seas. Over 200,000 skilled jobs could be created in thesolar energy sector, and the same number in
bioenergy plants togenerate energy from burning household and agricultural waste. “Motor fuels direct
from sunlight, digital light sources that lastfor decades, batteries that store electricity at 10 times the
currentdensity — these are some of the technologies of the future . . . ,”says the draft. “To master them
we have to explore new levels ofcomplexity in the physical and chemical phenomena that control
howmaterials perform and interact.”
Space Elevators
The EU solves best for space elevators – most funding being provided
EUSPEC 14, European Space Elevator Challenge, nearest date given is 2014, EUSPEC is an organization that
has provided a challenge for who can create the most efficient, effective, and cheap method for establishing a
space elevator, “Background Information,” http://euspec.warr.de/background?lang=en, NN
The fundamental idea of the “space elevator” goes back to 1895, when the scientist Konstantin
Tsiolkovsky considered building a tower from the surface of the Earth and reaching into the
geostationary orbit of space. The Artsutanov paper – 1960 – proposed a way to build a tensile structure
to the geostationary orbit of space. The aim was and still is, among other objectives, to deliver payload –
for example equipment, items, satellites etc. - to space in an economically viable way. This idea could be
an alternative solution to the expansive use of rockets. The actual concept of the space elevator system
includes a tether reaching from the surface of the Earth to the geostationary orbit. To keep the tether
taut by means of gravitational and rotational forces, the center of mass of the space elevator has to be
kept above this orbit. A climber is attached to the tether, which carries the payload up to the space
station or to the satellite. The energy supply is planned to be realized by “power beaming” (such as
laser), as well as using solar cells. European Space Elevator Challenge The challenge is to establish a
climber structure in compliance with predetermined requirements (see General Rules and
Requirements). Our focus is on: the efficiency of the climber the technical implementation of the
climber (especially payload systems) aspects which directly impact the development of the “real” space
elevator system Our main aims of the European Space Elevator Challenge are: to inspire young
engineers and scientists with the idea of the space elevator system and moreover to establish a larger
European space elevator community to increase our understanding of the space elevator system by
exchanging experiences, -also utilizing these experiences for the development of a real space elevator
system to introduce the space elevator concept to the public These aims are considered as long-term
goals and cannot be accomplished with one competition. Hence, our goal is to organize the European
Space Elevator Challenge annually. The European challenge offers participants the opportunity to
participate in two while later competitions will have up to four levels (see also section 3 General Rules
and Requirements). The Organizers Space Elevator Team The European Space Elevator Challenge is
organized by WARR, the Scientific Workgroup for Rocketry and Spaceflight of the Technische Universität
München (TUM). The members are mostly enrolled and alumni students from different institutes of the
TUM. WARR was founded in 1962 and is the oldest scientific workgroup of the TUM. The aim of WARR is
to provide its members with the opportunity to accomplish scientific work as an addition to their
studies.
The EU is leading space elevator development – most funding and infrastructure
Hollingham 12, Richard Hollingham, 8/20/12, Hollingham is a scientific researcher and staff writer for the
BBC, “Space elevators: Going up?” http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120817-space-elevators-going-up, NN
The Russians don’t do countdowns. For the final few seconds before launch those of us watching just
hold our breath and stand well back. I find several thousand kilometres back at the European Space
Agency’s mission control in Germany to be safest. When ignition comes, the launcher is engulfed in
clouds of toxic orange smoke before it rises through the inferno and accelerates into the clouds. Many
of these Russian rockets, such as the Cosmos and Rockot launchers, are converted from missiles
designed to deliver nuclear warheads. Given that their launch would originally have signalled the end of
the world, I don’t suppose the toxicity of the smoke was a major design consideration. Rockets are
dangerous, complicated and relatively unreliable. No-one has yet built a launcher that is guaranteed to
work every time. A misaligned switch, loose bolt or programming error can lead to disaster or, with a
human crew, a potential tragedy. Rockets are also incredibly expensive - even the cheapest launch will
set you back some $12 million, meaning the cost of any cargo costs a staggering $16,700 per kilogram.
Although the funky new space planes being developed, such as Britain’s Skylon or Virgin’s
SpaceShipTwo, will slash the costs of getting into space, they are still based on rocket technology – using
sheer brute force to escape the clutches of gravity. But there is a radical alternative. Science fiction fans
have long been familiar with space elevators. Popularised by Arthur C Clarke, the concept of an elevator
from the Earth to orbit has been around for more than a century. In the space operas of Iain M Banks or
Alastair Reynolds, space elevators are pretty much taken for granted – they’re what advanced
civilisations use to leave their planets. These futuristic engineering feats consist of a cable – also known
as a ribbon or tether - of material stretching from the Earth’s surface into orbit. An anchor and Earth’s
gravity at the lower end, and a counterweight and centrifugal force at the top end keep the elevator’s
“cable” taut and stationary over ground station. Robotic ‘climbers’ would then pull themselves up the
ribbon from the surface, through the stratosphere and out into space, potentially powered by lasers.
The climbers could carry satellites up and bring minerals from the moon, or asteroids, back. They could
take tourists into orbit or convey astronauts on the first part of their journey to the stars. No longer
would space exploration be held back by gravity or rely on smelly, dangerous and expensive rockets.
“You could take a ride for the cost of a first class airline ticket,” exclaims David Horn, the Conferences
Chair of the International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC). Estimates suggest that the cost of sending
cargo into space could plummet to around $100 per kilogram. “A primary school could have a bake sale
to cover the costs of sending a class science experiment into space.” Or, by selling enough cakes, even
the entire class. ISEC has been organising space elevator conferences for the past ten years – the latest
will be held in Seattle later this month. They are attended by scientists, engineers and students from
around the world, including those from various national space agencies like Nasa. There are also annual
conferences in Europe and Japan and technical papers on various aspects of space elevators are
published every year. "There’s global interest,” says Horn. “Reducing the cost to access space will
change the global economy.” Which would be wonderful, but how much of this interest is just wishful
thinking?
Tidal Power
The EU is establishing more infrastructure for tidal power – that solves
EurActiv 14, EurActiv, 4/2/14, EurActiv is a British news source that primarily writes about energy concerns,
“Ocean energy chief: Wave and tidal power can boost European industry,”
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/energy/ocean-energy-chief-wave-and-tidal-power-can-boost-europeanindustry-301314, NN
To commercially deploy ocean energy technology will require €500 million in investment before 2020,
grid roll-outs, a common European framework, public-private partnerships and, ideally, feed-in tariffs,
Remi Gruet told EurActiv. But its advantages could more than outweigh that. Remi Gruet is the policy
and operations director for Ocean Energy Europe What policy progress have we seen since the EU’s
Ocean Energy action plan was announced in January? Quite a bit, The Commission and Ocean Energy
Europe worked together to design the energy forum [for 2016] in a way that would enable industry, the
Commission and member states to identify core issues and solutions for the sector, and implement
them. We have two meetings planned - one in Brussels this Friday, 4 April, and one in Dublin on 11 June,
and these will gather stakeholders, industry representatives, academics, think tanks, member states and
the Commission together. What is the forum’s purpose? The forum was flagged in the EU’s action plan.
Its objective is to identify core issues and implement solutions. Deliverables are a market deployment
strategy and at the end of the forum, hopefully an industry initiative at the EU level. If we manage to
reach that stage, it will be a success. The forum will include three workstreams – technology, markets &
finance, and infrastructural and environmental issues. What impact has it had on investment so far?
Investment will tend to come towards the end of the forum. At the moment it is driven by member state
policies supporting the sector. The Commission’s announcement was not aimed at driving investment so
much as raising awareness and putting the right people together so they could work out how to get the
investments going. What do you think the industry initiative could look like? It is a bit early to answer
that. Our objective is to leverage €500 million by 2020 and the roadmap can deliver part of that
objective. We hope that it will get member states together to agree on the framework for supporting
ocean energy. That needs to be concerted so that we have a very good result at European level, and we
have competition across countries that are interested in the sector. What we need is a consistent
framework across different countries so companies are not jumping from one framework to another
and have better access to projects than at the moment. The procedural part of the forum is important.
There are lots of issues around grid connections and the time it takes to get consent. All of that has an
impact on the cost of energy in the end. The more streamlined the procedures are and the easier the
access to finance is, then obviously the lower the cost of energy in the end. Which Ocean Energy sectors
are likely to benefit the most - tidal, salinity gradient or ocean thermal energy? We expect all
technologies to benefit. Solutions currently tend to be focused on tidal and wave as they are closest to
market at present, but we want to go beyond those and include all other technologies as well. What sort
of targets and timeframe for the industrial development of the sector are you hoping for in 2016? A
target of providing 100GW in ocean energy by 2050 is our long term vision but by 2025, we also have a
target for the market roll-out of ocean energies. By 2015, we expect to have a few of those technologies
being reliable enough to be deployed. By 2020 we expect to have a better cost-confidence and by 2025,
we expect to have market rollout beginning with the first cost-competitive commercial farms. You used
to work for the European Wind Energy Agency, what similarities and differences do you find with ocean
energy? There is a really important similarity in that it is highly likely that these technologies are going to
be built in Europe by European companies. If you look at the wind sector, over 90% of turbines installed
in Europe are sold by European companies – including 100% of offshore turbines. That is because of
similarities in the types of device we are talking about – bulky devices that are heavy and require specific
investment and a high level of knowledge to handle. These are not solar panels on the roof. They are big
things that you need cranes and ships to move. Because of the similarities, I expect the EU market to be
controlled by EU players, which from an economic crisis and industrial developments perspective is a
good thing. For me, that is a key parallel to be made between wind and ocean energies. You can see this
already in market - Alstom, Siemens, GDF Suez and the utilities involved, and even smaller companies
like Aquamarine Power on the wave side, they are EU players testing and installing here. Is work on
Ocean Energy public-private partnerships going on beneath the radar? There is lots of discussion around
innovative finance in the sector. Historically it has relied on grants but companies have also invested
over €600 million euros in the last seven years. We estimate that there has been €80 million of public
funds invested in the last few years as well. Private funding is much higher at the moment and one key
area the forum will look at is how to leverage private finance using public money - not just in grants but
loans but through risk sharing, funds and facilities etcetera.
The EU is leading the tidal power industry – UK developments in the field prove
McGrath 13, Matt McGrath, 1/13/13, McGrath is an environmental consultant for the BBC, “UK tidal power
has huge potential, say scientists,” http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20983645, NN
The UK is underestimating the amount of electricity that could be generated from tidal sources, new
research says. The analysis says that estuary barrages and tidal streams could provide more than 20% of
the nation's demand for electricity. Despite high costs, experts say tidal power is more reliable than
wind. The predictable nature of tides makes them an ideal renewable energy source, the journal
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A reports. But finding effective ways of utilising their
latent power have proved elusive. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote Start small, learn quick
and build up” Dr Nicholas Yates National Oceanography Centre Essentially, engineers try to tap tides in
two ways: one involves building barrages across tidal estuaries that use the ebb and flow of the waters
to turn turbines - a major project of this type had been proposed for the River Severn. The other method
involves planting turbines underwater in fast flowing tidal streams in areas such as in coastal waters
around Cornwall and Scotland. Smaller better In the Royal Society report, researchers say they are
"extremely optimistic" that both types of technology can be realised and relatively soon. La Rance tidal
station (Getty Images) La Rance in Brittany, France, is the site of the world's first tidal power station
"From tidal barrages you can reasonably expect you can get 15% of UK electricity needs, that's a very
solid number," co-author Dr Nicholas Yates from the National Oceanography Centre told BBC News.
" On top of that there is a 5% tidal stream figure, and with future technological development that is
likely to be an underestimate in my view ," he said. The massive Severn estuary tidal barrage scheme
had been rejected by the coalition government because of its environmental impact, but ministers have
indicated they are open to review the idea. Despite his faith in the idea of barrages, Dr Yates, who
carried out the research with colleagues at the University of Liverpool, says he is against building one
across the Severn. "I think it's unfortunate that attention for tidal range has tended to focus on the
Severn, it's the wrong place to start, it's too big," he said. "Start small, it's what the Danes did with wind
- start small, learn quick and build up.". Developing power from offshore tidal streams is fraught with
difficulty, as the BBC discovered when reporting on the emerging industry in Scotland last year. Better
than wind But according to the authors of the latest research, 2013 could see a big breakthrough in tidal
stream power. A company called MeyGen is planning to deploy tidal stream technology in the Pentland
Firth that will initially generate up to 40MW of electricity, enough to power about 38,000 homes. "This is
a crucial milestone for us, it will be the first array of tidal stream turbines," observed report co-author
Professor AbuBakr Bahaj from the University of Southampton. "It will be a viable proposition for us in
energetic areas of the sea - it will be give us another element in the energy mix that's more reliable than
wind." Another key element that researchers have looked at in this research is the quality of the power
produced by tidal sources. The SeaGen project in Northern Ireland is the largest grid connected tidal
turbine in the world. Analysts have been looking to see if the power produced suffered from flicker,
caused by loads that vary. It's an established problem with older wind energy turbines and something
that causes consumers great annoyance when it happens to their lights. "In general, the results were
very good, the flicker levels were quite low," said Joseph MacEnri from ESB International who assessed
SeaGen. "Overall this device behaves like a modern, well-behaved wind turbine." While the report
paints a positive future for tidal power, a critical element is money. In the past month ,the EU has
announced funding in the region of £30m for two UK tidal projects. Investors in tidal technology are
currently rewarded with a payment of £40 per megawatt hour for energy generated from renewables,
but this scheme will end in 2017. According to Prof Bahaj, this could have serious implications for the
nascent industry. "It depends on the subsidy. Without it, it wouldn't stack up financially."
Warming
EU Success in Clean Tech uniquely key to solve warming, U.S doesn’t have the legitimacy
to encourage global action to solve
Parker ’10 [August 12 2010, Charles F Parker is a faculty member of theDepartment of Government at
Uppsala University,
“Climate Change and the European Union's Leadership Moment: An Inconvenient Truth?”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02080.x/full]
The EU's goal, as it states in its own words, is nothing short of ‘[l]eading global action’ against climate
change ‘to 2020 and beyond’ with the aim of limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius above
pre-industrial levels (Council, 2007, pp. 10–11). The Union, in its quest to play a leading role in
international climate protection, has provided high-profile support for the Kyoto Protocol and is
now vigorously throwing its diplomatic weight behind the effort to successfully negotiate a
comprehensive successor arrangement. In the late 1980s, the US began to disengage from
international environmental governance and under George W. Bush's administration the US
completely abdicated its leadership role, particularly in the area of climate change. The EU has stepped
into this void and has attempted to shoulder the mantle of leadership. How exactly has the EU attempted to lead the global efforts to
combat climate change? An
examination of the EU's actions reveals that it has deployed all three modes
of leadership in important ways, but it has primarily relied on directional leadership. In terms of
structural leadership the EU – the world's largest market, largest exporter, most generous aid
donor and largest foreign investor – is well endowed to offer economic, technological and
diplomatic incentives. The EU's vast internal market underpins all Union action, provides it with a
powerful bargaining chip and gives it an excellent potential to create and alter incentives. The
ability to act as a gatekeeper for those who want access to the EU market and the ability to
enforce EU standards on trading partners is an extremely valuable power resource. The sheer
scale of the internal market also means that the EU can offer and take actions that will have a
dramatic environmental impact. Despite these advantages, the EU has struggled to translate its material resources into
influence. This difficulty can in part be attributed to the EU's unique characteristics – its status as an intergovernmental actor and the
challenges this presents for truly acting as a Union – and highlights how its leadership efforts are enabled and constrained by its
complex agency-structure dynamics. As others have demonstrated, the EU's leadership impact has not been commensurate with its
structural power (Elgström, 2007). Nonetheless, it was the
EU's ability to leverage its structural leadership that
played an integral role in its successful mission to salvage the Kyoto Protocol. In 2001 President
Bush attempted to scuttle the Kyoto Protocol by announcing that the US was withdrawing from
further involvement with it. The EU responded to Bush's gambit by taking on the mission to save
the Protocol. In the face of US hostility and opposition, the EU successfully rounded up enough
followers for the Protocol to enter into force. It was the EU's support for Russian WTO
membership that was the final carrot that induced Russia to ratify the Protocol, which paved the
way for Kyoto to enter into force (Vogler, 2005). An EU–Russian energy deal that would nearly
double the price of Russian natural gas by 2010 was also a vital sweetener. As President Putin noted
at the time: ‘The European Union has made concessions on some points during the negotiations on
the WTO. This will inevitably have an impact on our positive attitude to the Kyoto process. We will
speed up Russia's movement towards ratifying the Kyoto Protocol’.1 In the run-up to the 2009 Copenhagen
conference, the EU once again displayed a willingness to exercise its structural leadership. On the inducement side, it promised
funding to developing countries for actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change if a satisfactory post-2012 agreement was reached
(Council, 2008b, pp. 6–7). Conversely, the spectre of imposing border tax adjustments on goods from countries with less stringent
climate regulations has been raised by the French as well as Commission President Barroso (BBC News, 2008a). The Union's power
resources also play a role in the second and historically most important leadership mode: directional leadership or leading by example.
The EU, drawing on its capacity and potential to act, has attempted to demonstrate its commitment to fighting climate change by
adopting a number of binding measures to reduce its emissions without corresponding reductions in other countries.
The EU has
also taken unilateral action by making the first move in putting future commitments on the table
and putting into place policy instruments, such as the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS).
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 38 industrialized countries are required to reduce their emissions
by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. The EU-15 agreed to an even larger target, committing to a collective
GHG emissions reduction of 8 per cent. Prior to the start of serious international negotiations for the post-2012 arrangements the
Union took autonomous action to drastically reduce its emissions. At its 2007 spring summit the EU launched its 20-20-20 by 2020 plan
(Council of the European Union, 2007, pp. 10–23). The EU committed to reduce its emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020 and it
dangled the carrot of increasing that cut up to 30 per cent if a satisfactory global agreement was reached. The
EU also
committed to increasing its share of renewable energy to 20 per cent and improving its energy
efficiency by 20 per cent by 2020. In January 2008 the Commission released a blueprint for
implementing and achieving these goals. Eleven months later the work carried out under the codecision procedure produced a first-reading agreement on an energy and climate package. The EU has
also developed and, in 2005, launched the EU-ETS. This established the world's largest companylevel market for trading CO2 emissions. The EU, which sees itself as the world leader in this
emerging market wants the EU-ETS to serve as the ‘pillar of a global carbon trading network’
(Commission, 2007, p. 2). It further envisions a future framework that enables comparable
emission trading arrangements in different regions to be linked together. The EU, which sees the ETS as a
vital tool for developed countries to reach GHG reductions in a cost-effective manner, believes the efficacy of the ETS will be further
enhanced by the revisions enacted by the 2008 climate package. The revised ETS directive, which will apply from 2013 to 2020, brings
new industries into the ETS, covers two additional GHGs, reduces the Community-wide quantity of allowances issued each year,
introduces full auctioning
from 2013 in the power sector and will phase in auctioning for the
manufacturing sector (with exceptions for sectors at risk of ‘carbon leakage’). The EU's promotion
of the revised ETS as a model that is ‘fit to go global’ and serve as the ‘nucleus’ for building a
global carbon market (Commission, 2008) provides a good example of how the EU's directional
leadership dovetails with its policy entrepreneurship activities. Although the idea for emissions trading was
originally a US idea initially resisted by the Europeans, the EU has now fully embraced the concept and
repackaged it as its own. In fact, the ETS has become a political pet that the EU has aggressively
implemented and promoted. The EU's directional leadership in this area has already had an impact as the positive and
negative lessons of the EU-ETS have been studied by emission trading initiatives being set up in the US and other countries. By
taking the lead in committing to sharp unilateral GHG reductions, adopting an aggressive climate
and energy plan, with binding targets for renewable energies and launching the EU-ETS, the EU is
attempting to spotlight that building a low-carbon economy is compatible with energy security,
economic growth and competitiveness. Finally, it is the Union's view that by taking action itself,
demonstrating the utility of that action and by promising to take even more aggressive action in
the future, it can credibly ask others to act as well. The hoped for demonstration effects from
leading by example are also linked to idea-based leadership. The Union has been an active policy
entrepreneur for climate protection. It worked hard to make its voice heard on problem
definition, agenda setting, goal setting and promoting policy solutions regarding the climate
threat. The Union has embraced the scientific conclusions from the IPCC; already in 1996 the
European Council endorsed the goal that global warming must be limited to no more than 2
degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. In addition to defining the nature of the problem, the EU has
conducted its own analysis and put forward its own proposals for what must be done (Council, 2008a). According to the EU
Commission's analysis, GHG emissions must be stabilized by 2020 and then reduced to 50 per cent of 1990 levels by 2050 if the world
is to avert a 2 degrees temperature rise. The Union has also laid out its vision for meeting these goals and how the burden should be
shared among the developed and developing countries. The Union argues that the developed countries must shoulder the lion's share
of the burden over the coming decades. The Union has called for the EU and other developed countries to enter into a new
international agreement requiring collective emission cuts of at least 30 per cent below the 1990 level by 2020. According to the EU,
the developed countries should aim for cuts of 60 to 80 per cent by 2050 (Council of the European Union, 2007, p. 12). The Union
wants these goals and commitments to be enshrined in a post-2012 international agreement containing binding rules with welldeveloped monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The Union also has a timeline in mind and it attempted to get the international
community to accept a 2009 deadline for a new agreement. This
review of the Union's climate leadership actions
and climate protection goals has revealed that the EU has laid out an extensive leadership agenda
for itself. It has also demonstrated that the Union's own actions are an integral part of these
plans. The EU aspires to show leadership by ‘setting a convincing example’ and demonstrating
that actions to reduce GHG emissions are ‘economically and technologically feasible’, which raises
the issue of performance
Whales
The EU is the leading force in preventing whaling across the globe – sonar systems
prove
EC 14, European Commission, 6/3/14, the European Commission is an environmental agency that works close
with the EU, “Underwater Noise: Cetacean disturbance by sonar activities,”
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/whales_dolphins/index_en.htm, NN
The Commission is aware of the current concerns about the impact of sonar on marine mammals. The
claim has been that emission of intense, low and medium frequency tone bursts has a disturbing effect
on cetaceans. Information has also been forwarded that these sonar sounds might also have an impact
on fish and fish behaviour. European legislation (mainly provisions of Directive 92/43/CEE “Habitats”)
requires Member States of the European Union to take requisite measures to establish a system of strict
protection for all cetaceans in European waters. However, in the absence of a comprehensive and
authoritative review of the available information concerning the impact of sonar, it is extremely difficult
to develop a clear position on this issue. dolphinThis question was raised by the Commission in the
Habitats Committee meeting of 20 November 2002. The information obtained thereafter on this
complex issue, coming from Member States and regional Marine environmental organisations, has to be
completed with more scientific studies. Therefore, on 25 September 2003, the Commission has
requested an independent scientific organisation, namely the International Council for the Exploration
of the Sea (ICES, Demark), to undertake a scientific review and evaluation of all relevant information
concerning the impact of sonar on cetaceans and fish, to identify the gaps in our current understanding
and to make recommendations for future investigations/research. The Commission would also be
interested in advice about possible mitigation measures to reduce or minimise the impact of sonar on
cetaceans and fish. It is only on the basis of sound scientific information that it will be possible to
determine what actions are needed to avoid cetacean disturbance by sonar activities in a consistent and
co-operative manner at EU level, ensuring compliance with the Habitats Directive provisions. However,
scientific uncertainties about effects must not justify a failure to take action to address this matter.
Given its potential impact on the marine environment, the Commission considers that this type of
technology should be used with extreme prudence, and ideally be subject to a prior assessment of its
possible effects. The Commission is aware of possible effects of military activities on the Environment,
but it is not possible to undertake further Community action to regulate the development of new
military technologies, due to lack of EU competencies in this field. This statement has been made by the
European Commission to the European Parliament in March 2004. The output of the Study is expected
by early 2005. In the meanwhile some EU countries (Spain…) have taken action in peace time, restricting
the use of these sonar technologies during military manoeuvres (previous impact assessment studies …)
The EU has the best chance to lead anti-whaling efforts
EUDUN 08, European Union Delegation to the United Nations, 2/8/08, EUDUN is an environmental and
political agency that works closely to the UN, “European Commission expresses concern over Japanese scientific
whaling,” http://www.eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_7712_en.htm, NN
The Member States of the European Union must act in unison to protect whales. The European
Commission calls on EU Member States to agree on a common position on the protection of whales
before the next meeting of the International Whaling Commission in June 2008 as proposed by the
Commission in December 2007. Such a common position would reinforce greatly the European Union's
efforts to protect whales. Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "The graphic images on our
television screens bring home the reality of whale hunting. This shows that more than ever the EU needs
to be united in opposing whaling. I call on Member States to reach a common position to reinforce the
efforts to protect whales." Commission Borg added: "Whales are protected by the International Whaling
Commission and European Union law. Scientific research must not be used as a cover for continued
whaling." Japan continues to undermine efforts to protect whales In November 2007 (IP/07/1736) the
European Commission expressed its concern over Japanese plans to kill up to 1000 minke, fin and
humpback whales in the South Pacific. It is now clear to the world that Japan continues to undermine
international efforts to conserve and protect whales despite the International Whaling Commission
(IWC) repeatedly urging Japan to refrain from hunting whales. The fin and humpback whales are
classified as "endangered" and "vulnerable" species by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). There is a
serious risk that Japanese whaling will undermine the long-term viability of these species. The European
Commission urges Japan - once again - to reconsider its decision and stop the hunt. The International
Community must find a comprehensive solution to whaling. The Commission calls on the members of
the International Whaling Commission to fully adhere to the 1986 whaling moratorium. The Commission
emphasises that there is no need to use lethal means to obtain scientific information about whales, and
that adequate data for management purposes can be obtained using non-lethal techniques. A unified EU
position The European Commission is working to coordinate European efforts to protect whales, but as
the European Union is not yet a party to the IWC the European Commission cannot negotiate on behalf
of EU Member States. European Union law on whaling is very clear. It is not allowed in EU waters. Under
EU environmental law all whale species are protected from deliberate disturbance, capture or killing
within EU waters and all Member States in the European Union are obliged to observe these laws. The
EU is not opposed to aboriginal peoples whaling for their subsistence - as allowed under the IWC
Convention - provided it falls within the confines of catch limits based on scientific advice. This is the
case for the aboriginal peoples of Greenland which are allowed to hunt fin and minke whales. But the
Commission condemns whaling disguised as scientific research as carried out by Japan. Whales are
highly migratory species. If whaling is only banned in EU waters but not everywhere else in the world
then such a ban can have only a limited effect on the well-being of whale species. This is why the
international ban on commercial whaling must stay and why all EU Member States party to the IWC
must oppose any move seeking to lift it. We need to move towards more international protection of
whales rather than less. Background In December 2007 the Commission presented a Communication
designed to establish an effective international regulatory framework on the hunting of whales which
would also cover scientific whaling. Accordingly, the Communication states that the moratorium
remains of central importance but stresses the need to take a comprehensive approach to address other
aspects such as scientific whaling. With this Communication the Commission intends to underline the
urgent need for the EU to act as a united major player in international whaling policy. The European
Union has not yet been able to use its political weight within the IWC because of the lack of a
coordinated and agreed EU position. Together with the Communication the Commission also presented
a proposal for a Council Decision in support of continuing the moratorium and to encourage the
collection of scientific data on whales using non lethal methods.
EU Soft Power Module
Soft power K2 Heg
European Ocean development is key to EU Competitiveness and soft power in the world
market
European Union 14, The European Union Press Release, 5/16/14, European Union is self-explanatory,
“Ocean Energy – Europe and the Caribbean,” http://www.sknvibes.com/news/newsdetails.cfm/87185, NN
European Maritime Day is celebrated annually across the European Union (EU) on 20 May. This is
relevant to the Caribbean as large parts of the EU and of course the entire Caribbean have a very close
relationship with the ocean and secondly, the ocean is an enormous source of energy. It is estimated
that 0.1% of the energy in ocean waves could be capable of supplying the entire world's energy
requirements five times over. The EU has established a trinity of energy policy goals, energy supplies
must be: i) secure; ii) sustainable and iii) underpin the EU’s global competitiveness. The energy
challenges facing the Caribbean are remarkably similar. The development of this emerging sector would
not only help us to achieve our mutual renewable energy and greenhouse gas reduction targets, but
could fuel economic growth through innovation and create new, high-quality jobs. Also for these
reasons, renewable energy is a key component of the EU's most recent policy document on
development cooperation; the 2011 "Agenda for Change". So, the potential is significant and, for now,
the EU position is very strong, and we are working very hard to consolidate our position as a global
leader and expand our efforts. Today, ocean energy covers around 0.02% of EU energy needs and it is
primarily used for electricity production. The target is for 15% of EU electricity to be provided from
ocean energy by 2050. This is a massive task, but one which the EU must deliver on. In the following, I
will briefly outline how the EU intends to achieve this goal. This may inspire a similar process in the
Caribbean or ignite desires for collaboration on specific areas. As in many areas, the EU has started at
the policy level. Important "Communications" from the European Commission, e.g. on "Blue Energy"
(2012), demonstrate how the EU views a possible development of marine energy. These policy
documents are complemented by a wide array of documents, statements etc from the EU private
sector, academia, civil society groups and governments. The Action Plan for ocean energy in the EU
comprises two phases. A first phase from 2014 – 2016, which is seeing the establishment of an EU-wide
Ocean Energy Forum and the formulation of an Ocean Energy Strategic Roadmap. From 2017-2020,
Phase 2 should see the implementation of a European Industrial Initiative, similar to a previous very
successful development relating to wind energy, and the adoption of sector specific
guidelines/legislation. Over the past seven years EUR 600 million private sector investments have been
made in the sector and this amount has been complemented by substantial public funding for research
either from the EU wide level or from individual Member States. Thus, today the EU has developed
several devices of 1Mega Watt (MW) and more and deployed these in our waters. The goal is to deliver
reliable and cost-effective electricity from larger-scale projects of up to 50MW by 2020 in preparation
for wholesale market roll-out from 2025. An EU development of particular interest for the Caribbean is
the development of Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC). Some of the Outermost Regions of the
EU are small island societies, very similar to the many Small Island Developing States of the Caribbean.
With OTEC, the difference of temperature between cold, deep seawaters and warm, shallow waters
creates a thermodynamic cycle, which can be used for producing electricity. For many Caribbean islands,
the conditions for this type of technology could be ideal. Indeed a prototype has already been launched
in the French island of La Reunion in the Indian Ocean. Here in the Caribbean, developments are already
underway to explore the technology in Aruba and Martinique. With quite a remarkable level of foresight
the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC), based in the UK, was established ten (10) years and is now
a world leader for real time testing and development of marine energy standards. Here in the
Caribbean, the UK/Antigua company Seatricity has designed, developed and patented what appears to
be a viable, practical and reliable wave energy plant – with prototypes having been tested in the
Caribbean Sea. Testing has now moved on to EMEC in northern Europe. My hope is that the EU can
establish strong research bonds with the Caribbean on marine energy, ideally building on the already
impressive results of our EU-CARINET collaboration. This is an exciting time for energy in the Caribbean.
A CARICOM energy policy was adopted in 2013, and the very strong contours of a road map to
implement this policy are emerging. Key stakeholders with strong track records in the region, such as
the Caribbean Development Bank, the University of the West Indies, and the Caribbean Export
Development Agency are also increasingly focusing on renewable energy. Also the private sector is in a
state of renewable energy flux. Critically, civil society organisations, such as Barbados Renewable Energy
Association (BREA) in Barbados, are emerging too. In short the environment seems to be ripe for
collaboration and technology transfer. Indeed in partnership with the Inter-American Development Bank
and the Barbados Government, important initial scoping studies are due to take place very soon in
Barbados. Funding facilities from the EU for the sector could be considerable – there is a wide array of
EU level and EU Member States funding opportunities. A significant first step towards EU-Caribbean
collaboration was taken when the UK hosted a Caribbean Marine Energy Seminar in Barbados in early
2014. This was a major success and we are exploring avenues to follow up. This should be the first of
many EU-Caribbean exchanges on the subject – and indeed I think we can learn quite a lot from each
other.
The leader of Multilateral cooperation has to be the E.U, the U.S has no credibility and
can only rentrench Anti-western sentiment because of empirically self-serving policies.
Messner ’07 [ 2007, Dirk Messner is the Director of the German Development Institute / Deutsches
Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), “The European Union: Protagonist in a Multilateral World Order or
Peripheral Power in the »Asia-Pacific« Century?” http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/ipg/ipg-20071/03_a_messner_gb.pdf]
The eu can fall back on four assets when it comes to developing its global governance capacities.
First, the European Union has globally been ascribed the mostly positive role of an international
negotiating or civil power, which stands for the development of a fair multilateralism. The eu is
perceived as a »benevolent actor« and a broker of conflicting interests (for example, in the Middle East, in
dealing with Iran) and a serious problem solver in important areas of world politics (for example, as regards
climate change) in comparison with the usa and other influential states. Secondly, against this
background the eu is helping to put a brake on rampant anti-Western world views and
perceptions which have gained impetus due to the Iraq war, human rights abuses in Abu Ghraib,
the erosion of human rights at Guantánamo Bay, and the unilateralism exhibited by the Bush
government. Francis Fukuyama in his most recent book »America at the Crossroads« describes how after September 11,
2001 the usa proceeded to damage its reputation as a »benevolent hegemon.« Charles Kupchan (2003),
adviser to the Clinton government on European politics, and Jeremy Rifkin (2004) underline, in contrast, that in many parts of
the world Europe enjoys trust which could serve as a foundation for more effective international
initiatives on the part of the eu but also of the West in general. The eu therefore possesses moral
capital which could be of the highest importance in the translation of economic, political or even
military potential into legitimate global action. Third, the eu is often reproached with making only
marginal contributions to stability and security in the international system. The eu’s engagement
in the successor states of the Soviet Union, as well as – in particular – the process of eastern
enlargement of the Union, have contributed substantially to the largely peaceful transformation
process in the former socialist countries. In this context the eu has made major political and
financial investments in Europe’s stability and security and so also that of the international
system, although this strategy has been controversial in many member states. The eu should capitalize on these
successes both internally and externally to make its mark as an effective player in international
politics. Fourthly, the eu itself constitutes a kind of regional »laboratory for global governance«.
Multilevel politics between national states and the Union, the far-reaching juridification of its
international cooperation ipg 1/2007 Messner, EU as Protagonist of Multilateralism 13 (European
jurisdiction), the bundling of »shared sovereignties,« the continuous development of common
interests between the member states, as well as the division of labor between national states, the
quasi-supranational eu Commission and the eu Parliament – that is, the complicated but
unavoidable »governing beyond nation states« – has been practiced in the eu for a number of decades. The
experiences obtained in this way and the political habits handed down and internalized in this process represent for both the eu and
the member states a political competitive advantage which is not to be undervalued when it comes to helping effectively to shape the
development of the global-governance architecture. The
eu is both the most advanced and at the same time the
most ambitious project of regional cooperation in the world and in principle an appropriate
answer to the challenges of globalization, which is increasingly giving rise to transnational sets of
problems and necessitating cross-border governance
U.S cannot lead the world, rejection of multilateral norms and bad reputation means
only EU can solve
Volger ‘6 [February 2006, John Vogler is Professor in International Relations at Keele University,“The
European Union as a Protagonist to the United States on Climate Change”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-3577.2006.00225.x/full]
Whatever the continuing influence of U.S. policy innovations, during the past decade, the idea of U.S. environmental
leadership has, to put it politely, ceased to be credible. In the words of one Commission official,
referring to a range of environmental negotiations in the mid-1990s, “the U.S. has raised sitting
on its hands to the status of an art form” (Interview then DGXI Brussels 6 June 1996). U.S. obstructionism and
disengagement across a range of negotiations left the EU with a leadership opportunity that it
was uniquely qualified to seize: The U.S. is a strong political actor whereas the EU is a slow moving but weighty ship. The
Community position has more weight in the long term. The U.S. often cannot define a credible negotiating
platform - they cannot think of all the ramifications, on North-South issues for example, as the Community can. In
climate, forests and biodiversity the EU is the only leader while the U.S. is absent, blocking or
destructive. (ibid.) Not only was the U.S. no longer a leader, but it was involved in a progressive
distancing from active involvement in climate-change management, culminating in the March 2001 formal
denunciation of the Kyoto Protocol. U.S. withdrawal from the negotiations prompted the observation by
the president of the sixth UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (CoP 6), Jan Pronk, that the EU “had
become the only game in town” (Earth Negotiations Bulletin 2001:13). It is possible, however, that the
period between the end of the Cold War and the attacks of 9/11 2001 was singularly propitious
for EU actorness. Despite demands that the EU should assert or increase its influence on the world stage, and in particular
should strive for an identity and roles that sharply distinguish its stance from that of the U.S.A., the contemporary period is
undoubtedly dominated by the U.S.-led “war on terror.” It
has been characterized by a significant disregard for
international law and the authority of the United Nations, by sustained efforts by the U.S.
government to undermine the newly established International Criminal Court, and by
contravention of civil and human rights norms. The denunciation of the Kyoto Protocol is seen,
rightly or wrongly, as part of a pattern of “lawlessness” (Sands 2005). To the extent that “security threats”
dominate the agenda of international politics, the EU may encounter a diminution in opportunity to develop a distinctive posture—
and, more specifically, to maintain a leadership role in climate-change diplomacy. Nevertheless, while the Iraq crisis demonstrated the
limitations of a common foreign policy, U.S.
rejection of the Kyoto Protocol has undoubtedly provided the EU
with a unique opportunity to capitalize on its economic and environmental presence and to
assume a leadership role in the climate-change regime. While EU representatives have
enthusiastically claimed this role, it remains to consider the extent to which the EU possesses the
capacity to achieve and sustain it.
EU soft power solves multiple great power wars and warming
Patrick R. Hugg 11, the John J. McAulay Professor of Law, Loyola University New Orleans College of
Law, Winter 2011, “Redefining the European Union's Position in the Emerging Multipolar World: Strong
Global Leadership Potential, Restrained by Asymmetry of Power and Dissonant Voices,” Tulane Journal
of International and Comparative Law, 20 Tul. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 145, p. lexis
The unprecedented pace of change unfolding in today's multipolar world is producing a new global order in which all participants are forced to
redefine their economic and political positions. n2 As many emerging economies promote growing nationalism across the globe,
traditional Western powers - including both the United States and the European Union - must face the reality of a world in which the West is
no longer solely ascendant. n3 As the Treaty on European Union (TEU) twenty years ago marked a bold redefinition of the European integration project, so the recent
Treaty of Lisbon has reformed institutions, streamlined processes, and elevated the European Union (EU) on the global stage n4 as it again faces existential opportunities and internal and
external conflict. The EU itself is in motion within a global order that is also in motion. This atomic relationship is more radically multipolar than is readily apparent: "Few in the West have
grasped the full implications of the two most salient features of our historical epoch. First, we have reached the end of the era of Western domination of world history ... . [*147] Second,
we
will see an enormous renaissance of Asian societies." n5 The media are replete with references to the emerging BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) n6
economies and their international influence. Industry analysts proffer, "In less than forty years, the BRICs economies together could be larger than the G6
in US dollar terms." n7 Other experts observe the significant economic growth of additional countries - such as Indonesia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, and others - as dynamic centers of
a world with a strong China reshaping Asia ;
India confidently extending its reach from Africa to Indonesia; Islam spreading its influence; a Europe replete with crises of
economic growth. n8 But the coming power structure is broader than merely emerging economies: Imagine
legitimacy; sovereign city-states holding wealth and driving innovation; and private mercenary armies, religious radicals and humanitarian bodies playing by their own rules as they compete
Further motion is seen
in the Middle East as the "Arab Spring" uproots many long-standing autocratic governments. n10 Likewise, uncertain energy supplies
for hearts, minds and wallets. It sounds familiar today. But it was just as true slightly less than a millennium ago at the height of the Middle Ages. n9
distort power, depending on the markets and the climate. n11 Currency manipulation by numerous governments [*148] contributes to
instability as governments react to economic and political pressures. n12 Also, many countries in the EU are in political and economic turmoil as national budgets - in response to fiscal
worldwide
woes - are reducing resources available for jobs and services to citizens, which has altered the generous social contract of the previous fifty years in Europe. n13 Due to the extreme financial
positions in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain, governments are pressured to enact hugely unpopular legislation, further destabilizing their ability to govern. n14 With national elections on
the horizon in some Member States, the political rhetoric becomes acerbic. n15 Massive "irregular" immigration from the Arab world rouses populist nationalism as well. n16 For example, in
the traditionally tolerant Netherlands, a law banning religious slaughter was recently proposed, causing alarm in Muslim and Jewish communities. n17 Many Jews and Muslims see the ban as
part of a growing European hostility to immigration and diversity. Geert Wilders, the far-right Dutch politician, has called for the Netherlands to ban the burka after France curbed the public
wearing of the Islamic face veil; politicians including Britain's David Cameron have proclaimed the failure of multiculturalism; and anti-immigration parties such as Finland's True Finns have
been increasingly successful at the polls. n18 With the French presidential election nearing in 2012, President Sarkozy is likely to continue a discourse focused on immigration, fear, and
xenophobia. n19 Such negative, insensitive rhetoric does not promote stability in the EU or promote acceptance in the Islamic world. Finally, change can be found in the fundamental ethos of
the EU itself. The original reasons justifying incremental pooling of aspects of [*149] sovereignty for the original supranational Communities - the need for internal peace and economic
rebuilding mixed with fear of external military aggression n20 - are now mainly obsolescent. A unitary core motivation is less apparent in today's European citizen and politician. B. What Form
of Polity Will the EU Assume in the Next Twenty Years? What Relative Position in the World? What Leadership Will It Exercise? The EU's famous common market will continue, and the Union especially if it can further deepen its integration - could grow to much more. The single market remains the EU's "biggest competitive advantage": n21 Five hundred million relatively
prosperous inhabitants make any such trading bloc significant. n22 Every Member State's "commercial interests are force-multiplied by 27 member states' weight." n23 The EU and the United
States have the largest bilateral trading and investment relationships, and their transactions together account for nearly forty percent of world trade. n24 Significant to political and legal
the EU will continue to present the most distinctly advanced model of peaceful cross-border
cooperation of any type, n25 the elements of which include: supranational authority, n26 post-Lisbon "legal personality," n27 reasonably effective democratic institutions,
science,
high standards of human rights, and rule-of-law [*150] enforcement. n28 Moreover, as discussed infra, recent events and EU decision making have further advanced the depth of European
integration, yielding a more complex, flexible, and integrated quasi-federal polity. Further,
the EU is especially well-situated for future regional
and international leadership in multiple sectors of international relations and policy, thereby fostering more
enlightened policies and improved practices across the world , despite its inherent difficulties in speaking
with "one voice." As a leader on the world stage, this quasi-federation is generally unencumbered by the past half-century of international interventions or domestic suppressions
that have so pointedly discredited, in many minds, the United States, China, and Russia. Thus, the EU stands in perhaps the most advantageous
position of all nations or regional/international organizations for principled leadership today. Viewed from another
perspective, EU leadership is essential to preventing this new multipolar world from degenerating
into another contentious bipolar world , possibly with the Western democracies opposing the
autocracies of Russia and China , or perhaps with the traditionally Western cultures opposing Islam. n29
The EU may be the most important player in determining this future character of the world's power
structure because China, Russia, and the United States all are "capable of both multilateral and
unilateral behaviour." n30 The specific areas in which the EU enjoys advantageous leadership potential are
several and could yield hugely significant results if the EU is able to exercise that leadership - for example,
Europe's unique position as the world's foremost advocate of human rights protection, especially following the
Treaty of Lisbon's amendments to the TEU's article 6. This article authorizes the EU to give legal effect to the EU's Charter of Fundamental
Rights and more significantly mandates that the Union accede to the Council of Europe's monolithic Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. n31 The EU's windward tacking toward authentic human rights protection at last nears its destination. n32
[*151] In 1992, the TEU substantiated the principle developed by the European Court of Justice by confirming in article F that the "Union shall
respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ... and
as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States as general principles of Community law." n33 The European
Council decision at Cologne in 1999 authorized the "expansive, innovative provisions" n34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. n35 The EU
required the Charter to broaden overall protection because the European Convention on Human Rights spoke mainly to civil and political rights
and did not address social and economic rights. n36 In spite of many criticisms that the Charter was unenforceable, it became enforceable with
the Treaty of Lisbon. n37 That treaty crowned the long procession by commanding the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human
Rights, n38 with enforcement authorized by two prestigious organizations, the EU and the Council of Europe. n39 Europe today stands in the
most prestigious pulpit of global human rights leadership. Moreover, the
EU's accomplishments in promoting
environmental protection, including its 20-20-20 energy and climate package, n40 give the EU special standing to
campaign for international cooperation . The EU has the opportunity to advance
both international
climate change cooperation and greener, more secure energy policies. n41 A collateral benefit of these
initiatives would potentially encourage further integration of energy-rich Russia into mainstream Europe in
areas ranging from economic and energy markets to improved cooperation in [*152] human rights. n42 The EU's Third Energy Package
will also help reduce Russia's current leverage over EU energy supplies by making it harder for a company, such as the Russian Gazprom, to be
both a supplier and transit provider. n43 Due to its geography, history, and present urgent circumstances, the
EU could forge a
breakthrough with improved migration and immigration policies, as well as the advancement of development and
humanitarian aid, but only if it can reach consensus on its approach. n44 In spite of diverging national perspectives, the EU (and other
countries and international and regional organizations) should rush to aid and stabilize exploding North African and Middle Eastern countries
with an expanded Mediterranean policy. n45 Italy's Foreign Affairs Minister, Franco Frattini, called for a new level of EU cooperation and "an
ambitious new development and stability pact" that includes: more money for the Mediterranean project, development to build jobs and
strengthen the ineffective Union for the Mediterranean, and the creation of a Marshall Plan for the Mediterranean. n46 "What if the Arab
spring turns to winter?" n47 Likewise, the
EU's development policy, focused on these and other parts of Africa, contributes to
stability of the regions and addresses dire human needs while advancing the EU's existing commitment to the United
Nations' Millennium Development Goals. n48 "Europe has vast [*153] experience, having developed aid programmes at
EU and national levels, and having created institutions such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development to put
central and eastern Europe on the path to democracy and a market economy." n49 The EU remains the
largest aid donor in the world. n50
Soft power K2 Econ
EU soft power is key to economic stability, governmental stability, and prevention of
conflicts and wars
Witney 14, Nick Witney, 2/24/14, Witney is Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign
Relations and formerly the European Defence Agency’s first Chief Executive, “Hard truths about Europe’s soft
power,” http://europesworld.org/2014/02/24/hard-truths-about-europes-soft-power/#.U71W5vldV8E, NN
The temptation to misapply defence budgets in these ways is understandable, especially in the midst of
recession. But it cannot be healthy in democracies to assert one thing and practice another; and such
oblique methods of funding economic objectives are unlikely to be the most efficient. Implicit in this
behaviour, moreover, is a set of assumptions about the world around us, and our position in it, which
when unpacked should give us pause. This general European lack of seriousness about defence presupposes that we can rest easy in the apparent absence of military threat for the foreseeable future. It
further pre-supposes either that the notions of European ‘power and influence’ on the global stage are
irrelevant/distasteful/outdated, or that in the modern age effective armed forces have no part to play in
maintaining such power. None of this looks safe. Time and again, as when we have found ourselves
astonished by invasions of the Falkland Islands or Kuwait, or by the Arab Spring, we discover that the
‘foreseeable future’ can amount to as little as a few days. Worse, an attitude of ‘no threats, so no
defence needed’ overlooks the vital deterrent purpose of armed forces. Threats are not like weather
events – they are backed by human calculation (something we almost wilfully obscure by broadening
our concept of ‘security’ to include pandemics and climate change). And human calculation is crucially
affected by perceptions of the other party’s will to resist, or at any rate stand up to bullying. In short, an
evident lack of seriousness about defence risks turning the potential threat into actuality. As for
European aspirations to be a ‘global player’, proactively promoting our interests and distinctive values,
the economic crisis has inevitably done great damage. Witness the mercantilisation of our diplomacy,
with Europe’s national leaders jostling in Beijing and the Gulf for investment and export orders. The U.S.
‘pivots to Asia’, but Europeans refuse to view the other side of the globe as more than an enormous
market. Germany sells arms as though they were nothing but expensive machine tools; British
Conservatives evoke Singapore as the model of their national ambition. Yet even ‘realists’ should reflect
that simply ceding global leadership to hungrier and more determined new powers is no way,
ultimately, to achieve even the most basic aim of enabling our children to make a living – that Europe’s
continuing prosperity depends on a continuing ability to demand that trade be fair as well as free, to
maintain access to raw materials, and to insist on minimum environmental and social standards in global
economic activity. “European leaders have had their heads in the sand about this for too long, too ready
to hide behind the 2003 Strategy – a triumph in its day, but now the product of a bygone era” So power
and influence in the wider world are vital if we are adequately to protect our interests, never mind
promoting our values, at a time when most of the rest of the world seems more interested in the
Chinese model of authoritarian capitalism than in any Western norms. The democracies amongst the
new powers may be somewhat more concerned for human rights: but Brazil and India as much as China
evince a ‘neo-Westphalian’ view of international affairs, focussing on national sovereignty and noninterference rather than on any ‘rules-based world’. Which of course is a big part of why military power
has an essential part to play if Europe is not to find itself shunted to the margins of global affairs. We in
Europe may be post-modern, but the rest of the world is not – including all those ‘swing voters’ whose
preferences will determine which of the new contenders for global leadership carries most weight.
Across the Middle East, through Africa, to East and South-East Asia, national leaders are either military
men, or at least preoccupied on a day-to-day basis with military issues which may well be matters of
government or even state survival. They want arms, and they also want training, and advice, and
intelligence, and the reassurance that can come from working with partners who understand military
affairs, and who will from time to time demonstrate their military reach and presence. This is not a
matter of sending gun-boats, or subscribing to Frederick the Great’s dictum that ‘diplomacy without
arms is like music without instruments’. It is a matter of understanding that effective armed forces can
and should have a role to play, not just in ‘countering threats’ but as instruments of state-craft.
European leaders have had their heads in the sand about this for too long, too ready to hide behind the
2003 Strategy – a triumph in its day, but now the product of a bygone era. It is high time for a firstprinciples European re-evaluation of how the world has changed, and will continue to change
(demographic projections, for example, are both dependable and worrying for Europeans), and to flush
out those old assumptions guiding Europe’s foreign policy which no longer hold true. A glance at
Europe’s own neighbourhood is enough to explode the notion that ‘soft power’ is all it takes. And what
policy should we now substitute for the happy but evaporated hope that new powers could be housetrained to become ‘responsible stakeholders’ in an international system designed by the West? To the
credit of the European Council’s president, Herman Van Rompuy, last December’s defence discussion
opened the door to this sort of debate when national leaders agreed to ‘assess the impact of changes in
the global environment’ and to consider ‘the challenges and opportunities arising for the Union’. It is to
be hoped that later this year the successor to Catherine Ashton will choose to exploit this opening to the
full. Without a fundamental rethink of Europe’s external strategy it will not just be Europe’s armed
forces that can expect to be hollowed out, but Europe’s interests and values too.
Best data proves – economic collapse causes war
Jedidiah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, M.Phil.
Candidate at the University of New South Wales, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signalling and
the Problem of Economic Crises”
Thus, the answer to the first question set out at the beginning of this section, whether economic integration and economic crises are linked,
seems reasonably well-established. Substantial recent scholarship indicates a positive association between interdependence and economic
crises. What then about the second question? Is there a correlation between economic crises and armed conflict? The
impacts at an individual level and on a state level are intuitive and well-documented (see. e.g., Richards & Gelleny, 2006). Rodrik (1997a,
1997b), among others, argues that instability
in the global economic system contributes to social disintegration
and political conflict. Social unrest, regime change and even civil war have directly resulted from the
vagaries of economic integration. / Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood
of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and
the security and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels.
Several notable contributions follow. / First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership
cycle theory, finding that rhythms in
the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent
power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic
crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin, 1981) that leads to uncertainty about
power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Fearon. 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could
lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins
(1996) also shows that global
economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood
of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global
economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. / Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland’s (1996. 2000) theory of trade
expectations suggests that “future expectation of trade” is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour
of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future
trade relations. However,
if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy
likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those
resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or
because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states. / Third, others have considered the link
between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong
resources, the
correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic
downturn. They write, / The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing.
Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the
presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts selfreinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess. 2002. p. 89) / Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in
the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg- Hess, & Weerapana. 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders
and lead to external tensions. / Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government.
'Diversionary theory' suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting
governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around
the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995), and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic
decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the
tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are
generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that
periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the
use of force. / In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of
economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This
implied connection between integration,
and deserves
crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate
more attention.
EU soft power is insufficient – increasing it is key to stopping wars
Rettman 13, Andrew Rettman, 6/5/13, Rettman is a staff writer for EUObserver, “Nato chief: EU soft power
is 'no power at all',” http://euobserver.com/defence/120046, NN
We Europeans must understand that soft power alone is really no power at all. Without hard capabilities
to back up its diplomacy, Europe will lack credibility and influence," he told MEPs on the European
Parliament's foreign affairs committee in Brussels on Monday (6 May). "If European nations do not make
a firm commitment to invest in security and defence, then all talk about a strengthened European
defence and security policy will just be hot air," he added. Twenty one out of the 27 EU countries are
also Nato members. Rasmussen said they lack "transport planes, air-to-air refuelling and intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance assets." He noted that, given the financial crisis, it is "too expensive for
any individual [EU] country" to buy the hardware that Nato needs Europe to have. He also indicated that
European countries are too dove-ish in their approach to foreign crises. "We must also have the political
will to use them [military means]. To deal with security challenges on Europe's doorstep. To help
manage crises further away that might affect us here at home," he said. Rasmussen spoke in the run-up
to an EU summit on defence in December - the first one since the financial crisis erupted in 2008. His
remarks on EU foreign policy prompted questions on whether he is interested in taking EU foreign
service chief Catherine Ashton's job when she departs next year. "I haven't started thinking about the
next step," he said, referring to his own career. He envisaged EU-level security co-operation with Nato as
a mixture of police missions and diplomacy. Taking the Western Balkans as an example, he said: "Nato
has shown its capacity to act quickly and in high intensity crises, while the European Union is able to
deploy a wide range of civilian and military expertise to help rebuild nations." He commended Ashton on
her recent diplomatic breakthrough in helping Belgrade and Pristina to end a frozen conflict in north
Kosovo. But he added: "Both parties wanted assurance that Nato would guarantee the security to
implement the agreement." MEPs also quizzed Rasmussen about Syria. The civil war saw two new
developments in recent days. Over the weekend, Israeli jets struck several Syrian targets, including a
military complex near Damascus. Reports say they killed more than 40 soldiers and that they did it to
stop Syrian weapons getting into the hands of Israel's fiercest enemy, the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon. A
UN investigator, Carla Del Ponte, also told Swiss TV on Sunday "there are strong, concrete suspicions"
that Syrian rebels have used Sarin gas, a banned chemical weapon. The developments saw the Russian
foreign ministry ring the alarm on Monday. "We are seriously concerned about the signs that global
public opinion is being prepared for a possible armed intervention in the Syrian conflict," its foreign
ministry spokesman told Russian media. For his part, Rasmussen in Brussels repeated the long-standing
Nato line on Syria. He told MEPs there will be no Nato intervention because there is no UN mandate and
because the conflict is too "complex." He also said the only way out is a "political solution." He declined
to comment on the Israeli strikes and he claimed he knows no more than what he reads in the papers
about chemical weapons. Nato has deployed US, German and Dutch "Patriot" anti-missile defence
systems on Nato member Turkey's border with Syria.
Soft power K2 Water
EU leadership is key to stopping water scarcity and water wars
Warner et al. 13, Jeroen Warner, Mark Zeitoun, and Naho Mirumachi, nearest date given is 2013, all three
authors are staff writers and environmental professors for the Australian National University, “How ‘soft’ power
shapes transboundary water interaction,”
http://press.anu.edu.au/apps/bookworm/view/Global+Water%3A+Issues+and+Insights/11041/ch03.2.xhtml, NN
With monotonous regularity since the late 1980s nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), politicians or
think tanks have predicted a water war. Recently, a UK minister predicted war in the coming decades
(Harvey 2012). No such thing has happened, though, and prominent water scholars have argued a war
fought strictly over water is unlikely in the future (Wolf 1996; Allan 2001). That does not mean there is
peace and harmony among co-riparians. Power differences and latent conflicts persist, usually under the
radar of the basin hegemon (or dominant power), but in full view of those who live their effects. The
state of affairs in many transboundary basins can be characterised as a mix of cooperation and conflict
(Mirumachi and Allan 2007), with those benefitting from the status quo emphasising the former. Our
first article on the subject called this the ‘ugly’ side of cooperation (Zeitoun and Mirumachi 2008). A clue
to understanding this situation, we argue in its sequel (Zeitoun et al. 2011), is to look at what lies
beneath: how power is exercised. The ‘water wars’ discourse has simplistically focused on the exercise
of hard power, predominantly violence and coercion. Both philosophical reasoning (Hannah Arendt) and
empirically grounded hydropolitical work (Dinar 2009) has shown, however, that rule based on fear and
brute power has little hope in the long term. Some kind of legitimacy and consent is needed to
perpetuate any skewed transboundary water arrangement based on unequal power relations.
Empirically, we find relations between riparians to be governed by a wider spectrum of power
instruments, from side payments and bribery to persuasion and inciting desire to emulating success.
This wide range of nonviolent, co-optative power manifestations is collectively known as ‘soft’ power:
getting others to want what you want. Nye (1990) sought to explain how relations can be peaceful
through the power of attraction without the need for a threat of violence. We find, however, that soft
power not only contains the positive power of attraction, but also its negative, repellence away from
certain agendas and issues, and towards maintenance of a biased status quo. Nye was reiterating
Machiavelli’s understanding of power as a centaur, half man (arguably rational), half horse (based on
strength). He was far more optimistic than Machiavelli about human progress towards eternal peace,
buttressed by freedom and trade. Fragmented evidence to support this hope exists in transboundary
water contexts; many treaties never really came off the ground, and even in highly integrated Europe,
diplomatic crises over water are not unheard of (Warner and van Buuren 2009). A soft power
perspective may not yet be sophisticated enough to explain power relations between riparians. Our
analytical framework of ‘hydro-hegemony’ (Zeitoun and Warner 2006) highlights how conflict, even if it
is not open and visible, can be structurally present between riparians (and groundwater users from
transboundary aquifers). In an integrated transboundary water configuration, interests between
dominant and subordinate are harmonious; in a distributed power configuration, they are
fundamentally at odds. Cooperation by the non-hegemonic actor, or its compliance with certain states
of affairs, does not necessarily mean consensus. Successful framing by the stronger party of the
common good (soft power), however, can result in power differences going uncontested and countries
signing treaties that bring highly differential benefits. Unqualified calls for and claims to transboundary
cooperation ‘of any sort, no matter how slight’ (UNDP 2006) are therefore as wrongheaded as are
alarms over water wars. Policy and programs promoting unqualified ‘cooperation’ were criticised on the
grounds that negative forms of cooperation need reform or resolution, not management or
encouragement.
Water insecurity lead to global instability, warming, and war
Harvey 12, Fiona Harvey, 3/22/12, Harvey is an environmental correspondent for The Guardian, “Water wars
between countries could be just around the corner, Davey warns,”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/22/water-wars-countries-davey-warns, NN
Water wars could be a real prospect in coming years as states struggle with the effects of climate
change, growing demand for water and declining resources, the secretary of state for energy and
climate change warned on Thursday. Ed Davey told a conference of high-ranking politicians and
diplomats from around the world that although water had not been a direct cause of wars in the past,
growing pressure on the resource if climate change is allowed to take hold, together with the pressure
on food and other resources, could lead to new sources of conflict and the worsening of existing
conflicts. "Countries have not tended to go to war over water, but I have a fear for the world that
climate instability drives political instability," he said. "The pressure of that makes conflict more likely."
Even a small temperature rise – far less than the 4C that scientists predict will result from a continuation
of business as usual – could lead to lower agricultural yields, he warned, at a time when population
growth means that demand for food was likely to be up by 70% by 2060. By the same time, he noted,
the number of people living in conditions of serious water stress would have reached 1.8 billion,
according to estimates. "Climate change intensifies pressures on states, and between states," he told
the conference, gathered to discuss whether climate change and natural resources should be regarded
as a national security issue. "[Its effects] can lead to internal unrest … and exacerbate existing tensions.
We have to plan for a world where climate change makes difficult problems even worse." But Davey
recalled previous global catastrophes that had been averted, including the threat of nuclear
armageddon during the cold war, and successes such as the elimination of smallpox. He urged
governments to work on adapting to climate change as a matter of urgency, as well as striving for an
international agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions. His call was echoed by Ali Bongo Ondimba,
president of the Gabonese Republic. He told the conference that Africa was the most vulnerable part of
the world to climate change, but that African people had been responding to a changing climate for
thousands of years – his own Bantu people had been forced, centuries ago, to move around Africa as
areas dried out and food became scarcer. Gabon had already started to take action to protect the 88%
of its land that is covered by rainforest, and to reduce carbon emissions by its industries, with a view to
a "transformation" by 2025. He warned that seeking to lift people out of poverty could not be achieved
at the expense of degrading natural resources. He warned that policies for economic growth across the
continent must reflect this immediately: "The impact [of degradation] cannot be reversed by policies
conceived too late."
Insecure access to water causes nuclear war
Weiner, 1990 (Jonathan Weiner, 1990, Visiting Professor of Molecular Biology at Princeton University. The Next One Hundred
Years: Shaping the Fate of Our Living Earth, p. 214)
If we do not destroy ourselves with the A-bomb and the H-bomb, then we may destroy ourselves with
the C-bomb, the Change Bomb. And in a world as interlinked as ours, one explosion may lead to the
other. Already in the Middle East, from North Africa to the Persian Gulf and from the Nile to the
Euphrates, tensions over dwindling water supplies and rising populations are reaching what many
experts describe as a flashpoint. A climate shift in the single battle-scarred nexus might trigger
international tensions that will unleash some of the 60,000 nuclear warheads the world has stockpiled
since Trinity.
Soft power K2 Russia War
European power projection is key to heg against Russian conflict
Bugajski 13, Janusz Bugajski, 2/8/13, Bugajski is a staff writer and expert on Russian affairs for The Ukrainian
Week, “Russia’s Soft Power Wars,” http://ukrainianweek.com/World/71849, NN
Moscow’s calculations, Russia and the West are embroiled in a long-term competition over zones of
dominance in the wider Europe and in Central Asia, despite the fact that the US and its European allies
have refused to acknowledge or legitimize such a “great game.” Russia’s drive for its own sphere in a
"multipolar" world contributes to retarding the formation of stable democratic states along its borders.
Governments in these countries turn to authoritarianism to maintain the integrity and stability of the
state or simply to cling to power. Such a process is invariably supported by Moscow as it contributes to
disqualifying these countries from the process of Western integration. Moscow opposes any
“encroachment” by outside powers in its self-proclaimed “privileged” zone of interests or the further
expansion of NATO, EU, and US influence. Russia views itself as a regional integrator, expecting
neighbors to coalesce around its leadership, rather than a country to be integrated in multi-national
institutions in which its own sovereignty is diminished. In this context, Russian “soft power” in all its
manifestations is understood as a means for supplementing Russia’s foreign policy objectives and
enhancing regional integration under Moscow’s tutelage. In marked contrast, the West’s “soft power”
approach is intended to generate reform, internal stability, external security, democratic development,
and open markets to make targeted states compatible with Western systems and institutions. In the
case of the EU, the prospect of membership itself has been the primary “soft power” tool as it entices
governments to meet the necessary legal, economic, and regulatory standards to qualify for Union
accession. However, EU or NATO membership remain voluntary and are not pressured by inducements
and threats, as is the case with Moscow-centered organizations. While the West promotes the pooling
of sovereignty among independent states, Russia pushes for the surrender of sovereignty within
assorted “Eurasian” organizations. To advance its strategic goals, the Kremlin needs to demonstrate that
it is in competition with the West and that Washington and Brussels are seeking to impose their political
structures and value system on the gullible Eurasian countries. This is a classic form of psycho-political
projection, with Russia’s leaders acting as if Western objectives were similar to their own in
undermining national independence and eliminating countervailing foreign influences. Putin launched a
blistering attack on Western “soft power” in an article in Moskovskiye Novosti (Moscow News) in
February 2012. He claimed that this weapon was being increasingly used as a means for achieving
foreign policy goals without the use of force, but by exerting informational and other levers of influence.
According to Putin, Western "soft power" is deployed to “develop and provoke extremist, separatist,
and nationalistic attitudes, to manipulate the public and to conduct direct interference in the domestic
policy of sovereign countries.” Evidently, for the Kremlin, democratic pluralism is a form of extremism,
national independence is a form of separatism, and state sovereignty is a form of nationalism. Putin
contends that there must be a clear division between “normal political activity” and “illegal instruments
of soft power." Hence, he engages in scathing attacks on "pseudo-NGOs" inside Russia and among the
post-Soviet neighbors that receive resources from Western governments and institutions, viewing this
as a form of subversion. In reality, the Kremlin is envious that Western values are often more appealing
to educated and ambitious segments of the population than traditional Russian values. The global
human rights agenda is berated by Putin as a Western plot, because the US and other Western states
allegedly politicize human rights and use them as a means for exerting pressure on Russia and its
neighbors. Human rights campaigns are depicted as a powerful form of “soft power” diplomacy
intended to discredit governments that are more easily influenced by Moscow. Russia supposedly offers
a legitimate political alternative to these countries - a quasi- authoritarian “sovereign democracy” and a
statist-capitalist form of economic development. “Sovereign democracy” is presented as a viable option
to the alleged Western export of democratic revolutions. Russia’s support for strong-arm governments
is intended to entice these countries under its political and security umbrella and delegitimize the West
for its criticisms of autocratic politics. MOSCOW’S SOFT POWER INSTRUMENTS In Putin’s version of “soft
power," an assortment of tools can be deployed to achieve strategic goals. These include culture,
education, media, language, minority protection, Christian Orthodoxy, pan-Slavism, and Russo-focused
assimilation. All these elements can supplement institutional instruments, economic incentives, energy
dependence, military threats, and the political pressures applied by the Kremlin. In a landmark article on
23 January 2012 in Nezavisimaya Gazeta (The Independent Newspaper) Putin promoted his plan for
uniting Russia’s multi-ethnic society and stressed the central importance of Russian culture for all
former Soviet states. In sum, for Eastern Slavs Russia is supposed to be the model “older brother,” while
for non-Slavs it is evidently the enlightened “father figure.” The stress is on uniting various ethnic
communities in the Russian Federation and former USSR under the banner of Russian culture and
values. Putin criticizes multiculturalism as a destabilizing force and instead supports integration through
assimilation, a veiled term for Russification. According to Putin, Russian people and culture are the
binding fabric of this “unique civilization.” He extolls the virtues of "cultural dominance," where Russia is
depicted as a “poly-ethnic civilization” held together by a Russian “cultural core.” The President notes
with satisfaction that many former citizens of the Soviet Union, “who found themselves abroad, are
calling themselves Russian, regardless of their ethnicity.” Russian people are evidently “nation-forming”
as the “great mission of Russians is to unite and bind civilization” through language and culture.
According to such ethno-racist thinking, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Georgians, and other nationalities
simply do not match the historical importance of the Great Russian nation. For Putin, the Russian state
has a key role to play in “forming a worldview that binds the nation.” He has called for enhancing
education, language use, and national history to buttress Russia’s tradition of cultural dominance and
lists numerous tools for promoting Russian culture, including television, cinema, the Internet, social
media, and popular culture. All these outlets must evidently shape public opinion and set behavioral
norms.
US/Russia war would lead to extinction
Helfand and Pastore 2009 [Ira Helfand, M.D., and John O. Pastore, M.D., are past presidents
of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
March 31, 2009, “U.S.-Russia nuclear war still a threat”,
http://www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/CT_pastoreline_03-3109_EODSCAO_v15.bbdf23.html]
President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit. They
the greatest threats confronting
humanity: the danger of nuclear war. Since the end of the Cold War, many have acted as though the danger of
nuclear war has ended. It has not. There remain in the world more than 20,000 nuclear weapons. Alarmingly,
more than 2,000 of these weapons in the U.S. and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert
status, commonly known as hair-trigger alert. They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the
other country 30 minutes later. Just one of these weapons can destroy a city. A war involving a
substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history. A study
conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high
alert exploded over our cities, 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes. An attack of
this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic, communications and transportation infrastructure on
which we all depend. Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with
huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant. They
would have no food, no fuel, no electricity, no medicine, and certainly no organized health care. In the following
months it is likely the vast majority of the U.S. population would die. Recent studies by the eminent climatologists
must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of
such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world
wide. If all of the warheads in the U.S. and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the
conflict, the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper
atmosphere — blotting out the sun. Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18
degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age, 18,000 years ago.
Agriculture would stop, eco-systems would collapse, and many species, including perhaps our
own, would become extinct. It is common to discuss nuclear war as a low-probabillity event. But is this true? We
know of five occcasions during the last 30 years when either the U.S. or Russia believed it was
under attack and prepared a counter-attack. The most recent of these near misses occurred after the end of the
Toon and Robock have shown that
Cold War on Jan. 25, 1995, when the Russians mistook a U.S. weather rocket launched from Norway for a possible attack. Jan. 25,
1995, was an ordinary day with no major crisis involving the U.S. and Russia. But, unknown to almost every inhabitant on the planet,
a misunderstanding led to the potential for a nuclear war. The ready alert status of nuclear weapons that existed in 1995 remains in
place today.
Soft power K2 Warming
EU leadership key to solving warming
Ischinger 7 German ambassador to Britain, Wolfgang. “Can the EU Fill Leadership Void Left by US?” China Daily, March 22,
http://www.china.org.cn/english/international/203945.htm]
In 1990, Charles Krauthammer published his famous essay on the "unipolar moment", about the United States' future power to shape the
world at will. He wrote: "The true geopolitical structure of the post-Cold-War world ... is a single pole of world power that consists of the
United States at the apex of the industrial west." In 2007, most will agree that the unipolar moment, if it ever existed, has passed.
That is only underlined by the failure of the unipolar experiment also know as the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the damage it inflicted
on Washington's international legitimacy and credibility. For traditional European Atlanticists, it does not make for pleasant viewing to see
US leadership damaged and questioned. But expectations are low today regarding US ability to lead the international community. In the
face of a US credibility crisis, some look to Europe to take the initiative and fill the vacuum. Can 2007 be
a European moment? Critics will contend that the EU is in no shape to lead, as it continues to grapple with its constitutional crisis, its
inability to provide clear foreign policy guidance and its lack of military power. But on three critical global issues nuclear nonproliferation , Middle East peace , and climate change it is better placed than anyone else . Opening nuclear negotiations
with Teheran was a European idea in 2004, initially given a lukewarm reception by Washington. More recently, as the EU3Britain, France and Germany-approach began to be seen as the only game in town, Washington has offered more active support, but so far
continuing to stop short of speaking to Teheran directly on the nuclear issue. Bringing Russia and China on board was, again, a European
initiative. If a solution emerges, it is likely to be European-brokered. There is much greater cohesion
among Europeans on Iran than there was on Iraq five years ago: On Iran, the EU will not be split. When it comes to the IsraeliPalestinian conflict, barely any progress has been made over the past six years. The adoption of the road map and the creation of the quartet
EU, Russia, the UN, the United States were born of European ideas. They were formally endorsed by Washington, but never seriously
pursued and later quasi-abandoned. This year, a major effort by the current EU presidency has led to the quartet's revival and more
diplomatic activity. Many in the region doubt, however, whether Washington will have the determination necessary for a breakthrough in the
peace process without even more active input from Europe. The European willingness to take more responsibility in the region and to play a
role in ending the Lebanon War in 2006, including the deployment of military forces to the country, was an eye-opener for many in the
region and beyond. On climate change, the critical question is who can and will lead the international debate about a post-Kyoto regime. If a
deal can be hammered out in 2007, and if it has any chance of endorsement in the United States, China and India, it will most likely be the
result of the EU's ongoing efforts to move ahead with ambitious goals on carbon dioxide emissions and energy saving. But would a European
moment in 2007 not be interpreted as a challenge to the global leadership role of the US? Let's not get carried away. Without active US
support, both political and military, none of these major challenges can be resolved. Europeans should beware the hubris of challenging the
United States. But the European moment could actually enhance the transatlantic relationship by offering,
at a crucial juncture, elements that the United States currently lacks: legitimacy and credibility. That is
why our American friends should encourage European initiatives, embrace a European willingness to
lead, and welcome the European moment.
Soft power K2 Middle East
EU soft power key to stopping Middle Eastern instability
Bildt 10, Carl Bildt, 10/4/10, Bildt is a staff writer for Regeringskansliet, “The European Union's Soft Power: A
Force for Change,” http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/7417/a/90906, NN
These days the media is filled with speculation about whether we are heading for policies of revenge or
policies of reconciliation between Turks and Kurds in the borderlands between Mesopotamia and
Anatolia. Much is at stake here - and there can be no doubt what we Europeans must strive to
contribute towards. Indeed, it is to a large extent the process of European modernisation of Turkey that
has opened up the present prospect of these policies of reconciliation. As Turkey moves away from
some of the traumas of its modern birth, and eyes a new European future, it is also increasingly able to
handle the complex issues associated with the Kurdish question. Prime Minister Erdogan has famously
stated that it is "more democracy" that is the true solution to this issue. And it might well be that it is
the feared success of these policies that has triggered the recent wave of terrorist attacks and activities.
We strongly condemn the acts of terrorism we have seen, and we strongly salute the efforts aimed at
political solutions that we are now seeing. They simply have to succeed. These tragic and dramatic
events have again demonstrated that if we are interested in the stability of the wider region, we have a
profound interest in anchoring Turkey in our common efforts at promoting peace, prosperity and
reconciliation in the area. Strategic drift in this region could easily be the recipe for strategic disaster.
From Israel through Iraq to Iran there is no lack of challenges in the months and years ahead. And for us
Europeans this is our immediate neighbourhood. That's clear to everyone in Athens. But it is nowadays
equally clear in Stockholm. In the small town of Södertälje just outside Stockholm we already have more
refugees from Iraq than there are in the entire United States. In many ways, our Europe extends into the
Middle East - and in many ways the Middle East extends into our Europe. There may now be a possibility
of moving towards a comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine. We must give this process however difficult - all the support we can. I believe the policies of the European Union will be critical to
success in these efforts. We all know that the position of the United States is of critical importance as we
approach the crucial meetings now ahead of us, and we should salute the determination demonstrated
by Secretary Rice in the last few months. She has rightly said that what is needed is a Palestine state not
in the distant and uncertain future, but more or less right now. But when it comes to actually
contributing to that building of a state in Palestine that will also be the key to the security of Israel, I am
convinced that the efforts and contributions of the European Union will be as critical as they have been
in state-building in the Balkans. Again and again, we see how the soft power of Europe - the inspiration
of our model of integration and shared sovereignty, the magnetism of our process of integration and of
building increasingly close relations with our neighbours, the transformational capacity of our
experiences in conflict resolution and state-building in complex areas - is becoming increasingly relevant
in the world in which we are living. Our Union is today far more than the regional player it was when
first Greece and then Sweden - to mention just these two countries - joined. You joined a community of
just nine and we a union of just twelve. Today, our Union encompasses 27 countries with half a billion
citizens living in a Europe that has never been as free, never been as secure and never been as
prosperous. We are the world's largest integrated economy. We are by far the world's largest trading
entity. We are a bigger exporter than the number two and number three taken together, and we are the
largest market for more than 130 nations around the world. We are by far the world's largest donor of
development assistance. And if there is one thing that has impressed me during the year I have served
as one of the foreign ministers in the Union, it is the demand that exists across the globe for an ever
stronger role and an even stronger political presence of our Union. If we look at the big issues
confronting our world in the years ahead - climate change, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
economic growth through trade and reforms, international terrorism, energy security, building bridges
between civilisations, trying to lift the bottom billion of our world out of despair - it is very difficult to
see them being moved towards some sort of solution without more active engagement on the part of
the European Union. I would say that an active role for the European Union is a precondition for moving
all of these issues in the direction we all seek - although it is obviously not enough. We must reinforce
our cooperation across the Atlantic with the United States - our traditional and firm partner - but we
must also intensify our efforts at building truly strategic relationships with the rising and responsible
powers of - to name just a few - India, China and Brazil. With the Reform Treaty now agreed, we are
creating new possibilities for our Europe to live up to its responsibilities as well as its opportunities in
these important areas.
Middle East instability escalates
Primakov, 9 [September, Yevgeny, President of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian
Federation; Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; member of the Editorial Board of Russia in
Global Affairs. This article is based on the scientific report for which the author was awarded the
Lomonosov Gold Medal of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2008, “The Middle East Problem in the
Context of International Relations”]
The Middle East conflict is unparalleled in terms of its potential for spreading globally. During
the Cold War, amid which the Arab-Israeli conflict evolved, the two opposing superpowers
directly supported the conflicting parties: the Soviet Union supported Arab countries, while the
United States supported Israel. On the one hand, the bipolar world order which existed at that
time objectively played in favor of the escalation of the Middle East conflict into a global
confrontation. On the other hand, the Soviet Union and the United States were not interested in
such developments and they managed to keep the situation under control. The behavior of both
superpowers in the course of all the wars in the Middle East proves that. In 1956, during the
Anglo-French-Israeli military invasion of Egypt (which followed Cairo’s decision to nationalize
the Suez Canal Company) the United States – contrary to the widespread belief in various
countries, including Russia – not only refrained from supporting its allies but insistently pressed
– along with the Soviet Union – for the cessation of the armed action. Washington feared that
the tripartite aggression would undermine the positions of the West in the Arab world and would
result in a direct clash with the Soviet Union. Fears that hostilities in the Middle East might
acquire a global dimension could materialize also during the Six-Day War of 1967. On its eve,
Moscow and Washington urged each other to cool down their “clients.” When the war began,
both superpowers assured each other that they did not intend to get involved in the crisis
militarily and that that they would make efforts at the United Nations to negotiate terms for a
ceasefire. On July 5, the Chairman of the Soviet Government, Alexei Kosygin, who was
authorized by the Politburo to conduct negotiations on behalf of the Soviet leadership, for the
first time ever used a hot line for this purpose. After the USS Liberty was attacked by Israeli
forces, which later claimed the attack was a case of mistaken identity, U.S. President Lyndon
Johnson immediately notified Kosygin that the movement of the U.S. Navy in the Mediterranean
Sea was only intended to help the crew of the attacked ship and to investigate the incident. The
situation repeated itself during the hostilities of October 1973. Russian publications of those
years argued that it was the Soviet Union that prevented U.S. military involvement in those
events. In contrast, many U.S. authors claimed that a U.S. reaction thwarted Soviet plans to
send troops to the Middle East. Neither statement is true. The atmosphere was really quite
tense. Sentiments both in Washington and Moscow were in favor of interference, yet both
capitals were far from taking real action. When U.S. troops were put on high alert, Henry
Kissinger assured Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin that this was done largely for domestic
considerations and should not be seen by Moscow as a hostile act. In a private conversation
with Dobrynin, President Richard Nixon said the same, adding that he might have overreacted
but that this had been done amidst a hostile campaign against him over Watergate. Meanwhile,
Kosygin and Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko at a Politburo meeting in Moscow strongly
rejected a proposal by Defense Minister Marshal Andrei Grechko to “demonstrate” Soviet
military presence in Egypt in response to Israel’s refusal to comply with a UN Security Council
resolution. Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev took the side of Kosygin and Gromyko, saying that he
was against any Soviet involvement in the conflict. The above suggests an unequivocal
conclusion that control by the superpowers in the bipolar world did not allow the Middle East
conflict to escalate into a global confrontation. After the end of the Cold War, some scholars and
political observers concluded that a real threat of the Arab-Israeli conflict going beyond regional
frameworks ceased to exist. However, in the 21st century this conclusion no longer conforms to
the reality. The U.S. military operation in Iraq has changed the balance of forces in the Middle
East. The disappearance of the Iraqi counterbalance has brought Iran to the fore as a regional
power claiming a direct role in various Middle East processes. I do not belong to those who
believe that the Iranian leadership has already made a political decision to create nuclear
weapons of its own. Yet Tehran seems to have set itself the goal of achieving a technological
level that would let it make such a decision (the “Japanese model”) under unfavorable
circumstances. Israel already possesses nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. In such
circumstances, the absence of a Middle East settlement opens a dangerous prospect of a
nuclear collision in the region, which would have catastrophic consequences for the whole
world. The transition to a multipolar world has objectively strengthened the role of states and
organizations that are directly involved in regional conflicts, which increases the latter’s danger
and reduces the possibility of controlling them. This refers, above all, to the Middle East conflict.
The coming of Barack Obama to the presidency has allayed fears that the United States could
deliver a preventive strike against Iran (under George W. Bush, it was one of the most
discussed topics in the United States). However, fears have increased that such a strike can be
launched Yevgeny Primakov 1 3 2 RUSSIA IN GLOBAL AFFAIRS VOL. 7 • No. 3 • JULY –
SEPTEMBER• 2009 by Israel, which would have unpredictable consequences for the region
and beyond. It seems that President Obama’s position does not completely rule out such a
possibility.
The impact is nuclear conflict—it would escalate
London 10 (Herbert, president of Hudson Institute, June 28, 2010, http://www.hudsonny.org/1387/coming-crisis-in-the-middle-east)
The coming storm in the Middle East is gaining momentum; like conditions prior to World
War I, all it takes for explosive action to commence is a trigger. Turkey's provocative flotilla,
often described in Orwellian terms as a humanitarian mission, has set in motion a gust of
diplomatic activity: if the Iranians send escort vessels for the next round of Turkish ships,
which they have apparently decided not to do in favor of land operations, it could have
presented a casus belli. [cause for war] Syria, too, has been playing a dangerous game, with
both missile deployment and rearming Hezbollah. According to most public accounts,
Hezbollah is sitting on 40,000 long-, medium- and short-range missiles, and Syrian territory
has been serving as a conduit for military materiel from Iran since the end of the 2006
Lebanon War. Should Syria move its own scuds to Lebanon or deploy its troops as
reinforcement for Hezbollah, a wider regional war with Israel could not be contained. In the
backdrop is an Iran, with sufficient fissionable material to produce a couple of nuclear
weapons. It will take some time to weaponize the missiles, but the road to that goal is
synchronized in green lights since neither diplomacy nor diluted sanctions can convince Iran
to change course. From Qatar to Afghanistan all political eyes are on Iran, poised to be "the
hegemon" in the Middle East; it is increasingly considered the "strong horse" as American
forces incrementally retreat from the region. Even Iraq, ironically, may depend on Iranian ties
in order to maintain internal stability. For Sunni nations like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, regional
strategic vision is a combination of deal-making to offset the Iranian Shia advantage, and
attempting to buy or develop nuclear weapons as a counterweight to Iranian ambition.
However, both of these governments are in a precarious state; should either fall, all bets are
off in the Middle East neighborhood. It has long been said that the Sunni "tent" must stand on
two legs: if one, falls, the tent collapses. Should this tent collapse, and should Iran take
advantage of that calamity, it could incite a Sunni-Shia war. Or feeling empowered, and no
longer dissuaded by an escalation scenario, Iran, with nuclear weapons in tow, might decide
that a war against Israel is a distinct possibility. However implausible it may seem at the
moment, the possible annihilation of Israel and the prospect of a second holocaust could
lead to a nuclear exchange.
Europe Multilateralism key to Middle East Conflict Resolution
Ortega ’06 [October 1 2006, Martin Ortega, from Spain, was a Research Fellow at the EUISS between
August 2002 and August 2007. At the Institute, he dealt with the regions of the Mediterranean and the
Middle East and the use of force in international relations, “Multilateralism in the Middle East”
http://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/detail/article/multilateralism-in-the-middle-east/]
This summer, war swept across the parched lands of the Middle East. Once more, and with a terrible feeling of déjà vu, we were
contemplating a fully-fledged, conventional war in Israel and Lebanon. And then, almost unexpectedly, war gave way to a ceasefire
and to a fragile peace. This rapid shift – a sign of our hasty times – was the product of several causes: Hezbollah’s resistance, Israel’s
hesitant tactics, and international pressure linked to profound disapproval of the war in international public opinion. But let us leave
the assessment of last month’s events and the exact combination of causes that led to a sudden peace to future historians. For
us
Europeans, what really matter are the lessons we can draw from the crisis. Without any doubt,
UNSC Resolution 1701 and its subsequent implementation represent a triumph of multilateralism.
As Javier Solana said on 13 August, ‘by definition, a resolution seeking to solve a conflict cannot
be perfect but it is important to find formulations that are accepted by the parties’. The resolution
was the result of multilateral negotiations. An effective ceasefire and further stabilisation
required a robust peacekeeping operation, which could only be mounted with key European
contributions. Confronted with a serious internation-al crisis, the Europeans stood ready to help to ensure the security of both
Israel and Lebanon. The parties and the international community welcom-ed Europe’s determination. In short,
multilateralism, responsibility and commitment prevailed over unilateral quick fixes. Now the
question is whether and to what extent multilateralism can be applied to other Middle Eastern
crises. In the last couple of years, it has become increasingly obvious that the Iranian challenge cannot be tackled
through unilateral action. Iran’s nuclear ambitions must be curbed but, at the same time, Iran
should be given a place in the international community. The Chatham House report ‘Iran, its neighbours and the
regional crises’, published in August, clearly shows how important the strategic position of Iran is in western Asia. Even though
targeted military strikes are still being considered in Washington, the European approach, which
combines dialogue and firmness, should be preferred. While the added value of multilater-alism
in the Iranian case is recognised by almost everyone, multilateralism is not a key element for the
resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Some time ago, the two parties abandoned the Road Map and, before this
summer’s war, it seemed that Israeli unilateralism was the only way out, something which was fatalistically accepted by the Quartet.
Today Israel has at least five options: (a) maintaining the status quo, with continued military action in Gaza and the West Bank; (b) the
‘Sharon plan plus’, which would include permanent withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank; (c) bilateral negotiations with
the Palestinians; (d) renewed contacts in the Quartet or any other analogous multilateral framework; or (e) wait for the next crisis and
the drafting of a new ‘1701-type’ resolution. Both
political circumstances within Israel and American onesided views of the conflict do not leave much room for multilateral initiatives. Nevertheless, the
Europeans should insist that multilateralism is the only way forward for a durable peace. Finally,
putting ‘Iraq’ and ‘multilateralism’ in the same sentence is like trying to mix oil and water. Since
May 2003 the US administration has led state-building in Iraq in an almost unilateral manner.
However, despite the US’s endeavours, the situation there is extremely worrying. As Kofi Annan put it
after his diplomatic visit to the region, ‘in a way, the US has found itself in a position where it cannot stay and it cannot leave’. Sooner
or later, the Americans will have to realise that their efforts to stabilise and rebuild Iraq will not bear any significant fruit unless all
political forces inside Iraq as well as all neighbours and the international community are directly involved in the search for a modus
vivendi. In
this respect, the idea of holding an international conference or conducting serious
negotiations with a view to drafting a ground-breaking UNSC resolution should be encouraged. In
an interconnected and interdependent world, where any single im-portant issue, from Iraq to the
greenhouse effect, from drug trafficking to terrorism, has global implications, is there still anyone
who believes that problems can be solved unilaterally? Is there anyone who really thinks that
isolationism is a credible option? Multilateralism is back and is here to stay. It remains to be seen,
though, if the huge long-term human and financial costs of such a policy have yet dawned on us.
Middle East Instability risks nuclear war
Primakov ’09 [September 2009, Yevgeny Primakov is the President of the Chamber of Commerce and
Industry and aRussian Federation, Member and a fellow at the Russian Academy of Science, “The
Middle East Problem in the Context of International Relations”, Russia in Global Affairs,
http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/number/n_13593]
The Middle East conflict is unparalleled in terms of its potential for spreading globally. During the
Cold War, amid which the Arab-Israeli conflict evolved, the two opposing superpowers directly
supported the conflicting parties: the Soviet Union supported Arab countries, while the United
States supported Israel. On the one hand, the bipolar world order which existed at that time
objectively played in favor of the escalation of the Middle East conflict into a global confrontation.
On the other hand, the Soviet Union and the United States were not interested in such developments and they managed to keep the
situation under control. The behavior of both superpowers in the course of all the wars in the Middle East proves that. In 1956, during
the Anglo-French-Israeli military invasion of Egypt (which followed Cairo’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal Company) the United
States – contrary to the widespread belief in various countries, including Russia – not only refrained from supporting its allies but
insistently pressed – along with the Soviet Union – for the cessation of the armed action. Washington feared that the tripartite
aggression would undermine the positions of the West in the Arab world and would result in a direct clash with the Soviet Union. Fears
that hostilities in the Middle East might acquire a global dimension could materialize also during the Six-Day War of 1967. On its eve,
Moscow and Washington urged each other to cool down their “clients.” When the war began, both superpowers assured each other
that they did not intend to get involved in the crisis militarily and that that they would make efforts at the United Nations to negotiate
terms for a ceasefire. On July 5, the Chairman of the Soviet Government, Alexei Kosygin, who was authorized by the Politburo to
conduct negotiations on behalf of the Soviet leadership, for the first time ever used a hot line for this purpose. After the USS Liberty
was attacked by Israeli forces, which later claimed the attack was a case of mistaken identity, U.S. President Lyndon Johnson
immediately notified Kosygin that the movement of the U.S. Navy in the Mediterranean Sea was only intended to help the crew of the
attacked ship and to investigate the incident. The situation repeated itself during the hostilities of October 1973. Russian publications
of those years argued that it was the Soviet Union that prevented U.S. military involvement in those events. In contrast, many U.S.
authors claimed that a U.S. reaction thwarted Soviet plans to send troops to the Middle East. Neither statement is true. The
atmosphere was really quite tense. Sentiments both in Washington and Moscow were in favor of interference, yet both capitals were
far from taking real action. When U.S. troops were put on high alert, Henry Kissinger assured Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin that
this was done largely for domestic considerations and should not be seen by Moscow as a hostile act. In a private conversation with
Dobrynin, President Richard Nixon said the same, adding that he might have overreacted but that this had been done amidst a hostile
campaign against him over Watergate. Meanwhile, Kosygin and Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko at a Politburo meeting in Moscow
strongly rejected a proposal by Defense Minister Marshal Andrei Grechko to “demonstrate” Soviet military presence in Egypt in
response to Israel’s refusal to comply with a UN Security Council resolution. Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev took the side of Kosygin and
Gromyko, saying that he was against any Soviet involvement in the conflict. The above suggests an unequivocal conclusion that control
by the superpowers in the bipolar world did not allow the Middle East conflict to escalate into a global confrontation. After
the
end of the Cold War, some scholars and political observers concluded that a real threat of the
Arab-Israeli conflict going beyond regional frameworks ceased to exist. However, in the 21st
century this conclusion no longer conforms to the reality. The U.S. military operation in Iraq has
changed the balance of forces in the Middle East. The disappearance of the Iraqi counterbalance has brought Iran to
the fore as a regional power claiming a direct role in various Middle East processes. I do not belong to those who believe
that the Iranian leadership has already made a political decision to create nuclear weapons of its
own. Yet Tehran seems to have set itself the goal of achieving a technological level that would let
it make such a decision (the “Japanese model”) under unfavorable circumstances. Israel already
possesses nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. In such circumstances, the absence of a Middle
East settlement opens a dangerous prospect of a nuclear collision in the region, which would have
catastrophic consequences for the whole world. The transition to a multipolar world has
objectively strengthened the role of states and organizations that are directly involved in regional
conflicts, which increases the latter’s danger and reduces the possibility of controlling them. This
refers, above all, to the Middle East conflict. The coming of Barack Obama to the presidency has allayed fears that the
United States could deliver a preventive strike against Iran (under George W. Bush, it was one of the most discussed topics in the
United States). However, fears have increased that such a strike can be launched by Israel, which would have unpredictable
consequences for the region and beyond. It seems that President Obama’s position does not completely rule out such a possibility.
Soft power K2 General Conflict
Only soft power efforts by the EU can solve for global instability and conflict
Frewen 10, Justin Frewen, 9/23/10, Frewen is a staff writer for STWR, “The EU and Soft Power: An Iron Fist
Behind the Velvet Glove,” http://www.stwr.org/imf-world-bank-trade/the-eu-and-soft-power-an-iron-fist-behindthe-velvet-glove.html, NN
The European Commission´s Agenda 2000, drawn up as the second millennium drew to a close and in
the immediate wake of the Cold War, boldly declared the EU´s intention to play an enhanced role in
global affairs through the implementation of a `soft power´ approach to international relations. But does
the EU really rely on soft power to obtain `consensus´ with partner States to advance its foreign policy
objectives, or has it been only too willing to resort to more coercive methods, particularly with weaker
States? The concept of soft power was first developed in 1990 by the former Assistant Secretary of
Defense and Dean of Harvard University, Joseph Nye, in his book Bound to Lead. He further clarified
what he meant in his article “Soft Power”. Soft power is the capacity to “get what you want through
attraction rather than coercion or payments”, and depends on three types of resources: the State´s
culture, its political values and its policies. These resources become effective when they appeal to
others, are seen to have legitimacy and are morally authoritative. Soft power is therefore understood as
a means to achieve international policy objectives through co-operation and partnership. While the
staple of hard power is coercion, soft power relies on attraction. While some commentators view hard
power as more or less synonymous with military force, Nye includes economic power, depending on its
manner of deployment. Economic sanctions and the application of commercial power to compel other
States into adopting particular policies can therefore also be regarded as the exercise of hard power. For
many analysts, the EU´s decision to promote its foreign-policy objectives through soft power is directly
attributable to its negligible hard-power resources, particularly when compared with those of the US.
They argue that the EU has been obliged to rely on negotiation, multilateral partnership and
`contractual agreements´ to achieve its foreign policy aims. At the same time, the EU´s impetus to
pursuing international policy objectives through soft power fits nicely with its declared support for
values such as human rights, the rule of law, good governance, `free´ trade and social justice. In fact, the
EU employs a range of mechanisms to advance its foreign policy goals. A major pillar in this area consists
of the EU´s provision of development and humanitarian aid. Including Member States’ contributions and
overall EU development-assistance allocations, the EU is by far the largest provider of aid globally.
However, although the EU has committed to allocating 0.7% of its budget to development assistance by
2015, it is not likely to attain this target. The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is used to
enable the EU to speak and act in a unified manner on international issues. At the core of the CFSP is an
official commitment to the use of soft power by means of diplomacy. Where necessary, however,
recourse is made to trade, aid and the provision of peacekeepers to resolve complicated conflicts and
`promote´ international understanding. The EU also avails itself of a range of trade-related mechanisms
to further specific policy goals. For example, the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) provides
preferential market access to `developing´ States, including duty-free and quota-free entry benefits for
many of their exports. GSP plus extends this market access even further for vulnerable developing
countries that have ratified and introduced what the EU esteems to be critical international conventions
on issues such as good governance, human rights, environmental protection and labour rights. Arguably
the greatest attraction of the EU for other States is the prospect of preferential access to the largest
single global market. The EU has thus made ample use of trade agreements to promote its foreign policy
objectives. The Union enjoys trade agreements with virtually every State worldwide and has
considerable persuasive power as to their final formulation, given the carrots of preferential access to its
internal market, inclusion in a free trade area or even potential membership of the EU, it can dangle at
the negotiating table. These trade agreements have therefore become a formidable weapon in the EU´s
foreign policy armoury. The efficacy of this approach, in promoting EU policy goals, is clear from even a
cursory examination of the Stabilisation and Association Agreements that were entered into with
countries in South-Eastern Europe (SEE). By inserting a range of conditions in these agreements, in
return for certain economic inducements, the EU was in a position to exercise influence over the policymaking processes of SEE States. In this respect, the 2000 Cotonou Agreement between the EU and the
African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) State countries is perhaps the most illuminating. Set up to replace
the Lomé Agreements, which had been in force since 1976, Cotonou now includes 79 ACP countries and
the 27 EU Member States. Under the four Lomé Agreements, the ACP were granted trading preferences
with the EU that they did not have to reciprocate. However, the establishment of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) in 1995 led to calls for the Lomé Agreement to be revised to conform with WTO
policies, primarily driven by the principle of reciprocity. At the same time, the demand to remove nonreciprocal preferential EU market access from the ACP coincided with the EU´s own foreign policy
objectives, in particular the promotion of free trade and greater market access. In effect, the EU has
used Cotonou to introduce trade liberalisation amongst the ACP faster and deeper than that required by
the WTO. For the ACP, whose economies are comparatively fragile and thence less able to compete on
the international stage, the introduction of Cotonou has been far less favourably received.
EU soft power is key to global hegemony and stopping conflict
Lough 14, John Lough, 1/17/14, Lough is a staff writer for the Moscow Times, “The EU Should Maximize Its
Soft Power,” http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/the-eu-should-maximize-its-softpower/492931.html, NN
Manipulated by Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and outplayed by President Vladimir Putin, the
European Union has emerged with a bloodied nose from Ukraine. While Ukraine's leaders have not
agreed so far to join the Russian-led Customs Union, indications are that they have signed away control
of swathes of the country's strategic industries in return for a $15 billion bailout package from Moscow
and a short-term reduction in the price for Russian gas. Russian carrots and sticks have held the day and
in practical terms, the prospect of Ukraine moving closer to Europe seems more remote than ever. But
the question of Ukraine's future orientation is still far from settled. Although the EU may have missed its
moment, recent opinion polls indicate that more 60 percent of Ukrainians now support integration with
Europe. The "Euro maidan" protests have shown that there is an active part of society in Ukraine ready
to voice its preference for living in a country with rule of law and accountability of leaders, where people
have real opportunities to improve their lives. Many of the current protesters on Maidan Square in Kiev
are owners of small businesses that cannot develop because of institutionalized corruption. Russia's
current development model holds no attraction for them. Opposition leaders speak confidently of being
able to take the protests east to regions traditionally supportive of close ties with Russia and consolidate
support for Ukraine's gravitation toward European norms and values rather than the governance model
based on "brotherly" relations with Russia. While it is difficult to tell to what extent this confidence is
justified, Moscow's strong-arm tactics to prevent Kiev from signing the Association Agreement have
undoubtedly alienated some of its key constituencies in the country. This is the behavior of a bullying
neighbor rather than a strategic partner. From an EU perspective, these are encouraging trends for the
longer term. Unlike Russia, the EU is not a geopolitical actor and does not think like one. This makes the"
protests particularly striking since they have shown that the EU's soft power remains impressively strong
in Ukraine as it also does in Georgia and Moldova. And this despite Europe's current economic woes and
the introspection of its leaders. Yet if EU countries want to see Ukraine begin to reform itself and avoid
the risk of divisions within the country deepening and becoming unmanageable, they cannot rely on
passive soft power alone to pull Ukraine in the right direction. They need to play a smarter game to
maximize the EU's soft power advantage. The key to achieve this is better communication with
Ukrainian society. The EU has so far failed to give clear explanations about the nature and benefits of
the Association Agreement, including the establishment of a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade
Agreement, or DCFTA. A full-scale campaign is required to build understanding in society of what the EU
is offering and to address disinformation about the effects of the DCFTA on economic relations with
Russia. Russia has been using hard and soft tools to undermine support among Ukraine's leaders and
broader society for gravitation toward Europe. Last summer, Moscow arbitrarily imposed trade
restrictions on different sets of Ukrainian exports from metals to chocolates, as a taster of the measures
it could enforce if Ukraine implemented the DCFTA. At the same time, it conducted its own
accompanying public relations effort to dissuade Ukraine's elites from building closer ties with the EU.
The message was that the provisions of the DCFTA were unaffordable for Ukraine since the EU would
not provide financial support, and that they would have a negative effect on Russia by displacing
Ukrainian goods into the Russian market as a result of Ukraine's free trade agreement with Russia. This,
in turn, would require a response from Russia to defend its economic interests. The EU was
conspicuously silent. Not a single EU leader challenged the Russian arguments by delivering the obvious
messages: the DCFTA offers Ukraine excellent opportunities to expand its markets in the EU and attract
investment that will modernize industry, raise productivity and help make the Ukrainian economy
competitive over the long term. Russian capital does not offer the same opportunities. Mexico has a
free-trade agreement with the EU and is a member of the North American Free Trade Agreement, or
NAFTA, so there is no reason why Ukraine cannot have a free trade agreement with the EU and trade
successfully at the same time with Russia.. The EU has powerful messages to differentiate its offering to
Ukraine from Russia's: Integration is a voluntary process. The EU has an excellent track record of
supporting institutional reforms that allow countries to function better and raise living standards. The
DCFTA will stimulate growth and make Ukraine more competitive in international markets. Ukraine's
citizens will benefit from better products and improved services. Ukrainians know that in contrast,
Russia is experiencing accelerating stagnation that is largely the result of incapacity to conduct structural
reforms required for economic modernization. Ultimately, of course, Ukrainians should choose how they
want to be governed and how they want the country to develop. To make that choice, they need a
debate based on reliable information. It is time for the EU to seize the opportunity in Ukraine and make
its soft power count.
EU practices Effective multilateralism, empirically proven to be able to bring nations
together
Geoghegan-Quinn 13[ Máire Geoghegan-Quinn is the European Commissioner for Research,
Innovation and Science, “EU Science: Global Challenges & Global Collaboration'”
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-186_en.htm]
Mr Cookson, Ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to have the opportunity to talk to you about Global Challenges and Global
Collaboration for EU science. We
are living in exciting, if challenging, times with profound changes to the
global research and innovation landscape. Growth economies such as China, India, Russia or
South Africa are transforming themselves, and investing strongly in their research and innovation
base. More and more scientific publications are co-authored by scientists from different countries, while multinational companies
are increasingly investing in research and innovation outside their home countries. This is to be welcomed, because the challenges that
we face today such as climate change, public health or energy supply affect people across the globe, and require global solutions. The
European Union is an excellent place to perform research. While we account for just 7% of the world’s population, we’re responsible
for 24% of research expenditure, 32% of high-impact publications and 32% of patent applications. We
have traditionally
strong links with partners such as the United States and Japan, and we’re strengthening our links
with fast-growing economies. And like everyone, we are keen to improve our competitiveness, and we can do this by
ensuring that our researchers, innovators and businesses have access to knowledge, including the knowledge produced outside our
own borders. At the same time, strengthening our collaborations opens up mutual market access for our companies. For all these
reasons,
international cooperation remains a crucial part of our research and innovation policy at
European level, and it is a vital component of our new programme for Research and Innovation,
Horizon 2020. The strategy we’re adopting under Horizon 2020 builds on the achievements of the
7th Framework Programme - or FP7 - that comes to an end this December. For example, FP7 has been
supporting the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, in which 14 EU
Member States, Norway and Switzerland, cooperate with sub-Saharan countries in the battle
against HIV/Aids, malaria and tuberculosis. Researchers from 80 different countries have participated in the
immensely successful Marie Sklodowska-Curie actions, while the European Research Council funds scientists from anywhere in the
world to conduct their research in Europe. ITER is another flagship project. Together
with China, India, Japan, Russia,
South Korea and the United States, we are attempting to demonstrate the viability of nuclear
fusion as an energy source. Rare diseases research is a prime example of the advantages of
international cooperation, which can maximise scarce resources, share data and coordinate
research efforts that might not be viable on a smaller scale. The International Rare Diseases
Research Consortium (IRDiRC) was launched in April 2011 to foster international collaboration in
diagnosing rare diseases and developing new therapies. The Joint Research Centre also provides
dozens of good examples of international cooperation, such as in the fields of nuclear safety and
the prevention and mitigation of natural disasters. The level of cooperation is such that around
20% of the projects funded by FP7 include at least one international partner in its consortium.
Around 5.4% of all FP7 participants come from ‘third countries’, with the top five sources being
Russia, the USA, China, India and South Africa. While we have done a lot to foster international cooperation, we’re
not resting on our laurels. We have much more to do. That is why last September the Commission adopted a new strategy
for international cooperation in research and innovation. The strategy lays down three key objectives: First: Strengthening
excellence in research and innovation by facilitating access to knowledge, people and markets
across the globe. Second: Tackling global challenges. We need to cooperate internationally to
tackle the major societal challenges that I mentioned earlier. Third: Supporting external policies.
Many of the international commitments that the EU has signed up to, such as the Millennium Development Goals, are underpinned by
research and innovation. Horizon 2020, the
new EU programme for research and innovation due to start in
2014 will be the main tool for implementing our international cooperation strategy. Horizon 2020
will be open to participation from all countries, but we will be a bit more restrictive as regards
providing funding from the EU budget. This is to take account of the fact that a number of countries have invested so
strongly in their research and innovation base that they are now able to cooperate on an equal footing. In addition, there will be
targeted cooperation actions. It will be up to policymakers to decide upfront both the area and the partner for cooperation. The
targeted actions will be selected on the basis of common interest and mutual benefit, and in some cases will be developed from the
ongoing dialogues with our global partners. In terms of the countries and regions with whom to cooperate, the Strategy identifies
three groupings: Enlargement and neighbourhood countries and EFTA (Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein). The focus is
on fostering these countries' integration into, or alignment with, the European Research Area, including through their possible
association to Horizon 2020. Industrialised countries and emerging economies, where the focus is strongly on competitiveness, access
to knowledge and markets; and, Developing countries, where the accent is on enhancing the research and innovation capacities of
these countries to assist them in their socio-economic development and in tackling the challenges most relevant to them. The resulting
targeted actions will be clearly laid out in a set of multi-annual roadmaps that will specify for each country and region the topics on
which we wish to cooperate. The roadmaps will subsequently be implemented through a range of instruments including collaborative
projects, networking between projects or joint initiatives between the EU and third countries, such as coordinated calls. In addition to
these funding actions, a specific point of attention of the new strategy will be to promote common principles for engaging in
international cooperation. These
principles, to be mutually agreed between the Union and international
partners, will enable researchers from across the globe to collaborate in full confidence. We will
work to create a level playing field for research and innovation with common principles on issues
such as research integrity, gender and open access. The protection of intellectual property will be particularly
important as we move to Horizon 2020 and its increased support for innovation activities. This strategy also represents the further
development of the international dimension of the European Research Area, and in this respect it is essential to deepen our work with
Member States on international cooperation. In this respect, important progress has been made through the Strategic Forum for
International Science and Technology Cooperation, where important steps have been taken to move forward common strategic
research and innovation agendas, for instance with India. Launching this strategy has only been the first step. Making it work will
require the full and visible integration of international cooperation into Horizon 2020 and a sound governance structure. As part of this
governance and to ensure that we stay on track, the Commission will produce a report every two years to measure progress and assess
impact. The first report, planned for early 2014, will also contain the first multi-annual roadmaps. Ladies and gentlemen, research and
innovation are vital elements of the Union's future. They are also essential ingredients of any approach that seeks to address today's
global challenges. Europe is reaching out to the world to join forces in addressing those challenges. I wish you all an interesting
conference and fruitful discussions. Thank you.
EU soft power key to global stability
EurActiv 13, EurActiv, 4/10/13, EurActic is a news agency primarily concerned with issues occurring in the
European Union, “Vimont: EU shouldn’t underestimate its soft power,”
http://www.euractiv.com/security/vimont-eu-shouldn-ashamed-foreig-interview-530870, NN
The Syrian war has been going on for two and a half years now, and has turned into a humanitarian
disaster. Despite all the goodwill and humanitarian aid, Europe hasn’t been capable of changing the
course of this conflict... Yes, but it is a shared responsibility of the United Nations and of others. Now, of
course, we haven’t been able to solve this crisis. But the EU is playing its part with all its diplomatic
contacts. And we are trying to improve humanitarian access as much as we can. The EU has responded
to each of the UN’s calls for aid donations, whenever possible, and we’ve received appraisal from the
UN on this. On the issue of chemical weapons inspections and the elimination of the chemical weapons
in Syria, we are going to bring some contributions to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons (OPCW) and to the UN. So we’re working on all of this. Looking at the developments in Syria
over the past weeks, would you agree that Europe is simply not a power broker, and it can only play a
role when backed by global powers in international community – notably the US? No, I think it is more
complicated than that. Each situation has to be looked at on its own. Syria is not Mali; Mali is not Libya;
Egypt is very different altogether. In each case, we have tried to do whatever we can. Syria itself is an
example in which the whole international community had failed – at first. The first actual success only
happened last week, with the new Security Council resolution [on the dismantling of Syria’s chemical
weapons] and the decision by the OPCW in The Hague. But Europe was hardly involved in initiating
these actions... Well, no, you’re right. The issue of chemical weapons became more prominent and
therefore the Americans put pressure [on Syria], threatening with military strikes. That this came about
was a good thing. Europe wasn’t there for the initiative itself but we have been as helpful as possible
ever since. Again, I’m not saying that what we have done was going to solve the crisis – that is certainly
not the case. You mentioned Egypt earlier, a country that has always been closely connected to EU
member states. Is the EU getting its point across: and does it have an actual impact on what is
happening domestically? It is a very difficult issue, we all agree. But one thing that frustrates me from
time to time is that people argue that Europe is absent in Egypt; that we’re not visible. Egypt is the
perfect example where Europe is in fact clearly involved. [EEAS High Representative] Catherine Ashton
currently is back there [in Egypt] again. The EU is the only player that is able to discuss with everyone.
We have invested a lot of effort, including visits from the high representative [for foreign and security
policy, Ashton], with special representative for the Southern Mediterranean region Bernardino Leon.
We’re there, trying to push for a solution. We haven’t succeeded in bringing two sides together, I agree.
The hardliners in Egypt have been the ones that have prevailed so far. But we are doing all we can and
are the only ones is involved at the moment. And we are working in a way that is, I feel, the right
attitude: not lecturing, not patronising, but listening and trying to work out a solution that is supported
by the Egyptians themselves. The amount of diplomatic effort put into this by the EU is also
considerable. Catherine Ashton is closely involved in person. Bernardino León is one of the EU’s top
international diplomats. What if the EU invested an equal amount of resources into other conflicts, and
in Syria for that matter? Well, we are involved everywhere – in some cases more visible than in others.
Take Tunisia, for example, where we have been discussing the present political deadlock with everyone.
We are present in Libya, in Yemen... We are trying to be as active as we can, at least in our
neighbourhood. I don’t pretend that we are succeeding as much as we’d like. But we’re trying. It seems
there has been a lot of interest on Egypt, and perhaps high representative Ashton’s visit contributed to
our visibility there.
AT: Aff Answers
AT: EU Won’t Give Information to US
Europe will share data with the US – solves the aff
COOPEUS 2013
Project CoopEUS WP 4 – Ocean Observation Deliverable D4.1- Fact Finding Report
http://www.coopeus.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/D4_1_Facts_Finding_10_03_FIN.pdf
Sharing scientific data can be the 'playing-field' for an easy and profitable commencement of the
scientific structured collaboration while complementing respective expertise. This approach also meet
the recent trend of EU and US funding agencies moving towards more openness and more sharing. The
analysis and definition of the basic principles and requirements for a shared data policy can be a first
step for a long-term transatlantic cooperation and can pave the ground for the data integration on a
global scale diminishing significant misalignment in the data issues. Besides, the adoption and
implementation of common data standards can facilitate the development of infrastructure and data
infrastructures that will be largely interoperable. The international ICT collaborative frame for the
interoperability of scientific data and infrastructures has to be leveraged to take advantages of the
continuous progresses and specialized skills. Parallel initiatives and projects at global and continental
scale have to be exploited with the aim of supporting the on-going networking process of the Ocean
Scientists and ICT engineers and specialists European ODIP, EUDAT iCORDI GENESI-DEC, GEOwow GPOD, TATOO and worldwide Research Data Alliance, DAITF( http://www.daitf.ore/ ) to mention some.
The present development status of the research infrastructures for ocean observations 001 and EMSO
enable, as they are now, to outline data sharing practices and protocols across borders and disciplines
although with some limitations. Limiting factors for an easy and extensive data use out of the respective
data production frame and user community can be misalignment of vocabularies and ontology,
metadata Incompleteness and heterogeneities, non standardized QC/QA practices. These issues shall be
the subjects of deepening discussion in CoopEUS to achieve reciprocal understanding and smooth data
interoperability and exchange.
Our counterplan text fiats that the EU would share all relevant information with the
US – solves all their offense
AT: EU Spending Disad
The EU’s economy is set to rise but only further investment in environmental
programs can ensure that
European Commission 14, European Commission, Winter of 2014, The European Commision is a subset
of the European Union in charge of producing reports on various European activities, “European Economic
Forecast,” http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2014/pdf/ee2_en.pdf, NN
The recovery is broadening. GDP growth in the EU, which has turned positive in the second quarter of
last year, is increasingly driven by domestic demand. This year, domestic consumption and investment
are set to expand further, reducing the dependency of the recovery on the external sector. Growth has
also returned in many of the vulnerable Member States, and growth differentials across EU Member
States are expected to narrow. At the same time as we are observing more balanced growth prospects
across the EU, the global economy is becoming more differentiated. Among advanced economies, the
US has displayed a strong resilience to domestic fiscal shocks and the related uncertainty. Assessing the
upswing there as sufficiently robust, the Federal Reserve has initiated the gradual shift towards a less
expansionary monetary stance. In turn, the prospect of a gradual normalisation of benchmark interest
rates and global liquidity has led international investors to discriminate more strongly among emerging
market economies, and capital flows to countries with sizeable external imbalances and domestic
weaknesses have dried up. This reallocation of capital flows has led to financial market tensions in mid2013 and again in early 2014. They are a reminder that the global economy remains vulnerable, even as
growth and trade are accelerating. Within the EU economy, welcome recent improvements point to a
path towards gradual normalisation. However, the consequences of the crisis are still holding back
growth and job creation and could do so for some time. On the one hand, there are positive
developments on several fronts. After years of necessary front-loaded fiscal consolidation, the aggregate
fiscal stance is now close to neutral, although efforts are still required in a number of Member States.
The ECB's comprehensive assessment of the banking sector provides an opportunity to finalise the
overdue repair of bank balance sheets that is a precondition for overcoming financial fragmentation in
the euro area and for getting credit to support the real economy. There are first signs that recent
reforms in a number of Member States start bearing fruit as they facilitate internal and external
adjustment and, crucially, improve the prospects for employment growth. On the other hand, as long as
debt in several sectors of the economy remains too high, unemployment is at record levels and the
adjustment of previous imbalances is incomplete, there is a serious risk of growth remaining stuck in low
gear. Indeed, should the impetus for reforms at EU and Member State level falter, we would squander
the opportunity to put the EU economy back on a higher growth trajectory. The present very low
inflation - well below the ECB definition of price stability - could exacerbate the risk of protracted
lacklustre growth if it becomes entrenched. Disinflation may have the positive effect of improving real
incomes and supporting demand. However, it also makes the competitiveness adjustment in vulnerable
Member States more challenging, as the required negative inflation differential to the rest of the euro
area could adversely affect debt dynamics. Going forward, much depends on the stability of inflation
expectations for the medium term. Should they shift lower, the corresponding increase of real interest
rates and the debt burden would make it harder for growth to accelerate. Making 2014 the first year of
a sustained recovery therefore requires continued and determined policy efforts: bold structural
reforms in both vulnerable and core countries to tackle slow growth and facilitate rebalancing via
demand rotation; full and effective implementation of the Banking Union to overcome financial
fragmentation, sever sovereign-bank links and unlock credit in support of the recovery; improvement in
the quality of public finances to boost investment and favour job creation. It can be done, provided that
policy makers at national and EU level do not mistake the recent signs of improvement as definite
normalisation. There is still some sailing to do before we reach harbour.
China CP Solvency
Exploration
China is revamping its ocean exploration—new deep sea vessels and commitment to
ocean tech and science
Marlow 13 [Jeffery, a graduate student in Geological and Planetary Sciences at the California Institute
of Technology, “China’s Deep Sea Ambitions”, 12/30/13, http://www.wired.com/2013/12/chinas-deepsea-ambitions/] alla
Recently, China’s Jiaolong manned submersible became the world’s deepest-diving state-sponsored
research vessel, with four trips to 7,000 meters depth. Around the same time, news broke of plans for a
National Deep Sea Center, a $78 million facility that will operate the sea-going fleet and serve as a
central base for oceanographic research and technology development. Months later, the center’s
director, Liu Baohua, announced a nationwide search for oceanauts, men and women who will pilot
Jiaolong and its planned sister sub around the ocean’s depths.¶ It’s all part of China’s rhetorical, financial,
and strategic return to the sea, a realm that it dominated several centuries ago. Chinese maritime
strength reached its apex in the early 15th century, as admiral Zheng He crisscrossed the Indian Ocean
with enormous fleets, returning with gifts (most famously a giraffe) for the Emperor. But a few years
later, as political winds shifted, the Ming Dynasty ended the epic voyages, choosing instead to focus on
other, more local, priorities. This abrupt 180 is frequently cited as a cautionary tale highlighting the
dangers of isolationism, a poor strategic move that doomed the discoverers to become the discovered.¶
So why the resurgence in sea-based activity? Dean Cheng is a Research Fellow at The Heritage
Foundation and an expert on China’s technological ambitions. He points to the innocuously named “863
Program” as an underappreciated game changer that reconfigured the country’s relationship with
technology across a number of disciplines.¶ In March of 1986 (hence the “863” title), four prominent
engineers wrote to then-Chairman Deng Xiaoping, warning of impending doom for civil society’s
scientific institutions. A long-standing focus on military might had neglected other aims of technological
development, and if China didn’t redistribute its resources soon, it would be fated to watch the “new
technological revolution” from the outside.¶ Xiaoping took the argument to heart, initiating research and
exploration programs focused on seven key fields: biotechnology, space, information technology, lasers,
automation, energy, and materials science.¶ Marine Technology was added to the roster in 1996, well
coordinated with the country’s broadening regional influence and growing appetite for sea-based
resources. “China has become much more dependent on the oceans and ocean-based trade for food
and commerce,” notes Cheng. “They’d also like to know what’s off the coast; there are vast unexplored
swaths of their seabed as well as deeper ocean reaches that could prove useful.Ӧ And while Plan 863
indicates a formal commitment to oceanographic exploration, China’s movement has been measured
and deliberate, similar to its spacefaring progress. With all the fanfare surrounding the country’s entry
into manned spaceflight, it’s important to maintain historical perspective. In the decade since it became
the third country to put a man in space, China has completed four flights; the bulk of the Space Race,
from Gagarin to Armstrong, happened in less time.¶ It seems likely, then, that the oceanaut program will
be a slow burning initiative, the leading edge of a larger oceanic strategy. Going forward, China will
continue to consolidate its strategic interests and look to secure access to resources, whether in the
form of deep ocean minerals or coastal fish. As Cheng explains, “there are relatively few sudden
interests in Chinese politics. The broader set of research areas tend to be methodical in the
development process – it’s been true for outer space and it’s true for inner space too.”
China solves ocean exploration
Tsering 12 [Dolma was an intern at the National Maritime Foundation, “China's Deep Sea Exploration:
Research and Capacity Building”, 6/28/14,
http://www.academia.edu/2482772/Chinas_deep_sea_exploration]
The significance of deep sea exploration was evident when first discovery of hydrothermal vents
(Hydrothermal (hot-water) vents are formed on the ocean floor when seawater circulates through hot
volcanic rocks that are often located where new oceanic crust is being formed. Vents also occur on
submarine volcanoes. In either case, the hot solution emerging into cold seawater precipitates mineral
deposits that are rich in iron, copper, zinc, and other metals) was made in 1976 and first samples to
verify them were collected by a manned submersible vehicle in 1977. Since then countries have
intensified their quest for commercial exploitation of resources on the ocean floor. Like other countries,
China has committed substantial finances on deep sea exploration. In 1984, China drew its oceanic mine
resources plan. This plan gained further traction with the establishment of COMRA in 1990. It is
governmental organizations to coordinate the activities of deep-sea bed exploration and exploitation in
China as well in the international sea and is currently responsible for China’s deep sea exploration
project at SWIR. The Chinese deep sea exploration capacity can be said to have evolved in three phases.
Phase I: (1995-2005) The first major development for China’s deep sea exploration effort was the launch
of its most advanced scientific research vessel ‘Dayang Yihao’ in 1995. ‘Dayang Yihao’ is the only openocean going vessel designated and equipped for deep sea research in China. This vessel is equipped with
the most advanced global positioning and communication systems and scientific research equipment. It
conducts deep sea sampling, drilling and videotaping at the depth of over thousand meters. In 1996, the
research on oceanography was strengthened with an allocation of more than 800 million yuan under the
‘Ninth Five Year Plan’ (1996-2000). During this period, the Chinese government formulated the national
plan for implementing the ‘program for marine development by reliance on science and technology’.
This program laid emphasis on research, development and assimilation of marine reproduction
technologies, fine processing of marine biological resources, exploration and extraction of marine
pharmaceuticals and exploitation of chemical resources in seawater. Another major development during
this period was the launch of ‘Jiaolong’ manned submersible in 2002. China unveiled this advanced
submersible in August 2010 after eight years of secretive development. Like other submersibles, the
‘Jiaolong’ manned submersible operates with a mother ship, ‘Xiangyanghong 09’, an oceanographic
research ship subordinate to the North Sea branch of State Oceanic Administration (SOA). With its
designed dive capability up to 7,000 meters, it is capable of reaching 99.8 percent of the world’s undersea areas. ‘Jiaolong’ manned submersible has completed 17 dives in the Pacific Ocean, including dive till
5,188 meters in South China Sea and the latest with 7020 meters at Mariana Trench. ‘Jioalong’ manned
submersible has become an integral tool for China’s scientific expedition on deep sea resources. Phase
II: 2005-2012 A milestone in China’s project on deep sea exploration was achieved when China
embarked on its first around-the-world oceanographic sailing mission by ‘Dayang Yihao’ oceanographic
research ship in 2005-06. During this global expedition, scientists found tantalizing evidence of active
hydrothermal vents at SWIR. They gathered critical data that led them back to the site in 2007. A
remarkable breakthrough was made in 2007 when Chinese scientists aboard ‘Dayang Yihao’ discovered
hot liquid at SWIR independently for the first time. In 2010-2011 ‘Dayang Yihao’ attempted China’s
largest and most expansive global expedition in all the three oceans. The scientists discovered 16
hydrothermal vents, of which five were found in South Atlantic Ocean and 11 in the East Pacific Ocean.
China has now discovered 33 hydrothermal deposits comprising one tenth of the discovered submarine
hydrothermal deposits, in the last three decades. A significant development occurred on November,
2011 when China launched another state-of-art comprehensive oceanographic research vessel the
‘Kexue’. The vessel displacing 4000 tonnes is equipped with a padded electric propulsion system, the
first for a research ship anywhere in the world. According to the chief engineer of the project, the ship
can be equated with world-class facilities for water body detection, atmospheric exploration, deep sea
environment exploration and remote sensing information research. China considers that the ship will
definitely boost its capability in oceanographic surveying and bridge the gap between China and western
marine powers. Further the Chinese media has pointed out that China has plans for the construction of a
deep sea scientific research base in eastern Shandong province. According to a report, the base will
cover 26 hectares of land and 62.7 hectares of sea. The total constructed area is 24,526 square meters.
Investment for the first phase of the project is 495 million yuan and it will become a national-level public
service platform for deep sea scientific research, ocean resources investigation and deep sea equipment
development. This base will also serve as the ground support station for ‘Jiaolong’ manned submersible.
Phase III-2012 onwards The third phase of China’s research and capacity building on deep sea
exploration began in 2012. On 18 April 2012, the State Oceanic Administration (SOA) announced the
establishment of a national maritime survey fleet in an effort to improve China's ability to conduct
maritime survey and research. The fleet consists of 19 survey vessels, 11 of which are oceangoing
research ships with a displacement of more than 1,500 tonnes. The ships are separately owned by the
SOA, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the Ministry of Education (MOE) and other government
sectors and institutes with maritime interests. According to the SOA, the main task of the fleet is to
undertake comprehensive maritime survey and complete research tasks as part of major national
research projects, international maritime research cooperation and inter-governmental cooperative
projects. On 28 April, 2012, Chinese research vessel ‘Dayang Yihao’ again departed from Sanya port in
Hainan Province for the 26th oceanic expedition mission. Further, China has reportedly spent $1 billion
for ultra-deepwater rig. China intends to use this rig for the exploration of oil and gas resources in the
disputed South China Sea. This development is another indication of China progressing towards building
its deep sea exploration capabilities. Conclusion China is paying great attention to oceanic exploration in
fulfilment of its broad policy objective of ‘reasonably utilizing oceanic resources’ as laid down in its ninth
Five Year Plan. It is looking at the East Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean for future mining resources.
Moreover China is looking forward to build at least 10 more advanced research vessels in the next five
to ten years to meet the country’s rising demand for marine exploration. With the successful dive of
‘Jiaolong’ manned submersible till 7020 meters, China now occupies a leading position in this ocean
exploration realm. However, this development has also caused some speculation about the possible
military and security implications in Indian Ocean region. The ‘Jioalong’ manned submersible, which is
said to be for civilian exploitation, could be used for dual purposes too. The submersible has the
capability to intercept undersea communication cables, retrieve foreign weaponry on the ocean floor
and repair or rescue submarines. It may also be used for clandestine military tasks and special
operations. Taking the dual use connotation also into account, it is considered that the success of this
comprehensive maritime research capability will substantively contribute in realisation of the Chinese
aspiration of becoming a great maritime power.
China solves ocean exploration—has advanced deep sea tech and methods—world
record for deep sea dive
Tsering 12 [Dolma was an intern at the National Maritime Foundation, “China's Deep Sea Exploration:
Research and Capacity Building”, 6/28/14,
http://www.academia.edu/2482772/Chinas_deep_sea_exploration] alla
*can read for the MH370 aff b/c its about deep sea exploration or the mineral mining aff*
A new area of attention was added to the China’s watchers list in 2011 when International¶ Seabed
Authority (ISBA) awarded a Chinese company the right to explore deep sea minerals¶ at Southwest
Indian Ocean Ridge. The concern over China’s exploration in SWIR increased recently with the “Jiaolong”
manned submersible¶ achieving incrementally deeper diving capability than it was designed for. The
much awaited test dive of “Jiaolong” manned¶ submersible was carried out at Mariana Trench, Central
Pacific from 15 June 2012 onwards. On 25 June 2012, “¶ Jiaolong¶ ” manned submersible¶ successfully
attempted test dive of 7020meter under sea there¶ by surpassing Japan’s submersible “¶ Shinkai¶ ”
which till date holds the¶ record of ¶ world’s deepest¶ dive to a depth of 6500 meters. This underwater
feat will play a stellar role in the Chinese deep sea exploration program. On 19 July, 2011, ISBA
approved the application from the China Ocean Mineral ResourcesResearch and Development
Association (COMRA) to explore polymetallic sulphide rich in copper, iron, lead, zinc, gold and silver at
the SWIR. COMRA has been given exclusive rights to explore the area measuring 10,000 square
kilometres (3,800 square miles) in theSWIR for 15 years. The area is estimated to have reserves of 420
million tons of polymetallic nodules, of which 3 million tons can be exploited in the next two decades.
According to Jin Jiancai, secretary-general of COMRA, the refined metals from the deposits will help
China meet the increasing demand for mineral resources for rapid economic development.
Mineral Mining
Chinese companies are investing in new robotics that will be able to develop and mine
for REE—perm fails--US and China have competing interests
O’Connor 11 [Patrick, Journalist with the World Socialist Web Site, mainly covering Australian, East
Timorese, and South Pacific politics, “Rival powers scramble for seabed mineral rights in South Pacific”,
6/29/11, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2011/06/seab-j29.html] alla
Chinese companies are reportedly keen to begin exploration in the region. China last year filed the first
application to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for a deep sea mining project in international
waters, in the Indian Ocean. The Chinese government recently boosted funding for deep sea
technologies, including robotics and special submersibles, in part to bolster its position in the contested
waters of the South China Sea.¶ Minmetals, China’s largest metals trader, announced in April that it was
accelerating its research into deep seabed mining. Minmetals President Zhou Zhongshu told the China
Daily: “China relies heavily on costly raw-material imports, and this will push the country to go for deepsea mining to explore metals, including copper, nickel, silver and gold.”¶ Japan is promoting its industry,
with the state Natural Resources and Energy Agency directing mining companies to hydrothermal
deposits off the Okinawa Islands and the Iza-Ogasawara Island chain south of Tokyo, areas reportedly
containing rich deposits of gold, silver and rare earth minerals.¶ China currently produces 95 percent of
the world’s rare earth minerals, which are used in many high-tech devices, such as fibre optics,
computer disk drives and memory chips, and high-temperature superconductors. When Beijing
announced an embargo on rare earth exports last year, prices spiked. US Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton declared the incident a “wake-up call” on the urgent need to find new sources.¶ The potential for
huge profits from deep seabed mining adds further fuel to the growing rivalry for economic and political
influence in the South Pacific between US imperialism and its Australian and New Zealand allies, on the
one hand, and the rising power, China, on the other.
China is exploring the Indian Ocean for deep-sea minerals—China has the capability to
make tech innovations in mineral mining
The Hindu 11 [an English-language Indian daily newspaper, “China to expand seabed mining in Indian
Ocean”, 9/17/11, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/china-to-expandseabed-mining-in-indian-ocean/article2462204.ece] alla
BEIJING, SEPT 17: ¶ China today announced plans to expand its seabed mineral explorations in the Indian
Ocean after an international authority approved its bid to mine for polymetallic sulphide ore, much to
the surprise of India.¶ Beijing has approval to explore in a 10,000 sq km seabed area in southwest Indian
Ocean for the ore and now it plans to invest more to expand the “depth and scope of oceanic
research”.¶ Following the approval, China’s Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development
Association is set to sign a 15-year exploration contract with the International Seabed Authority (ISA)
later this year granting pre-emptive rights for it to develop the ore deposit in future, state-run Xinhua
reported.¶ “We will expand the depths and scope of oceanic research and improve our understanding of
the ocean, with special focuses on the polar regions and deep sea environments,” Liu Cigui, head of the
State Oceanic Administration (SOA), told a meeting on oceanic technology here.¶ The move has raised
concerns in India with the Directorate of Naval Intelligence (DNI) informing the Indian government that
the contract would provide an excuse for China to operate its warships besides compiling data on the
vast mineral resources in India’s backyard.¶ Chinese released a guideline on the oceanic science and
technology development between 2011 and 2015, vowing to invest more to boost the country’s
maritime economy.¶ Liu said more efforts will be made to boost innovation and strive for breakthroughs
in key technology in order to stimulate the development of emerging oceanic industries but did not
mention the amount money China will be investing.¶ The announcement followed China’s bid for
exploring the international seabed region of southwest Indian Ocean for polymetallic sulphide deposit
was approved by ISA, last month much to the surprise+ of India.
China is expanding its deep-sea mineral mining activities now—China has exclusive
access to valuable resources underwater
China Daily 14 [China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic
of China, 4/30/14, “Country gets OK to mine ocean floor”, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/201404/30/content_17475337.htm] alla
China can now search the international seabed for three valuable minerals after a new exploration
contract with the International Seabed Authority was signed on Tuesday in Beijing.¶ The 15-year contract
signed between ISA and the China Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development Association
approved the country's exploration plans in the western Pacific Ocean for cobalt-rich ferromanganese
crusts.¶ Under the contract, China has exclusive right to explore an initial area of 3,000 square
kilometers. Over the first 10 years of the contract, 2,000 sq km of this area is to be relinquished.¶
Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts contain rare metals such as cobalt, nickel and iron and are used in
various industries such as engineering, electronics, infrastructure and batteries.¶ The contract, the third
signed between ISA and COMRA, makes China the only nation authorized to explore international
seabeds for as many as three major types of minerals - polymetallic nodules, polymetallic sulfides and
cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts.¶ "China's faith and responsibility in peacefully exploring deep-sea
resources and protecting the deep-sea environment will motivate our further cooperation in deep-sea
activities," Jin Jiancai, COMRA's director, said at the signing ceremony.¶ He said COMRA will conduct
comprehensive investigation and assessment on the resources and the environment in the contract area
to deepen scientific knowledge of the deep sea and make contributions to global deep-sea exploration.¶
ISA has received 26 applications, of which 19 contractors have been given the go-ahead, to explore
international seabeds for the three valuable minerals.¶ Michael W. Lodge, deputy to the secretarygeneral and legal counsel of ISA, congratulated China's impressive progress over the past decade.¶
Although a latecomer to deep-sea exploration, China won the right to search for polymetalic nodules in
the northeastern Pacific Ocean in 2001, for polymetallic sulfide deposits in the southwestern Indian
Ocean in 2011 and for cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts in the western Pacific in 2014.¶ With China's
first contract to end in 2016, which means the country can begin commercially mining for polymetallic
nodules in the northeastern Pacific, the country still faces technical hurdles in mining the ocean floor.¶
China is also improving its legal system related to deep-sea exploration and mining to regulate deep-sea
activities and protect the ocean, according to the China Institute for Marine Affairs, a think tank for the
State Oceanic Administration.
Icebreakers
China is making investments in new icebreaking tech—China has better icebreakers
than the US
New York Times 10 [NYT is an American daily newspaper, founded and continuously published in
New York City since September 18, 1851. It has won 112 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news
organization, “China’s Arctic Ambitions”, 5/24/10, http://ideas.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/chinasarctic-ambitions/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0] alla
The United States, Russia, Canada and other countries near the Arctic have claim upon it, but China?
Whether it does or not, Paul McLeary writes in World Politics Review, it’s making its move. The notable
holdout on climate-emissions cutbacks has been expanding its navy and its quest for resources and land
from Latin America to Africa to the Middle East. Now this:¶ … It’s not what China has done so far, but
instead what it appears to be planning to do, that has raised eyebrows among members of the Arctic
Council [the federation of Arctic powers].¶ Specifically, not only does the Beijing government operate the
world’s largest non-nuclear icebreaker — the Xuelong (Snow Dragon), purchased from Ukraine in 1993
— but in October 2009, China’s State Council declared that that Xuelong needed “brothers and sisters,”
approving construction of a $300 million Chinese-built icebreaker expected to be operational in 2013.
Between the two ships, China will have larger and more modern icebreakers than either the United
States or Canada. While the new vessel is smaller than the Xuelong, with a displacement of 8,000 tons to
the Xuelong’s 21,000 tons, its construction is a bold statement from a country that would benefit from
the seasonal shipping lanes many expect to open up over the next several decades, as well as from the
possibility of future oil and gas extraction in the unclaimed far north.¶ China- and Arctic-watchers have
also noted that the new Chinese Embassy in Reykjavík, Iceland, will be the largest in the capital, and that
the Chinese have been making investment overtures in the country since the island nation’s economy
collapsed in 2008. The Chinese, as usual, have been circumspect about all of this activity.
China can build icebreakers and is making new tech improvements to its newest ship
China Daily 14 [China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic
of China, 1/6/14, “New icebreaker planned by 2016: officials”, http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/201401/06/content_17216619.htm] alla
China expects to build its new icebreaker before 2016, government officials said, as the veteran Xuelong,
or Snow Dragon, remains stuck in Antarctic ice after rescuing 52 passengers from a Russian vessel.¶ "The
new ship will surpass China's only icebreaker, the Xuelong, in scientific research and ice-breaking ability,
greatly improving the country's polar research capability," Qu Tanzhou, director of the Chinese Arctic
and Antarctic Administration under the State Oceanic Administration, said on Sunday.¶ The new
icebreaker will be designed mainly for field research, instead of transporting supplies, and it will have a
better power system plus larger decks and laboratories, making it a "mobile research station", Qu said.¶
It will be shorter and have blades at the bow and a stern that will be able to break ice up to 1.5 meters
thick, about 0.4 meters more than the Xuelong can handle.¶ The design contract, which cost more than
$613 million, was signed with Aker Arctic Technology of Finland in 2012, and it will be built by a Chinese
shipyard, the Chinese Arctic and Antarctic Administration said.¶ According to the preliminary design, the
vessel will be 100 to 120 meters long and about 24 meters wide, and it will displace 8,000 metric tons.¶
The ship, which will have a crew of 90, will have a cruising radius of 37,000 km, and it will be fitted with
twin propeller drives.¶ One icebreaker cannot meet China's increasing demand for polar expeditions,
scientists and experts said.
MH370
Chinese deep sea vessels can find the missing plane
China Daily 14 [China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic
of China, 4/8/14, “Jiaolong 'up to MH370 salvage task’”,
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2014planemissing/2014-04/08/content_17415083.htm] alla
China's deep-sea manned submersible Jiaolong is capable of salvaging the black box flight recorders
from the missing Malaysia Airlines jet, according to an official.¶ Liu Feng, director of the National Deep
Sea Center, a government-funded organization in charge of the submersible's management and
maintenance, said Jiaolong is ready for the salvage operation.¶ Chinese patrol ship Haixun 01 picked up
electronic pulse signals in the Indian Ocean on Friday and Saturday.¶ Liu said that after the black boxes
from flight MH370 are located Jiaolong can play an important role in salvage work and in evaluating
deep-sea conditions.¶ Xiangyanghong 09, the mother ship of Jiaolong, will start a 40-day scheduled
mission to the northwest Pacific in May or June before going to the southwestern Indian Ocean in
November.
Tidal Power
Chinese companies are creating new offshore wind farms—small company
collaboration solves
MEC Intelligence 14 [MEC Intelligence is a focused market insight company supporting growth by
providing high quality actionable insights ¶ for the maritime, energy and cleantech sectors, “Chinese
build-up in offshore wind gains momentum
paving way for a global supply chain”, 2/14/14,
http://www.mecintelligence.com/uploads/Press%20Release-Offshore%20Wind%20China%20An%20Insight.pdf] alla
*WTG=Wind Turbine Generator
Interest in developing the industry remains high. Onshore wind developers such as China Longyuan
Power Group, ¶ China Datang Renewables, Huaneng New Energy; renewable energy subsidiaries of
nuclear generation company ¶ China Guangdong nuclear and hydro power developer China Three Gorges
see this as an opportunity for growth. Oil ¶ extraction company CNOOC - has plans to utilize its offshore
installation experience into offshore wind and has ¶ announced its plan to develop offshore wind. ¶ ¶
Experience and supply chain is required ¶ The increased optimism of the opportunity must be balanced
with the relative nascent stage of the local industry. ¶ Developers, turbine’s component suppliers,
foundation suppliers, and installation equipment manufacturers either ¶ currently under-estimate the
challenges and timelines or are currently researching new equipment compatible with ¶ local and
international requirements. This creates an opportunity for experienced international players to chalk
out a ¶ measured strategy and develop co-operative business models along with the right timing to
maximise the opportunity ¶ offered by the offshore wind market in China. ¶ ¶ Similar need leads to global
opportunity ¶ The European WTGs have been able to develop 5-6 MW capacity turbines, which are
considered superior in ¶ technology to their Chinese counterparts. However, the Chinese WTGs operate
on a cost-effective model. In China ¶ smaller players such as Shanghai Electric, Dongfang, CSIC
Haizhuang & XEMC have developed and currently ¶ testing turbines of 5-6 MW. Top four Chinese
suppliers Sinovel, Goldwind, United Power and Ming Yang have also ¶ developed 5-6.5 MW turbines and
shown their intent to aggressive research by announcing involvement in R&D of ¶ 10-12 MW capacity.
Although, the market is likely to be controlled by local players – the main opportunity for foreign ¶ WTGs
and component manufacturers to invest in the Chinese market lies in production and supply of
downstream ¶ products such as control systems, power converters and bearings. ¶ ¶ Similarly, in
foundations, the needs of the Chinese offshore industry will converge with European foundation ¶
technologies. Most projects so far have come up in the regions closer to shore that require multi-pile
foundations (due ¶ to muddy seabed) compared to projects in Europe where mono-pile foundations are
typically used for shallow-water ¶ establishments. However, new developments in China are going to
push offshore development in deeper waters ¶ creating potential for joint collaboration on jacket and
tripod collaboration designs. Two biggest players China ¶ Longyuan Power Group (Developer) and ZPMC
(ship construction company) have joined hands to provide overall ¶ offshore wind farm construction
equipment and services including foundation and logistics.
China is investing in offshore tidal and wave energy parks—government allocation of
funds
China Daily 14[China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic of
China, 6/9/14, “3 trial parks will harness wave and tidal power”,
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2014-06/09/content_17571500.htm] alla
China plans to build three marine renewable-energy trial parks by 2016, to help speed up the
commercial expansion of the wave and tidal power industry, a senior official said.¶ "The parks will be
developed in Zhuhai, Guangdong province, Zhoushan, Zhejiang province and Weihai, Shandong
province, to help accelerate research and development in marine energy technologies," said Kang Jian,
deputy director of the science and technology department of the State Oceanic Administration, on the
eve of the World Oceans Day. Such parks generate electricity by converting the energy of waves and
tides.¶ The site in Zhuhai will be a wave park, where a 300-kilowatt wave farm and a test site will be
built, while the Zhoushan site will have a tide farm with a 1 megawatt or more capacity and a test
zone.¶ The one in Weihai will be a comprehensive project for wave and tide power, according to the
administration.¶ "Once the parks are built, companies and institutions can research and develop marine
wave and tide power technologies there and turn them into products," Kang said.¶ Because the parks are
still in the design phase, authorities did not disclose the total investment involved.¶ Lian Lian, a
researcher at the State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, applauded the plan, saying the trial parks
will be platforms connecting scientists and engineers with users, forming a complete chain from
research and development to testing and final application.¶ "These parks will definitely boost the
country's science and technology development in marine renewable energy," Lian said.¶ The State
Oceanic Administration's latest marine resources survey, released in 2011, estimated that marine
energy potential in the coastal areas can reach 1.6 billion kW.¶ The huge potential bodes well for the
country's large appetite for energy.¶ As a newcomer to the nascent marine energy industry, China, the
world's largest energy consumer, is accelerating its pace in exploring the ocean for the country's future
energy supplies.¶ The 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-15) on renewable energy spelled out that by 2015, the
country plans to build offshore marine power farms with a total capacity of 50,000 kW, helping lay the
foundation for commercial expansion.¶ "Developing marine renewable energy will be on top of our work
agenda in the coming years," said Lei Bo, director of the SOA's science and technology department.¶ But
because marine energy technology is in an early stage, the large-scale commercial exploration of marine
energy cannot be realized before 2030, according to a report released in late May by the National Ocean
Technology Center.¶ Kang admitted that the investment in research and development of marine energy
technology is huge and said the government needs to take the lead.¶ From 2010, the central government
has allocated 800 million yuan ($128 million) for marine energy funding, sponsoring 93 related projects.¶
As one of the sponsored projects, the expansion of the Jiangxia tidal range power station in Zhejiang,
operated since 1980, is scheduled to be completed in September. The annual capacity will increase by
200,000 kWh.¶ "It is a good sign that the investment in the marine sector is increasing and the marine
economy is playing a role in the country's economic blueprint," Lian said.
Arctic
China solves Arctic exploration—recent ascension to Arctic Council
Blank 13 [Dr. Stephen, is a professor at the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College at
Carlisle Barracks, PA. , “Exploring China's Arctic icebreaker”, 7/17/13,
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/CHIN-02-170713.html] alla
The recent decision of the Arctic Council to admit China and several other Asian states to observer
status there represents an epochal decision for both Arctic and Asian affairs. China, Japan, India, South
Korea, Singapore, and Italy all won observer status - the inclusion of so many observers from Asia
highlighting the importance of these markets. This decision also means that Asian voices will be heard
for the first time in decisions regulating Arctic use and commercial exploitation as that ocean becomes
more accessible due to climate change. Indeed, a Chinese shipping company is planning China's first
commercial voyage through the Arctic later in 2013. ¶ China's growing interest in the Arctic has long
since been a matter of record. [1] In 2012, the Chinese icebreaker Xue Long (Snow Dragon) became the
first Chinese vessel to navigate the¶ Northern Sea Route into the Barents Sea going from Iceland to the
Bering Strait via the North Pole. This trip encouraged Chinese officials to think seriously about
commercial exploitation of the Arctic in the belief that, by 2020, 5%-15% of China's international trade mainly container traffic - would use the route, amounting to anywhere between 125,000 to 375,000
tons. ¶ China, however, is not alone in seeking to maximize the economic, trade and commercial benefits
it stands to gain by being in the council. Even Singapore's "Arctic diplomacy" is driven primarily by an
ambition to exploit an emerging market niche in which it sees itself as a technological and expertise
leader. For the other Asian states now on the council, that commercial and trade also clearly means
access to energy riches. China is again not alone it its ambitions. In January this year, Indian Foreign
Minister Salman Khurshid stated that India's energy requirements were growing at a "terrifying pace".¶
"He further observed that if India continued to grow at its current rate of 8%-9%, its energy import
dependence would also increase dramatically. Khurshid projected that India would be importing up to
57% of its coal, 94% of its oil, and 57% of its gas within the next two decades, compared to 15% for coal,
80% for oil, and 15%-18% for gas currently. India now imports 70% of its oil and 80% of its liquefied
natural gas (LNG) from the Middle East. But given recent instability in that region, there is a sense of
urgency in India abut pursuing more diverse sourcing options. This will include supplies from the Russian
Arctic and Far East and the Pacific coast of North America as well as fields in the South China Sea itself.
All of these sources will depend on freedom of navigation on the high seas. To secure that freedom,
India will require greater coordination with Japan as well as some kind of understanding with China."
(World Politics Review, February 11)¶ Consequently, India is discussing a potential US$5 billion
investment by an Indian consortium of hydrocarbon companies in the northern Alberta oil sands deposit
being developed by Conoco Phillips as well as other Arctic and North American locations and the
acquisition of a stake in Russia's Trebs and Titov fields in northwest Russia as part of the Pechora
region's fields and also possibly deposits on the Arctic Yamal peninsula. ¶ India also is a potential
destination for liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipped from Canadian liquefaction terminals in British
Columbia. Indeed, India's government recently announced that it refuses to lay down a quota for
importing oil (and presumably gas) from any country, including Iran. India will buy oil (and again
presumably gas) from wherever "it gets the best deal". ¶ India's interest in the Arctic and North Pacific is
not just an outgrowth of its energy partnerships with Russia on Sakhalin. Indian media commentary
states that if India is to be seen as a viable contender for membership in the UN Security Council it must
become much more active diplomatically in regard to the "behind the scenes exercises to shape the
future of the Arctic". A second reason for upgrading its diplomacy concerning the Arctic is to check
China's interest in grabbing access to energy holdings lest India be left out. of this race. ¶ Other
commentators have given additional reasons for India's need to expand its energy perspectives into the
North Pacific and the Arctic. They decried India's frosty relations with Denmark-one of Arctic Council
member states - and also warned that if India does not develop an Arctic policy and try to restrain China
, it is "heading for near diplomatic disaster". Thus, apart from purely commercial considerations of trade
and access to energy sources, classic geopolitical strategic rivalries and identity politics also play no
small role in driving the policies of states interested in the Arctic. [2] ¶ All these motives - enhanced
commercial opportunity, access to energy sources in the Arctic, increased international status as a
member of the council, etcetera - pertain to China. Given the extent of China's pre-existing interest and
claims in the Arctic, Beijing gains perhaps even more form inclusion as an observer to the Arctic Council.
An article in Beijing Review claimed that other actors were trying to exclude China but by dint of
enormous exertions and large expenditures of funds to finance energy infrastructure in Russia and
Canada as well as its own scientific program of Arctic research "China has ultimately managed to
reshuffle the Arctic balance of power in record time." ¶ More crassly, one might suggest China paid
dearly for its newfound status. Nevertheless China will not only gain real access to state of the art
Icelandic clean energy technologies, it also will gain leverage and influence in Iceland itself and that
influence, once Iceland joins the Council, will redound again to China's benefit. ¶ Beyond these
considerations China gains even more legitimate access to the Arctic beyond bilateral deals with
individual states like Russia. Even before the Council decision, Rosneft and Gazprom were competing to
offer China access to the Arctic. Moreover, during the recent visit by Xia Jinping, new deals between
Rosneft and China to explore the Arctic were signed. Similarly, even before the Council decision, China's
commercial perspective on the Arctic was already growing and this decision will only allow it to
consolidate those gains. ¶ Recent Taiwanese reports suggest by 2020 China is expected to be shipping
15% of its exports through this route using Chinese rather than Russian icebreakers, further reducing
Russia's alleged advantages as an East-West transit and trade corridor between Europe and Asia. China
also has sought permanent observer status on the Arctic Council as part of its commercial drive here.
China also is clearly very interested in exploring the mining riches of other states in and around the
Arctic, eg Greenland's copper and iron ore and in using Iceland as a future transport hub for Arctic
shipping. Beijing also will gain a voice in the important Arctic fishing industry and fishing is a very big
business for China.¶ Beyond even these considerable commercial and energy, investment and trade
access gains, China also gains strategically. Beijing now has access to a body that can and will probably
have to take serious decisions about climate change that already are affecting China seriously and has
done so in the past. China also will have a secure footing from which it can defend what it will claim to
be its "legitimate rights" in the Arctic. It is quite conceivable that China will use that foothold to demand
a voice in the resolution of Arctic territorial boundaries that are being negotiated. ¶ In 2009-10, Beijing
had claimed that no state had sovereignty in the Arctic, a clear slap at Russian claims. Now, to join the
Council, it had to repudiate that position and state that it respected the sovereignty of all the states
claiming territory in the Arctic but accept that the decision will be made in the future-a sharp contrast to
its rigid insistence on its "core interests" and sovereignty in the Senkakus and the South China Sea.
Indeed, given those claims, Beijing had no choice but to do so. Nonetheless, it now calls itself a "nearArctic state" and an "Arctic stakeholder". ¶ In this context a paper by Tang Guoquiang for the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs-administered China Institute of International Studies claims that unnamed "military
experts" believe "that to dominate the Arctic is to control the commanding point in the world military
affairs". [3] If that perspective accurately characterizes Chinese strategic thinking, the opportunity to
participate in demarcating Arctic maritime and land boundaries is of considerable value to Beijing. ¶ The
possibility for intensified strategic rivalries in the Arctic where China will either participate in the
disputes or have to participate in attempting to adjudicate or resolve them should not be taken lightly.
On February 27, Russian President Vladimir Putin told an expanded session of the Ministry of Defense
Collegium the following:¶ We see how instability and conflict are spreading around the world today.
Armed conflict continues in the Middle East and Asia, and the danger of 'export' of radicalism and chaos
continues to grow in our neighboring regions. At the same time, we see methodical attempts to
undermine the strategic balance in various ways and forms. The United States has essentially launched
now the second phase in its global missile defense system. There are attempts to sound out possibilities
for expanding NATO [the North Atlantic Treaty Organization] further eastward, and there is also the
danger of militarization in the Arctic. All of these challenges - and they are just a few of the many we
face - are of direct concern to our national interests and therefore also determine our priorities.¶ Putin
singled out the Arctic here presumably because of its huge mineral and energy endowment. Russia,
however, has embarked on a steady course of militarization in the Arctic that has forced European and
NATO counties as well as Canada and potentially the United States to follow suit. At least in Europe if
not in Asia (and observers should not forget the very tense maritime disputes now roiling Asia), there is
clearly a race between militarization, irrational commercial exploitation and a more considered,
international approach to the use of the Arctic. ¶ China along with four other Asian states now have been
invited formally into that race, and China has already been participating in it and will continue doing so
with gusto. Which way will the Arctic and China's policies go? That answer, unfortunately, remains to be
seen.
China is going to start its newest Arctic expedition—chinese interests and data
collection—china is accelerating their focus on the arctic
China Daily 14 [China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic of
China, 7/3/2014, “China embarks on sixth Arctic trek to explore the North Pole”,
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2014-07/03/content_17639396.htm] alla
China's sixth Arctic expedition will set off from Shanghai on July 11 to study the North Pole and how
changes in the region's climate are affecting the world.¶ Sixty-five scientists will take part in the 76-day
expedition, including three from the United States and one each from Germany, Russia and France. It
will be China's sixth trip to the region since 1999.¶ "Exploring the Arctic Ocean is vital to understanding
the link between climate change in the Arctic and increasing extreme weather events in China," said
Wang Yong, head of the division of science programs of the Chinese Arctic and Antarctic
Administration.¶ As the planet and Arctic temperatures get increasingly warmer, scientists from around
the globe are trying to unravel the Arctic's role in global climate change.¶ Many scientists agree that the
summer melting of the Arctic ice has serious consequences for Earth's climate. Li Yuefeng, climate
expert from the National Climate Center, said precipitation in China may be affected by the summer
climate in the Arctic.¶ "Only when we collect more atmosphere and ocean data about the region can
scientists further explore how the Arctic climate is affecting China," Wang said.¶ In addition to studying
the region's impact on climate change, there has been a surge of interest in the Arctic because of its rich
natural resources. The US Geological Survey has estimated that the Arctic contains up to 30 percent of
the world's undiscovered gas deposits and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil resources. There also is the
possibility of a shorter commercial sea route during the summer.¶ Russia and other countries with an
Arctic coastline are laying claims to the region's seafloor, which is said to contain one-fourth of the
world's mineral resources. The untapped riches become more accessible because of the summer ice
melt.¶ "Like other countries, China is also interested in the resources and the Northern Sea Route,"
Wang said, referring to the shipping lane from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean along the Russian
Arctic coast.¶ Wang added that the route can help Chinese shipping companies reduce their transit times
between China and Europe.¶ Zhai Jiugang, deputy head of the Ministry of Transport's Maritime Safety
Administration, said the route can save Chinese cargo ships 5,186 kilometers and nine days from the
traditional voyage to Europe.¶ During the expedition, Chinese scientists will collect information on
climate change, consider future uses of the Northern Sea Route and explore the region's resources,
Wang said.¶ An ongoing research project backed by the US Department of Energy has predicted that the
Arctic could lose its summer sea ice cover by as early as 2016, 84 years ahead of conventional models'
projections.¶ "As a latecomer, China is accelerating its pace in exploring the Arctic," said Wang, who
added that a new icebreaker will be built as part of the coming 13th Five Year Plan (2016-20) to enhance
the country's polar expedition capacity.¶ "Once the ship is built, the Arctic expedition can be conducted
every year," he said.
Antarctic
China can build Antarctic stations and does research about the Southern Ocean close
to the Antarctic
China Daily 14 [China Daily is an English-language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic
of China, 4/16/14, “China to establish fifth research station in the Antarctic”,
http://english.people.com.cn/202936/8599218.html] alla
A groundbreaking ceremony for China's fifth station in the Antarctic is expected to take place during the
next South Pole expedition planned for November.¶ "It will take at least three years to build the fifth
Antarctic research station because of the short annual construction period and our limited
transportation capacity in Antarctica," Qu Tanzhou, director of the State Oceanic Administration's
Chinese Arctic and Antarctic Administration, told China Daily on Sunday.¶ Summer at the South Pole lasts
from November to February with temperatures struggling to get above -20 C, according to the research
center British Antarctic Survey.¶ China's icebreaker, Xuelong, or Snow Dragon, returned to Shanghai on
Tuesday, finishing the 30th Antarctic expedition.¶ Besides tough weather conditions, Qu said that
because the new station will be permanent, it requires the approval of other Antarctic consultative
states before construction.¶ China has finished and submitted the environmental assessment report,
which will be discussed at an international meeting in Brazil later this year, Qu said. ¶ "The area of the
new station, less than 5 square kilometers, will be located in Terra Nova Bay in the Ross Sea region,
which can help scientists study the Southern Ocean in Antarctica," Qu said.¶ The station will be designed
to house up to 80 people in summer and 30 in winter, People's Daily reported.¶ Zha Enlai, a researcher at
China Geological Survey's Center of Hydrogeology and Environmental Geology who went to the Ross Sea
base this year, said the geological conditions, which are mainly granite, are good for construction.¶ He
said the main building will be about 6,000 square meters and a wind farm will help power the station.¶
The Ross Sea region is one of the most important areas of Antarctica and a leading gateway to the
continent. The region has unique biological and geological features, including various specimens, active
volcanoes and the largest ice shelf on Earth.¶ China plans to purchase its first fixed-wing aircraft for
polar expedition this year.¶ The country expects to build a new icebreaker in 2016, which will be
designed mainly for field research, according to the State Oceanic Administration.¶ The country's polar
exploration will enter a period of fast development, Qu said.¶ China has built four Antarctic research
bases — Great Wall, Zhongshan, Kunlun and Taishan.¶ The main building of the latest Taishan summer
field camp was completed within 45 days from late December to February.
Ocean Medicine
China can utilize deep sea data for medical uses
Xinhua 3 [Xinhua is the state press agency of the People's Republic of China, “
China Develops Ocean Medicine”, 10/27/2003, http://www.china.org.cn/english/scitech/78419.htm]
alla
China has succeeded in sending a man into space, but Chinese scientists are also looking down, into the
ocean depths, to tap resources for medicine.¶ ¶ A state-level research program is underway to discover
how microbes survive in extreme conditions in the ocean, as part of the 863 High-Tech Program
(initiated in March 1986), the nation's priority science development plan.¶ ¶ The research, being carried
out by Zhejiang University, in the coastal province of Zhejiang, aims to find natural bio-active substances
in marine life that live in extreme environments in deep water.¶ ¶ Many micro-organisms thrive around
thermal areas, where the temperature is well above boiling, and survive tremendous water pressure
thousands of meters below the surface and huge amounts of heavy metals.¶ ¶ The research on the
microbe's life systems and the medical benefits would produce large and profound changes in the biomedicine industry, Yang Weijun, a marine life expert, said at the 21st Century Free Forum of Life Science
in Zhejiang.¶ ¶ The importance of ocean resources, and medicines made from them, is coming under
increasing international scrutiny. Oceans contain 80 percent of the earth's resources, and can provide a
wide diversity of materials for medical use. Moreover, extreme deep sea conditions accommodate a lot
of marine life with many pharmaceutical usages.¶ ¶ In China, many enterprises are taking part in the
research and development of ocean medicine. Hundreds of natural products from the seas have been
studied and have entered into clinical use.
OTEC
Companies are investing in and developing OTEC plants along the Chinese coast—
China is getting ahead in the OTEC race
Lockheed Martin 13 [Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs about
120,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development,
manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services,
4/16/13, “Lockheed Martin and Reignwood Group to Develop Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Power
Plant”, http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2013/april/lockheed-martin-andreignwood-group-to-develop-ocean-thermal-ene.html] alla
BALTIMORE, April 16, 2013 – Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] has announced that it is working with
Reignwood Group to develop an Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) pilot power plant off the
coast of southern China. A memorandum of agreement between the two companies was signed in
Beijing on Saturday. Following the ceremony, both companies met with United States Secretary of State
John Kerry during his first official state visit to the People’s Republic of China.¶ The 10-megawatt
offshore plant, to be designed by Lockheed Martin, will be the largest OTEC project developed to date,
supplying 100 percent of the power needed for a green resort to be built by Reignwood Group. In
addition, the agreement could lay the foundation for the development of several additional OTEC power
plants ranging in size from 10 to 100 megawatts, for a potential multi-billion dollar value.¶ “The benefits
to generating power with OTEC are immense, and Lockheed Martin has been leading the way in
advancing this technology for decades,” said Dan Heller, vice president of new ventures for Lockheed
Martin Mission Systems and Training. “Constructing a sea-based, multi-megawatt pilot OTEC power
plant for Reignwood Group is the final step in making it an economic option to meet growing needs for
clean, reliable energy.Ӧ OTEC takes the natural temperature difference found in the ocean in tropical
regions and uses it to create power. This technology is well-suited to island and coastal communities
where energy transportation costs typically make other sources of power very expensive. The process
provides a native power source to areas, and, like other renewable energy technologies, OTEC plants will
be clean, sustainable and powered by free fuel.¶ Unlike other renewable energy technologies, this power
is also base load, meaning it can be produced consistently 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. A
commercial-scale OTEC plant will have the capability to power a small city. The energy can also be used
for the cultivation of other crucial resources such as clean drinking water and hydrogen for applications
such as electric vehicles.¶ In addition to several other green energy-related projects across a variety of
industries, Reignwood Group is currently developing two large scale low-carbon resort communities,
with others planned in key locations in China. Using Lockheed Martin’s OTEC technology to power a new
resort will help the company to develop its first net-zero community.¶ “Our mission at Reignwood Group
is to invest in low-carbon applications and solutions, integrating these new green technologies into a
plan to promote sustainable development practices,” said Colin Liu, senior vice president of Reignwood
Group. “Lockheed Martin’s OTEC technology offers a ground-breaking solution that will help us to
achieve this mission.Ӧ Once the proposed plant is developed and operational, the two companies plan
to use the knowledge gained to improve the design of the additional commercial-scale plants, to be built
over the next 10 years. Each 100-megawatt OTEC facility could produce the same amount of energy in a
year as 1.3 million barrels of oil, decrease carbon emissions by half a million tons and provide a domestic
energy source that is sustainable, reliable and secure. With oil trading near $100 a barrel, the fuelsavings from one plant could top $130 million per year.
Offshore Wind
China excels at offshore wind—will become the leading producer of offshore wind
energy by 2020 and has surpassed other major OSW producers
Wind Power Offshore 14 [Windpower Offshore is a dedicated news and intelligence service offering
unparalleled access to information and data on the global offshore wind power industry, “China aims for
the global top spot”, 5/30/14, http://www.windpoweroffshore.com/article/1296027/china-aims-globaltop-spot] alla
Offshore wind in China is not entirely new, having started in 2007 with a 1.5MW direct-drive Goldwind
turbine installed by the China National Offshore Oil Corporation at the Suizhong oilfield in northern
China's Bohia Sea. In June 2010 the 102MW Shanghai Donghai Bridge demonstration project was
inaugurated and connected to the grid. A second demonstration project, the 182MW inter-tidal wind
farm at Rudong in Jiangsu province, was commissioned in 2012. Both projects were largely experimental
in nature, used as proving grounds for different turbines and foundation designs.¶ The first round of
state-sponsored tendering for development of four offshore projects with franchised rights was
launched on 10 September 2010. Totalling 1GW in capacity, all were sited off the coast of Jiangsu
province in the east of the country, near Yancheng city. A second round of tendering for a total capacity
of 1.5-2GW was announced for June 2011 but never took place, and the National Energy
Administration's (NEA) final approval of three of the four projects tendered in the first round only came
through in August 2013.¶ Development delay¶ The delay was caused by a number of factors, of which
maritime re-zoning was a major reason. Offshore wind projects were, in general, required to choose
sites further from shore and their plans had to be endorsed by several government departments, such
as the State Oceanic Administration. The demanding nature of offshore wind technology, combined with
the high cost of building and operation, also plays a role. The lack of clear government policy with no
pricing structure for offshore wind made potential investors hesitate.¶ As a result, cumulative offshore
installations by the end of 2013 stood at merely 428MW, accounting for barely 0.5% of the country's
total wind installations.¶ The three offshore projects given NEA approval last August are: Datang New
Energy's Jiangsu Binhai (300MW); Longyan Electric Jiangsu Dafeng (200MW); and Luneng's Jiangsu
Dongtai (200MW). But, according to the organising committee of July's 2014 offshore wind and
operation-and-maintenance conference in Shanghai, installation work has been, or will be, launched this
year for seven offshore projects with a combined capacity of nearly 1.5GW. And another 13 projects
totalling more than 3.5GW are expected to be launched in 2015.¶ "The year 2014 will be a new era, a
real start for China's offshore wind development," said Liu Qi, deputy general manager of Shanghai
Electric, at a press conference earlier this year.¶ The government's wind-power development planning
for the 12th five-year plan period (2010-2015) stated that, based on preliminary results of demo
projects, scaled-up offshore wind development will be promoted. Priority will be given to sites in
Shanghai, Jiangsu, Hebei and Shandong. And planning and building will be quickened for areas in other
costal provinces, such as Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Hainan and Liaoning. The current fiveyear period is considered by many industry watchers as critical for China's offshore wind. The building of
a host of offshore wind farms to achieve technology maturity, management standardisation and policy
adequacy will lay a solid foundation for further development. The country's first offshore wind
benchmark pricing system is widely expected to be released this year.¶ Partnership¶ Having
accommodated the nation's first large-scale offshore wind project, the city of Shanghai is keen to
continue its lead in the sector. In partnership with Siemens, Shanghai Electric has accelerated
investment. "Siemens' innovative technology has been incorporated into Shanghai Electric's offshore
wind strategy. Our goal is to become the country's number-one offshore player," said Liu Qi.¶ Statistics
compiled by the China Wind Energy Association show that by the end of 2013 the supply of offshore
turbines sat at:, Sinovel (39.7%), Goldwind (25/5%), Siemens (11.7%), United Power (9.1%), CSIC
Haizhuang (3.3%) and Shanghai Electric (3.2%).¶ China aims to overtake Europe and have 100GW of wind
power capacity installed by the end of 2015, of which around 5GW is expected to be offshore. The
overall target can comfortably be met, but the goal for offshore wind will be more difficult to
accomplish, admitted Shi Lishan, deputy chief of NEA renewable energy division, earlier this year.¶ The
government's targets for 2020 call for a total of 200GW of wind power capacity, with 30GW of it
offshore. That looks like a tall order, but even if China were to achieve half that figure it would almost
certainly finish the decade as the world's leading producer of offshore wind energy.
China is heaviliy investing in OSW—subsidies, new plants, new additions to old plants,
and economic analysis for returns on each plant
Yuanyuan 14 [Liu, Director of Operations and Co-Founder of Nanjing Shanglong Communications, “China
Boosts Offshore Wind Power Development”, 5/22/14,
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/05/china-boosts-development-ofoffshore-wind-power] alla
BEIJING -- China has taken steps to accelerate the development of its offshore wind power industry in a
bid to increase the installed capacity beyond its 428.6 MW installed at the end of 2013.¶ Some industry
analysts expressed pessimism concerning the offshore wind power sector in China as the industry has
experienced slow progress with only 39 MW in installed capacity added last year, a year-on-year decline
of 69 percent. However, the China National Renewable Energy Centre (CNREC) said that a number of
new offshore wind farms are scheduled to kick off within this year, including the 100-MW Phase II
expansion project of Donghai Bridge in Shanghai and China Longyuan Power Group’ (Longyuan) Nanri
Island project already under construction in Fujian province. Two projects are also under contruction in
Jiangsu province: China General Nuclear Power Group's new offshore project in Rudong on track to start
construction in the second half of this year and Longyuan's windmill project in Dafeng.¶ In early 2014,
the National Energy Administration (NEA) issued a Notice on Developing Offshore Wind Power Projects
selecting Shanghai as well as Fujian and Zhejiang provinces as the locations for the country’s key pilot
construction projects for offshore wind power. The Shanghai government announced in early May new
initiatives to boost support for its new and renewable energy sectors, providing subsidies of 0.1 yuan
per kWh for onshore wind power projects and 0.2 yuan per kWh for offshore wind farms. However,
some industry analysts expressed concerns about the impact of regional subsidies on the nationwide
feed-in tariff for offshore wind projects.¶ The rapid growth of the Chinese offshore wind power sector
requires a rational and clear tariff structure, allowing offshore wind farm developers to have realistic
expectations of what the return on their offshore wind power investments should be and in turn, boost
the development of the whole sector, according to analysts.¶ The NEA and the pricing department of the
National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) have been in ongoing discussions concerning the
tariff rates for offshore wind farms and expect to issue the rates within this year.¶ An industry expert at
NDRC indicated that the combined capacity of approved offshore wind farms in China, including
intertidal projects, has exceeded 4,000 MW. The combined capacity of offshore wind projects scheduled
to start construction by 2015 will exceed 300 MW, according to data from CNREC.¶ The U.S. Department
of Energy (DOE) said in early May that it will allocate up to $141 million to three pioneering offshore
wind demonstration projects over the next four years to help speed up the deployment of more
efficient offshore wind power technologies. Benefiting from the support for offshore wind projects in
the U.S., Fishermen's Energy's 25MW offshore windmill backed by Xiangtan Electric Manufacturing, a
China-based electrical equipment manufacturer, won a US$4 million grant from the DOE, subject to
regulatory approvals.
Aquaculture
China has been a world leader in aquaculture—government support and investment in
technology
NBSO 10 [Netherlands Business Support Office, A worldwide network that provides Dutch
entrepreneurs with services and support for doing international business, “An overview of China's
aquaculture”, http://china.nlambassade.org/binaries/content/assets/postenweb/c/china/zaken-doenin-china/import/kansen_en_sectoren/agrofood/rapporten_over_agro_food/an-overview-of-chinasaquaculture] alla
China has a long history in aquaculture dating back more ¶ than 2500 years. It actually all started with
the pond ¶ farming of carps. Fingerlings were caught in the Yangtze ¶ River and subsequently transferred
to earthen ponds for ¶ farming. From that moment onwards, the farming of ¶ freshwater species steadily
expanded throughout China. ¶ The expansion slowed down in early 20th century as the ¶ demand for fish
seed exceed what could be supplied ¶ from the wild. This triggered the government to play ¶ a more
active role in further developing aquaculture. ¶ The stimulating role the government played in the ¶
development of aquaculture ranged from providing ¶ fish seeds through artificial spawning, researching
and ¶ developing, introducting new species, developing marine ¶ aquaculture and passing on new
culture techniques to the ¶ small farmers in rural areas engaged in aquaculture. After ¶ the opening-up
policy was taken in place in 1978, the ¶ development of aquaculture further continued in terms ¶ of new
species, new techniques and the start of bigger ¶ and better integrated companies in the field of aquatic
¶ products, also the establishment of business forms other ¶ than a cooperative or a state owned
enterprise became ¶ possible (e.g. corporations, individual, joint ventures, ¶ ventures with foreign
companies) (Hishamunda & ¶ Subashinge, 2003).¶ The government remains an important key facilitator ¶
when it comes to aquaculture. In fact, as aquaculture ¶ further developed; the bureaucratic system
within the ¶ government to further facilitate its development also ¶ expanded. Below an impression of
how this system looks ¶ like: The above figure shows that the role of the government ¶ exerts on 3 levels.
Level 1 concerns the relevant ministries ¶ and local governments. Their role is to set out the ¶ objectives
stated in the five year plans and to provide for a good infrastructure for aquaculture development. Level
¶ 2 are the research institutes for further scientific R&D ¶ and training. The Chinese Academy of Fishery
Science ¶ and the National Fisheries Research Institutions are the ¶ key R&D and training centers,
whereas the local research ¶ and educational institutions are there to train on a local ¶ level and to adapt
the R&D from the national centers ¶ into workable solutions taken into account the local ¶ conditions.
Finally is Level 3, there are the Technology ¶ Extensions Centers. These centers provide assistance ¶ to
companies and local farmers when it comes to ¶ implementing new technologies and know how coming ¶
from the research institutes.
China is a world leader in Aquaculture—largest output and more aquaculture than
wild capture
NBSO 10 [Netherlands Business Support Office, A worldwide network that provides Dutch entrepreneurs
with services and support for doing international business, “An overview of China's aquaculture”,
http://china.nlambassade.org/binaries/content/assets/postenweb/c/china/zaken-doen-inchina/import/kansen_en_sectoren/agrofood/rapporten_over_agro_food/an-overview-of-chinasaquaculture] alla
As regulations and quotas in the fisheries sector ¶ worldwide are being intensified and the demand for
high ¶ quality aquatic products is increasing, more and more ¶ attention turns to aquaculture as the
solution to confront ¶ the issue of diminishing supply and increasing demand. ¶ To this concern, China is
a country that should not be ¶ neglected. Currently China’s output from aquaculture ¶ is the largest in
the world and accounts for about 67% ¶ of the world’s total production. Moreover, China is the ¶ only
country in which aquaculture output exceeds wild ¶ capture output and where more than 90% of the
domestic ¶ consumption of seafood is from aquaculture. The ¶ Chinese government at the same time
also attaches great ¶ importance in further developing aquaculture as it plays ¶ a key role in alleviating
poverty in rural areas, ensuring ¶ food supply and international trade. Therefore the ¶ need for further
development of aquaculture worldwide ¶ and certainly in China presents many opportunities for ¶
cooperation in terms of research and development, ¶ farming techniques, food safety and quality, feed, ¶
environmental protection, processing etc. ¶
Chinese aquaculture utilizes the most environmentally friendly methods—newer tech
such as GIS makes it more effective
NBSO 10 [Netherlands Business Support Office, A worldwide network that provides Dutch entrepreneurs
with services and support for doing international business, “An overview of China's aquaculture”,
http://china.nlambassade.org/binaries/content/assets/postenweb/c/china/zaken-doen-inchina/import/kansen_en_sectoren/agrofood/rapporten_over_agro_food/an-overview-of-chinasaquaculture] alla
With increasing demand for environment friendly ¶ aquaculture, the use of probiotics in aquaculture is
now ¶ accepted. In Guangdong area, some farmers have used ¶ the probiotics to improve the quality of
the water. Recent ¶ research also shows that the use of commercial probiotics ¶ in Penaeus vannamei
Pond can reduce concentration of ¶ nitrogen and phosphorus and increase the shrimp yields ¶ (Wang et
al., 2008).¶ Overwinter technique has been used in some expensive ¶ species cultured in north. For
example, abalone takes ¶ very long time to grow to commercial size because it ¶ stops growing in
winter time due to low temperature. ¶ It takes around three years to grow to the commercial ¶ size.
Overwinter technique is to move the products ¶ to the south e.g. Fujian province in the winter. The ¶
products are shipped to the south by sea and culture in ¶ the cage. Normally the products are moved to
the south ¶ from October and back around May next year. Using ¶ the method, the survived rate of the
products increase ¶ in winter time, and most important the products keep ¶ growing and can reach the
commercial size one year ¶ earlier comparing to the traditional method. Recently ¶ some farmers have
begun to send other species e.g. sea ¶ cucumber to the south overwinter.¶ Geography information
system (GIS) played a great role ¶ in the management an display of marine date, especially ¶ in the
three dimensional modeling, visualization and ¶ quantitative analysis since 1990s (Su, et al., 2006). ¶
Recently using GIS as a tool to survey the farming pond ¶ of shell fish alongshore is ongoing in Liaoning
province. ¶ Using GIS, more accurate data in aquaculture area, the ¶ density of the cultured pond can be
acquired. This can ¶ help the government to set proper policy and allocate ¶ water resource in a more
sustainable way.
Methane Hydrates
China has untapped Methane Hydrate reserves in the South China Sea—drilling and
surveying have already begun
Chen 13 [Aizhu, Energy Writer at Reuters, “China Finds Major Gas Hydrate Reserve in South China Sea”,
19/12/13,
http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/130730/China_Finds_Major_Gas_Hydrate_Reserve_in_South_
China_Sea] alla
BEIJING, Dec 19 (Reuters) - China said it has identified a major gas hydrate reserve in the northern part
of the South China Sea, joining a small group of nations in the world seeking to tap a potentially vaste
future source of energy. There is currently no technology to commercially unlock the energy also known
as "flammable ice", gas frozen in ice-like crystals buried deep under the oceans and experts say
commercial, scaled development could be beyond 2030. China's Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR)
announced on Tuesday it had found a gas hydrate reserve that spans 55 square kms (34 square miles) in
the Pearl River Mouth basin with controlled reserve equivalent to 100-150 billion cubic metres (bcm)
natural gas, according to a report carried on the ministry's website (www.mlr.gov.cn). That would be the
size of a major conventional natural gas field, like in China's top gas province Sichuan. Guangzhou
Marine Geological Survey Bureau, an MLR unit, collected samples of "high purity" gas hydrates over
nearly four months of surveys and drilling of 23 wells in the waters off south China's Guangdong
province. Two gas hydrate layers with a thickness of 15-30 metres were found just below the seabed,
which was at a depth of 600 to 1,000 metres. "It marks a breakthrough in investigating the resource and
proves that the Pearl River Mouth basin is rich in gas hydrate," the report said, adding China becomes
the fourth country in the world to have collected sample of the methane hydrate after the U.S., Japan
and India
China will increase its development of methane hydrate fields in the South China Sea
SHIMADA 14 [Gaku, Nikkei staff writer, Nikkei Inc. is one of the largest media corporations in Japan.
Nikkei specializes in publishing financial, business and industry news. Its main news publications include:
“Chinese eye methane hydrate reserves in South China Sea”, 4/21/14, http://asia.nikkei.com/PoliticsEconomy/International-Relations/Chinese-eye-methane-hydrate-reserves-in-South-China-Sea] alla
In a move that could further fuel tensions in the South China Sea, China will step up exploration for
methane hydrate, which is drawing attention as a future source of energy.¶ Research last summer led to
the discovery of a high-purity methane hydrate reserve in the northern part of the South China Sea,
according to the Land and Resources Ministry. The reserve, sitting off the coast of Guangdong Province,
is estimated to span 55 sq. km and amount to the equivalent of 100 billion to 150 billion cu. meters of
natural gas.¶ China will further explore the reserve, which it believes to stretch to the south. Domestic
experts estimate that the body of water has methane hydrate reserves equal to 68 billion tons of crude
oil, a figure amounting to 130 years of the country's energy consumption .¶ The Chinese aim to make
methane hydrate commercially viable around 2030, seeing it as a promising means of coping with
surging domestic demand for energy.¶ The nation also seeks to reduce its dependence on energy
imports. China relies on imports for nearly 60% of its crude oil needs, making it the world's No. 2
importer by volume, after the U.S. For natural gas, the share of imports rose past 30% for the first time
in 2013.¶ Methane hydrate is also expected to aid China's efforts to shift to natural gas from coal, which
accounts for nearly 70% of its primary-energy consumption.¶ As China widens its search for methane
hydrate in the South China Sea, it may create more frictions with such countries as the Philippines and
Vietnam, with which it is embroiled in territorial disputes there.
Remote Sensing
China has been collecting oceanic data by satellite for over a decade and is able to
collect data that is used to analyze and understand the composition of China’s waters
Yan 11/1/2002[Jihui, Workshop Secretariat at the National Marine Environment Forecasting Center
at China’s State Oceanic Administration, “Ocean Remote Sensing and its Application in China”,
http://ivy3.epa.gov.tw/OMISAR/Data/OMISAR/wksp.mtg/WOM9/01-1030Yan.htm] alla
ABSTRACT¶ With the advancement of space technology and the development of ocean science, satellite
remote sensing has become an important tool for marine research as well as for marine environment
observation and prediction. Over the past decade, China has exerted great effort to apply satellite data for both
ocean research and operational purposes. Furthermore, China has successfully launched her first ocean
satellite this year, which is an ocean color satellite designed to detect some of the marine environmental parameters in the Chinese sea
waters, including chlorophyll concentration, suspended sediment concentration, dissolved organic matter, and sea surface temperature. In this
paper, a brief introduction of the ocean application of remote sensing data in China is presented, and a description of the new ocean satellite
program is given.¶ INTRODUCTION¶ China is a coastal country with a lengthy coastline of around 18,000 kilometers along the mainland and a
vast sea area under its jurisdiction. The coastal area of China is densely populated and economically developed. The coastal area only accounts
for 13.4% of the nation’s land area, but supports 40.2% of the nation’s population and produces 62% of the GNP. ¶ Observing
and
monitoring the ocean, protecting the marine environment, developing and exploiting ocean resources
are of great importance to the social and economic development of China. Over the past decade, China has
made great efforts to develop new technologies for the above-stated purposes, including the application
of satellite remote sensing data to ocean research and ocean-related operational activities.¶ The research
institutions under the State Oceanic Administration (SOA), a government agency in China responsible for
coastal and ocean affairs, have been active in utilizing data from satellite and from aircraft in China’s
coastal and ocean management, including sea area utilization, ocean functional zoning, marine
environment protection, public ocean services and resource conservation. Fruitful results have been
achieved. Some examples of successful remote sensing application ocean satellite data in the prediction of
harmful algae bloom and in sea ice prediction in China’s coastal waters. Over the past few years, emphasis has
been shifted to the development of ocean satellites for both research and operational purposes, and a
program for the development of satellite for ocean observation has been launched.¶ With the increase of population
and the gradual depletion of terrestrial resources, China, like many other coastal states, has to embark on new programs for harnessing ocean
resources. The ocean
will play an ever-increasing role in China’s future development. Within this context, ocean
satellite will be one of the focuses in China’s future ocean technology development agenda.¶ APPLICATION
OF SATELLITE REMOTE SENSING¶ In the late 1970's, measurements from satellites demonstrated that ocean color
remote sensing is a powerful tool for understanding oceanic biological and physical process. In 1978,
Nimbus-7 coastal zone color scanner CZCS started to operate, providing observations of ocean color from the space. This provides
oceanographers with good opportunity to observe the variable patterns of global biological productivity.
Following that, the Chinese satellites FY-1A and FY-1B were launched to orbits respectively in 1987 and 1989. In 1996, Japan’s ADEOS Ocean
Color and Temperature Sensor OCTS provided ocean color data for about ten months. And in August 1997, one special ocean color satellite –
SeaStar -- was successfully launched. The sea-viewing wide field-of-view sensor, SeaWiFS, installed on SeaStar, brought to oceanographers a
large volume of quality ocean color remote sensing data.¶ Since the late 1980’s, a number of institutions in China have been studying the
application of data from satellites to oceanographic research and operation. Since 1994, the Second Institute of Oceanography (SIO) of SOA,
together with other institutes, has been implementing a project for the development of
a Chinese scientific research system
for SeaWiFS, which includes data receiving, processing, distribution, calibration /validation and
application.¶ The ground station located in SIO is a SeaWiFS scientific research station authorized by NASA of USA to receive SeaWiFS data.
Since September 1997, the station has been normally receiving and archiving SeaWiFS data. And the data has been used for various
purposes, such as measuring the concentration of chlorophyll, suspended material, and for the study of
red tide and the dynamics of the coastal water in China’s waters.¶ The results of studies on the application
of satellite data on red tide show that SeaWiFS data has great potential in determining environmental
characteristics of the coastal water around China.¶ ¶ Sea ice is present in the coastal area in winter in the northern part of
China, especially in the Bohai Sea and in the northern part of the Yellow Sea. There are even sea ice disasters in these areas. Therefore,
special attention has been paid to sea ice monitoring and forecasting in China.¶ Since 1970s, research has been
conducted on the application of remote sensing to sea ice monitoring and forecasting in China. At the beginning,
study and experiment was carried out only in aerial remote sensing. In 1980s, research was directed to satellite remote sensing. Scientists in
the National Marine Environment forecasting Center carried out sea ice remote sensing research, which promoted the application of satellite
remote sensing data to sea ice monitoring and forecasting. In 1990s, a study was conducted on multi-source data fusion for use in sea ice
monitoring and forecasting.¶ Numerical
sea ice forecasting, using remote sensing data, have been in routine
operation in China now. ¶ CHINA’S OCEAN SATELLITE PROGRAM¶ The experiences of ocean satellite observations in a
number of countries have exhibited the usefulness of satellite remote sensing. In order to effectively
monitor the ocean and improve the accuracy and timeliness of marine environment forecasting, China
has embarked on its ocean-oriented satellite program, and an operational satellite application system
will be established. The first ocean satellite of the program, HY-1 (HY is the abbreviation of “Hai Yang”, which means
“Ocean”), is an ocean-color satellite designed to measure marine environmental parameters such as
chlorophyll concentration, suspended sediment concentration, dissolved organic matter, pollutants and
sea surface temperature. It was successfully launched in May 2002.¶ General description of the satellite¶ HY-1, a threeaxis stabilized small satellite, is designed to operate in orbit for about 2 years. In order to obtain a short repeat period, orbit transfer is made,
making the satellite move and operate in a near sun-synchronous and near-polar orbit at the altitude of 798 km.¶ Tasks of the satellite¶ The
mission of the
first ocean satellite is designed to monitor marine environmental variation in the coastal and
ocean areas off China, including: marine primary productivity, dynamics of meso-scale eddies, etc. It is also aimed at monitoring the
variations of the coastal zone, obtaining experiences for developing space observation of the ocean, and promoting the development of small
satellite platform. ¶ Sensors¶ China’s first ocean satellite is equipped with two sensors: the 10-babd Ocean Color and Temperature Scanner
(COCTS) and the 4-band CCD coastal zone imager (CZI), designed and manufactured by Shanghai Institute of Technical Physics of the Chinese
Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Space Technology. The COCTS is an optical radiometer to detect ocean color and surface
temperature.¶ The COCTS has a function to detect chlorophyll concentration and dissolved substances in the water, as well as temperature
distribution. The data from OCTS will be used to get information on ocean conditions for fishery and environment monitoring purposes. It has a
repeat period of 3 days, and 8-channel visible and near-infrared bands and 2-channel thermal infrared band with a spatial resolution of 1.1km.¶
China has already planned two more ocean surveillance satellites—these satellites will
be operational until 2025 and collect data to be analyzed by many ground stations
IOCCG 13 [International Ocean Colour Coordinating Group, was established in 1996 following a
resolution endorsed by the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS). The group is made up of
an international Committee of experts comprising representatives from both the provider (Space
Agencies) and user communities (scientists, managers). The objectives of the IOCCG are to develop
consensus and synthesis at the world scale in the subject area of satellite ocean colour radiometry
(OCR), “China: Ocean Colour Remote Sensing and Application in China”, 5/7/13,
http://iocs.ioccg.org/wp-content/uploads/report-iocs-2013-meeting.pdf] alla
Prof. Delu Pan (Second Institute of Oceanography, China) reported on ocean -colour remote ¶ sensing and application
in China, giving a review of present and future Chinese satellite ¶ missions. There are four series of
satellites for ocean-colour remote sensing in China: the HY ¶ series is for ocean observation, the FY series for
meteorology, the HJ series for environment ¶ and disaster monitoring, while the SZ series is the spacecraft program. China launched the
first ¶ ocean satellite HY-1A in May 2002 which operated successfully for two years, and was followed ¶
by HY-1B in April 2007, which is still in operation. These missions carry two ocean-colour ¶ sensors: the
Chinese Ocean Color and Temperature Scanner (COCTS) with 10 bands, and the ¶ Coastal Zone Imager
(CZI) with 4 bands and a CCD Camera. There are four HY-1B satellite ¶ ground stations in China which
receive the raw data in real time and process, archive, manage ¶ and distribute the data. The ground station in
Hangzhou is primarily concerned with developing ¶ algorithms and software for the HY-1 mission. Products such as Chl, SST and TSM are
produced ¶ routinely. Data
from HY-1/2 can be requested from the National Satellite Ocean Application ¶
Service of China. Regarding future missions, the HY-1C and HY-1D satellites are planned for ¶ launch
before 2016 for ocean colour and SST observation. These satellites will carry the COCTSand CZI sensors, as
well as a new UV imager for CDOM retrieval and atmospheric correction in ¶ highly turbid waters. Oceancolour sensors will be included on HY-3 Sea-watch and HY-4 SeaGeo (geostationary) ocean satellite
series until to 2025. Ocean-colour data has many applications, including measuring the sea surface
partial pressure ¶ of carbon dioxide (pCO2) and global air-sea CO2 flux. A number of empirical algorithms
have ¶ been developed to estimate aquatic pCO2 using proxies such as SST, Chl-a and salinity although ¶ it is difficult to find a
straightforward, significant relationship. Mechanistic-based, semi-analytic ¶ satellite algorithms can be used to develop more accurate,
quantitative expressions using ¶ satellite products of Chl-a, SST, salinity, as well as DIC and alkalinity values. Results using ¶ satellite data provide
more frequent estimates of pCO2 with less uncertainty, and can also ¶ provide air-sea CO2 fluxes. ¶
China is great at ocean satellite mapping—new tech, more data, and experience in the
field
NRSCC 12 [The National Remote Sensing Center of China, the NRSCC provides recommendations and
solutions to the development strategy, planning and overall policy decision of remote sensing
technology, “Department of Ocean Remote Sensing”,
http://www.nrscc.gov.cn/nrscc/en/departments/201205/t20120508_30907.html] alla
Introduction Department of Ocean Remote Sensing relies on the National Satellite Ocean Application Service (NSOAS). Established in 2001,
NSOAS is a national institution affiliated to the State Oceanic Administration (SOA). The mission
of NSOAS is to initiate and
prepare national programs for the development of ocean satellite series and related application
research, and is responsible for the development and management of the ground application system for
Chinese ocean satellites. At present, two ocean color satellites have been successfully launched (HY-1A, HY-1B).
The ocean dynamics satellite, Haiyang-2 (HY-2), is scheduled to launch in 2011. Meanwhile, NSOAS now has a completed ocean
satellite system for ocean satellite research, operation and applications, including three ground
receiving stations located in Beijing, Sanya and Mudanjiang, a data processing center in Beijing, an open
lab for ocean remote sensing and applications in Beijing. NSOAS thus plays a central role in China 's
ocean satellite program.¶ Research Fields As an operational institution for ocean satellites, aimed at the requirements of Chinese
ocean remote sensing development, the research fields of NSOAS include development and
management of ocean resources, monitoring and protection of ocean environment, monitoring and
forecasting of ocean hazard, international collaboration in oceanography, exploration in north and south
poles,etc.. Through remote sensing applications research, NSOAS provides satellite data and information
services to marine administration agencies, environment protection agencies as well as national
departments for marine rights protection and law enforcement.¶ Achievements Since the founding of NSOAS, it has
been actively involved in fields such as ocean satellite preliminary studies and ocean remote sensing
applications. NSOAS has recently been responsible for several national research programs including the National High Technology Research
and Development Program of China (863 Program), the Major State Basic Research Development Program of China （973 Program), the
National Science Foundation of China (NSFC), manned space program, oceanic public service program etc.. It
also achieved significant
scientific achievements in plenty of research fields including "Applications of the Haiyang-2 Satellite Data in Ocean Dynamics,
Environment, and Gravitational Fields Retrievals", "Synthetic Monitoring of the Ocean with Waves Spectrometer and Scatterometer", "Ocean
Remote Sensing Calibration and Validation", "Open Ocean Fishery Environment Information Retrieval
and Applications", "Oil Spill Monitoring Automation and Applications", "Data Processing Technique for
Microwave Ocean Dynamics Environment Satellite". The research and its applications are recognized by
many ocean remote sensing related communities. Especially, the National 863 Program "Open Ocean Fishery Environment
Information Retrieval and Applications", was awarded the second prize in the National Science and Technology Progress Award, a prestigious
award of science and technology in China. With the advance of research programs in NSOAS, many research results have been applied into
operational systems and played important roles in sea ice monitoring, algae bloom monitoring, oil spill monitoring, and sea surface
temperature products.¶ Staff As a research based institution, a team of high-level researchers were educated and actively involved in remote
sensing research in NSOAS. Among the 90 staff in NSOAS, 41 persons have graduate-school background, 26 persons are senior professionals
and technical personnel, 3 experts with special government allowances of the State Council, one national candidates of the New Century
Talents Program, and the average age of all staff is 36. These young scientists are playing an important role in the long term development of
ocean satellite program.¶ Equipment and Facilities
NSOAS is equipped with a completed system for data receiving,
processing, archiving and data distribution, as well as capacity of receiving some international ocean
satellite data. NSOAS also has state-of-the-art calibration equipment for ocean remote sensing, which is
fundamentally important for quantitative studies. Now, NSOAS has successfully established operational
system for oil spill monitoring and prediction, as well as for green tide monitoring and prediction.¶
China has experience with using satellites to survey the ocean—China recently
launched their second ocean surveillance satellite
Xinhua 12 [state press agency of the People's Republic of China, “SOA gains control of China's oceanic
surveying satellite”, 3/6/12,
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/SOA_gains_control_of_Chinas_oceanic_surveying_satellite_999.ht
ml] alla
Control of China's oceanic surveying satellite Haiyang-2 was handed over Friday to the State Oceanic
Administration (SOA), by its manufacturer and launcher China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation.¶ The
environmental satellite was launched into the orbit in mid-August last year, and since then, it has passed
all tests on all the equipment aboard and functioned in accordance with the design, said Jiang Xingwei, director
of China's National Satellite Ocean Application Service.¶ Haiyang-2 is expected to play an important role in monitoring
the oceanic environment, oceanographic research and resources development, the protection of China's
maritime rights, and other ocean-related studies, said Jiang.¶ Jiang said the satellite can effectively monitor
extreme weather conditions such as storms, typhoons and tsunamis, thus improving the early-warning
system for marine disasters.¶ In addition, the data Haiyang-2 acquires will be helpful for observing changes
in the sea level, globally, and polar ice caps, and supporting studies of the global climate change, he said.¶
Haiyang-2 will work in collaboration with Haiyang-1, the first Chinese oceanic surveying satellite already
in orbit, according to the official.¶ "This will greatly improve the surveying and monitoring capacities of China's
earth observation satellites, and end the monopoly of Western countries in the collection of remote
sensing data involving the dynamic environment of oceans," Jiang said.
SMR
China solves SMR tech—investment two new types of SMRs now
WNA 14 [World Nuclear Association is the international organization that promotes nuclear power and
supports the many companies that comprise the global nuclear industry, “Nuclear Power in China”, July
2014, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-A-F/China--Nuclear-Power/] alla
ACP100 Small modular PWR¶ A ‘key project’ on the 12th Five-Year Plan is CNNC’s multi-purpose small
modular reactor, the ACP100. Preliminary design should be finished in 2014 ready for construction start
in 2015. This is based on the larger ACP (and CNP) units, or AP1000, has passive safety features and will
be installed underground. It has 57 fuel assemblies 2.15m tall and integral steam generators (287ºC), so
that the whole steam supply system is produced and shipped a single reactor module. Its 310 MWt
produces about 100 MWe, and power plants comprising two to six of these are envisaged, with 60-year
design life and 24-month refueling. Or each module can supply 1000 GJ/hr, giving 12,000 m3/day
desalination (with MED). Industrial and district heat uses are also envisaged. Capacity up to 150 MWe is
possible.¶ CNNC China New Energy Corporation (CNNC-CNEC), a joint venture of CNNC (51%) and China
Guodian Corp, is planning to build two ACP100 units in Putian county, Zhangzhou city, at the south of
Fujian province, near Xiamen and not far from Fuqing, as a demonstration plant. This will be the CNY 5
billion ($788 million) phase 1 of a larger project. Construction time is expected to be 36-40 months,
starting 2015 for the two Putian units. CNNC is seeking NDRC approval in 2014.¶ It involves a joint
venture of three companies for the pilot plant: CNNC as owner and operator, the Nuclear Power
Institute of China (NPIC) as the reactor designer and China Nuclear Engineering Group being responsible
for plant construction. CNNC-CNEC signed a second ACP100 agreement with Hengfeng county, Shangrao
city in Jiangxi province, and a third with Ningdu county, Ganzhou city in Jiangxi province in July 2013 for
another ACP100 project costing CNY 16 billion. Further inland units are planned in Hunan and possibly
Jilin provinces. Export potential is considered high. CNNC-CNEC will construct major parts of the reactors
in Bashan, Jilin province.¶ CAP150 Small modular PWR¶ This is an integral PWR, with SNPTC provenance,
being developed from the CAP1000 in parallel with CAP1400 by SNERDI, using proven fuel and core
design. It is 450 MWt/ 150 MWe and has 8 integral steam generators (295°C), and claims “a more
simplified system and more safety than current third generation reactors”. It is pitched for remote
electricity supply and district heating, with three-year refueling and design life of 80 years. It has both
active and passive cooling and in an accident scenario, no operator intervention required for seven days.
Seismic design basis 300 Gal. In mid 2013 SNPTC quoted approx. $5000/kW capital cost and 9 c/kWh, so
significantly more than the CAP1400.
China solves nuclear technology—experience with different systems, new methods of
harnessing, and innovative design systems
Buijs 12 [Bram, Bram Buijs joined the Clingendael International Energy Programme (CIEP) in January
2009. After taking a Master’s degree in Mathematics he specialized in energy & geopolitics in a second
Master Contemporary Asian Studies, writing his thesis on the future challenges facing China’s energy
system. For one and a half year he combined work in China with an intensive Chinese language
programme at the Shanghai International Studies University. He has continued with research on energy
and Asia at CIEP, focusing on the challenges to a sustainable energy system in China and its stance in
post-Kyoto climate treaty negotiations, “China and the Future of New Energy Technologies”, March
2012, http://www.clingendaelenergy.com/inc/upload/files/China_technology.pdf] alla
The choice between developing indigenous nuclear power technology versus importing more ¶ advanced
technology from abroad has been a longstanding debate in China. In fact, ever since ¶ the very start of
nuclear power development in China both tracks have been pursued, and ¶ tension between those who
favour indigenous (but less advanced) technology and those in ¶ favour of imported more modern
technology has continued since. ¶ Of the first two reactors that were built, one was an indigenously
designed 300 MW reactor at ¶ Qinshan that developed as part of the “738” government technology
development ¶ programme.156 Simultaneously, the Guangdong provincial government supported the
acquisition ¶ of foreign technology for the construction of a nuclear power plant at Daya Bay, near Hong
Kong. ¶ For this reactor, imported M310 technology from the French nuclear firm Framatome (later ¶
Areva) was used. Both reactors began commercial operations in 1994. ¶ In the course of the next
decades, both tracks were further pursued. The 300 MW indigenously ¶ designed Qinshan reactor was
upgraded to a 600 MW reactor (the ‘CNP‐600’), of which several ¶ units were built at the same site. The
Daya Bay reactor was emulated and used for additional ¶ units at the Ling Ao site nearby. They are
considered to be virtual ‘replicas’ of the Daya Bay units ¶ and some core technology was supplied by
Framatome – the localisation rate is estimated to be ¶ 30 percent.157 ¶ The China Guangdong Nuclear
Power Corporation (CGNPC) that manages the Daya Bay reactors ¶ continued by developing the CPR‐
1000 reactor, which is an upgraded version of the 900 MW‐¶ class French M310 three‐loop technology
used in the Daya Bay reactors. This CPR‐1000 reactor ¶ version, informally known as the ‘improved
Chinese Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR)’, has been ¶ widely deployed in China, with another 57 likely
to be built by the end of 2011 CGNPC managed ¶ to create an almost completely domestic supply chain,
steadily increasing the localisation rate ¶ with every new unit of the CPR‐1000 that was commissioned –
reaching close to 90 percent in ¶ recent projects.158 ¶ However, the struggle was not yet over between
those favouring indigenously developed ¶ technology, represented by the China National Nuclear
Corporation (CNNC), and the State ¶ Nuclear Power Technology Corporation (SNPTC) that favoured
imported technology. ¶ In September 2004, the Chinese State Council decided to set up an international
tendering ¶ process to choose a third generation nuclear reactor design from one of the international
nuclear ¶ firms that would then be used for two reactors at the Sanmen site in Zhejiang province, to be ¶
followed by at least two more reactors at other locations (see Figure 10 for map with reactor ¶ sites).159
All major nuclear industry players took part in the tendering process: Westinghouse ¶ (with its AP1000
reactor), Areva (with the EPR) and Atomstroyexport (VVER‐1000 model V392). ¶ Technology transfer was
made a key condition in the evaluation criteria for the bids. After a ¶ process which lasted several years,
the formal decision was announced in December 2006, ¶ selecting the AP1000 reactor on the grounds of
its passive safety systems, cost and the level of ¶ technology transfer offered.160 The Shanghai Nuclear
Engineering Research and Design Institute ¶ (SNERDI) was appointed as the main research institute to
receive and adopt the technology. ¶ Westinghouse accepted stringent conditions regarding technology
transfer, which required it to ¶ cooperate with the State Nuclear Power Technology Corporation (SNPTC)
in building the first four ¶ AP1000 reactors, in order to ensure that SNPTC could build following units by
itself. Following the ¶ first four reactors at Sanmen and Haiyang, there are another 4 reactors planned
and at least 30 ¶ proposed, all using the AP1000 design. ¶ Moreover, it was agreed that if the Chinese
parties were able to upgrade the capacity of the ¶ reactor design to 1350 MW or more, they would own
the intellectual property rights for the enhanced design.161 Hence, this has become the major objective
of the Chinese nuclear ¶ engineering programme led by SNERDI.162 The desired reactor has already
received the name ¶ CAP1400, as a shorthand for ‘Chinese AP1400 reactor’ ¶ ¶ Despite Westinghouse
having won the major tender, also AREVA – supplier of China’s original ¶ first nuclear power technology
at Daya Bay, by means of its predecessor Framatom – was ¶ awarded another couple of reactors. The
China Guangdong Nuclear Power Corporation (CGNPC) ¶ agreed on a deal with Areva in November 2007
to purchase two 1700 MW EPR reactors for the ¶ site at Taishan, including contracts for the supply of
fuel and other related services. An ¶ engineering joint venture was set up between Areva and CGNPC as a
vehicle for technology ¶ transfer and the possible development of more EPR reactors in China and
abroad. In this joint ¶ venture CGNPC and other Chinese parties together hold a 55 percent stake, against
45 percent ¶ held by Areva.163 ¶ ¶ The variety of different types of nuclear power plants that are being
used in China has been ¶ criticized by some Chinese analysts. Earlier, still other reactor types were
bought and installed, ¶ such as the Canadian‐designed CANDU‐6 heavy‐water reactor and Russian VVER
AES‐91.164 The ¶ decision to purchase these reactors appears to have sometimes been motivated by
politics and ¶ the desire to create goodwill in international relations, rather than stemming from a well‐¶
thought‐out nuclear power development strategy.165 Opponents of these decisions argue that ¶ this
practice is hampering standardization, which is one key factor in bringing down construction ¶ and
operating costs, as it has been in France. On the other hand, those in favour of diversification ¶ argue
that in this way China is hedging its bets and functioning as a testing ground for different ¶ nuclear
reactor designs, being able to gain experience with all of them. ¶ ¶ Concerning domestically designed
reactors, the CPR‐1000 is being deployed in large numbers ¶ alongside the ‘new’ standard of the
AP1000. This CPR‐1000 reactor is based on the French M310 ¶ technology used in the Daya Bay reactors.
In the current expansion plans this CPR‐1000 reactor ¶ also takes a prominent role; 20 of the 27 reactors
under construction as of November 2011 are of ¶ this type. Of all the reactors that are either under
construction or planned, the CPR‐1000 ¶ accounts for almost half (34 reactors out of a total of 78) while
another 30 are AP1000 reactors. ¶ ¶ The development of the CAP1400 reactor is progressing, and China is
also improving its capacity ¶ in building some of the core reactor components for the AP1000, such as
the primary reactor ¶ coolant pipes.166 Research has also started on a second, even larger version of
the reactor, ¶ designated CAP1700 with an intended capacity of 1700 MW.167 Still further away from
commercialization but indicative of China’s push to become a world ¶ leader in advanced nuclear power
technology are the efforts to develop alternative nuclear ¶ power technologies such as fast breeder
reactors and high‐temperature gas‐cooled pebble‐bed ¶ reactors. Fast neutron breeder reactors can be
used to ‘breed’ plutonium from fissile materials ¶ and thus prolong the effective use of nuclear fuel
supplies. The technology has been identified by ¶ the Chinese government as a longer‐term objective, as
it would allow China to continue its ¶ nuclear expansion without dramatically increasing its need for
imported uranium.168 A first ¶ experimental fast neutron reactor with a thermal capacity of 65 MW (and
20 MW of electric ¶ power output) was successfully connected to the grid in July 2011, partly using
Russian imported ¶ technology.169 ¶ ¶ Finally, China is researching modular high‐temperature gas‐cooled
pebbled‐bed reactors, which ¶ operate using nuclear fissile material shaped in pellets, coated and
encapsulated inside a ceramic ¶ material. The key feature of this design is that it has very strong passive
safety characteristics, ¶ since the pebbles and ceramic material are designed in such a way that a total
lack of cooling ¶ would not cause the overall structure to disintegrate. Moreover, it can be used to
build small ¶ reactors at a modular design basis , which can be easily expanded. The technology was
originally ¶ developed in South Africa but not further pursued there. A first small 10 MW experimental ¶
reactor was developed by Tsinghua University in the context of the 863 Program for national ¶ research
and reached criticality in 2003. Construction of a larger demonstration project with two ¶ reactor
modules driving a 210 MW steam turbine was begun at the Rongcheng Shidaowan site in ¶ Shandong
province in 2009 and is scheduled for completion in 2013. Regarding this Chinese ¶ effort, the report
China’s Program for Science and Technology Modernization: Implications for ¶ American
Competitiveness prepared for the US‐China Economic and Security Review Commission ¶ in 2011
remarks: ‘Scientists predict that if the PRC program to make a commercially‐viable pebble ¶ bed reactor
is successful, it will represent a revolution in reactor technology—perhaps the largest ¶ advance in a
quarter of a century.’170
China DA Links
Chinese and US interests are a zero-sum game in the South China Sea and Pacific
Ocean—military interests, resources, and diplomatic influence
Wallis 12 [Dr. Joanne, is a lecturer in the Strategic and Defense Studies Centre at the Australian
National University, where she convenes the Bachelor of Asia-Pacific program. She researches politics
and security in the South Pacific, 9/19/12, http://www.e-ir.info/2012/09/19/the-south-pacificmicrocosm-of-future-us-china-competition/] alla
United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s decision to attend the Pacific Islands Forum meeting in
late August 2012 suggests that the South Pacific’s strategic importance in the broader Asia-Pacific region
is increasing. Indeed, the South Pacific may become a microcosm of how the Asia-Pacific’s changing
power structure could develop, as it provides a small-scale and relatively low-risk testing-ground where
the United States and China can explore their capacity to project power, judge each others’ responses,
and potentially develop mechanisms for cooperation, rather than competition.¶ The theme of the 2012
Pacific Islands Forum meeting was ‘Large Ocean Island States – the Pacific Challenge’,[1] which
highlighted that the islands of the South Pacific between them hold sovereignty over 20 million square
kilometres of the Pacific Ocean. These islands lie across vital sea lines of communication between the
United States, Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia. Therefore, they could offer strategicallyimportant locations for military and naval access.¶ The South Pacific consists of three broad geographic
and cultural areas: Melanesia, which comprises the arc of islands to the immediate north and east of
Australia; Polynesia, which comprises the triangle of states above New Zealand and stretching up to
Hawaii; and Micronesia, the band of islands to the north of Melanesia.¶ The United States’ focus in the
region is in Micronesia, where it controls Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands. It also has Compacts of Free Association with the Marshall Islands, Palau and the Federated
States of Micronesia, according to which it is obliged to provide public services, security and defence
support. In Polynesia the United States also controls American Samoa. Most significantly, the United
States has the Anderson Air Force Base on Guam, and the Ronald Reagan Missile Defence test site at its
base on Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.¶ During the Cold War the United States engaged in
strategic competition with the Soviet Union for influence in the South Pacific. However, after the end of
that war the United States largely withdrew its presence in the region. Consequently, it reduced its aid
program, halved the number of Peace Corps volunteers and closed aid and diplomatic posts.[2]¶ In
contrast, China has been increasingly active in the South Pacific in the last few decades. China’s interest
was initially driven by its competition with Taiwan for diplomatic recognition. Although a truce (of sorts)
has held since 2008, this competition has seen China and Taiwan engage in ‘chequebook diplomacy’ to
win the favour of South Pacific states, and has resulted in China becoming the third-largest aid donor in
the region, behind Australia and the United States.[3]¶ China’s more recent interest may be due to its
desire to access the South Pacific’s natural resources, which include fisheries, timber, mineral and
hydrocarbon deposits. And, regardless of their small size, each independent South Pacific state has a
vote in international organisations, which China can seek to persuade them to use in pursuit of its
interests. China also appears to have strategic interests in demonstrating its ability to project power in
the region, and in potentially obtaining military and naval access as part of its ‘island chain’ defence
strategy.[4] Although China will remain militarily inferior to the United States long into the future, there
are claims that in the event of conflict China could use locations in the South Pacific to approach the
United States asymmetrically, perhaps as part of a sea denial strategy.[5] The region also offers
opportunities for signals intelligence monitoring, and China has already constructed a satellite tracking
station in Kiribati (although it later had to be dismantled after Kiribati switched diplomatic recognition to
Taiwan), which it is alleged to have used to monitor missile defence system tests in the Marshall
Islands.[6]¶ China’s Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Cui Tiankai, declared at the recent Pacific Islands
Forum meeting that China is ‘here in this region not to seek any particular influence, still less
dominance’.[7] Despite this, China has invested heavily in diplomacy, and is now said to have the highest
number of diplomats in the region.[8] High-level Chinese officials have also undertaken a number of
visits to the region, which have been reciprocated by South Pacific politicians and officials. China has
also used tools like language training, student exchanges and tourism to build links. It also engages in
military assistance and capacity-building programs.[9] China also seized the opportunity created by
Australia’s and New Zealand’s attempts to isolate the military regime in Fiji by building links with the
Melanesian Spearhead Group, in which Fiji is an active memb.er¶ Clinton has admitted United States’
concern about China’s increasing presence. For example, in her testimony before the Senate Committee
on Foreign Relations in March 2011 she stated: ‘let’s just talk… straight Realpolitik… We are in a
competition with China. Take Papua New Guinea, huge energy find… ExxonMobil is producing it. China is
there every day in every way trying to figure out how it’s going to come in behind us, come in under
us’.[10] At the 2012 Pacific Islands Forum meeting Clinton was more circumspect, and in response to
questions concerning China’s presence in the region, declared that ‘the Pacific is big enough for all of
us’.[11]¶ However, the fact that Clinton attended the Forum meeting highlights Washington’s increased
sensitivity to growing Chinese influence in the South Pacific. Consequently, the United States has
resumed a more active role in the region. Senior officials have conducted tours, the United States has
bolstered its diplomatic presence and it has opened a USAID office in Papua New Guinea. It has also
increased its military presence, with the relocation of marines from Okinawa to Guam, and via the
expansion of its ‘shiprider’ program, under which ships and aircraft from the United States Coast Guard
(and now Navy), host law enforcement officers from South Pacific states and patrol their sovereign
waters.[12]¶ Given the United States’ and China’s increasing focus on the South Pacific, the region might
become a microcosm of broader emerging strategic rivalry between the two powers. Pessimistic
analyses would predict that China and the United States (and its ally Australia) will engage in a zerosum competition for regional influence, as occurred during the Cold War. Robert Kaplan has argued
that it is ‘not hard to imagine… a replay of the decades-long Cold War, with the center of gravity not in
the heart of Europe but, rather, among Pacific atolls’.[13] If this competition took on a military
dimension it could come to a head if there is a clash between China’s island chain strategy and the
United States’ presence in Micronesia. Military bases in the region might also mean that South Pacific
states could be dragged into a conflict elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific, such as in the South China Sea.¶
Russia CP Solvency
Arctic
Russia is moving ahead with Arctic drilling projects—more oil and natural gas fields
than the US—perm fails disagreements about standards
Kramer and Krauss 11 [Andrew E. Kramer is the Moscow correspondent for The New York Times
and Clifford Krauss is the New York Times energy correspondent , “Russia Embraces Offshore Arctic
Drilling”, 2/19/11,
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/business/global/16arctic.html?pagewanted=all] alla
MOSCOW — The Arctic Ocean is a forbidding place for oil drillers. But that is not stopping Russia from
jumping in — or Western oil companies from eagerly following. Russia, where onshore oil reserves are
slowly dwindling, last month signed an Arctic exploration deal with the British petroleum giant BP,
whose offshore drilling prospects in the United States were dimmed by the Gulf of Mexico disaster last
year. Other Western oil companies, recognizing Moscow’s openness to new ocean drilling, are now
having similar discussions with Russia.¶ New oil from Russia could prove vital to world supplies in coming
decades, now that it has surpassed Saudi Arabia as the world’s biggest oil producer, and as long as
global demand for oil continues to rise.¶ But as the offshore Russian efforts proceed, the oil companies
will be venturing where other big countries ringing the Arctic Ocean — most notably the United States
and Canada — have been wary of letting oil field development proceed, for both safety and
environmental reasons.¶ After the BP accident in the gulf last year highlighted the consequences of a
catastrophic ocean spill, American and Canadian regulators focused on the special challenges in the
Arctic.¶ The ice pack and icebergs pose various threats to drilling rigs and crews. And if oil were spilled
in the winter, cleanup would take place in the total darkness that engulfs the region during those
months.¶ Earlier this month, Royal Dutch Shell postponed plans for drilling off Alaska’s Arctic coast, as
the company continued to face hurdles from wary Washington regulators. ¶ The Russians, who
control far more prospective drilling area in the Arctic Ocean than the United States and Canada
combined, take a far different view.¶ As its Siberian oil fields mature, daily output in Russia, without
new development, could be reduced by nearly a million barrels by the year 2035, according to the
International Energy Agency. With its economy dependent on oil and gas, which make up about 60
percent of all exports, Russia sees little choice but to go offshore — using foreign partners to provide
expertise and share the billions of dollars in development costs.¶ And if anything, the gulf disaster
encouraged Russia to push ahead with BP as its first partner. In the view of Russia’s prime minister,
Vladimir V. Putin, BP is the safest company to hire for offshore work today, having learned its lesson in
the gulf.¶ “One beaten man is worth two unbeaten men,” Mr. Putin said, citing a Russian proverb, after
BP signed its Arctic deal with Rosneft, the Russian state-owned oil company. The joint venture calls for
the companies to explore three sections in the Kara Sea, an icebound coastal backwater north of central
Russia.¶ The BP agreement touched off little public reaction in Russia, in part because the environmental
movement is weak but also because opposition politicians have no way to block or hinder the process.¶
The Arctic holds one-fifth of the world’s undiscovered, recoverable oil and natural gas, the United States
Geological Survey estimates. According to a 2009 report by the Energy Department, 43 of the 61
significant Arctic oil and gas fields are in Russia. The Russian side of the Arctic is particularly rich in
natural gas, while the North American side is richer in oil.¶ While the United States and Canada balk,
other countries are clearing Arctic space for the industry. Norway, which last year settled a territorial
dispute with Russia, is preparing to open new Arctic areas for drilling.¶ Last year Greenland, which
became semi-autonomous from Denmark in 2009, allowed Cairn Energy to do some preliminary drilling.
Cairn, a Scottish company, is planning four more wells this year, while Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Shell
are also expected to drill in the area over the next few years.¶ But of the five countries with Arctic
Ocean coastline, Russia has the most at stake in exploring and developing the region.¶ “Russia is one of
the fundamental building blocks in world oil supply,” said Daniel Yergin, the oil historian and chairman of
IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates. “It has a critical role in the global energy balance. The Arctic
will be one of the critical factors in determining how much oil Russia is producing in 15 years and
exporting to the rest of the world.Ӧ Following the template of the BP deal, Rosneft is negotiating joint
venture agreements with other major oil companies shut out of North America and intent on exploring
the Arctic continental shelf off Russia’s northern coast. That includes Shell, its chief executive said last
month. Rosneft’s chief executive, Eduard Y. Khudainatov, said other foreign oil company representatives
were lining up outside his office these days.¶ Artur N. Chilingarov, a polar explorer, has embodied
Moscow’s sweeping Arctic ambitions ever since he rode in a minisubmarine and placed a Russian flag on
the bottom of the ocean under the North Pole, claiming it for Russia, in a 2007 expedition.¶ “The future
is on the shelf,” Mr. Chilingarov, a member of Russia’s Parliament, the Duma, said in an interview. “We
already pumped the land dry.Ӧ Russia has been a dominant Arctic oil power since the Soviet Union
began making important discoveries in the land-based Tazovskoye field on the shore of the Ob Bay in
Siberia in 1962. The United States was not far behind with the discovery of the shallow-water Prudhoe
Bay field in Alaska five years later.¶ What is new is the move offshore.¶ The waters of the Arctic are
particularly perilous for drilling because of the extreme cold, long periods of darkness, dense fogs and
hurricane-strength winds. Pervasive ice cover for eight to nine months out of the year can block relief
ships in case of a blowout. And, as environmentalists note, whales, polar bears and other species
depend on the region’s fragile habitats.¶ Such concerns have blocked new drilling in Alaska’s Arctic
waters since 2003, despite a steep decline in oil production in the state and intensive lobbying by oil
companies.¶ In Canada, Arctic offshore drilling is delayed as the National Energy Board is reviewing its
regulations after the gulf spill.¶ But Russia is pressing ahead. The central decision opening the Russian
Arctic easily passed Parliament in 2008, as an amendment to a law on subsoil resources. It allowed the
ministry of natural resources to transfer offshore blocks to state-controlled oil companies in a no-bid
process that does not involve detailed environmental reviews.
Russia solves arctic oil development--only country to have acquired and shipped Arctic
oil
Gertz 14 [Emily, Editor at Guardian News and contributor at Popular Science, “Russia Ships The World's
First Load of Offshore Arctic Oil”, 4/18/14, http://www.popsci.com/article/science/russia-ships-worldsfirst-load-offshore-arctic-oil] alla
Russia has announced its first shipment of Arctic offshore oil . Russian President Vladimir Putin
watched oil loading from the Prirazlomnoye drilling platform onto a tanker Friday via video link,
according to state-run ITAR-TASS, and celebrated the shipment as the beginning of a bigger Russian
presence on world energy markets.¶ The 70,000 metric ton load (roughly 490,000 gallons) is, as far as we
know, the world's first market-sized shipment of oil extracted from the floor of any marine body above
the Arctic Circle. Offshore oil extraction has only become commercially viable in recent years, as
advances in petroleum technologies have combined with warming temperatures to ease, slightly, the
physical and financial challenges of drilling in the harsh Arctic environment.¶ Greenpeace and others
have charged that the potential for an oil spill is too risky in the easily damaged Arctic environment,
which includes important fisheries in the Barents Sea. They also argue that untapped supplies of fossil
fuels should be left underground, in favor of developing energy sources that won't create greenhouse
gas pollution and further destabilize the climate.¶ The Prirazlomnoye field is located about 38 miles off
Russia's northwestern coast, in the Pechora Sea, the southeastern section of the Barents Sea. It holds an
estimated 72 million metric tons of recoverable oil. The oil company Gazprom Neft operates the field,
and has partnered with Shell on its overall Arctic offshore oil development.¶ Russia already produces
more than 10 million barrels (420 million gallons) of oil daily, but intends for Arctic offshore strikes to
maintain this level of production as its Western Siberian oil fields run dry, reports Reuters.¶ The
Prirazlomnoye platform was the site of an anti-drilling protest last September, which ended when
masked Russian paratroopers boarded the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise and arrested all 30 crew
and activists. The demonstrators were ultimately released without criminal prosecution thanks to a
parliamentary amnesty. But Russia has not given up the ship, which remains in Murmansk.¶ President
Putin's apparent satisfaction about this offshore Arctic oil shipment seems particularly newsworthy set
against his nation's recent, retro-futuristic geopolitical relations with Ukraine, which feature the seizure
of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in March, and subsequent threats to cut off natural gas shipments to
Ukraine and the rest of Europe. (Russia is the major supplier of fossil fuels to Europe, according to the
European Commission.) The former Soviet republic yesterday hosted a a renewable energy conference
at its embassy in Washington, D.C.
Russia has major incentive to increase Arctic oil and natural gas drilling in the Arctic—
new tax exemptions for drilling companies in the Arctic solve tech acquisition
Bennett 12 [Mia, is pursuing a PhD in Geography at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).
She received her MPhil (with Distinction) in Polar Studies from the University of Cambridge's Scott Polar
Research Institute, where she was a Gates Scholar, “Russia looks to step up Arctic offshore drilling to
reclaim oil-production throne”, 5/27/12, http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/russia-looks-steparctic-offshore-drilling-reclaim-oil-production-throne] alla
According to data from the Joint Organization Data Initiative, Saudi Arabia has surpassed Russia as the
world’s largest oil producer, a position which the latter country held for six years.¶ The Middle Eastern
kingdom’s oil production rose to a 31-year high last year, while Russia’s dropped. As Matthew Hulbert
writes in his analysis for Forbes, “If we wanted any further evidence why the Arctic really matters for
Russia, we just got it.” Declining production in Western Siberia can only be replaced by drilling for
offshore oil, in Russia’s Arctic . Whereas Saudi Arabia has spare capacity, allowing it to ramp up
production, Russia is already producing to the fullest extent possible.A drop in production is a scary
thing to contemplate for President Vladimir Putin, who began his third presidential term earlier this
month. He has succeeded in large part by placating the middle class with economic growth and stability.
Since oil and gas compose two-thirds of Russia’s exports, both the price of oil and volume of oil the
country exports are crucial to maintaining his power. The price of oil has held steady lately at over $100
per barrel.¶ But what has changed in recent years are two things. First, Putin keeps promising more and
more, requiring a higher cost per barrel of oil to make ends meet. With increases to pensions and a 33
percent hike in the defense budget, the Economist reports that the country will need oil to sit at $130 a
barrel to balance its budget, which is funded about 60 percent by oil and gas taxes. Second, the
discovery of new sources of oil has slowed down, and offshore oil production will not begin in earnest
until 2020.¶ The Kremlin reports that Russian oil production has has remained near the highs reached
after the fall of the USSR, but latest figures show that not only has production slowed, it has actually
decreased.¶ As you can see from the chart above, the difference between Saudi and Russian oil
production is minimal.¶ However, the recent drop in Russian oil production is quite large, at 5 percent
between December 2011 and January 2012 -- a decline of 500,000 barrels, which Mark Adomanis of
Forbes says is “the equivalent of the total production of a country like Argentina or Ecuador
disappearing overnight.” He questions whether the data is accurate, since there were no reports of
problems within the Russian oil industry that would cause such a dramatic drop.¶ Regardless of whether
production has fallen off that much and that quickly, Putin knows that new sources of oil need to be
exploited. He has announced that exports from new offshore fields will enjoy business-friendly tax rules
for at least the next 15 years, and he is even considering allowing private companies to receive licenses
to drill. This would be a big change for a country in which the oil and gas industries are controlled by
state-owned companies Rosneft and Gazprom.¶ The new tax rules, which will tax exports less the more
difficult the oil is to extract, are designed to foster $500 million in investment in offshore oil. Production
will be ranked according to four different categories, with the most challenging areas being the Laptev
Sea, East Siberia, Bering Sea, the northern part of the Kara Sea, and the Sea of Okhotsk, and the second
most difficult areas in parts of the Arctic such as the Barents Sea, Pechora, and the southern part of the
Kara and Okhotsk seas, including the continental shelf of Sakhalin.¶ In recent weeks, Rosneft has
announced that it will team with Exxon Mobil in the Kara Sea and the Italian oil company Eni in the
Barents Sea. Tax breaks will also probably encourage Statoil and Total to resuscitate the Shtokman
natural gas project, in which they have stakes. It had been put on hold due to uncertainty with regard to
tax regulations.¶ All of this could bode well for Russian offshore oil and gas production, but if the
government lowers taxes, the country’s budget will not get as big a boost as it otherwise would have
from such development.¶ Putin will have to strike a balance between inviting investors to help exploit
resources on the continental shelf -- which Russia does not have the know-how to do alone -- and
balancing the budget.¶
Russia solves Arctic exploration and development
Ebinger et al 14 [Charles Ebinger is the director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings Institute,
John P. Banks is a senior fellow at Brookings Institute, Alisa Schackmann is a researcher at the Brookings
Institution's Energy Security Initiative, “Offshore Oil and Gas ¶ Governance in the ¶ Arctic”, March 2014,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2014/03/offshore%20oil%20gas%20gover
nance%20arctic/Offshore%20Oil%20and%20Gas%20Governance%20web.pdf] alla
In February 2013, Russia released its first Arctic ¶ strategy through the year 2020, emphasizing the ¶
importance of the Arctic region for national security, economic growth, and improvement of ¶ jobs and
quality of life.29 In particular, the strategy focuses on regional infrastructure and the ¶ development of
oil and gas deposits in the continental shelf. Russia has the greatest potential for Arctic ¶ offshore oil
and gas with 52 percent of all assessed ¶ oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids in the region. By 2020,
Russia intends to study and develop ¶ the offshore fields in the Barents, Pechora, and Kara ¶ Seas as well
as in the Yamal and Gydan Peninsulas. ¶ The government is also establishing a state program ¶ for
mineral exploration and development in the ¶ Arctic shelf to tap known resources of chrome, zinc, ¶
manganese, titanium, aluminum, tin, and uranium. ¶ Offshore hydrocarbon production has already ¶
commenced: the Kirinskoye gas field in the Sea of ¶ Okhotsk began production October 2013, and the ¶
Prirazlomonoye oil field in the Pechora Sea started production in December 2013.31 ¶ Other projects are
also moving forward. Moscow is seeking ¶ partners for Rosneft and Gazprom to develop off-shore oil
and gas, and there has been considerable ¶ interest. In the wake of a settlement of Norway’s ¶ disputed
maritime boundary with Russia, Rosneft ¶ signed a $2.5 billion agreement in May 2012 with ¶ Norway’s
Statoil to explore a field in the Barents ¶ Sea.32 ¶ The China National Petroleum Corporation ¶ signed a
deal in March of 2013 to explore three ¶ offshore oil fields with Rosneft, and China is assessing other
arrangements to increase its oil and ¶ gas links with Russia.33¶ In perhaps the most significant
development, ExxonMobil signed a Strategic Cooperation Agreement with Rosneft in August 2011 which
was subsequently expanded in February 2013. While little ¶ noted at the time, the original agreement
included ¶ exploration rights for hydrocarbon resources in ¶ three blocks in the Kara Sea covering more
than ¶ 125,000 square kilometers, an area equal in size to ¶ the total leased acreage in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico. Under the extended agreement, ExxonMobil ¶ received access to an additional 600,000 square ¶
kilometers across seven new blocs in the Chukchi, Laptev, and Kara Seas, all regions considered ¶ among
the world’s most promising and least explored offshore areas. The agreement also offered ¶ Russia
participation in some of some of ExxonMobil’s acreage in Alaska. As part of the February ¶ 2013
agreement with Rosneft, ExxonMobil agreed ¶ to study a prospective LNG project in Russia’s Far ¶ East
and to collaborate with Rosneft in establishing ¶ an Arctic Research Center.34
No chance the perm solves—Crimean tensions, military buildup, and conflicting
interests
Friedman 14 [Uri, a senior associate editor at The Atlantic, where he oversees the Global Channel,
“The Arctic: Where the U.S. and Russia Could Square Off Next”, 3/28/14,
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/the-arctic-where-the-us-and-russia-couldsquare-off-next/359543/] alla
In mid-March, around the same time that Russia annexed Crimea, Russian officials announced another
territorial coup: 52,000 square kilometers in the Sea of Okhotsk, a splotch of Pacific Ocean known as the
"Peanut Hole" and believed to be rich in oil and gas. A UN commission had recognized the maritime
territory as part of Russia's continental shelf, Russia's minister of natural resources and environment
proudly announced, and the decision would only advance the territorial claims in the Arctic that Russia
had pending before the same committee.¶ After a decade and a half of painstaking petitioning, the
Peanut Hole was Russia's. Russian officials were getting a bit ahead of themselves. Technically, the UN
commission had approved Russia's recommendations on the outer limits of its continental shelf—and
only when Russia acts on these suggestions is its control of the Sea of Okhotsk "final and binding."¶ Still,
these technicalities shouldn't obscure the larger point: Russia isn't only pursuing its territorial ambitions
in Ukraine and other former Soviet states. It's particularly active in the Arctic Circle, and, until recently,
these efforts engendered international cooperation, not conflict.¶ But the Crimean crisis has
complicated matters. Take Hillary Clinton's call last week for Canada and the United States to form a
"united front" in response to Russia "aggressively reopening military bases” in the Arctic. Or the
difficulties U.S. officials are having in designing sanctions against Russia that won't harm Western oil
companies like Exxon Mobil, which are engaged in oil-and-gas exploration with their Russian
counterparts in parts of the Russian Arctic.¶ In a dispatch from "beneath the Arctic ocean" this week, The
Wall Street Journal reported on a U.S. navy exercise, scheduled before the crisis in Ukraine, that
included a simulated attack on a Russian submarine. The U.S. has now canceled a joint naval exercise
with Russia in the region and put various other partnerships there on hold.¶ This week, the Council on
Foreign Relations published a very helpful guide on the jostling among countries to capitalize on the
shipping routes and energy resources that could be unlocked as the Arctic melts. The main players are
the countries with Arctic Ocean coastlines: Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Norway, Russia, the United
States (Alaska)—and, to a lesser extent, Finland, Iceland, and Sweden. These nations have generally
agreed to work together to resolve territorial and environmental issues. But some sovereignty disputes
persist, including American opposition to Russia's claims to parts of the Northern Sea Route above
Siberia.¶ Here's CFR's infographic on where the Arctic's shipping and natural-resource potential is, and
where the "Arctic Five" are most at odds with each other (you can even layer summer sea ice onto the
map!):¶ "Few countries have been as keen to invest in the Arctic as Russia, whose economy and federal
budget rely heavily on hydrocarbons," CFR writes. "Of the nearly sixty large oil and natural-gas fields
discovered in the Arctic, there are forty-three in Russia, eleven in Canada, six in Alaska, and one in
Norway, according to a 2009 U.S. Department of Energy report."¶ "Russia, the only non-NATO littoral
Arctic state, has made a military buildup in the Arctic a strategic priority, restoring Soviet-era airfields
and ports and marshaling naval assets," the guide adds. "In late 2013, President Vladimir Putin
instructed his military leadership to pay particular attention to the Arctic, saying Russia needed 'every
lever for the protection of its security and national interests there.' He also ordered the creation of a
new strategic military command in the Russian Arctic by the end of 2014."¶
Russia is defending its Arctic territories—new in investment in security and
governmental cohesion
RT 14 [RT is an international multilingual Russian-based television network, “Russia to create united
naval base system for ships, subs in Arctic – Putin”, 4/22/14, http://rt.com/news/154028-arctic-russiaships-subs/] alla
A united system of naval bases for ships and next-generation submarines will be created in the Arctic to
defend Russia’s interests in the region, President Vladimir Putin said.¶ He urged the government to
provide full state funding for the socio-economic development of the Russian Arctic through 2017-20.¶
Putin said that a separate state agency should be created to implement Russian policy in the Arctic
and to improve the quality of governance and decision-making in this area .¶ “We do not need a bulky
bureaucratic body, but a flexible operational structure, which will help better coordinate the activities of
ministries and departments, regions and businesses,” he said.¶ At a Russian Security Council meeting
Tuesday, the president said that suggested “strengthening of the naval component of the Federal
Security Service (FSB) border guard group.”¶ “At the same time, we should strengthen the military
infrastructure. Specifically, I’m referring to the creation of a united system of naval bases for ships and
next-generation submarines in our part of the Arctic,” he added.¶ Putin emphasized that even the
smallest aspects of the integrated security system in the Russian Arctic needed attention.¶ “All security
issues should be thoroughly worked out during multiagency exercises and training sessions, in which the
units of the Defense Ministry, Emergencies Ministry and other structures should take part on a regular
basis,” Putin said.¶ “Russian oil and gas production facilities, loading terminals and pipelines in the Arctic
must be protected from terrorists and other potential threats,” he added.¶ "It makes sense to create a
body similar in status to the state commission with broad authority, as it was previously done for the
Russian Far East," the president said, adding that he would await specific proposals from the
government.¶ ‘Moscow must safeguard every part of Russian Arctic shelf’¶ The president urged Russian
experts to “be active in bilateral and multilateral consultations with governments of the Arctic states
and assert every piece of the continental shelf of the Russian Arctic marine areas.Ӧ Putin said that
Russia is already successful in this field, as the country managed to come up with a strong argument to
prove its indisputable right to a piece of land in the Sea of Okhotsk.¶ During the 33rd session of the UN
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in March, Russia staked a claim for the area of
“52,000 square kilometers in Sea of Okhotsk, which is a continuation of Russia’s continental shelf,” he
said.¶ The problem of establishing the international legal border of the Russian continental shelf in the
Arctic Ocean requires urgent and careful attention, the president said.¶ ‘Northern Sea Route to become
effective and profitable’¶ Putin said that the construction of new nuclear and diesel icebreakers should
be accelerated to develop an effective economic model for the Northern Sea Route. ¶ “The turnover of
the Northern Sea Route must be at 4 million tons by 2015,” he said. ¶ The president urged the speedy
completion of modern navigation infrastructure, communications, technical services and emergency
care to be established along the Northern Sea Route – from Russia’s Far East to Murmansk on the
Barents Sea.¶ “We need to make sure that it would be profitable and convenient for shipping companies
to operate under the Russian flag, so that the majority of transport in the Arctic would be carried out by
vessels under our jurisdiction,” he stressed.¶ The discovery of large hydrocarbon deposits in the Arctic
has sparked international competition over the region’s resources . ¶ Regional powers are quickly filing
claims for the sea shelf, with Russia preparing to preparing to file a bid for 1.2 million square kilometers
of Arctic waters to the UN later this year.¶ The melting Arctic ice cap has opened shipping routes and
made the exploration for resources at the bottom of the world’s smallest ocean a real prospect. ¶ The
North Pole icecap has decreased by 40 percent since 1979, opening up two shipping routes, the North
Sea route and the Northwest Passage, with extremely high economic potential. ¶ Approximately 30
percent of the world’s undiscovered natural gas and 15 percent of its oil lie in the Arctic. ¶ But an
estimated 84 percent of the Arctic’s 90 billion barrels of oil and 47.3 trillion cubic meters of gas remain
offshore. ¶ According to the UN’s sea convention, countries have sovereign rights to resources within
200 nautical miles of its territorial waterways. ¶ There are five countries with territories near the Arctic:
Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the US. ¶ Russia has been seeking to secure and reinforce its
military presence in the Arctic for some time now, after other nations started to express interest in the
region’s vast resources. ¶ The Basic Concept of State Policy in the Arctic, approved in 2009, outlined the
creation of a dedicated military force as a primary objective.
Aquaculture
Russia is working to improve domestic aquaculture—new plants and more laws
promoting the growth of the industry
World Fishing 13 [World Fishing is dedicated to all aspects of commercial fishing. It provides readers
with the latest news and product launches, alongside country profile features, interviews and regular
columns from fishery experts, “Russia’s largest aquaculture plant”, 8/7/13,
http://www.worldfishing.net/news101/fish-farming/russias-largest-aquaculture-plant] alla
Russian Salmon Company, one of Russia’s largest fish producers, has announced plans to establish a
large-scale aquaculture complex in the Murmansk region of Russia, which will specialise on the
production of juvenile Atlantic salmon and trout, reports Eugene Gerden.¶ According to Andrew Laskov,
general director of Russian Salmon, the new plant will be built on a 12ha site in the Little Volokovaya
Bay. Construction is scheduled to begin in spring 2014 and the first phase of the plant is expected to be
launched in spring 2016.¶ The volume of production during the first phase will be 10 million juveniles and
is expected to be increased up to 30 million during the second stage.¶ The volume of investment in the
project has not been disclosed, however, according to sources close to the company, it could be up to
RUB8bn (USD$240m).¶ Russian analysts believe that the establishment of such a complex will help to
partially reduce Russia’s current dependence on the supplies of Atlantic salmon from Norway and to
stimulate domestic production.¶ According to Dennis Bezruchko, a senior analyst of St. Petersburg
Fisherman Club, at present the annual volume of supplies of Norway Atlantic salmon to Russia is about
135,000 tonnes, which is a large figure for Russia. The implementation of the project will help to solve
this problem.¶ However, he also warned that the company may face serious problems during the
implementation of the project - in particular high mortality rate of juveniles, as well as a longer period of
implementation of the project, as the growth of fish in Murmansk takes significantly longer than in
Norway, due to colder conditions.¶ At the same time analysts believe that implementation of the project
will be very important for Russia, as the level of development of the country’s aquaculture leaves much
to be desired.¶ According to the Federal Agency for Fisheries and the Ministry of Agriculture, the share of
Russia in global aquaculture production is currently estimated at only 0.2%. The recently approved
federal law ‘On aquaculture’, aims to create more favourable conditions for the development of
aquaculture in Russia and to significantly increase the level of production.¶ In the meantime, Russian
Salmon is not the only Russian company, which plans to become a prominent player in the domestic
salmon market in the coming years.¶ Russian Sea, Russia’s leading fish producer and processor, is also
involved in production of Atlantic salmon in the Barents Sea. Several weeks ago the company
commissioned the second phase of its aquaculture plant in the Murmansk region and plans to continue
to build its aquaculture business in the future.
Mining
Russia has mining claims in many parts of the World Ocean—the UN approved and
Russia is getting ready to develop its area
Voice of Russia 11 [The Voice of Russia is the Russian government's international radio broadcasting
service, “UN approves Russia’s request to explore Atlantic for copper, gold”, 8/5/11,
http://voiceofrussia.com/2011/08/05/54250558/] alla
The International Seabed Authority, a U.N. body that oversees mining in international waters, has
approved Russia’s request to explore one of the world's largest untapped copper and gold deposits on
the Atlantic Ocean bed.¶ The International Seabed Authority, a U.N. body that oversees mining in
international waters, has approved Russia’s request to explore one of the world's largest untapped
copper and gold deposits on the Atlantic Ocean bed.¶ This is the first time when the UN’s Seabed
authority allows explorations in the area of the World Ocean which does not belong to any state’s
economic zone. Earlier the UN approved China’s request to explore the western part of the Indian
Ocean in search for polymetallic sulphides, which contain base metals that include copper, lead and zinc,
as well as gold and silver. Together with the Russian request the agency granted licenses for
explorations to two island states in the Pacific Ocean - Nauru and Nonga.¶ Russia began to show interest
in the mineral deposits of the Atlantic Ocean 20 years ago. Scientific expeditions had worked there for
many years taking samples of water and sea-bed ground. But the international rights of sea-bed
explorations changed and it became obligatory for a country to file a request to the UN’s authority.
Russia also had to go through this procedure and finally the permission has been received. ¶ The license
is valid for 15 years and can be prolonged for five more years. After that the development stage should
begin. Now it is already known that the concentration of gold and copper underwater is 5-10 times
higher than onshore, Georgy Cherksahov, the Deputy director of the Institute of the World Ocean’s
geological and mineral recourses, says.¶ "Our data show that underwater ground contains high
concentrations of zinc, lead, cooper, gold and other metals. Their concentration on the sea-bed is much
higher than on the continent. Moreover they can be found in the upper layers of the sea-bed and it is
not necessary to remove layers above them."¶ Of course, everything is not that simple. Firstly, it will be
necessary to develop special equipment for such a production. At present neither Russia nor any other
country has it. It will be also necessary to work out an environmental program and to prepare specialists
who will work in the ocean in 15 years.¶ By the way, experts in higher education are confident that the
preparation of sea geologists and engineers is one of the most promising directions in modern higher
education. Considering Russia’s claims on the deposits of the Arctic region and Pacific Ocean such
specialists won’t stay unemployed in the coming decades.
Russian Icebreakers
Russia is the only country with nuclear icebreaker experience—new icebreakers on
the way—Arctic exploration now
RT 13 [RT is an international multilingual Russian-based television network, “Russia lays down world’s
largest icebreaker”, 11/5/13, http://rt.com/news/world-biggest-icebreaker-russia-275/] alla
Russia has started building the world’s largest universal nuclear-powered icebreaker capable of
navigating in the Arctic and in the shallow waters of Siberian rivers. The unique vessel will further
increase Russia’s dominance in the region.¶ The 173m ship is being built by the Baltiysky Zavod shipyard
in St Petersburg, and is planned to be completed by 2017. Once finished the ship will be 14 meters
longer and 4 meters wider than the current record holder, “50 year Victory” that is 159 meters long and
30 meters wide. ¶ "There is no doubt that this work will be completed on time and in good quality," said
the head of "United Shipbuilding Corporation" Vladimir Shmakov. ¶ In August 2012 Atomflot – a sister
company of Rosatom signed a 37 billion ruble ($1.2 billion) contract to begin construction of a
"universal" vessel. According to the general director of Atomflot Vyacheslav Ruksha, the Icebreaker LK60 Project 22220 vessel is likely to be called the "Arctic". ¶ Powered by two “RITM-200” pressurized
water reactors the “Arctic” is being built to generate 175MWe. Its efficiency and power allows the new
model to crack ice fields 3 meters thick. ¶ The Arctic will be granted the highest ice class – 9, meaning
the ship will be able to break ice in the Arctic area all year round. ¶ The new design will allow the
icebreaker to alter its draught, or the depth of the loaded vessel in the water between 8.5 to 10.8
meters. This will enable the ship to navigate the shallow waters of Siberian rivers as well as the Arctic
and tow ships of up to 70,000 tons. ¶ Atomflot has also announced an 80 million ruble ($2.5 billion)
tender for the construction of two similar class icebreakers which will be announced in the near future,
and their delivery to the Navy is expected sometime between 2018 and 2020. The main objectives of
these new icebreakers would be servicing the Northern Sea Route and carrying out various expeditions
to the Arctic. ¶ Constructions of new icebreakers are important for Moscow as Russia is continuing to
collect data to expand its continental shelf borders in the Arctic. The US, Canada, Norway, and Denmark
and Iceland have also announced claims to exclusive economic rights on the Arctic shelf. Russia argues
that “Lomonosov Ridge” is an extension of Siberia’s shelf, and therefore belongs to Russia exclusively. ¶ ¶
Russia, the only country with nuclear powered icebreakers, currently has 5 vessels cruising the Arctic,
built between 1985 and 2007. ¶ Russian companies also use "Vaygach" and "Taymyr", two shallow-draft
nuclear-powered icebreakers to navigate Siberia’s frozen rivers.
Arctic Exploration
Russian companies like Rosneft have the most data on the Arctic—new sensors solve
Arctic mapping
PortNews 14 [PortNews is a leading and widely read source of maritime and river transport news, and
a channel of interactions of businesses, government and the media, “The Kara-Winter-2014 Ice
Expedition completed”, 6/11/14, http://en.portnews.ru/news/181929/] alla
The Kara-Winter-2014 Ice Expedition organized by the Arctic Research and Design Center (a joint
venture of Rosneft and ExxonMobil) with expert support from the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute
Federal State Budget Institution was successfully finished, Rosneft said in a press release. ¶ It has become
the largest expedition in the Arctic Ocean since the USSR collapse. Within 63 days scientists have been
studying least developed areas of three northern seas: the Laptev, Kara, and East-Siberian Seas on board
the Yamal Ice-Breaker. The works have been also carried out off the coast of Novaya Zemlya, Severnaya
Zemlya archipelagoes, and De Long Islands.¶ There have been carried out ice and meteorological
measurements at 35 stations. 40 drifting buoys have been installed at ice fields and icebergs, the
westernmost buoy has been installed off the coast of Novaya Zemlya, and the easternmost along
Bennett Island in the East Siberian Sea. These buoys allow constant monitoring of ice features
coordinates and to determine driftage of their trajectory.¶ There have been never carried out so largescale studies in the arctic seas before. This was the first time, when physical and chemical properties and
morphometric parameters of icebergs and hummocks of the Laptev Sea were studied, as well as water
mass distribution, stream, and variability of temperature. Iceberg drift along Severnaya Zemlya
archipelago was studied for the first time. Most of the icebergs (about two thousand) have been
recorded along the eastern coast of the archipelago. Along Matusevich inlet there has been discovered a
giant iceberg of 3x1 km of linear dimensions.¶ Remote-piloted vehicles and helicopter KA-32 were
involved in the exploration of ice cover, and unique remotely operated vehicles Gnom with depth of
submersion of up to 100 meters for the exploration of sea floor. The participants of Ice Expedition
studied the gouging traces at the bottom of the sea, which can show drift directions and maximum keels
of hummocks.¶ During the Ice Expedition, scientists were observing oceanic mammals and birds in order
to evaluate potential impact of oil production to arctic nature, and to develop environmental regulations
for shelf development.¶ On the basis of the received data there will be constructed 3D models of ice
features. This will allow Rosneft to determine safe points for exploration works, to design drilling
platforms and other constructions for oil production, to choose routes for transportation of
hydrocarbons and possible routes of offshore pipelines. The expedition is not only about pragmatic
interests of the Company. In the scientific community, data received in the course of this expedition are
considered as a breakthrough in studying the Arctic.¶ Rosneft holds 46 licenses for offshore oil and gas
exploration and production in the Russian Federation and is the largest Russian offshore subsoil user, its
resources amounting to 318 boe. The Russian Arctic sedimentation basins are comparable with the
world’s largest oil and gas regions in their total oil and gas potential.
Ocean Satellites
Russia solves ocean satellites
RIA 11 [RIA Novosti is one of the largest news agencies in Russia, “Russia to launch ocean satellite in
March”, 1/12/11, http://en.ria.ru/science/20110112/162115755.html] alla
Russia will launch an oceanography satellite in March to keep track of a vast amount of data that will
help improve weather, climate and ocean forecasts, a Russian scientist said on Wednesday.¶ "It will be a
kind of an orbital 'radio receiver' listening to Earth," said Viktor Savorsky, acting laboratory head at the
Institute of Radio and Electronic Technology affiliated with the Russian Academy of Sciences, which
developed the satellite equipment.¶ It will provide data, among other things, about oceanic temperature
and salinity, as well as moisture levels and temperature on land, which are essential to meteorologists,
climatologists and oceanographers, he added.¶ The satellite will use a frequency of 21 centimeters,
which ensures the complete "transparency" of the earth's atmosphere, enabling the probe to receive
data around the clock regardless of weather conditions.¶ Information from the mission will improve
knowledge of changes on the global and regional level and ensure more accurate weather, ocean and
climate forecasts.
Russia solves weather satellites—gathers oceanic data
Clark 14 [Stephen, Journalist for Space Flight Now, Space Flight Now is a source of current space news,
“Soyuz rocket sends up Russian weather satellite”, 7/8/14,
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1407/08soyuz/#.U79A-_ldWSo] alla
A new Russian weather satellite lifted off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on Tuesday,
riding a Soyuz launcher into space with six small piggyback satellites from Britain, the United States and
Norway. The polar-orbiting Meteor M2 satellite will track cloud cover, storm systems, temperature and
humidity, and polar ice for weather forecasters.¶ The 6,124-pound Meteor M2 satellite launched at
1558:28 GMT (11:58:28 a.m. EDT) from Site 31 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, where it
was 9:58 p.m. local time.¶ A Soyuz 2-1b rocket -- a modernized version of the venerable Russian launcher
-- and a Fregat upper stage were programmed to reach a temporary parking orbit about 11 minutes
after liftoff. The hydrazine-fueled Fregat engine fired two times before deploying the Meteor M2
weather observatory about an hour after launch in a sun-synchronous orbit more than 500 miles above
Earth at an inclination of 98.8 degrees.¶ The Fregat upper stage reduced its altitude before releasing a
small Russian space weather research satellite. A fourth ignition of the Fregat engine set up for
separation of five other satellites in a circular orbit with an altitude of about 390 miles.¶ Russian planned
a live video stream of the launch on the Internet, but officials announced less than an hour before liftoff
there would be no webcast.¶ Designed for a five-year mission, the Meteor M2 weather satellite is the
second in a series of upgraded observatories owned by the Russian government. Its launch Tuesday
came nearly five years after the launch of the Meteor M1 satellite, which is still operational, according
to Roscosmos, the Russian Federal Space Agency.¶ Meteor M2 will collect timely global information for
weather forecasting, monitor the ozone layer and the radiation environment in near-Earth space,
measure sea surface temperatures, and track ice in the polar regions to aid navigation.¶ The spacecraft's
six instruments include multi-channel cameras, a microwave radiometer and infrared sounder to
measure temperature and moisture in the atmosphere, an X-band radar payload to detect ice, snow and
vegetation, and a radiation detector to probe the environment around the satellite.¶ Meteor M2 also
carries a radio system to relay data from remote weather stations and ocean buoys on the ground,
according to NPO VNIIEM, the satellite's manufacturer.¶ The satellite will supply data on global weather
systems, helping meteorologists craft forecasts.
Russia SMR
Russia is developing the most advanced SMR tech—new commercialization projects
and 10 times more funding than the US
Deign 13 [Jason, writer at Nuclear Energy Insider, which is a leading provider of business intelligence to
the nuclear energy community, “Floating SMR: Russia’s answer to flexible low maintenance nuclear
power?”, 12/4/13, http://analysis.nuclearenergyinsider.com/small-modular-reactors/floating-smrrussia%E2%80%99s-answer-flexible-low-maintenance-nuclear-power] alla
While the US remains the most promising market for SMR development and installation, Russia is
making waves with its barge-based technology. It might just be the added-value proposition of low
maintenance and no decommissioning that is the clincher.¶ Russia is quite literally pushing the boat
out with small modular reactor (SMR) technology. Earlier this year, World Nuclear News reported on
how Rosenergoatom, Russia’s state-owned manufacturer, had put two reactors onto a barge in Saint
Petersburg after four years of testing.¶ The barge-based plant is intended to set sail for northeast
Russia’s Chukotka Peninsula, in the East Siberian Sea, to serve mining interests close to the Arctic,
according to reports.¶ But Russia, which is working on a number of SMR variants, clearly expects to
be able to commercialise its floating designs abroad, too .¶ “The Russian business model, as I
understand it, is that they will simply tow in a 40MWe unit, connect it to your drop line, and provide you
with power for up to three years,” says Jay Harris, an SMR consultant based in Canada.¶ “They will either
charge you a flat rate to provide the capacity and availability for the power, or use a per-kilowatt-hour
fixed price model. When the unit requires service or refuelling, they tow in a new unit and disconnect
the old one.Ӧ Old reactors will return to a centralised service yard in Russia, he adds, so as well as
having no upfront cost the electricity customer does not have to deal with spent fuel issues or even
outages.¶ No decommissioning¶ “Costs are fixed and availability is known,” says Harris. “You don’t have
to worry about finding financing, cost overruns, delays or finding labour. They do everything. You just
pay them for the power you use, or the power available. Also, no decommissioning. They just tow the
unit back.Ӧ This plug-and-play, pay-as-you-go simplicity contrasts sharply with the situation in the
world’s biggest SMR development market, the USA. There, plenty of companies are working on SMR
technologies, but few are finding the path towards commercialisation easy.¶ In September, for example,
General Atomics presented plans for a so-called Energy Multiplier Module the size of a school bus, using
depleted uranium with helium cooling to operate for 30 years without refuelling.¶ General Atomics
claims the module, which is designed to be placed underground in sealed containment, has a 53%
efficiency, twice that of current light water SMR designs.¶ SMR development in the US took a step
forward in 2012 when the Department of Energy (DoE) agreed to pick up half the five-year cost of
designing, licensing and commercialising a design.¶ Babcock & Wilcox won the race to pick up the DoE’s
Licensing Technical Support Program, to the chagrin of competitors such as Westinghouse, NuScale
Power, Gen4 Energy and SMR.¶ Funding opportunity¶ However, all these developers will get another bite
of the cherry with a second, USD$452m DoE funding opportunity that is due to close by year-end.¶ While
such moves would appear to put the US in good stead as far as SMR development is concerned, US
vendors face a challenge because they are essentially trying to commercialise new technologies.¶ In
contrast, the Russians are hawking a tried-and-tested technology, according to Harris. “These units are
based on existing naval reactors, and have many millions of hours of operating experience between
their navy and their icebreaking vessels. It is an existing reactor, not a paper one.Ӧ That said, there are
also a number of drawbacks with the Russian design. One is its size. The Russian KLT-40S product
currently being commercialised, for example, yields 35MWe, making it primarily suitable for off-grid
applications.¶ The mPower reactor being designed by Babcock & Wilcox in association with Bechtel and
Tennessee Valley Authority, meanwhile, weighs in at between 125 and 180MWe, giving it major grid
potential. Westinghouse is looking at a 225MWe design.¶ Another challenge for Russia’s SMRs is that
they are water-cooled reactors and so require active cooling, potentially increasing the chances of a
failure.¶ In a post-Fukushima world, it is also uncertain how barge-mounted reactors could cope with
beyond design-basis accidents such as aircraft crashes.¶ Radiation releases¶ Theoretically, if a barge sinks
the reactor would be passively cooled by the surrounding water, although this is unlikely to be of much
comfort to communities that might be affected by water-borne radiation releases.¶ “I think some of the
old Soviet-influenced zones might be interested for installations on their sea coasts,” says Harris. “I
highly doubt any mainland European nations would tolerate such a unit just because of it being a
Russian reactor.Ӧ This is an opinion and does not necessarily portray what could someday form into an
internationally regarded and regulated product in emerging markets. Notably, nothing has yet to
prevent US SMR advocates from being frustrated by Russia’s carefree progress towards
commercialisation. ¶ Mark Lewis, an energy consultant for the state administration in Arizona, says: “It
is annoying to me that the Russians are pouring major research and development into this non-carbon
power source and the US is spending one tenth of others’ research and development budgets.¶
Russia is developing floating nuclear power now—past experience with nuclear tech in
oceanic conditions
RT 13 [RT is an international multilingual Russian-based television network, “World’s first floating
nuclear power plant to begin operating in Russia in 2016”, 7/9/13, http://rt.com/news/floating-nuclearplant-russia-759/] alla
In three years, Russia will have the world’s first floating nuclear power plant , capable of providing
energy and heat to hard-to-get areas as well as drinking water to arid regions.¶ The unique vessel should
be operational by 2016, the general director of Russia’s biggest shipbuilders, the Baltic Plant, Aleksandr
Voznesensky told reporters at the 6th International Naval Show in St. Petersburg. ¶ The Akademik
Lomonosov is to become the spearhead of a series of floating nuclear power plants, which Russia plans
to put into mass-production. ¶ The floating power-generating unit, aimed at providing energy to large
industrial enterprises, port cities and offshore gas and oil-extracting platforms, was designed on the
basis of nuclear reactors which are equipped on the icebreakers ships. The technology has proved itself
for over 50 years of successful operation in extreme Arctic conditions. ¶ The floating power plant is a
vessel with a displacement of 21,500 tons and a crew of 69 people. It’s non-self-propelled and therefore
has to be towed to the desired destination. ¶ Each ship will have two modified KLT-40 naval propulsion
reactors together providing up to 70 MW of electricity or 300 MW of heat, which is enough for a city
with a population of 200,000 people. ¶ The floating nuclear power plants are expected to be used in
remote regions of Russia’s high north and Far East, which currently see economic growth suffering from
a lack of energy. ¶ For export purposes, the floating power plant can also be modified as a desalination
plant able to produce 240,000 cubic meters of fresh water on a daily basis. ¶ 15 countries, including
China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Algeria, Namibia, Cape Verde and Argentina, have previously expressed
interest in acquiring such power stations.¶ The manufacturer stresses that the process of fuel
enrichment on the vessels complies with the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) dealing with nonproliferation of nuclear arms. ¶ Like every atomic station the floating power plant
is designed with a safety margin, exceeding any possible threats, which makes the reactors invulnerable
to tsunami waves or crashes with other ships or on-land structures. ¶ The power-generating unit is to be
replaced by a new one after 40 years, with the used reactor returned to a specialized facility for reutilization. ¶ The vessels are said to be safe for the environment as they don’t release any hazardous
substances during operation. ¶ The construction of the maiden floating nuclear power station, Akademik
Lomonosov, began in 2007 at the Sevmash Submarine-Building Plant in Severodvinsk. ¶ A year later it
was transferred to the Baltic Plant, but was stalled for the last two years due to a lack of financing. ¶ The
new deal to finalize the construction of a floating power unit for the floating nuclear power plant was
signed between the Baltic plant and the Russiam state Rosenergoatom company in December 2012.
Russia solves floating nuclear power plants—conforms to international safety
regulations
Singh 13 [Timon, is a graduate of Liverpool University where he received a degree in Social and
Economic History, “Russia Develops World's First Floating Nuclear Power Plant, The Akademik
Lomonosov”, 11/4/13, http://inhabitat.com/russia-develops-worlds-first-floating-nuclear-power-plantthe-akademik-lomonosov/] alla
Russia has announced that the world’s first floating nuclear plant will be online by 2019. Shipping
corporation LLC Baltiysky Zavod Shipbuilding and the state nuclear power company Rosenergoatom
have joined forces to construct the Akademik Lomonosov despite ongoing struggles at the Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Plant in Japan.¶ The first-of-its-kind ship will contain a pair of small nuclear KLT-40 naval
propulsion reactors that will be capable of generating up to 70 megawatts (MW) of electricity. This is
enough to provide electricity, heat and desalinated water to a city of 200,000 people.¶ Construction on
the Akademik Lomonosov began on 15 April 2007 at the Sevmash Submarine-Building Plant in
Severodvinsk. The ship is estimated to cost $232 million and when it becomes operational will supply
power to Severodvinsk town and Sevmash itself.¶ In 2019, when it launches, the 472ft long ship will be
crewed by 69 people, who will monitor the on-board reactors.¶ Of course, there are certain safety
concerns about what is essentially a mobile nuclear device, but instead of using highly enriched uranium
like traditional Russian icebreakers’ reactors, the Akademic Lomonosov’s units will be modified to run on
lightly enriched uranium that conform to the International Atomic Energy Commission rules aimed at
preventing fuel from being stolen and diverted for use in nuclear weapons.¶ The ship’s owner has also
said that the reactors would be “resilient in a disaster,” though they don’t cite what these disasters
would be.¶ The floating power station would provide power and heat to isolated consumers in remote
areas that do not have centralized power supply. In Russia, there are many large population centers and
ports in the Arctic and the Far East coast, not to mention mineral deposits and military bases that would
benefit from the energy.¶
Russian Deep Ocean Exploration
Russian deep ocean submersibles solve ocean exploration—98% of the ocean is
observable
NOAA 13 [The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is a scientific agency within the
United States Department of Commerce focused on the conditions of the oceans and the atmosphere,
“The Marvelous Mirs”, 4/16/13, http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/technology/subs/mir/mir.html] alla
The Mir I and Mir II are battery-powered, three-person submersibles with a maximum operating depth
of 6,000 m (20,000 ft). This deep-diving capability ranks the Mir vehicles among the deepest diving
submersibles ever built, and gives them the capability to reach approximately 98% of the ocean floor.¶
The Mirs allow scientists to observe the deep sea through multiple view ports, video records,
instrument placement, sample collecting, and environmental monitoring. The submersibles are
launched and recovered with a specialized crane from the starboard side of their primary support vessel
the Research Vessel Akademik Mstislav Keldysh.¶ The Keldysh has the advantage of having access to two
deep-diving submersibles at the same time. This allows one submersible to conduct science dives while
the other remains in "ready" status in case of an emergency. For example, if the working sub were to get
stuck at the bottom of the ocean or trapped in abandoned fishing nets, the second sub could be
launched and rushed to the site, where it could work to free the first sub. Then too, some research
projects benefit from the concurrent use of both submersibles. Indirect lighting of subjects, such as
shipwrecks, is a special task best completed by the Mirs in tandem.¶ Each submersible is 7.8 m long and
weighs 18.6 tons. The personnel sphere of each sub is just over 2 m in diameter and is made of a 5-cmthick combination of nickel and steel. The pilot and crew spend a long time in that small sphere, as the
Mirs descend and ascend at the rather slow rate of 35-40 m/min. Reaching the full depth of 6,000 m can
take more than 2 hrs! Once on the bottom, the Mirs can travel at up to 5 knots thanks to their large
maneuverable propellers. Smaller steering propellers are located on each side. An adjustable ballast
system allows the pilot to control the submersible’s buoyancy and hover over the bottom like an
underwater helicopter.¶ To observe the ocean, the crew can peer out of a huge viewing port. While
looking out the window is great, the primary data that come from submersible dives are videos. Six
5,000-watt lights allow for excellent filmmaking. Scientists are not the only ones to employ the Mirs in
underwater filming. Director James Cameron used them to make his blockbuster Titanic, and they have
also been used for IMAX films.¶ In addition to video capabilities, both submersibles have versatile
manipulator arms. A skilled pilot can use the arms to collect biological and geological samples. The arms
are also used for many other tasks. They include placing small temperature recorders into hydrothermal
vents, and gently pushing the sub backward when the pilot wants to avoid stirring up sediments with
the thrusters.¶ In recent years, the Mir submersibles have continually been at the forefront of deepocean exploration . They have been used to survey and document submerged World War II vessels such
as the German battleship Bismarck and Japanese submarine I-52, and the Russian nuclear submarines
Kursk and Komsomolets. In 2007, the Mirs were part of an international expedition to reach the North
Pole seafloor, and in 2008-2009 they were used extensively to study Lake Baikal, the world’s oldest and
deepest body of fresh water.¶ Just like the Russian space station with which they share their name, the
marvelous Mir submersibles are valuable tools for exploring the unknown.
The Mir submersibles can withstand the depth and cold of the North Pole’s waters—
Russian tech solves deep ocean observation
Broad 8 [William J., is a science journalist and senior writer at The New York Times. He shared two
Pulitzer Prizes with his colleagues, as well as an Emmy Award and a DuPont Award, “Russian Scientists
Honored for Exploration of Arctic Seabed”, 3/18/08,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/science/18pola.html?_r=0’] alla
Move over, polar bears. The standard view of Arctic life is changing after a team led by Russian scientists
plunged through pack ice around the North Pole last August and descended more than two miles
through pitch darkness to the ocean bottom. They accomplished the historic first in twin submersibles.
Hovering above the ooze, lights blazing, the explorers found a previously hidden world of Arctic life,
including wiggling fish with long tails, fields of burrowing sea anemones and shrimp-like crustaceans that
danced beneath the bright lights.¶ “A world that had forever lain in complete darkness” is how the team
described the eerie panorama.¶ The team recently submitted an 18-page report on the dive to the
Explorers Club, which honored the expedition’s chief scientist on Saturday night in New York.¶ The
findings help discredit the old view of the deep ocean as a biological desert. Instead, though dark and
frigid, it turns out to seethe with life, even miles beneath the pole’s frozen wastelands.¶ The team dived
in Moscow’s twin submersibles. The size of small trucks, both are named Mir, Russian for peace.¶ Each
Mir has a superstrong personnel sphere that protects a pilot and two observers, and each sphere has
tiny portholes designed to withstand the crushing pressures of the deep sea so occupants can peer out.
Typically, a dive into the abyss is an all-day affair, requiring hours to and from the bottom.
AT: RT=Biased
AT : RT=Biased
Abbruzzese 14 [Jason, is a Business Reporter at Mashable, Mashable is a British-American news
website, technology and social media blog, “Russia's English-Language TV Channel: We're Biased and So
Are You”, 3/5/14, http://mashable.com/2014/03/05/rt-russian-english-tv/] alla
RT, the Russian government-funded English-language television channel, presents its country’s view of
the world.¶ So, it claims, does every other broadcaster. RT is just honest enough to admit it.¶ “Media
outlets do not exist in a vacuum. Can you really expect any American corporate-owned news network to
report a story in a way that goes against the U.S. national interest? Or Euronews to not advocate
[European Commission] positions?” said Margarita Simonyan, who has led the editorial side of RT since
its inception in 2004 as Russia Today. The Ukranian conflict has put RT in the spotlight like never before
in its nine-year history. RT portrays its coverage as reflective of the Russian perspective on this topic.
Some U.S. news media outlets charge RT is merely disseminating propaganda and oddball stories like
action star Steven Seagal’s recent media critique.¶ BuzzFeed noted other examples including a report
that labeled Russian military a “stabilizing force for Ukraine" and supposed Ukranian appeals to a
Chechen terrorist.¶ The attention was compounded earlier this week when Abby Martin, an RT anchor,
delivered a Network-like rant against Russia's role in the conflict. “Russia was wrong,” said Martin, from
RT's Washington bureau headquarters. Martin's tirade was followed by an emotional on-air resignation
by another RT anchor, Liz Wahl. Wahl said she couldn't stand "whitewashing" Russian President Vladimir
Putin's actions anymore.¶ RT issued a statement about Wahl's resignation to Mashable, published below,
that read in part: "When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the
usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to
quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing
more than a self-promotional stunt."¶ Though there are rare parallels in U.S. journalism of high-profile
journalists questioning their government — like Walter Cronkite's 1968 advocacy of a Vietnam pullout
— such sentiment is highly unusual for any anchor, much less one from a state-owned media company.¶
George Galloway, a British minister of parliament who also hosts a show on RT, said media watchers
shouldn't be shocked that RT has a different way of looking at the world than most Americans — and
even its own American anchors.¶ “Every television station has its own bias. You are talking to me from
the land of Fox News , so most of this kind of criticism is completely hollow as far as I’m concerned,”
said Galloway. “Every state broadcaster like the BBC supports the prevailing view, the prevailing
orthodoxy of its state. RT is no different in that regard.Ӧ If RT's goal is to disperse propaganda, it's doing
so under the pretext of a mainstream news outlet. Even amidst the latest sturm and drang over Ukraine,
RT comes across in most ways like a straightforward news outlet, albeit one that leans more to the left
than most when it comes to U.S. topics.¶ Originally called Russia Today, the company rebranded to RT in
2009. Simoyan said the move was an attempt to broaden the channel's audience and not meant to hide
its Russian origins.¶ While the homepage is particularly heavy on Ukraine news right now, it also features
stories on Facebook’s drone efforts, an air race world championship and Brazil celebrating the first day
of Carnival in Brazil.¶ Unlike stereotypical Soviet-era media like TASS or Pravda, RT coverage has earned
somewhat of a reputation for journalistic integrity. It's been nominated for various awards including an
International Emmy for its Occupy Wall Street Coverage. The channel also recently inked a deal to
feature Larry King’s online talk shows.¶ In addition, RT has massive reach, beaming to some 644 million
people in more than 100 countries. It has also found some success with its YouTube channel, which hit 1
billion views in June. In comparison, CNN’s channel sits just below 350 million. It has a headcount of
around 2,000 globally with about 100 in its Washington D.C. bureau.¶ Funding for the channel comes
from the Russian government. That's a fairly unusual arrangement in the U.S., but not abroad, where
other outlets, including the BBC, have been government funded and editorially independent, Simonyan
said.
Russia DA Link
Plan encroaches on Russia’s Influence in the Arctic—increased competition over
resources and military buildup
Mitchell 14 [Jon, is an independent writer working to cultivate experience in foreign policy and
political-military analysis. He is pursuing his Master’s degree in public policy, with a concentration in
international affairs, “Russia’s Territorial Ambition and Increased Military Presence in the Arctic”
4/23/14, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2014/04/23/russias-territorial-ambition-and-increasedmilitary-presence-in-the-arctic/] alla
As the U.S. and E.U. keep a very close eye on the situation with Russia and Ukraine, Russia is also
increasing its presence and influence elsewhere: the Arctic – a melting region that is opening up prime
shipping lanes and real estate with an estimated $1 trillion in hydrocarbons.[1] With the opening of two
major shipping routes, the North Sea route and the Northwest Passage, the potential for economic
competition is fierce, especially among the eight members of the Arctic council: Canada, Denmark,
Norway, Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Russia, and the United States.[2]¶ President Putin made statements
this week concerning Russia’s national interests in the Arctic region: chiefly, militarization and the
preparation of support elements for commercial shipping routes.[3] The Russian President called for full
government funding for “socio-economic development” from 2017-2020, including a system of Russian
naval bases that would be home to ships and submarines allocated specifically for the defense of
national interests that involve the protection of Russian oil and gas facilities in the Arctic.[4] Russia is
also attempting to accelerate the construction of more icebreakers to take part in its Arctic strategy.[5]¶
The Russian Federation recently staked a territorial claim in the Sea of Okhotsk for 52,000 square
kilometers,[6] and is currently preparing an Arctic water claim for 1.2 million square kilometers.[7] The
energy giant owns 43 of the approximate 60 hydrocarbon deposits in the Arctic Circle.[8] With Russian
energy companies already developing hydrocarbon deposits and expanding border patrols on its Arctic
sea shelf (in place by July 1, 2014),[9] Putin is actively pursuing a strong approach to the Arctic region.
Russian oil fields, which significantly contribute to the country’s revenue, are in decline – forcing Russian
oil companies to actively explore the Arctic region.[10] While the U.S. Defense Secretary called for a
peaceful and stable Arctic region with international cooperation, the Arctic has created increased
militarization efforts, particularly by Russia.¶ Already the Arctic has seen powerful warships of Russia’s
Northern Fleet, strategic bomber patrols, and airborne troop exercises.[11] In fact, Russian military
forces have been permanently stationed in the Arctic since summer 2013.[12] According to a source in
the Russian General Staff, a new military command titled Northern Fleet – Joint Strategic Command, will
be created and tasked to protect Russian interests in its Arctic territories; a strategy that was approved
in 2009.[13] Furthermore, weapons developers are being tasked with creating products that can face
the harsh Arctic environment. According to an RT report, “Putin ordered the head of the Russian arms
industry, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, to concentrate the efforts on creation of Arctic
infrastructure for the soonest deployment of troops. Rogozin reported that all Russian weapons systems
can be produced with special features needed in the extreme North and the weapons companies were
ready to supply such arms to the Defense Ministry.”[14]¶ The “Arctic infrastructure” that Rogozin refers
to will include Navy and Border Guard Service bases.[15] These bases are part of Putin’s aim to
strengthen Russian energy companies and military positions in the Arctic region. In 2013, a formerly
closed down base was reopened in the Novosibirsk Islands and is now home to 10 military ships and
four icebreakers – a move that Reuters called “a demonstration of force. ”[16] The Defense Ministry is
also planning on bringing seven airstrips in the Arctic back to life.[17]¶ Russia’s militarization in the
Arctic region is only a part of its increasing activity throughout the globe. Vice Prime Minister Dmitry
Rogozin said, “It’s crucially important for us to set goals for our national interests in this region. If we
don’t do that, we will lose the battle for resources which means we’ll also lose in a big battle for the
right to have sovereignty and independence.”[18] On the contrary, Aleksandr Gorban, a representative
of the Russian Foreign Ministry is quoted saying that a “war for resources”[19] in the Arctic will never
happen.¶ But what was once a more hands-off region of the world that provided international
cooperation and stability is now turning into a race for sovereignty and resources claims – as evidenced
not only by Russia’s increasing military presence, but also Canada and the United States. Canada is now
allocating part of its defense budget towards armed ships that will patrol its part of the Arctic Circle,[20]
while the United States has planned a strategy of its own. In addition to conducting military exercises
with other Arctic nation members, the U.S. Navy has proposed a strategy titled The United States Navy
Arctic Roadmap for 2014 to 2030 that was released in February 2014. The 2013 National Strategy for the
Arctic Region, cited in the Arctic Roadmap, provides the Navy’s two specific objectives for the Arctic: 1)
advance United States’ security interests; and 2) strengthen international cooperation.[21] According to
the strategy, the Navy’s role will primarily be in support of search and rescue, law enforcement, and civil
support operations.[22] However, this may grow to a more militarized strategy depending on the U.S.
government’s view of Russia’s increased military activity in the Arctic region over the next few years. In
either case, the U.S. is falling behind in Arctic preparation. It has very few operational icebreakers for
the Arctic region where its only primary presence is seen through nuclear submarines and unmanned
aerial vehicles, according to an RT article.[23] Until 2020, the Navy will primarily use its submarines and
limited air assets in the Arctic, while its mid-term and far-term strategy emphasizes personnel, surface
ships, submarines, and air assets that will be prepared for Arctic conditions and operations.[24] Despite
its mid and long-term strategy, the U.S. will already be lagging in establishing a military presence to
compete with Russia’s, who already has strategies in motion until 2020 and later.¶ Last month, former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called for a united Canadian-U.S. counterbalance to Russia’s Arctic
presence, pointing out “they have been aggressively reopening military bases.”[25] While the U.S.
cannot legitimately criticize Putin for opening military bases and simultaneously avoid blatant hypocrisy,
it is worth noting that Russia is developing a strong military presence in a potentially competitive
region . Russia’s plans to reopen bases and create an Arctic military command fosters the conclusion
that Russia wants to be the first established dominant force in a new region that will host economic
competition and primary shipping lanes, albeit in a harsh environment that makes it difficult to extract
resources. Nicholas Cunningham aptly stated “both Russia and the West fear losing out to the other in
the far north, despite what appears to be a small prize.”[26]¶ Although the Arctic holds a mass of the
world’s oil and gas deposits, the extreme environment and remote location makes it difficult to produce
energy quickly and efficiently. Despite this, the Russian Federation is focused on developing disputed
hydrocarbon areas that it claims are part of the country’s continental shelf. In addition, Russia is
allocating funds and forces to the Arctic to protect its interests. While the U.S. is currently lacking in
natural resource development and exploitation in the Arctic Circle, it desires to display a show of
strength in the cold region to compete with potential Russian domination and influence. But because
the Defense Department faces constant budget cuts, preparing an Arctic naval force will be slow and
difficult. For now, the United States can only show strength through nuclear submarines and drone
technology.¶ Putin and the Russian Federation are laying disputed claims to territories both inside and
outside the Arctic while creating the foundation for a potential military buildup in the Arctic – provided
that the U.S. and Canada can even allocate sufficient budgets for Arctic military expansion. One thing is
sure: if the Arctic region continues to melt and open up vital shipping lanes, there must be international
cooperation to provide security and rescue elements for commercial shipping. Since Russia has
significant territorial claims and the most coastlines in the Arctic Circle, it would be natural for the
Russian Federation to have a wide security presence in the region, but this must be coupled with
international cooperation in commercial shipping lanes and by providing support elements, such as
search and rescue. The United States will not be able to fully compete with a country that is heavily
investing in the Arctic region – particularly due to budget constraints and lack of Arctic-prepared vessels.
If the U.S. desires to limit Russian influence and territorial claims, it must do so by partnering with other
members of the Arctic council – not by entering into a military buildup simply to dominate Russia in the
Arctic.
Canada CP Solvency
Generic development
Canadian firms solve ocean development - superior technology and firms
DFO 14 [fisheries and oceans Canada has the lead federal role in managing Canada’s fisheries and
safeguarding its waters. The Canadian Coast Guard (CCG), a Special Operating Agency within DFO, is
responsible for services and programs that contribute to the safety, security, and accessibility of
Canada’s waterways. “oceans action plan” http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/publications/oappao/page05-eng.asp] (sakin)
Canadian firms have established themselves as world leaders in oceans technology niches. To fully
employ Canadian ingenuity and to secure markets, which will allow this industry to prosper, the
Government needs to provide a supportive environment for the development and commercialization of
oceans technology. There is a tremendous opportunity to turn the government’s need for technology solutions that arise from the other
three pillars of the Oceans Action Plan into business and commercial opportunities, especially for coastal communities. The Marine and Ocean
Industry Technology Roadmap provides a vision for development of technologies that will help address . The
Roadmap outlines
actions to develop technology and emphasizes sustainability. The ocean technology industry comprises
many small and medium-sized firms as well as regionally-based research and development
organizations. The marketplace is moving toward integrated technology-based solutions, and Canadian firms will need partnerships with
each other to increase their capacity to respond. [PHOTO: Deep Worker L Deep Rover R(b)]There is a need to network with coastal communities
to achieve economic development, ensure economy of scale for small-to-medium size firms, and capitalize on the current market. Ocean
science and technology networks and organizations, as well as Research Council institutions,
government labs, and consortia of private firms are emerging as focal points for information-sharing,
and innovation. Development and demonstration are critical to research and development and commercialization. Working relationships
with firms and research institutes are needed to establish needs, define applications and demonstrate new technologies. The
government, as a main user and purchaser of oceans technologies, can also foster and support the
commercialization of new technologies. The Oceans Action Plan supports the development and
implementation of a technology demonstration platform to facilitate wireless transmission of key
oceanographic information for integrated management and for modeling systems. The regional
economic development agencies – Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Western Economic
Diversification, and Canada Economic Development for Quebec, as well as Industry Canada, the National
Research Council, granting councils, and other technology development programs can also support the
Oceans Action Plan and facilitate the development of the oceans industry sector. The Industry Portfolio has been
actively working to encourage small and medium sized business innovation. With increased focus and coordination, more can be done to
position Canadian companies to create next generation technologies aimed at an expanding international oceans market.
Generic Exploration
Canada has best Ocean exploration tech in the world
Douglas 09 [Business Magazine “ NEPTUNE Canada Ocean Observatory Goes LiveNEPTUNE Canada
Ocean Observatory Goes Live” http://www.douglasmagazine.com/headlines/362-neptune-canadaocean-observatory-goes-live.htmlhttp://www.douglasmagazine.com/headlines/362-neptune-canadaocean-observatory-goes-live.html]
VICTORIA - A
new era of ocean exploration has begun. Today, the NEPTUNE Canada cabled ocean
observatory—the largest and most advanced facility of its kind in the world—officially turned on the
data flow from hundreds of scientific instruments and sensors installed on the seafloor of the Pacific Ocean.
Led by the University of Victoria, NEPTUNE Canada pioneers a new generation of ocean observation systems that
use innovative engineering and the Internet to provide continuous, long-term monitoring of ocean
processes and events, as they happen. “This is a tremendous leap forward for global ocean science and
technology,” says Dr. David Turpin, president of the University of Victoria. “Thanks to the vision and dedication of a talented team of
scientists and engineers, and ongoing investments by governments and funding partners, we now have unprecedented access to the deep
ocean.”
Every year for the next 25 years, NEPTUNE Canada will amass more than 60 terabytes of scientific
data—equivalent to the text in about 60 million books—on biological, physical, chemical and geological
processes in the Pacific Ocean. The data will have policy applications in the areas of climate change,
hazard mitigation (earthquakes and tsunamis), ocean pollution, port security and shipping, resource
development, sovereignty and security, and ocean management. The observatory’s cutting-edge
technologies are already generating commercialization and job creation opportunities, and are
attracting considerable attention from other countries building or planning similar facilities. “One small click
of a mouse—one giant leap toward ocean discoveries that will benefit the entire world,” says Iain Black, Minister of Small Business, Technology
and Economic Development, who officially turned on the data flow at the event. “From creating jobs for British Columbians and protecting the
environment to exploring resources under the ocean floor, NEPTUNE Canada is an example of our province leading through innovation.” “It is a
matter of national pride that the world’s largest undersea observatory has been built in Canadian seas for Canadian researchers, and CANARIE
is honoured to be supporting this important initiative,” says Guy Bujold, president of CANARIE. “Our
advanced technology and tools
will help enhance NEPTUNE Canada’s success on the research, educational and environmental fronts.” A
curious rattail fish, or grenadier, supervises the installation of a seismometer more than 2.6 km below
the surface. “The science community is driving a new era of ocean exploration and discovery,” says NEPTUNE
Canada project director Dr. Chris Barnes. “We’re overjoyed to bring online the world’s first regional cabled ocean observatory. The fire hose of
real-time data will increase as we add more instruments next summer.” The
Government of Canada, through the Canada
Foundation for Innovation (CFI), recently committed $24 million over the next two years to support the
operating requirements of NEPTUNE Canada and its sister observatory, VENUS. The development of NEPTUNE Canada has
been funded by more than $100 million from the Government of Canada through CFI, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
and CANARIE, and the Government of British Columbia through the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund.
Tidal energy
Canada has the beast geography and currents for tidal energy.
MRC 13 [Marine renewable energy of Canada “Marine Renewable Energy in Canada & the Global
Context state of the sector report http://www.marinerenewables.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2012/11/State-of-the-Canadian-MRE-Sector-20131.pdf] (sakin)
Tidal In Canada the best sites for tapping tidal currents are located in coastal lagoons, estuaries, and
narrow passages between islands. An assessment of Canada’s marine renewable energy resources
identified 191 sites having potential mean power estimated to be greater than 1 MW.22 Nunavut,
British Columbia, and Nova Scotia had the greatest number of sites. Not all of the sites identified are
ideal because of distance from an electrical grid, year-round climate (ice), or distance from a centre of
demand, but there are many that could service remote and rural community needs as well as more
populated areas. For example, the Bay of Fundy has sites that are close to areas with electricity demand
and have proximity to the electrical grid. These attributes as well as the shear energy potential of the
Bay of Fundy make it one of the best tidal energy locations in the world. Studies conducted by the
Electric Power Research Institute in 2006 originally estimated that about 300 MW could be safely
extracted from the Minas Basin and Minas Passage areas of the Bay of Fundy.23 More recently,
assessments conducted by Dr. Richard Karsten at Acadia University indicate that there may be greater
resource potential in the Bay of Fundy. For example, the assessment found that in the Minas Passage, a
narrow 5-kilometer span between Cape Split, Kings County and Parrsboro, Cumberland County, the
channeling of the water results in as much as 7,000 MW of extractable power, 2,500 MW of which could
be extracted using tidal devices with less than a 6% change in the tides locally and afar24
.
MPA’s
Canada Marine Protected Areas are sufficient
DFO 14 [fisheries and oceans Canada has the lead federal role in managing Canada’s fisheries and
safeguarding its waters. The Canadian Coast Guard (CCG), a Special Operating Agency within DFO, is
responsible for services and programs that contribute to the safety, security, and accessibility of
Canada’s waterways. “oceans action plan” http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/publications/oappao/page05-eng.asp] (sakin)
Marine Protected Areas Fisheries and Oceans Canada contributes to the Network through the
establishment of MPAs under the Oceans Act. DFO also focuses on areas of interest that are at various
stages of progress towards designation. These areas are ecologically significant, with species and/or
properties that require special consideration. Fisheries and Oceans Canada designates marine protected
areas under the Oceans Act in order to protect and conserve: commercial and non-commercial fishery resources and
their habitats; endangered marine species and their habitats; unique habitats; marine areas of high biodiversity or biological productivity; and
any other marine resource or habitat necessary to fulfill the Minister’s mandate. MPA
Approach and Process Establishing
marine protected areas (MPAs) within the context of integrated oceans management provides a
mechanism for taking into account stakeholder input as well as broader ecological, social, cultural and
economic considerations. It also provides an opportunity to reinforce conservation measures with
complementary management regimes implemented in surrounding areas, including linkages with broader
ecosystem objectives, as well as land-based initiatives such as habitat protection and enhancement, pollution control, land use controls and the
establishment of coastal terrestrial parks. This
approach of nesting MPAs within broader planning initiatives helps
maintain the integrity and long-term viability of the MPA and maximize the conservation effectiveness
of all MPA planning processes.
Nat gas
Canada natural gas mining solves. Canada has a ton of it
CPP 14 [Canadian Petroleum Producers “natural
gas”http://www.capp.ca/canadaIndustry/naturalGas/Pages/default.aspx]
Natural gas is an abundant and a naturally occurring resource in Canada. The Resource: Natural Gas
Canada is the world’s fifth largest producer of natural gas with production of 13.9 billion cubic feet per
day. Natural gas mainly consists of methane and other gas types. Wells are drilled into the ground to
remove the gas. From there, the natural gas is transported through pipelines to a plant where it is
processed (liquids and gases are separated) and is then transported to consumers for use in products
like plastics or heating. Courtesy JuneWarren PublicationsNatural gas exists in many different
formations, some harder to access than others. Shale gas, which is gas that’s stored in shale rock
formations, and natural gas from coal, which is gas found in coal deposits, also known as coalbed
methane, are two types of natural gas that are found in different formations. Natural gas is an abundant
and a naturally occurring petroleum product in Canada. British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, Nova Scotia
and the Northwest Territories all have significant natural gas resources. Our industry is also exploring
natural gas reserves in offshore Nova Scotia, along with shale gas in northeastern British Columbia and
Quebec.
Canada has more than enough natural gas –studies
Vanderklippe 12 [ Reporter for the Globe “Canada home to a century's worth of natural gas”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/canadahome-to-a-centurys-worth-of-natural-gas/article597794/]
Canada has enough natural gas to maintain its current output for a full century, according to new data
compiled by the Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas. In a country that consumes 2.6 trillion cubic
feet (tcf) of natural gas a year, 4,000 tcf of the fuel are buried beneath Canada's foothills, plains and
lowlands, the society found after conducting a broad, coast-to-coast survey. Of that, between 700 and
1,300 tcf can be brought to surface and sold, the society estimates. "The magnitude of these numbers
may blow you away," said society president Mike Dawson, as he presented the figures to an industry
audience Wednesday. "We have an awful lot of natural gas potential lying within the country." That is
both a blessing and curse to an industry that requires long-term reserves to preserve its bottom line, but
is struggling with gas prices that have been hammered by a supply gut. Canada currently produces far
more natural gas than it uses - about five to six tcf a year - and exports the remainder to the U.S. Even
accounting for those exports, the society's estimates show the country is home to enough gas to
continue pumping at today's rates for over 100 years.
Methane
Canada has enormous potential to develop Methane Hydrates
CBC 13 [ CBC news “ Canada drops out of race to tap methane hydrates”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/canada-drops-out-of-race-to-tap-methane-hydrates-1.1358966]
Canada has confirmed reserves of methane hydrates in the Mackenzie River Delta, the Arctic
Archipelago and along the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. According to a 2012 study from the University of Alberta and the
Geological Survey of Canada, the total amount of methane gas in Canada is measured in trillions of cubic metres.
Estimates put methane hydrates at anywhere from two to 30 times the amount of conventional natural
gas present in the country. In spite of that potential volume, the recent technological breakthrough
permitting deposits to be tapped, and a successful research record, Canada has lost interest in
commercializing this vast source of energy. Paul Duchesne, manager of media relationships for Natural Resources Canada, told
CBC News in an email that growing interest in shale gas and low prices for conventional sources of natural gas make energy from methane
hydrates non-competitive.
Desalination
Canada has the best desalination technologies and the new energy efficient forward
osmosis methods
Hamilton 13 [Tyler Hamilton, author of Mad Like Tesla, writes weekly about green energy and clean
technologiesTyler Hamilton, author of Mad Like Tesla, writes weekly about green energy and clean
technologies “New approach to water desalination holds great potential: Hamilton”
http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/01/18/new_approach_to_water_desalination_holds_great_pot
ential_hamilton.html
Canada, the land of abundant fresh water, has little need for desalination technologies to quench the thirst of its citizens. This makes it all the
more amazing that Canadians
are behind some of the most innovative new approaches to taking salt out of
seawater, the need for which is expected to rise substantially over the coming years. According to a
recent report from the National Intelligence Council, which reflects the combined input of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies,
global water demand will exceed sustainable supplies by 40 per cent by 2030. That means certain
countries, particularly in the already volatile Middle East region, will need to rely increasingly on the
ocean as a source for drinking water and crop irrigation. Just as important, they will need more efficient and low-cost ways
of doing it. Vancouver-based Saltworks Technologies, which has been mentioned many times in this column, is an example of
a company responding to the need. Assisted by waste heat or solar heat, it uses specially tuned filters
that selectively block the natural flow of sodium, chlorine and other ions as they move through various
stages of concentration. The approach requires little pressure, making it tremendously energy-efficient
when compared to conventional methods of salt removal such as distillation and reverse-osmosis. Now
researchers at GreenCentre Canada, the government-funded green chemistry research lab based at
Queen’s University in Kingston, have come up with yet another novel and promising approach based on
the well-known concept of forward osmosis. Osmosis, as you might remember from high-school science class, is the natural
movement of a solvent through a partially permeable membrane from a low concentration to a high concentration until a balance is reached on
both sides. This natural movement is called “osmotic pressure.” One of the most popular approaches to water desalination today is reserveosmosis, which is designed to work against osmotic pressure. Seawater is pumped through a salt-blocking membrane to produce purified water
on the other side. This uses a lot of energy because it requires high pressure. The membranes also tend to get fouled up with contaminants,
boosting maintenance costs. Forward
osmosis, on the other hand, goes with the flow by taking advantage of
osmotic pressure. Instead of using electricity to force water through a membrane, a draw solution with
much higher salt concentrations than seawater is used to pull the pure water through the membrane.
Japan CP Solvency
Methane hydrates
Japan solves methane hydrates. They have the tech
Demetriou 14 [writer for the telegraph, a UK news agency “Is 'burning ice' the solution to Japan's energy
crisis?” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10646210/Japanmethane-hydrate.html]
A Japanese
company is planning to extract methane hydrate from the seabed with the goal of creating a
new domestic energy source for resources-poor Japan. Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. (MES) hopes to
become a pioneer in the field of extracting methane hydrate, also known as “burning ice”, a compound
believed to exist in abundance beneath seas around Japan. The company, which has previously
developed offshore oilfields, has set up a new department devoted to tapping into the nation’s
underwater energy extraction potential. It has also designed an underwater robot capable of diving to
depths of nearly 23,000 ft to assist the test-mining of mineral ores, with manufacturing discussions reportedly
underway with an undisclosed North European company. Although a timescale has not yet been made public in relation to when they will start
the extraction process, Masatoshi Inui, a spokesman at MES, told the Telegraph: “It’s true that the company plans to explore and extract
seabed resources, including methane hydrate and rare metals
Japan has best resources to develop methane hydrates
Jogmec 14 [Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation “Promoting the Development of Methane
Hydrates”http://www.jogmec.go.jp/english/oil/technology_015.html]
Methane hydrates below deep ocean flow off the coast of Japan have the potential to supply the
nation's natural gas needs for decades. JOGMEC is closely involved in the planning and investigation necessary to make this
material available for practical use as a next-generation source of clean energy. Methane Hydrates: A NextGeneration Resource One of JOGMEC's corporate objectives is to overcome the constraints of limited resources. Our
investigation of next-generation energy resources includes research on methane hydrates. Known as
"burnable ice," methane hydrates available within Japan's territorial waters may well be able to supply
the nation's natural gas needs for a century. JOGMEC also aggressively investigates and researches mineral resources deep in
the ocean, where rare metals are abundant. Methane hydrate is a crystalline solid like ice that stores gas molecules, usually methane. Each
flammable gas molecule is surrounded by a cage of water molecules.
Methane hydrate can be found and under in the
permafrost of polar regions and in the sediments of deep-sea regions where the temperature is low and
the pressure is great. Methane gas is used as municipal gas and fuel for vehicles and fuel cells, and is a cleaner fuel than oil and coal.
Deposits of methane hydrates have been reported in marine sediments in the Nankai Trough off the Pacific coast of central Japan, where the
water depth is more than 500 meters. Some
estimates indicate that the reserves of methane hydrate correspond
to a 100-year supply of natural gas for Japan, making it an important potential source of energy. The
Japan National Oil Corporation (JNOC) began research work on methane hydrates in 1995, and JOGMEC
has overseen the project since the JNOC's restructuring. An international joint research team including Japan has obtained
successful results in experimental production of methane gas by injecting hot water into a borehole in the Mackenzie Delta in the arctic region
of Canada. In accordance with Japan's Methane Hydrate Exploitation Program established by the Advisory Committee for National Methane
Hydrates Exploitation Program under METI, JOGMEC promotes
the evaluation of methane hydrate resources in the
Nankai Trough and other regions. Plans for test production of gas from the methane hydrates in the Nankai
Trough will depend on the results.
Japan tech solves methane hydrates and leads to global adoption after it is seen as
successful.
WSJ 13 [Wall Street Journal, News agency “Scientists Envision Fracking in Arctic and on Ocean Floor”
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324694904578600073042194096]
Nevertheless, the government of Japan—where natural gas costs are currently $16 per million British thermal units, four times the level in
the U.S.—has vowed to
bring methane hydrate into the mainstream by 2023 after a successful drilling test
in March. In the government-sponsored test off of the southern coast of Japan's main island, Honshu, a
drilling rig bored nearly 2,000 feet below the seafloor. Special equipment reduced the pressure around
the methane hydrate crystals, dissolving them into gas and water, and then pumped about 4.2 million
cubic feet of gas to the surface. While not a huge haul, it was enough to convince Japanese researchers that
more natural gas could be harvested. If Japan can deliver on its vow to produce natural gas economically
from the methane hydrate deposits off its shores, it could experience a natural-gas boom that matches
the fracking-fueled one under way in North America, said Surya Rajan, analyst at IHS CERA. "If you look at what a dramatic
shift the North American gas industry has gone through, could you afford to bet against something similar happening in methane hydrate?" Mr.
Rajan said. Successful development of methane hydrates could throw a wrench into liquefied-natural-gas
megaprojects such as Australia's $50 billion Gorgon development led by Chevron Corp. CVX -0.44% , experts say. "It would make me have pause
about investing billions of dollars in an LNG export terminal," said Christopher Knittel, an energy economics professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Not
all observers think that the costs can come down enough to make
methane hydrate viable. But plenty of countries, particularly in Asia, are planning to try. China plans to
host an international conference on methane hydrate in 2014. India is contemplating a push to develop
the vast quantities of methane hydrate discovered off its coast in the Indian Ocean in 2006, according to the U.S.
Geological Survey, a part of the U.S. Department of Interior that conducts scientific research. In the U.S., scientists explored the northern Gulf
of Mexico in May to map some of the 6.7 quadrillion cubic feet of methane-hydrate clusters believed to be underwater there. The Consortium
for Ocean Leadership, a nonprofit group of researchers, is now trying to convince the Department of Energy to lend it a research drilling ship to
do more tests. "There are a huge amount of people internationally working in this area," said Carolyn Ruppel, head of
the gas hydrates project at the USGS. "A lot of national governments have gotten into the game." The most optimal places to harvest methane
hydrate are near where the continental shelf transitions to the deep ocean, areas difficult to access from sea level.
OTEC
Japan has the tech and will export the energy to the US
EP 10 [EnergyPlace is a service to educate facility owners and managers on Alternative Energy Systems
and Energy Efficiency Programs. “Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC)”
http://energyplace.com/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26view%3Darticle%26id%3D7%26Itemi
d%3D11]
Japan has been a major contributor to the development of OTEC technology, primarily for export to
other countries. In the 1970s, the Tokyo Electric Power Company built a 100 kW closed-cycle OTEC plant
on the island of Nauru. The plant became operational in 1981 and produced about 120 kW of electricity
(90 kW was used to power the plant, and the remaining electricity was used to power a school and
several other facilities in Nauru). This set a world record for power output from an OTEC system where
the power was sent to a real power grid. What Share of the World’s Energy Needs Could OTEC Supply?
Some experts believe that if OTEC became cost-competitive, it could provide gigawatts of electrical
power, and in conjunction with electrolysis, could produce enough hydrogen to completely replace all
projected global fossil fuel consumption.
Find MH 370
Japan can help efforts to find the plan, specific aircrafts and s satellite technology
Tiezzi 14 [Shannon Tiezzi is an Associate Editor at The Diplomat.Her main focus is on China, and she
writes on China’s foreign relations, domestic politics, and economy. “Japan Joins Search for Malaysia
Airlines Flight 370”http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/japan-joins-search-for-malaysia-airlines-flight370/]
On Tuesday, Japan officially joined in the search efforts for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. A
statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that the government was sending a “Japan
Disaster Relief Team” to Kuala Lumpur to assist in rescue operations. The eight-person team will include
officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defense, Japan Coast Guard, and Japan
International Cooperation Agency. Japan also announced that it is sending aircraft to assist in the search,
beginning with a C-130H Transport Aircraft (photos of which were posted to the Japanese Ministry of
Defense’s Website). Reuters reported that Japan also plans to send three other aircraft, including two
P3C surveillance planes. As my colleague Ankit wrote earlier this week, the search for Flight 370 has
provided a rare opportunity for cooperation among Southeast and East Asian nations, many of whom
are involved in territorial disputes. In addition to Japan, India and Brunei are also new additions to the
search efforts. They join Australia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the
U.S., and Vietnam in the search, bringing the total number of countries involved to 12. The search
efforts, being spearheaded by Malaysia, have been a rare example of cooperation in the South China
Sea, an area that recently seems to have become synonymous with territorial disputes. However
acrimonious the disputes in the South China Sea have been, though, they pale in comparison to the level
of tensions between China and Japan. Even the rough relationship between China and the Philippines,
who have competing claims to several islands and shoals in the South China Sea, looks almost friendly
compared to the constant diplomatic barbs flying between Beijing and Tokyo
South Korea CP Solvency
Generic Ocean development
South Korea solves Ocean development, sufficient research and technology
Dong 05 [writer for Kordi, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute “Korea Ocean Research and
Development Institute” http://www.apecvc.or.kr/?p_name=website&sort=WK4&gotopage=25&query=view&unique_num=WD2005000016]
1. Overview Since it was established in 1973, Korea's only comprehensive ocean research institute, the
Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute (KORDI) has been engaged in various research and
development activities of ocean science and technology contributing development of ocean-related
national policies and advancing ocean development to the next level. Over the last three decades,
KORDI has accumulated substantial research experiences and accomplishments on basic and applied
ocean sciences to enhance the national capacity in ocean sciences and technology and to explore and
utilize ocean resources in rational and sustainable manner. Based on such research experiences and
accomplishments, KORDI has grown steadily, and has laid a strong foundation for taking every
challenges from our oceans. In addition to its headquarter in Ansan, there are several branch and
associated institute and centers; the Korea Research Institute of Ships and Ocean Engineering(KRISO) in
Daedeok Science Town located in Daejeon City; the South Sea Institute in Jangmok, Geoje Island; and
the Korea Polar Research Institute(KOPRI) established in 2004 under KORDI system for more systematic
investigation of polar region and operates both King Sejong Antarctic Station in King George Island,
Antarctica and the Artic Research Center-Dasan at Ny-Alesund, Svalbard Islands, Norway; Other
overseas centers include the Korea-China Joint Ocean Research Center at Qingdao, China; the KoreaSouth Pacific Ocean Research Center, Chuuk, Federated States of Micronesia, the Korea-Chile Ocean
Research Center, Punta Arenas, Chile. Indeed, KORDI has become a comprehensive ocean research
institute with research bases all around the world. With its 30th anniversary in 2003, KORDI seeks to
emerge as a world class ocean research institute by reinventing KORDI's operation to a more efficient
and sophisticated research management system.
South Korea solves ocean development, effective research and policies.
Sik 09 [ staff writer for The Korea Times “Ocean holds key to Korea’s future”
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/common/printpreview.asp?categoryCode=117&newsIdx=66522]
South Korea, surrounded
by the water on its three sides, should make more of an effort to turn the ocean
into its future repository of food and natural resources amid rapidly depleting land-based reserves, the
nation's leading oceanographer said. In an interview with The Korea Times, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute (KORDI) President
Kang Jung-keuk said countries poor in resources, like Korea,
must proactively explore the sea in order to continue
sustainable development in the future, stressing Asia's fourth largest economy should spend more
money to study the marine environment and develop state- of-the-art technologies to secure deep-sea
minerals. ``Many say that the 21st century is an `era of the sea' and I couldn't agree more. It has become inevitable for us to
pay more attention to the ocean for survival in line with the rapid depletion of easily exploited resources
and intensifying competition across the globe to secure food and energy on land. The ocean is our next frontier
and our future depends on it,'' Kang said. He said the institute has been playing a key role in promoting the
importance of the sea to Korea's future through a wide array of oceanographic research, ranging from
studies of the nation's seas and open oceans, and investigations on preservation, control and restoration
of marine environments, to the development of marine energy resources. KORDI is located in Ansan, Gyeonggi
Province, and operates three branch institutes across the country. It also maintains two overseas research facilities in the South Pacific and
China. Its
affiliate, the Korea Polar Research Institute, studies global environment changes and natural
resource reserves in Antarctica and the Arctic. ``Our mission is to select and foster some of the most
future-promising marine scientific technologies, and then turn them into the nation's new growth
engines. Our research focus includes the monitoring of the marine environment and eco-system in coastal waters
to effectively cope with unusual weather phenomena and possible pollution. We are also studying tidal
currents to turn them into pollution-free and renewable energy sources,'' Kang said. The institute is also
trying to find ways of collecting minerals on the sea floor. ``We secured a mineral exploration site in the
Pacific Ocean in 2002, while obtaining exclusive rights to explore waters off the Kingdom of Tonga in the South
Pacific in April 2008. We also successfully tested a deep-water mining robot, ``MineRo,'' in June last year,'' he said. The institute is
currently developing an underwater unmanned submarine capable of operating in waters below 6,000
meters. With the ongoing global warming and a range of subsequent changes in the marine
environment as a result, including the rising sea levels and unusual weather phenomena, KORDI has been
stepping up its monitoring of sea levels, water temperature, salinity and other oceanic factors to better understand changes in the global
environment and protect human lives and properties against tidal waves, typhoons and other natural disasters. ``Temperatures
in
coastal waters surrounding the Korean Peninsula have been increasing at a faster pace than in other
parts of the globe, severely affecting the marine environment here. We will continue to strengthen monitoring and
studies of changes in the surrounding seas in a bid to better understand what is really going on. So, we can help policymakers make better
informed decisions to preserve the marine eco-system in a more sustainable state,'' the oceanographer said Additionally, the institute has
recently bolstered studies on the marine environment surrounding the country's easternmost islets of Dokdo. ``We
set up a center
exclusively dedicated to studying the islets in 2005. It surveys the eco-environment surrounding the
island, gathers various data, and publishes findings in international academic journals. All these activities
have and will help us boost our sovereignty over Dokdo,'' the KORDI head said. However, he said Korea still lags far behind
advanced countries in marine science and technology. ``Our competitiveness in this field is only half that of the United States, Japan and other
advanced economies. Additionally, only 2.5 percent of state research and development (R&D) funds are allocated to the marine science and
technology fields.'' But Kang expressed an optimistic outlook for Korea's marine science and industry, saying the government and private
companies are increasingly paying greater attention to the sector for potentially lucrative business opportunities. ``The
country is
already the world's largest shipbuilder and the world's sixth largest shipper. If we take advantage of
these globally competitive industries, Korea will soon become one of the world's top five nations in
marine industries,'' he said. To turn KORDI into one of the world's top-notch marine research institutes, Kang said it will soon come out
with a blueprint outlining major areas designed to transform the nation into a marine-based economy. ``The United States and Japan have
already named ocean development as one of their main national growth strategies. China has also announced its intent to explore natural
resources in the ocean. We should place top policy priority on developing a wide range of marine science and technologies to foster a
competitive marine industry.'' Kang
also said the institute will boost international cooperation with research
centers in foreign countries and jointly carry out scientific research and resources exploration.
Methane hydrates
South Korea icebreakers solve for methane Hydrates
Bennet 9-13 [Mia Bennett is pursuing a PhD in Geography at the University of California, Los Angeles
(UCLA “South Korean icebreaker leads expedition to Canada’s Beaufort Sea for methane hydrates”
http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2013/09/30/south-korean-icebreaker-leads-expedition-to-canadasbeaufort-sea-for-methane-hydrates/]
Four months after its acceptance as an observer to the Arctic Council, South Korea is fulfilling
expectations surrounding its new role by leading a research survey into the Beaufort Sea to look for
subsea permafrost and methane hydrates. The East Asian country’s self-constructed icebreaker, the
Araon, left Barrow, Alaska on September 8 bound for Canadian waters. The Araon will spend a
maximum of twenty days in Canada’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ), within the boundaries of the
Inuvialuit Settlement Region (ISR), conducting its research. Seismic data will be collected with an array of
eight airguns and ten ocean bottom seismometers. The project is called the Canada-Korea-USA Beaufort
Sea Geoscience Research Survey. Its leaders are scientists from Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN),
Korea Polar Research Institute (KOPRI), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). In terms of infrastructure
provided, however, South Korea might actually warrant top billing. On an expedition to Antarctica this
past spring, glaciologist Ted Scambos reported that the Araon’s announcer called the vessel “the ship of
dreams for polar research.” Scambos agreed with this description. Neither Canada nor the U.S. have
ships that can quite compare with the state-of-the-art Korean icebreaker, built in 2009. Scientists were
involved in the construction of the Araon from its inception, so it is “so it is very well-equipped for
science, with all the latest high-tech equipment, as well as dry and wet laboratories,” according to Dong
Min Jin, KOPRI’s director. During its expedition in the Beaufort Sea, the Araon will also have an AS-350
helicopter onboard to help transport researchers carrying out separate projects on marine mammals
and sea ice. This latest expedition is a prime example of South Korea’s prowess in Arctic research. The
country has the funds to carry out polar science, and, thanks to its world-class shipbuilding industry, it
also has the necessary infrastructure. China, by contrast, has not yet mastered the art of ice-class
shipping technology. The country’s sole icebreaker was purchased from Ukraine (though it is in the
process of building a new icebreaker from scratch). South Korea and Japan are the only two Asian
countries to have developed their own icebreakers. Japan’s polar research program is older than South
Korea’s, and explorer Nobu Shirase even led a Japanese Antarctic expedition in 1910-1912. But South
Korea is now the country making headlines in Asian-led polar research, bringing foreign scientists on
board its vessel, too.
Indian Ocean
Japan is expanding their influence into the Indian Ocean. Solves with high tech
industries
FDI 12 [Future Direction International Future Directions International (FDI) is an independent, not-forprofit Research Institute. It was established in 2000, by Major General the Honourable Michael Jeffery
(former Governor General of Australia) together with a small group of leading Australians, to conduct
comprehensive research of important medium to long-term issues facing Australia. “South Korea:
National Involvement in the Indian Ocean Region”
http://www.futuredirections.org.au/publications/indian-ocean/373-south-korea-national-involvementin-the-indian-ocean-region.html]
South Korea (officially, the Republic of Korea) has commenced a process of enlarging its strategic reach,
which includes the Indian Ocean region. As a net importer of energy resources, South Korea has a
growing appreciation of the security environment and stability required in the Indian Ocean. With many
rapidly growing economies, the Indian Ocean region is capable of providing South Korea with significant
markets for its goods and high technology industries, as well as providing the natural resources to
maintain South Korea’s own economic and strategic position. South Korea is becoming more ambitious
in the use of its defence forces in multilateral operations beyond its own immediate region, signalling a
willingness to take a greater responsibility for its own strategic future. South Korea has embarked upon
a process of increasing its global presence and strategic reach, with a focus on the increasingly
important Indian Ocean region. South Korea, as a net energy importer, is necessarily committed to
maintaining the supply of the energy resources that are crucial to its economy. To facilitate the
continued supply of energy and resources, South Korea has been actively increasing its level of
diplomatic and economic activity with many of the states in the Indian Ocean region. South Korea has
adopted a proactive role in the security of the Indian Ocean and the sea lines of communication (SLOCs)
which cross it. Seoul has increased its naval capabilities and become more active in multilateral military
operations, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan. The increased activity has assisted South Korea in
lifting its profile and to solidify its status as a middle power.
Aquaculture
South Korea solves Aquaculture, eased regulations and new large companies
Kim 12 [writer for MK business news “Large companies to enter S. Korea`s aquaculture
industry”http://news.mk.co.kr/english/newsRead.php?rss=Y&sc=30800011&year=2012&no=50981]
Large companies will be allowed to enter the aquaculture sector for select items as the South Korean
government plans to ease regulations barring conglomerate entry. "We need large-scale capital to
nurture the fisheries sector," said Minister Seo Gyu-yong of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MIFAFF) in an
interview with the Maeil Business News last Thursday. "We are planning to abolish the current ban on large company
entry into the aquaculture industry," he said. Current regulations disqualify companies with more than
1,000 full time employees and capital asset over 500 billion won ($443.6 million) from obtaining
fisheries licenses. This law has prevented large company entry into marine farming, shellfish farming, and fish farming that could have
benefited from large capital inflow. "Large companies will still be barred from seaweed farming and other sectors
where the competition could devastate the livelihood and survival of small time fishers and small
companies. Conglomerate entry will thus be limited to large fish farms such as tuna and abalone farms,"
Seo continued. Seo also explained that this amendment was driven by government hopes of driving up fisheries exports. "We won't be placing a
ban on conglomerate entry into the domestic fisheries market, but our
main objective behind allowing large company
entry into the sector is to boost fishery exports," he added. The new law will come into effect within the
next month or two, once it passes through the National Assembly. "Last year's agriculture and fisheries exports hit a
record high at $7.28 billion, but conditions will become tougher this year as the global economy slows," Seo said, while promising to chair
monthly meetings to make sure Korea reaches $10 billion in exports this year.
Affirmative Answers
EU CP Answers
Perm
Perm solves best – EU and US cooperation over climate issues is key
LowCVP 14, LowCVP, 3/14/14, LowCVP is an organization that works towards education on various different
forms of combatting climate change, “EU and US agree to work together to tackle climate change,”
http://www.lowcvp.org.uk/news,eu-and-us-agree-to-work-together-to-tackle-climate-change_2961.htm, NN
Following a meeting with EU leaders in Brussels during March, US President Obama said that he and EU
leaders will throw their combined weight behind tackling climate change. The announcement follows
shortly after news of a similar commitment by the US and China. "Sustainable economic growth will only
be possible if we tackle climate change," a draft communique (reported by Reuters) ahead of the EU-US
summit on March 26 said. However, the text is subject to further negotiation between the European
Union and the United States. Both the European Union and the United States are preparing new pledges
on cutting emissions for the first quarter of 2015, ahead of a U.N. summit in Paris that is meant to agree
a new worldwide deal. China and the United States, the world's top emitters of greenhouse gases,
announced in a joint-statment (following Secretary of State John Kerry's visit to Beijiing during February)
that they "will work together...to collaborate through enhanced policy dialogue, including the sharing of
information regarding their respective post-2020 plans to limit greenhouse gas emissions." The
statement said that "both sides reaffirm their commitment to contribute significantly to successful 2015
global efforts to meet this challenge." In another development, the UK and China have agreed a new
£20m three-year programme that will support research to develop new low carbon manufacturing
processes and technologies, low carbon cities and offshore renewables. Signing a memorandum of
understanding at a recent meeting in London, witnessed by the UK's Minister of State for Climate
Change, Greg Barker, the UK and China will each commit £10m of matched resources over the course of
the programme. The MoU, which was signed by representatives from the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (NSFC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), as part
of the Research Councils UK (RCUK) Energy Programme, is the latest collaboration in a series of joint
research programmes stretching over the last five years.
Only the perm solves – the combination of EU and the US is better than just solo agents
Leal-Arcas 13, Dr. Rafael Leal-Arcas, November 2013, Arcas is a staff writer for the ICTSD, “Working
Together: How To Make Trade Contribute to Climate Action,”
http://www.ictsd.org/downloads/2013/11/working-together-how-to-make-trade-contribute-to-climateaction1.pdf, NN
The days of mutual distrust between the trade and climate agendas are long gone (Leal-Arcas, 2013).
Today, numerous areas of symbiosis between the two agendas have been recognized, including
emissions trading schemes, border carbon measures and labelling schemes, to name but a few (ICTSD,
2011). Both trade and climate have irrefutable links to sustainable development, making it a logical step
to explore the potential for mutual cooperation and factor this into response measures. Moreover, both
regimes can offer a system of carrots and sticks. Given this context, climate response measures should
aim at minimizing trade impacts; response measures that solely factor in climate change mitigation
goals, without acknowledging trade repercussions, may end up hindering sustainable development on
other fronts. In this respect, Article 3.14 of the Kyoto Protocol commits its parties to strive to minimize
adverse economic, social and environmental impacts on other parties, especially developing countries
and in particular, those identified in Articles 4.8 and 4.9 of the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC). How can we further capitalise on trade measures’ ability to address climate change
mitigation? Is the overall impact of current climate response measures trade restrictive? Or, do these
measures manage to achieve both environmental and economic goals? How can current governance of
climate and trade be expanded or amended to make climate response measures more trade-friendly or
to use trade more effectively toward achieving climate action goals? This paper explores these questions
while putting forth several proposals for using trade tools to further progress toward climate change
mitigation. * Dr. Rafael Leal Arcas is a reader in Law, Queen Mary University of London (Centre for
Commercial Law Studies), UK. Ph.D. (European University Institute, Florence); JSM (Stanford Law
School); LL.M. (Columbia Law School); M.Phil. (London School of Economics and Political Science).
Member of the Madrid Bar. Author of the books Climate Change and International Trade (Edward Elgar
Publishing, 2013); International Trade and Investment Law: Multilateral, Regional And Bilateral
Governance (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2010); and Theory and Practice of EC External Trade Law and
Policy (Cameron May, 2008). The author can be contacted at: r.leal-arcas@qmul.ac.uk. 2 Proposals for
incorporating trade into climate response measures Trade has already proven to be a powerful tool in
achieving environmental goals. For example, the Montreal Protocol restricted parties from trading in
ozone-depleting substances with non-parties. This served the dual purpose of encouraging wide
participation (the Montreal Protocol now has 196 parties), and removing any competitive advantage
that a non-party might enjoy (that is, preventing leakage to non-participating jurisdictions) (Leal- Arcas,
2013). Moreover, the success of the Montreal Protocol lies in the fact that trade was not actually
restricted (Barrett, 2010). Climate change, however, is a far more complex issue, both connected with
and giving rise to a host of other issues and areas, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, clean
energy technology, knowledge transfer, investment in low-carbon economies, development assistance,
carbon capture and storage and adaptation. While this makes response measures more challenging, it
also presents more potential areas of cooperation across different regimes and disciplines. This paper
proposes several ways trade goals can feed into climate goals and vice versa. RTAs with Chapters to
Promote Climate Change Mitigation This paper proposes the introduction of a regional model for
promoting climate change mitigation, technology transfer and sustainable energy for all as an
alternative to the present structure of the UNFCCC/Kyoto Protocol framework. Given the proliferation of
regional trade agreements (RTAs)—especially in the form of bilateral treaties—in the international
trading system, this section proposes creating RTAs with climate change chapters, thus embedding
climate goals within bilateral, trilateral and plurilateral trade agreements. Involving major GHG emitters
through RTAs and economic partnership agreements that include contingent climate mitigation efforts
can be an effective avenue toward reducing GHG emissions and could therefore move both the trade
and climate agendas forward harmoniously. Climate-related chapters could promote, among other
things, trade and investment in environmental goods and services and climate-friendly products and
technologies. In fact, this is already being planned for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment
Partnership (TTIP) (European Commission, 2013a). Given that the major GHG emitters are large
economies, the most effective climate-related RTAs would be large, such as the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) Agreement, the TTIP, or the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Indeed,
given how proactive developing countries are in the conclusion of RTAs, the option of climaterelated
RTAs would be an effective way to make progress towards a future global climate change agreement,
especially since the Kyoto Protocol imposes no concrete obligation on developing countries. In this
sense, climate-related RTAs can be used as legal mechanisms to further the multilateral climate change
agenda, while also including major developing countries. A further option for such ‘environmentally
conscious’ RTAs is to include provisions related to climate change adaptation efforts. These could take
the form of knowledge transfers and capacity-building, infrastructural and agricultural support, et
cetera. The advantage of such an approach lies not only in providing trade incentives for GHG emissions
reduction, investment in renewable energy or other climate change mitigation goals, but also in that it
circumvents the currently arduous multilateral trading process to make use of the ever-expanding
network of RTAs around the world. RTAs promoting climate mitigation goals can have strong benefits for
economic growth in developing countries, delivering both environmental and trade wins. In fact, in a
2007 speech, former World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General, Pascal Lamy, cited the benefits
of trading with developing countries that are exporters of climate-friendly products: Indonesia, one of
the world’s top 10 exporters of steam condensers; India, a top exporter of hydraulic turbines; and
Malaysia, which is among the world’s top five exporters of photovoltaic cells.1 All these cases represent
clear examples where the trade and climate agendas can work
Perm do both solves best – recent meetings in Paris prove
Saxon 14, Clare Saxon, 3/26/14, Saxon is a staff writer for The Climate Group, “EU AND US JOIN FORCES TO
AGREE CLIMATE DEAL IN PARIS,” http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/eu-and-us-joinforces-to-agree-climate-deal/, NN
LONDON: Today the European Union and the US committed to work together on agreeing a new global
climate deal at COP21 in Paris next year, a promising sign of the power international collaboration could
have in tackling climate change and securing a low carbon future. US President Barack Obama and José
Manuel Durão Barroso, President of the European Commission, met in Brussels earlier today, where
they pledged joint commitment to a global climate agreement at COP21 in a public statement. The
statement reinforces the regions’ previous signals that they would enforce "strong determination"
towards a deal at Paris. It says: “Sustainable economic growth will only be possible if we tackle climate
change, which is also a risk to global security. [...] The 2015 agreement must be consistent with science
and with the goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below 2°C, and should therefore include
ambitious mitigation contributions, notably from the world’s major economies and other significant
emitters.” Underscoring that they will implement existing pledges as well as prepare new mitigation
contributions in early 2015, the EU and US leaders have committed to work together on: accelerating
mainstream adoption of sustainable and renewable energy improving energy security in Europe phasing
out fossil fuel subsidies promoting energy efficiency slowing down the production and consumption of
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and limiting their use under the Montreal Protocol. GLOBAL ACTION The
joint pledge comes in the middle of an important week when the world’s top scientists, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), are meeting in Japan to release the AR5 Working
Group II report this coming Monday. Leaks of the report contain stark evidence of the impacts runaway
climate change will have on businesses and communities, which should spur urgent action from leaders.
Ahead of the IPCC release, several separate reports have bolstered a sense of urgency, including the
World Health Organization’s analysis which attributes 7 million deaths to pollution last year, and a UN
report that reveals 2013 was the sixth warmest year on record. EU ENERGY INDEPENDENCE In his
remarks on EU-US joint action today, Jose Manuel Barroso, European Commission President spotlighted
Europe's energy independence. He said: "Our teams are going to meet already next week to discuss
some issues in terms of energy cooperation between Europe and the United States.” The topic of
Europe's energy security was first raised in the media last week when the EU Council agreed to
postpone further decisions on its 2030 climate and energy package until October. Although the longawaited opportunity to raise ambition on the EU goals was missed, the Council agreed to increase
energy independence by promoting domestic sources such as renewable energy, following events in
Ukraine.
EU Fails
The EU can’t protect the oceans- current policies prove
Fournier 14, Nicolas Fournier, 5/26/14, Fournier is a staff writer for The Beacon, “EU Seas Are In Bad Shape,”
http://oceana.org/en/blog/2014/03/eu-seas-are-in-bad-shape, NN
In 2008, EU Member States took an ambitious decision to safeguard and restore the state of European
seas by 2020. After years of negotiations, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive was adopted, which
aimed at making sure all human activities that impact the quality of our marine environment are
addressed. Today, five years since implementation, and with six more years to go, the goal seems more
of a challenge to reach. Two weeks ago, the EU Commission published its first evaluation of progress,
revealing an overall gloomy picture of the state of our seas, and worse, a general lack of ambition from
our governments. As European Environment Commissioner Janez Potočnik summarized: "The message is
clear: Europe's seas and oceans are not in good shape.” Most notable was the poor performance of the
northern European countries around the Baltic Sea. This was due to the lack of coordination between
the neighboring countries when defining the goal for 2020. Simply put, they couldn’t agree on common
indicators to evaluate what a healthy sea should look like: How much fish there should be? What is
tolerable level of harmful substances or underwater noise? How contaminated can seafood be? Which
species need protection, and how to go about it? They also couldn’t manage to put together a coherent
plan integrating different activities, such as water, agriculture or nature conservation. The most
worrying issue at this point is that the past five years were meant to lay the foundation for concrete
measures that will be adopted over the next six years. The lack of ambition we’ve seen so far has thus
seriously undermined the entire aim of the MSFD. But, this dismal half-time report is a necessary wakeup call, and the good news is that there is no need to reinvent the wheel; the tools already exist to move
in the right direction. Just last week the Baltic Sea countries celebrated 40 years of successful
cooperation in the region under the HELCOM umbrella. This partnership produced several very useful
tools for countries aiming to contribute to the implementation of marine directive. Unfortunately, the
leadership of these countries is reluctant to use the very same tools they developed and agreed to use
so long ago. It’s as though Baltic Sea states are in a dysfunctional marriage: after 40 years together
they’ve stopped talking to one another, and when it comes to making things work, they’d rather do it
alone than together. Unfortunately, these shortcomings and delays are not isolated to the Baltic: we are
seeing Atlantic and Mediterranean countries drag their feet as well.
EU fails at ocean policies – fishing subsidies and lack of coordination
Sullivan 13, Justine Sullivan, 7/9/13, Sullivan is a staff writer for Oceana, “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
EU Fishing Subsidies,” http://oceana.org/en/blog/2013/07/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-eu-fishing-subsidies,
NN
Yesterday, Oceana released the results of a six-month study on European Union (EU) subsidies to the
fishing sector since 2000, and the results were shocking. Our report showed that 4.9 billion euros in
subsidies were granted in the form of “state aid” for the fishing sectors, with most of this €4.9 billion
($6.3 billion) fueling overfishing and environmentally harmful practices. Our estimates show that of this
€4.9 billion, only 1% can be identified as beneficial to the marine environment. To add insult to grave
environmental injury, despite the EU’s commitment to transparency, we found that information on how
tax payer money is being spent and allocated to these fishing subsidies is both scarce and unclear.
“Public funding should be used for the public good – while that seems obvious to most of us, it doesn’t
seem to register with Member States when it comes to funding the fishing industry. Over the past 13
years only 1% of state aid subsidies have gone to directly benefit the very environment and resource
that the industry relies on”, stated Xavier Pastor, executive director of Oceana in Europe. “When you
consider the poor state of EU fish stocks and the degradation of the marine environment, and look at
the fact that 65% of these subsidies are feeding into these very problems, one cannot help but be
outraged.” Since signing the UN Law of the Sea, the EU has declared itself dedicated to ensuring the
management and conservation of its living marine resources. Over the past decades, however, the
discrepancy between reality and rhetoric has become increasingly clear – many of Europe’s fish stocks
have been overfished for decades. This overfishing is fueled by huge fishing subsidies that have allowed
European fleets to fish longer, harder, and over wider expanses than would otherwise be economically
and ecologically feasible. Many European fleets could not survive without these subsidies; the European
Union and its Member States are thus using taxpayer money to keep alive a fleet that has the ability to
catch two to three times more than what the ocean can provide sustainably. The Hidden Fishing
Subsidies “Oceana urges the members of the Committee to stop the vicious cycle of overfishing and
overcapitalization of European fleets and end subsidies that fuel overfishing,” explained Vanya
Vulperhorst, policy advisor at Oceana in Europe. The EU should exclude environmentally harmful and
capacity-enhancing subsidies and financially support the protection of the marine environment through
the creation of marine protected areas, the increase of fisheries controls, and investment into scientific
research. Just yesterday, we celebrated a huge EU victory with the adoption of a strict ban on all shark
finning. Tomorrow, a decisive vote on the new financial mechanism for the fisheries sector, the
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, will take place in the Fisheries Committee of the European
Parliament. There is no question that the European Union can adopt the practices and regulations
needed to bring its fishing under control. The only question is, will they choose to do so?
Only the US can solve for ocean policy, the EU fails
Obaidullah 4/14 (FARAH OBAIDULLAH, writer for Greenpeace, “COUNCIL AGAIN FAILS
TO PROTECT THE MAGNIFICENT BERING SEA CANYONS,” 4/14/14,
http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2014/04/14/council-fails-protect-magnificent-bering-seacanyons/)
I am new
to the politics of ocean conservation in the USA. I am usually based in the Netherlands, where I work for
Europe, I have had the ample displeasure of witnessing first hand how
international bodies like the UN, regional fisheries management organizations, or the European Union
go about failing to protect our oceans and the animals that live in them.¶ It’s not like the science is in
dispute. Close to 80 percent of global fish stocks are in a poor state as a direct result of over-fishing. Add to that pollution, deep-seabed
mining, ocean acidification, and climate change — it is time to give our oceans a break. To recover, replenish, build
resilience, and ensure bounty from our oceans for future generations, we need to establish ocean
sanctuaries.¶ The USA is perceived to be a global leader when it comes to managing and protecting
ocean resources. Not long ago, I was in Tasmania, Australia for the annual international meeting to conserve marine life in Antarctica.
Greenpeace International. Working in
Acting like a leader, the US proactively pushed for the protection of the Ross Sea.
The EU shouldn't do the plan, history of ineffective policies that backfire
Mearns 13 (Euan Mearns, Honorary Research Fellow at The University of Aberdeen,
“The Failure of Kyoto and the Futility of European Energy Policy,” 11/4/13,
http://euanmearns.com/the-failure-of-kyoto-and-the-futility-of-european-energypolicy/)
In the same period, since 1997, Global average temperatures have risen by <0.1˚C (based on Hadcrut4
data) despite cumulative emissions of 460 Gt CO2 being added to the atmosphere (Figure 2). In the
period 1997 to 2012 there is absolutely no evidence from the atmospheric temperature record that
global warming or climate change are linked to CO2 emissions*.¶ European Union (EU) and UK energy
policies aimed at reducing CO2 emissions have failed to make any impact at the Global level. These
same policies have succeeded in pushing up electricity prices, making EU economies less competitive
and in spreading energy poverty amongst the poorer people of Europe.
EU control causes over fishing and exploits developing countries
Brittin ‘13 (Rachel, communications officer for Pew Environment Group. "EU Subsidies Favor Industry, Promote Overfishing Abroad"
November 27, 2013. The Pew Charitable Trust, http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/2013/11/27/eu-subsidiesfavor-industry-promote-overfishing-abroad // M.O.)
The European Union, or EU, pays 75 percent of the access fees for European vessels to fish in the waters
of developing countries in Africa and the South Pacific, according to a new study by researchers at the
University of British Columbia. Industry pays the remaining 25 percent, but that represents only about 2 percent of the revenue it
receives from selling the catch. The EU subsidies provide strong incentives for overfishing, according to the
study, published November 27, 2013 in the journal PLOS ONE. “Frequently, subsidies cover the cost of
fuel or equipment, but in this case, the government covers a large part of the access fees as well,” says
Frédéric Le Manach, lead author of the study and a fisheries expert with the Sea Around Us Project at the UBC Fisheries Centre in Vancouver.
“Since
the fishing fleets don't pay the full cost of access, greater profit allows for spending on more
efficient vessels. This may lead to over-exploitation of the developing countries' tuna populations and
other already vulnerable marine resources.” In the study, supported by The Pew Charitable Trusts, the UBC researchers
analyzed agreements the EU made with developing countries to access their waters between 1980 and 2012. These agreements include fees
that range from roughly €400,000 to €230 million per year per country (about US$470,000 to US$305 million at today's exchange rates). The
text of the agreements shows that the EU government paid a total of about €5 billion toward the access fees during this period. To compare the
industry's fee to its revenues from fishing, the researchers used data from the agreements and a database of global fish prices. Such
calculations were possible only for agreements relating to tuna because other agreements did not consistently include the catch level available
to EU vessels. The study found that the fishing industry paid about one-fourth the cost of access. Assuming that ratio holds for all agreements,
this equates to about €1.7 billion over the 33-year period. But revenue from fishing in these waters totaled about €96 billion, so the fees paid
by the industry amounted to only about 2 percent of its revenue (1.5 percent for tuna and 3.2 percent for other species). “The EU has the
potential to lead the world in sustainable fisheries,” says Daniel Pauly, principal investigator with the Sea Around Us Project and a study coauthor. “But
as they stand now, these access agreements are being subsidized in ways that disadvantage
developing countries and contradict the EU's own development goals by forcing their citizens to
essentially pay twice for the fish they're taking off of the plates of developing countries.” The authors
recommend that host countries learn from Pacific nations that recently began to charge higher fees for access to their waters—up to 50
percent more than the world average in the case of the island nation of Kiribati. They also note that a senior representative of the French tuna
fleet recently acknowledged that the fees paid by the industry are low and that it would be reasonable to set them at up to 7 percent of the
value of fish landed.
EU fails in environmental policy – can’t solve
Watt 06, Nicholas Watt, 2/20/06, Watt is a staff writer for The Guardian, “Species in decline as Europe fails to
meet biodiversity targets,”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2006/feb/21/conservationandendangeredspecies.internationalne
ws , NN
Europe's urban sprawl increased by an area three times the size of Luxembourg in the 1990s,
highlighting the continent's failure to protect the environment, a report warned yesterday. Experts at a
biodiversity conference in Croatia this week will be told Europe is performing poorly in eight of nine
biodiversity targets set in Kiev in 2003. "It is clear that achieving the 2010 biodiversity target in Europe
requires not only a redoubling of efforts ... but a firm commitment by the parties to act," it says. The
report, by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Council of Europe, says there are 800,000
hectares (2m acres) of built-up areas on the continent. The impact of urban areas on the environment is
highlighted by the example of London, whose "ecological footprint" - the standard measure of
environmental impact - is two times the size of Britain. "Humanity continues to use resources at an unsustainable level,"
the report says, warning that Europe's failure to protect the environment is threatening wildlife species. The numbers of Iberian Lynx and
British moths are said to be declining at an alarming rate. The protection of species, both those classified as under threat and others selected at
random, is one of the targets that Europe is failing to meet. The
UNEP highlighted a report by Butterfly Conservation
yesterday, which showed that the number of large moths in Britain had decreased by 32% since 1968.
The moth population in Scotland has increased slightly in the same period. Species traditionally found in
Scotland have declined as rapidly as those found in England. But overall numbers in Scotland have
stabilised because English moths have headed north, probably because of global warming. Sir David
Attenborough described the report as "significant and worrying". "Moths are valuable indicators of what
is happening in our countryside," he said. "Other insects are almost certainly in decline as well." Michael
Williams of the UNEP said the moth report was a perfect illustration of ecological damage. "Even at the level
of moths, species are in trouble. It is pretty amazing," he said. He also warned of a threat to Iberian Lynx. A recent UNEP report said only about
1,200 lynx were left in south and western Spain after the widespread clearance of marquis vegetation in the 1940s and the rapid economic
development of the country over the past 30 years. On the plus side, the report says that 30% of Europe's land area is still covered by forests,
including 17% in 18,000 nature sites. "There has been a significant increase in coverage of protected areas over the past decade, although
efforts are needed to increase protected area coverage
in marine ecosystems," it says. Jeff McNeely, the chief
scientist at the World Conservation Union, told Reuters: "Europe is probably doing better than most
continents in protecting diversity but is not yet doing enough."
US Solves Best
US data is critical, provides more than half of global sensor platforms
Levy 11 (Joel Levy, 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 Observation 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.
The US has the best ocean policy – no other countries come close
Ocean Leadership 14, Ocean Leadership, nearest date given is 2014, Ocean Leadership is a company that
works to inform people of the best way to solve for biodiversity issues, “Executive Summary,”
http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_blueprint.pdf, NN
America is a nation intrinsically connected to and immensely reliant on the ocean. All citizens—whether
they reside in the country’s farmlands or mountains, in its cities or along the coast—affect and are
affected by the sea. Our grocery stores and restaurants are stocked with seafood and our docks are
bustling with seaborne cargo. Millions of visitors annually flock to the nation’s shores, creating jobs and
contributing substantially to the U.S. economy through one of the country’s largest and most rapidly
growing economic sectors: tourism and recreation. The offshore ocean area under U.S. jurisdiction is
larger than its total land mass, providing a vast expanse for commerce, trade, energy and mineral
resources, and a buffer for security. Born of the sea are clouds that bring life-sustaining water to our
fields and aquifers, and drifting microscopic plants that generate much of the oxygen we breathe.
Energy from beneath the seabed helps fuel our economy and sustain our high quality of life. The oceans
host great biological diversity with vast medical potential and are a frontier for exciting exploration and
effective education. The importance of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes cannot be overstated; they
are critical to the very existence and wellbeing of the nation and its people. Yet, as the 21st century
dawns, it is clear that these invaluable and life-sustaining assets are vulnerable to the activities of
humans. Human ingenuity and ever-improving technologies have enabled us to exploit—and
significantly alter—the ocean’s bounty to meet society’s escalating needs. Pollution runs off the land,
degrading coastal waters and harming marine life. Many fish populations are declining and some of our
ocean’s most majestic creatures have nearly disappeared. Along our coasts, habitats that are essential
to fish and wildlife and provide valuable services to humanity continue to suffer significant losses. Nonnative species are being introduced, both intentionally and accidentally, into distant areas, often
resulting in significant economic costs, risks to human health, and ecological consequences that we are
only beginning to comprehend. Yet all is not lost. This is a moment of unprecedented opportunity.
Today, as never before, we recognize the links among the land, air, oceans, and human activities. We
have access to advanced technology and timely information on a wide variety of scales. We recognize
the detrimental impacts wrought by human influences. The time has come for us to alter our course and
set sail for a new vision for America, one in which the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are healthy and
productive, and our use of their resources is both profitable and sustainable. It has been thirty-five years
since this nation’s management of the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes was comprehensively reviewed.
In that time, significant changes have occurred in how we use marine assets and in our understanding of
the consequences of our actions. This report from the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy provides a
blueprint for change in the 21st century, with recommendations for creation of an effective national
ocean policy that ensures sustainable use and protection of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes for
today and far into the future.
The US solves best for ocean policies – Obama’s new reforms and policies establish
the US as lead in the field
Eilperin 14, Juliet Eilperin, 6/17/14, Eilperin is an environmental writer who primarily works for The
Washington Post as part of their staff, “Obama proposes vast expansion of Pacific Ocean sanctuaries for marine
life,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-will-propose-vast-expansion-of-pacific-ocean-marinesanctuary/2014/06/16/f8689972-f0c6-11e3-bf76-447a5df6411f_story.html, NN
The proposal, slated to go into effect later this year after a comment period, could create the world’s
largest marine sanctuary and double the area of ocean globally that is fully protected. “I’m going to use
my authority to protect some of our nation’s most precious marine landscapes,” Obama said in a video
to participants at a State Department conference, adding that while the ocean is being degraded, “We
cannot afford to let that happen. That’s why the United States is leading the fight to protect our
oceans.” The announcement — first reported earlier Tuesday by The Washington Post — is part of a
broader push on maritime issues by an administration that has generally favored other environmental
priorities. The oceans effort, led by Secretary of State John F. Kerry and White House counselor John D.
Podesta, is likely to spark a new political battle with Republicans over the scope of Obama’s executive
powers. The president will also direct federal agencies to develop a comprehensive program aimed at
combating seafood fraud and the global black-market fish trade. In addition, the administration finalized
a rule last week allowing the public to nominate new marine sanctuaries off U.S. coasts and in the Great
Lakes. Expanding a marine monument? Obama has used his executive authority 11 times to safeguard
areas on land, but scientists and activists have been pressing him to do the same for untouched
underwater regions. President George W. Bush holds the record for creating U.S. marine monuments,
declaring four during his second term, including the one that Obama plans to expand. Under the
proposal, according to two independent analyses, the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National
Monument would be expanded from almost 87,000 square miles to nearly 782,000 square miles — all of
it adjacent to seven islands and atolls controlled by the United States. The designation would include
waters up to 200 nautical miles offshore from the territories. “It’s the closest thing I’ve seen to the
pristine ocean,” said Enric Sala, a National Geographic explorer-in-residence who has researched the
area’s reefs and atolls since 2005. Obama has faced criticism from a variety of groups — including cattle
ranchers, law enforcement officers and ATV enthusiasts — over his expansion of protections for federal
lands. The ocean area under consideration, by contrast, encompasses uninhabited islands in a remote
region with sparse economic activity. Even so, the designation is expected to face objections from the
U.S. tuna fleet that operates in the region. Fish caught in the area account for up to 3 percent of the
annual U.S. tuna catch in the western and central Pacific, according to the Pew Charitable Trusts. When
Bush created the monument in 2009, he exempted sport fishing to address industry opposition. Mike
Leonard, ocean resource policy director for the American Sportfishing Association, said recreational
fishing enthusiasts would push to ensure their existing exemption stays in place if the protected area is
expanded. “We believe in almost all instances you can still have marine conservation and marine
protection, and still allow for sustainable recreational fishing activities to take place,” Leonard said,
adding there’s almost no sportfishing activity in the area because “it’s a heck of a trek out there. Our
concern is obviously with the precedent this might set.”
US commission on Ocean policy is best
USCOP 09, United States Commision on Ocean Policy, nearest date given is 2009, USCOP is a research
organization concerned with US environmental developments in the oceans, “The US Commission on Ocean
Policy,” http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/, NN
On September 20, 2004, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy fulfilled its mandate to submit
recommendations for a coordinated and comprehensive national ocean policy to the President and
Congress. The Commission's final report, "An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century," contains 212
recommendations addressing all aspects of ocean and coastal policy. The 16 members of the
Commission call on the President and Congress to take decisive, immediate action to carry out these
recommendations, which will halt the steady decline of our nation's oceans and coasts. On December
17, 2004, in response to the Commission's findings and recommendations, the President issued an
executive order establishing a Committee on Ocean Policy as part of the Council on Environmental
Quality and released the U.S. Ocean Action Plan. Following the White House announcement of these
actions, the Commission responded with a preliminary assessment of the Ocean Action Plan, calling it a
promising first step toward the implementation of a comprehensive national ocean policy. To view the
Commission's preliminary assessment click here. On December 19, 2004, the Commission expired, as
provided under the terms of the Oceans Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-256), as amended. However, this website
will continue to be available as an archive of the Commission's work. An electronic version of the fullcolor final report is currently available on the Documents page of this website. The full-color final report
is also available in hard copy from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) for $45. The NTIS
package includes the final report, a CD-ROM with the seven supplementary books, a DVD with an 11minute summary of the Commission's recommendations, and a 37-minute video recounting the work of
the Commission. To order from NTIS, call 1-800-553-6847 and quote order number PB2005-101629KTF.
Or order online at www.ntis.gov.
Preserving US marine ecosystems is key to avoid extinction and global biosphere
collapse. CP can’t put sensors in our waters
Craig 3 (Robin Kundis Craig, 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)
marine ecosystems
Biodiversity and ecosystem function arguments for conserving
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, non-extractive
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
ecosystem function that intact coral reef ecosystems provide. n857 More generally, "ocean ecosystems
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 otherwise insignificant species have strong effects on sustaining
the rest of the reef system. n860¶ Thus,
maintaining and restoring the biodiversity of marine ecosystems is critical to
maintaining and restoring the ecosystem services that they provide. Non-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 United
States 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 we are not completely sure about causation or about how to fix
every problem. 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 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
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.
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
enlightened self-interest thus suggest that the
United States should protect fully-functioning marine ecosystems wherever possible - even if a few fishers go out of
major cities and major rivers, forcing marine animals to flee and killing all that cannot. n866 Ethics as well as
business as a result.
Effective coastal conservation in the US is key to human survival
Pan 13 (Jeronimo Pan, 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
Links to NB
The CP links to politics – environmental policy in Europe is incredibly unpopular
Baltruks 14, Dorothea Baltruks, 5/26/14, Baltruks is a staff writer for the environmental agency Nouvelle,
“The English channel : a river or an ocean?” http://www.nouvelle-europe.eu/en/english-channel-river-or-ocean,
NN
After 5 long years of recession (which included a change in Westminster from a Labour to the first
coalition government since WWII of the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats), dissatisfaction
with politics is high, populism thrives and identity politics is ripe - not only in Scotland that may leave the
UK after the referendum this summer. Britain’s political parties are divided in their positions on EU
membership and the free movement of people. It is now one of the clearest cleavages between the
political right and left. It is a struggle for the meaning of sovereignty and identity that we have seen in
many European countries; yet its potency is particularly high on this island and may push the country
out of the Union in three years’ time. Of course, the EU has always been an ambiguous topic in British
politics, which is illustrated by the pick-and-mix nature of its membership. Both the Conservative Party
with its social conservatism on the one hand and business-friendliness on the other, and the Labour
Party, more socially progressive but concerned with protecting the interests of British workers, have
always been split on the issue. Forty years ago, it was the Labour Party that advocated a withdrawal
from the European Community, opposing the Conservatives’ advocacy of it. Sure, Margaret Thatcher’s
Bruges speech in 1988 illustrates that the UK was always more outspoken than other countries about
putting its self-interest first, keen on the economic benefits of the single market, suspicious of the
political union that accompanied it. With Tony Blair, New Labour committed itself firmly to the EU, and
decided not to impose any significant transitional arrangements on the free movement of people from
the new member states that joined in 2004. A wave of immigration from these countries - especially
Poland - followed. It was economically hugely beneficial, yet accompanied by a rise in xenophobia and
anti-immigrant sentiments in the popular discourse. In a parallel development, New Labour turned the
party that had traditionally defended the state and the working class, into a party that subscribed to
neoliberal ideas, curtailed civic liberties, and continued the transformation from the ‘Keynesian Welfare
State’ to the ‘Schumpertarian Workfare State’ that Thatcher had started. Many disappointed voters
turned to the Liberal Democrats, for many a protest party on the left, which led to the historical election
of 2010 in which the ‘third party’ became the kingmaker and joined a coalition with the Conservatives
despite huge political differences. Four years later, the Lib Dems are now seen as having subscribed to
the same neoliberal consensus given the coalition government’s record of austerity, privatisations and
marketisation. Hence, many Britons feel - perhaps not unjustly - a lack of differentiation between the
main parties in terms of traditional left/right cleavages. The rise of the UK Independence Party (UKIP)
and arguably the nasty political effects of the recession, have strengthened an old and a new divide:
immigration and Europe. For UKIP these two ‘problems’ are connected. It is not the qualified immigrants
from Asia who are targeted, but the Eastern and Southern European immigrants who are associated
with ‘welfare tourism’ and ‘stealing British jobs’. Being a member of the EU is equated with ‘no control
over our borders’. Hence, the logic of UKIP and many members of the Conservatives goes, the only way
to ‘become a sovereign country again’ is to leave the EU. While the Prime Minister has continuously
voiced his support for membership, he has attached conditions to it. He wants to reform the EU,
renegotiate the UK’s membership, and then hold an ‘In/Out’ referendum in 2017. Some of the changes
he demands are minor, others - especially those that require Treaty change - far fetched. In an interview
a few days ago, for instance, David Cameron said that he does not want the principle of ‘ever closer
union’ to apply to Britain anymore - a Treaty change that is highly unlikely to be confirmed by the other
Member States. As is his demand to restrict the free movement of people, one of the founding
principles of the Union. These demands exemplify Cameron’s strategy: he says Britain should stay in the
EU - in an EU that will give in to his demands! He is obviously trying to create a win-win situation for
himself and his party. As the EU will not give in to all of his demands, he can remain an advocate of the
principles of the single market, and a critic of the EU’s “overbearing influence”. If there will be an
referendum on EU membership in 2017, Cameron wants to ensure that he will be the winner - not
matter what the result will be. This is a risky strategy and a weak commitment to the EU. Although
Labour’s leader Ed Miliband said last year that the previous Labour government ‘got it wrong’ on
immigration when not imposing transitional arrangements on the free movement of workers from the
new member states, the party seems to have decided now to stand firmly behind Britain’s EU
membership, yet it has been more reluctant that the other two parties on the left, the Lib Dems and the
Green Party, to speak out for it. The Lib Dems, who have been stuck on an unpopularity record high
since 2010, have come out in the run-up to the European Election as firmly committed to EU
membership. Nick Clegg, the party’s leader, has even taken on Nigel Farage in two TV debates on the
issue - and was declared the loser. Farage with his bluntness, charisma and well-rehearsed slogans has
become a regular in TV discussions and news programs. Undoubtedly, the rise of UKIP is a rise of Farage
- despite rather than because of the rest of his party that regularly gets into the news for racist,
islamophobic and homophobic comments that Farage is busy downplaying. Farage is not Marine Le Pen,
but some UKIP candidates seem to be closer to the Front National’s positions than their leader makes
like them to be. Arguably more helpful for Farage is the support of the powerful right-wing populist
press that spreads his messages across the country on a daily basis. So, yes, the pressure UKIP’s
popularity is exerting on the Conservative Party has been a major contributor to the deepening of the
left/right divide on Europe. Yet, the cleavage appears to be deeper than that. The recession has made
Britain a more insecure country - insecure about its place in the world, about its identity. The younger
generation - which is more likely to lean towards the left-wing parties - sits more comfortably with the
thought of a globalised world order of interdependent countries that benefit more from transnational
cooperation, especially when it comes to the big issues of our time: climate change, resource depletion,
unreliable financial markets, etc. But this is not just a cleavage between young and old. It is a cleavage
between those who are looking backwards and those who are looking ahead and accept the reality of a
future Britain that is not a global player in its own right. If Scotland leaves the UK, which would result in
a shift of voting weight towards the right, this preoccupation with the search for Britain’s identity may
intensify further and in the worst case even push the country out of the EU - out of insecurity rather
than conviction.
**EU Spending Disad**
UQ
The EU economy is incredibly fragile right now – further spending risks economic
collapse
Yoon 14, Sangwon Yoon, 4/14/14, Yoon is a staff writer for Bloomberg, “Fragile Europe Weakens U.S. Push
for Russia Sanctions,” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-14/fragile-europe-weakens-u-s-push-for-russiasanctions.html, NN
The U.S. readiness to impose new economic sanctions on Russia over Ukraine is offset by the European
Union’s reluctance to introduce stronger measures that could threaten its already fragile economic
recovery. While the Obama administration said yesterday that it’s prepared to ramp up sanctions,
possibly to target specific sectors of the Russian economy such as financial services and energy, the EU
limited its decision to expanding an existing list of individuals under asset freezes and travel bans. U.S.
officials concede that squeezing Russia’s economy is the only realistic weapon the U.S. and its European
allies have to respond to the clashes between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian authorities.
Without European support, though, U.S. sanctions will have little effect on Russian President Vladimir
Putin’s ambitions in Ukraine, said Simon Mandel, vice president for emerging Europe equity sales at
Auerbach Grayson & Co. Full coverage of the Crisis in Ukraine: Ukraine Deploys Military as Russia Evokes
Specter of Civil War Obama Warns Putin on Ukraine After Deadly Clashes in East Opinion: Putin's
Costume Drama in Ukraine “The level of trade between the U.S. and Russia directly is quite limited,”
Mandel said in a phone interview. “Whatever sanctions the U.S. comes out with, unless the Chinese
government or the EU are willing to support them, they will still have a minimal impact on the Russian
government.” Photographer: Genya Savilov/AFP/Getty Images Po-Russian activists hold shields signed
"Obama hands off Ukraine" and "Down with US... Read More “It will have a meaningful impact in terms
of the perception, and that will, I think, come as a detriment to the market generally,” said Mandel,
who’s based in New York. “But in some of the fundamental impact, I think that would be quite limited.”
EU Meeting EU foreign ministers agreed yesterday in Luxembourg to add new names to a list of people
facing sanctions following Putin’s annexation of Crimea last month. A wider EU blacklist may hit “other
entities” deemed to be involved in destabilizing Ukraine in addition to individuals, Irish Deputy Prime
Minister Eamon Gilmore said. EU leaders may meet next week to decide on new sanctions against
Russia, according to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. A Snapshot of Ukraine's Past and Future
The U.S. is weighing further measures under executive orders signed by U.S. President Barack Obama to
“allow for all kinds of different sanctions,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters in
Washington yesterday before a call between the American and Russian presidents. Energy, Mining The
administration is considering measures targeting individuals, as well as “certain sectors of the Russian
economy such as financial services, energy, metals and mining, engineering and defense,” U.S. State
Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said yesterday. Any meaningful sanctions by the U.S. “over the
long-term would be lining up the European allies at a very fragile time for some very significant
economic risk of their own,” said Sean Kay, a professor of international relations at Ohio Wesleyan
University who specializes in Europe. “They have signaled strongly that they don’t want to have to go
down a further road of sanctions, but if Russia were to take overt actions in eastern Ukraine, they’d be
prepared to do that,” Kay said in a phone interview. Russia is vulnerable to economic pressure, data
compiled by Bloomberg indicate. More than half the revenue of the 50 firms that make up the
benchmark Micex stock index comes from outside Russia -- almost 56 percent, compared with slightly
less than half five years ago. Lukoil’s Revenue Energy giant OAO Lukoil (LKOH), the No. 4 company on
the Micex top 50 list, gets more than 81 percent of its revenue from foreign sources. The Moscow-based
company produces more than 16 percent of Russia’s oil, almost 17 percent of its oil refining and paid the
Russian government $39.3 billion in taxes in 2012. Even so, investors have deposited $721 million in
Russia-focused exchange-traded funds since early March, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Still, doubts now may be taking root amid the continuing unrest and the threat of additional sanctions:
The ruble declined to a three-week low yesterday, the Micex retreated 1.3 percent and Brent crude oil
advanced to a five-week high. The EU already has blacklisted 51 Russian and Ukrainian political and
military figures. Its challenge now is how to inflict stiffer punishments without harming Europe’s
economy, such as by provoking Russia to cut off gas and oil deliveries. U.K. Prime Minister David
Cameron discussed Ukraine yesterday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the two agreed that
the EU foreign ministers should discuss “how work on potential further sanctions can be accelerated,”
Cameron’s spokesman, Jean-Christophe Gray, told reporters in London. EU Divided While the German
government has been coordinating the next phase of sanctions behind the scenes, there’s growing
dissent among EU governments about the nature of additional sanctions and when they should be
imposed, said a high-ranking German official who asked not to be named, citing government policy.
Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius urged striking at Russia’s banking and financial system,
tactics the U.S. and EU have used to isolate Iran over its suspected nuclear weapons program. In the
Ukraine crisis, the U.S. already has sanctioned St. Petersburg-based Bank Rossiya, owned by close
associates of Putin. Linkevicius voiced frustration with the consensus-based decision-making that forces
the 28-nation EU to move at the pace of its slowest member. “We shouldn’t focus too much on washing
dishes when the house is on fire,” he said. Countries farther from the EU’s eastern borders are in less of
a hurry than those such as Lithuania and Poland that were under Soviet domination for five decades.
Greek Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos called for diplomacy, and Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean
Asselborn said Russia has sanctioned itself, citing the ruble’s drop and jitters among foreign investors.
“The serious risk for Russia in that is that the oligarchs will feel pain, its economy would feel pain and
crucially they would lose the vital gas sales they need to sustain their economy and financing of their
debt,” said Kay, the Ohio Wesleyan professor.
Link
Ocean spending perceived as useless-ocean exploration are massively expensive an
don’t appeal to the public
Carlyle 13( Ryan, BSChE, Subsea Hydraulics Engineer, 1/31/2013 @ 12:11PM , Forbes, “Why Don't We Spend More On Exploring The
Oceans, Rather Than On Space Exploration?”,http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/01/31/why-dont-we-spend-more-on-exploring-theoceans-rather-than-on-space-exploration/)
So as someone whose job deals with exploring the ocean deeps — see my answer to Careers: What kinds of problems does a subsea hydraulics engineer solve? — I
can tell you that
the ocean is excruciatingly boring. The vast majority of the seafloor once you get >50 miles
offshore is barren, featureless mud. On face, this is pretty similar to the empty expanses of outer space, but in
space you can see all the way through the nothing, letting you identify targets for probes or telescopes.
The goals of space exploration are visible from the Earth, so we can dream and imagine reaching into the heavens. But in the deep oceans, visibility
is less than 100 feet and travel speed is measured in single-digit knots. A simple seafloor survey to run a
100 mile pipeline costs a cool $50 million. The oceans are vast, boring, and difficult/expensive to explore —
so why bother? Sure, there are beautiful and interesting features like geothermal vents and coral reefs. But
throughout most of the ocean these are few and far between. This is a pretty normal view from a subsea robot: Despite the
difficulty, there is actually a lot of scientific exploration going on in the oceans. Here’s a pretty good public website for a science ROV mission offshore Oregon: 2009
Pacific Northwest Expedition To reinforce my point about it being boring, here’OCes a blog entry from that team where they talk about how boring the sea floor is:
2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition What IS really interesting in the deep ocean is the exotic life. You see some crazy animals that are often not well-known to
science. Something floats by the camera 5000 ft down, and you say “what the hell was that?” and no one knows. Usually it’s just some variety of jellyfish, but
occasionally we find giant* isopods: Unfortunately, deep-sea creatures rarely survive the trip to surface. Their bodies are acclimated to the high pressures
(hundreds of atmospheres), and the decompression is usually fatal. Our ability to understand these animals is very limited, and their only connection to the surface
biosphere is through a few food chain connections (like sperm whales) that can survive diving to these depths. We’re
fundamentally quite
disconnected from deep ocean life. Also, there is no hope of ever establishing human habitation more than
about 1000 ft deep. The pressures are too great, and no engineering or materials conceivable today would
allow us to build livable-sized spaces on the deep sea floor. The two times humans have reached the deepest part of the ocean, it
required a foot-thick flawless metal sphere with barely enough internal space to sit down. As far as I can tell, seafloor living is all but
impossible — a habitable moon base would be vastly easier to engineer than a seafloor colony. See my answer
to International Space Station: Given the actual space station ISS, would it be cheaper to build the equivalent at 3-4-5 miles deep underwater? Why? To recap: we
don’t spend more time/money exploring the ocean because it’s expensive, difficult, and uninspiring. We
stare up at the stars and dream of reaching them, but few people look off the side of a boat and wish
they could go down there.
Ocean Exploration is massively expensive and unjustifiable in the modern deficit
Conathan 13(Michael, director of Ocean Policy at American Progress and former staffer of ocean senate committee, “Rockets Top
Submarines: Space Exploration Dollars Dwarf Ocean Spending”, American Progress,
http://americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/06/18/66956/rockets-top-submarines-space-exploration-dollars-dwarf-oceanspending/)
In fiscal year 2013
NASA’s annual exploration budget was roughly $3.8 billion. That same year, total funding for
everything NOAA does—fishery management, weather and climate forecasting, ocean research and management, among many other
programs—was about $5 billion, and NOAA’s Office of Exploration and Research received just $23.7 million.
Something is wrong with this picture. Space travel is certainly expensive. But as Cameron proved with his dive that
cost approximately $8 million, deep-sea exploration is pricey as well. And that’s not the only similarity between space
and ocean travel: Both are dark, cold, and completely inhospitable to human life. Yet space travel excites
Americans’ imaginations in a way ocean exploration never has. To put this in terms Cameron may be familiar with, just
think of how stories are told on screens both big and small: Space dominates, with “Star Trek,” “Star Wars,” “Battlestar Galactica,” “Buck Rogers
in the 25th Century,” and “2001 A Space Odyssey.” Then there are B-movies such as “Plan Nine From Outer Space” and everything ever mocked
on “Mystery Science Theater 2000.” There are even parodies: “Spaceballs,” “Galaxy Quest,” and “Mars Attacks!” And let’s not forget Cameron’s
own contributions: “Aliens” and “Avatar.” When it comes to the ocean, we have “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea,” “SpongeBob SquarePants,”
and Cameron’s somewhat lesser-known film “The Abyss.” And that’s about it. This imbalance in pop culture is illustrative of what plays out in
real life. We
rejoiced along with the NASA mission-control room when the Mars rover landed on the red
planet late last year. One particularly exuberant scientist, known as “Mohawk Guy” for his audacious hairdo, became a minor celebrity
and even fielded his share of spontaneous marriage proposals. But when Cameron bottomed out in the Challenger Deep
more than 36,000 feet below the surface of the sea, it was met with resounding indifference from all but
the dorkiest of ocean nerds such as myself. Part of this incongruity comes from access. No matter where we live, we can
go outside on a clear night, look up into the sky, and wonder about what’s out there. We’re presented
with a spectacular vista of stars, planets, meteorites, and even the occasional comet or aurora. We have all
been wishing on stars since we were children. Only the lucky few can gaze out at the ocean from their doorstep, and even those who do cannot
see all that lies beneath the waves. As a result, the facts about ocean exploration are pretty bleak. Humans have laid eyes on less than 5
percent of the ocean, and we have better maps of the surface of Mars than we do of America’s exclusive economic zone—the undersea
territory reaching out 200 miles from our shores. Sure, space is sexy. But the oceans are too. To those intrigued by the quest for alien life,
consider this: Scientists
estimate that we still have not discovered 91 percent of the species that live in our
oceans. And some of them look pretty outlandish. Go ahead and Google the deepsea hatchetfish, frill shark, or Bathynomus
giganteus. In a time of shrinking budgets and increased scrutiny on the return for our investments, we
should be taking a long, hard look at how we are prioritizing our exploration dollars. If the goal of government
spending is to spur growth in the private sector, entrepreneurs are far more likely to find inspiration down in the depths of the ocean than up in
the heavens. The ocean already provides us with about half the oxygen we breathe, our single largest source of protein, a wealth of mineral
resources, key ingredients for pharmaceuticals, and marine biotechnology.
Ocean Exploration costs unpredictable-can cost as much as three time original
requested funding
Broad 8(Wiliam, a science journalist and senior writer at The New York Times. He shared two Pulitzer Prizes, “New Sphere in Exploring the
Abyss”, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/science/26alvi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)
The United
States used to have several submersibles — tiny submarines that dive extraordinarily deep. Alvin
replacement, costing some $50
million, is to go deeper, move faster, stay down longer, cut the dark better, carry more scientific gear
and maybe — just maybe — open a new era of exploration. Its architects at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution on
Cape Cod describe it as “the most capable deep-sea research vehicle in the world.” Alvin can transport a pilot and
two scientists down 2.8 miles,
providing access to 62 percent of the dark seabed. The new vehicle is expected to descend more
than four miles, opening 99 percent of the ocean floor to inquiry. But the greater depth means that the vehicle’s personnel
is the only one left, and after more than four decades of probing the sea’s depths it is to be retired. Its
sphere and its many other systems will face added tons of crushing pressure. “Technologically, it’s quite challenging,” Robert S. Detrick Jr., a senior scientist and vice
president for marine facilities and operations at Woods Hole, said of forging the new personnel sphere. “It’s also something that hasn’t been done for a long time in
the United States.” To better resist the sea’s pressure, the wall of the new personnel sphere is to be nearly three inches thick, up from Alvin’s two inches. Deep
explorers always use spheres to make crew compartments because that geometry best resists the
crushing force. “We have confidence it can be done,” Dr. Detrick said in January of the sphere’s forging. “But we don’t have a lot of margin
for error. If the first forging is bad, it would be quite expensive to redo it.” Just when the replacement Alvin will join the
world’s small fleet of submersibles has become uncertain. Like many federal projects, i t faces cost overruns and financing troubles.
When first proposed in 2004, the anticipated bill ran to $21.6 million. But delays set in and the price of
materials, planning and contracting ran higher than expected. Officials say titanium alone has seen a
fivefold price increase. The National Science Foundation, the federal agency that sponsors the project, has
too many competing needs to meet the new estimated cost of about $50 million. So officials at Woods Hole came up
with a phased approach that promises to lower the immediate expense. In an Aug. 8 letter, Susan K. Avery, the president of Woods Hole, outlined the plan to
Deborah Kelley, a University of Washington oceanographer and chairwoman of the Deep Submergence Science Committee, a team of researchers that advises the
government on abyssal exploration. The new personnel sphere, she said, might first be fitted onto Alvin’s body, giving the old submersible a life extension and a
capability boost. Alvin would also get new batteries, new electronics, better lights, cameras and video systems. But the hybrid would be limited to Alvin’s depth of
2.8 miles. The second phase, Dr. Avery said, would build a new submersible body that would let the replacement vehicle dive to the full intended depth of four
miles. How soon? The
original schedule of 2004 foresaw the replacement vehicle as ready in 2008. Early this
year, amid growing uncertainty, the keepers of the schedule put the date at 2010. Now, the soonest the
upgraded Alvin might hit the water is estimated to be 2011. And the full replacement, according to
Woods Hole officials, might not materialize until 2015. “Phase 2 is about finding additional resources,” Dr. Detrick said. “It’s a matter
of money.” Officials talk about a $25 million shortfall and hopes that a private donor might materialize who
could close the gap and ensure the speedy debut of the new submersible and its program of deep
inquiry.
Impact
Best data proves – economic collapse causes war
Jedidiah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, M.Phil.
Candidate at the University of New South Wales, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signalling and
the Problem of Economic Crises”
Thus, the answer to the first question set out at the beginning of this section, whether economic integration and economic crises are linked,
seems reasonably well-established. Substantial recent scholarship indicates a positive association between interdependence and economic
crises. What then about the second question? Is there a correlation between economic crises and armed conflict? The
impacts at an individual level and on a state level are intuitive and well-documented (see. e.g., Richards & Gelleny, 2006). Rodrik (1997a,
1997b), among others, argues that instability
in the global economic system contributes to social disintegration
and political conflict. Social unrest, regime change and even civil war have directly resulted from the
vagaries of economic integration. / Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood
of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and
the security and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels.
Several notable contributions follow. / First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership
cycle theory, finding that rhythms in
the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent
power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic
crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin, 1981) that leads to uncertainty about
power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Fearon. 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could
lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins
(1996) also shows that global
economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood
of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global
economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. / Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland’s (1996. 2000) theory of trade
expectations suggests that “future expectation of trade” is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour
of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future
trade relations. However,
if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy
likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those
resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or
because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states. / Third, others have considered the link
between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong
correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic
downturn. They write, / The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing.
Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the
presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts selfreinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess. 2002. p. 89) / Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in
the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg- Hess, & Weerapana. 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders
and lead to external tensions. / Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government.
'Diversionary theory' suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting
resources, the
governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around
the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995), and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic
decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the
tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are
generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that
periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the
use of force. / In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of
economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This
implied connection between integration,
and deserves
more attention.
crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate
Turns environment – kills new energy developments and causes more gasoline usage
Klare 08 (Michael T. Klare, a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author, October 20th 2008, “How the Economic Crisis Will Affect the
Environment,” http://www.alternet.org/story/103808/how_the_economic_crisis_will_affect_the_environment)
But there is a downside to all this as well. Most serious is the risk that venture
capitalists will refrain from pouring big bucks
into innovative energy projects. At an energy forum organized by professional services firm Ernst & Young on October 9, experts
warned of a sharp drop-off in alternative energy funding. "The concept of alternative energy has a lot of
momentum," says Dan Pickering, head of research for Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities in Houston. "But lower oil prices
make it harder to justify investment. At $50 a barrel, a lot of that investment will die." Governments
could also have a hard time coming up with the funds to finance alternative energy projects. Moderators at
the presidential debates repeatedly asked both John McCain and Barack Obama what programs they would cut in order to finance the massive
financial-rescue packages the Bush administration has engineered in order to avert further economic distress. Both insisted that their
respective energy initiatives would be spared any such belt-tightening. It is
highly likely, however, that costly endeavors of this
sort will be scaled back or postponed once the magnitude of the financial rescue effort becomes
apparent. The same is true for Europe and Japan, who have also pledged to undertake ambitious energy initiatives in their drive to reduce
greenhouse-gas emissions. Indeed, leaders of some European Union countries are calling for a slowdown in efforts to curb emissions of
greenhouse gases due to the burgeoning economic crisis. Under a plan adopted by the EU in 2007, member countries pledged to reduce such
emissions by 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, which is far more ambitious than the Kyoto Protocol. European leaders are scheduled to
implement a detailed plan to achieve this goal by December of this year. But at a rancorous summit meeting of the EU heads of state in midOctober, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy and the leaders of some Eastern European countries indicated that due to the current crisis,
they were no longer able to finance the high costs of attaining the 2020 goal and so weren't prepared to adopt a detailed plan. "We don't think
this is the moment to push forward on our own like Don Quixote," Berlusconi declared at the summit. "We have time." At some point, the
price of gasoline will fall so low that many drivers will once again engage in the wasteful driving habits
they may have given up when the price of gas soared over $3 per gallon. This may not occur right away.
But with crude oil at $70 per barrel, half of what it was in August, a corresponding drop in the price of refined products
will eventually follow. And that could lead people to see cheap gasoline as the one bright spot on an otherwise dismal horizon.
Economic growth is key to hegemony
Beckley 12 (Michael Beckley, Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at Tufts University, 2012, “China’s Century? Why
America’s Edge Will Endure,” http://china.praguesummerschools.org/files/china/4china2012.pdf)
Wealth functions as a source of power because it insulates a state from dependence on others and
provides things of value that can be used in bargaining situations. As Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye point out,
economic interdependence involves relations of asymmetric vulnerability.80 Wealthy states are better
equipped to wield market access and economic sanctions as tools of influence over others. They also
have more capital to fund technological innovation and military modernization. All states face the dilemma of
balancing short-term spending against long-term economic growth. This predicament, however, is less acute for wealthy states, which can
sustain significant investments in innovation and military power with a relatively small percentage of their total resources. The
ability to
innovate, defined as the creation of new products and methods of production, also constitutes a source of power. Like wealthy
states, innovative countries are less dependent on others and more capable of producing goods that
others value. Innovation also creates wealth and tends to beget further innovation as individual discoveries spawn multiple derivative
products and improvements. Innovative activity therefore tends to cluster in [End Page 56] particular places and provide certain countries with
significant technological and military advantages. As Joshua Goldstein has shown, “The
country creating a major cluster of
innovations often finds immediate military applications and both propels itself to hegemonic status and
maintains that status by that mechanism.”81 Military power is generally considered to be the “ultima ratio” of power because it
functions as a decisive arbiter of disputes when it is used and shapes outcomes among states even when it is not. Military capabilities
can be used to destroy, to back up coercive threats, and to provide protection and assistance. When
performed well, these actions can alter the behavior of other states. Military superiority can also generate wealth by, for example, making a
country a more secure and attractive place to invest, as well as provide the means to coerce other countries into making economic concessions.
The RAND study found that nuclear weapons were of less importance than conventional capabilities for national influence. Thus, I do not
consider them in the following analyses. The authors of the RAND study explain: “Even though nuclear weapons have become the ultima ratio
regum in international politics, their relative inefficacy in most situations other than those involving national survival implies that their utility
will continue to be significant but highly restricted. The ability to conduct different and sophisticated forms of conventional warfare will,
therefore, remain the critical index of national power because of its undiminished utility, flexibility, responsiveness and credibility.”82
The
key point is that national power is multifaceted and cannot be measured with a single or a handful of
metrics. In the analyses that follow, I allot more space to economic indicators than to military indicators. This is not
because economic power is necessarily more important than military power, but rather because most declinist writings argue that the United
military power is ultimately based on economic strength .
International relations scholars tend to view civilian and military realms as separate entities, but militaries are embedded within
economic systems. In a separate study, I show that countries that excel in producing commercial products and innovations also tend to
excel in producing military force.83 Part of this advantage stems from greater surplus wealth, which allows [End Page
57] rich states to sustain large military investments. Economically developed states, however, also derive
military benefits from their technological infrastructures, efficient production capacities, advanced data
analysis networks, stocks of managerial expertise, and stable political environments. In short, economic
States is in economic, not military, decline. Moreover,
indicators are , to a significant degree, measures of military capability . Focusing on the former, therefore, does not imply
ignoring the latter.
Russia
2AC Perm
The US and Russia are increasing cooperation over the Arctic—new bilateral projects
and reduction in competing claims
Byers 13 [Michael, holds the Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the
University of British Columbia. He is the author of “International Law and the Arctic”, “Great Powers
Shall Not in the Arctic Clash”, 11/11/13, http://globalbrief.ca/blog/2013/11/11/great-powers-shall/] alla
The recent showdown between Russia and the West over Syria sits in sharp contrast with the deep
cooperative logic that governs great power behaviour in today’s Arctic. Let us recall that, in 2010, at a
conference in Moscow, Vladimir Putin famously said: “It is well known that, if you stand alone, you
cannot survive in the Arctic. It is very important to maintain the Arctic as a region of peace and
cooperation.” ¶ Of course, everything in the High North today is changing with great rapidity – largely
because the Arctic Ocean exists in a precarious balance between ice and water and is, as a consequence,
acutely exposed to climate change. Indeed, at the current rate of melting, the entire ocean could be
seasonally ice-free within five years. This rapid transformation has given rise to concerns about potential
conflict over Arctic shipping routes and resources. And yet, apart from climate change, the most
significant development in the Arctic today is the ever-increasing level of international cooperation –
especially between Russia and the NATO countries.¶ The charting efforts of the navy of the former USSR
extended to the heart of the Canadian Arctic. Indeed, in 2011, Soviet-era charts shown to the author on
board the Russian research vessel Akademik Ioffe showed more depth soundings in the Northwest
Passage than do comparable Canadian charts. For decades, the Soviets dominated the Arctic in military
terms – to the point where, by 1989, their Northern Fleet included more than 100 nuclear submarines.
Although the fleet has since been scaled back, dozens of Russian submarines continue to operate under
the Arctic ice, maintaining a second-strike capability that Moscow deems essential to great power
status.¶ Russian politicians have long used Arctic exploits to stoke nationalist pride. The first people to
be designated “Heroes of the Soviet Union” were the pilots who rescued the crew of the SS Chelyuskin
after it was crushed by ice in the Northern Sea Route in 1934. In 2007, Artur Chilingarov was designated
a “Hero of the Russian Federation” after he descended approximately 4,000 metres in a submersible to
plant a Russian flag on the seabed at the North Pole. Chilingarov is a notable Arctic scientist, but he was
also the deputy chairman of the Russian Duma during an election campaign. One of the other scientists
involved in the flag plant later admitted that the event was nothing more than a publicity stunt.¶ In point
of fact, the Russian government has explicitly acknowledged that the country’s future success will
depend on international cooperation, including in respect of access to foreign capital and technology to
develop vast offshore reserves of Arctic oil and gas. Oil and gas rescued Russia from economic collapse
in the 1990s. Today, these account for roughly 30 percent of the country’s GDP. As more than two-thirds
of that 30 percent comes from Russia’s Arctic, continued development of the region is an objective of
central national importance.¶ Two Arctic natural gas deposits – the Bovanenkovo field on the Yamal
Peninsula and the Shtokman field in the Barents Sea – hold more reserves than the total proven
conventional reserves of the US. France’s Total and Norway’s Statoil have been brought in to help
develop the deposits through joint-venture agreements – although development of Shtokman is on hold
for the moment because of the currently diminished global demand for gas.¶ Russia is the world’s largest
producer of oil. However, falling production levels in Western Siberia have created an imperative to
move northward – often in partnership with Western companies. In April 2013, Russian state-owned
Gazprom signed an agreement with Royal Dutch Shell to cooperatively explore and develop Russia’s
Arctic offshore oil reserves. The importance of the agreement was underlined by the presence of both
President Putin and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte at the signing ceremony. In June 2013, Russian
state-owned Rosneft signed a similar agreement with ExxonMobil. The agreement foresees investments
up to US $500 billion should reserves meet expectations.¶ Getting the oil and gas to markets will require
improved transportation links. Much of the gas from the new fields will be shipped west through the
newly opened Nord Stream pipeline, which runs along the bottom of the Baltic Sea between Russia and
Germany. Much of the oil, for its part, will be shipped east to Asia via the Northern Sea Route. Russia
already uses icebreakers to escort commercial vessels along its 6,600 kilometre-long Arctic coastline,
and charges fees for the service. (In 2007, it launched the world’s largest nuclear powered icebreaker,
the Fifty Years of Victory, which is able to sail more or less at speed through 2.5 metres of ice.)¶ The
Northern Sea has long been considered essential to Russia’s interests. During WW2, some 34 ‘lendlease’ vessels owned by the US and crewed by Soviets carried supplies from North America along the icy
waterway in order to avoid German submarines. Today, the Russian government is intent on
transforming the Northern Sea Route into a commercially viable alternative to the Suez Canal and the
Strait of Malacca. Said Putin in September 2011: “The shortest route between Europe’s largest markets
and the Asia-Pacific region lies across the Arctic. This route is almost a third shorter than the traditional
southern one. I want to stress the importance of the Northern Sea Route as an international transport
artery that will rival traditional trade lanes in service fees, security and quality.Ӧ Washington opposes
Moscow’s claim that portions of the Northern Sea Route constitute Russian internal waters – a
classification that requires foreign ships to seek permission to enter. However, the US has never
physically challenged that position. When the US Coastguard icebreaker Northwind approached the
Vil’kitskii Strait north of Siberia in 1965, Moscow threatened to “go all the way” if the ship continued
onward. Washington responded by ordering the Northwind to turn round, and has kept its ships away
ever since.¶ In 2010, a ship owned by Russian mining giant Norilsk Nickel was reported to have
completed a round trip via the Northern Sea Route from Murmansk to Shanghai. The ship apparently
needed only 41 days for the 18,000-kilometre trip, as compared to the 84 days that it would have taken
it to complete the 38,000-kilometre journey by way of the Suez Canal. In 2011, the 280-metre Russian
supertanker Vladimir Tikhonov carried natural gas condensate from Murmansk to Thailand. In so doing,
it became the largest ever vessel to complete the route. It was able to do so because ice conditions now
allow ships to sail north of the New Siberia Islands, thereby bypassing the shallow waters between those
islands and the mainland.¶ In 2012, the Chinese research icebreaker Xuelong traversed the Northern Sea
Route under the escort of the nuclear-powered Russian icebreaker Vaygach. The presence of the
Vaygach underlined an important point: despite the increase in shipping, Russia holds fast to its position
that the Northern Sea Route passes through internal waters and is subject to its full control.¶ At the
same time, Russia’s offshore oil and gas interests have strengthened Moscow’s commitment to the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This treaty grants each coastal state a 200-nautical mile
(370-kilometre) exclusive economic zone (EEZ), where it has absolute rights over fish and seabed
resources. Beyond 200 nautical miles, a coastal state may also have exclusive rights to adjacent seabed
resources if it can scientifically establish that the seabed in any particular area is a natural prolongation
of its landmass. An international body of scientific experts – the UN Commission on the Limits of the
Continental Shelf – exists to review and legitimate such claims.¶ These international rules accord Russia a
massive area of seabed – thanks to its immensely long coastline and the general shallowness of the
Arctic Ocean. Indeed, the combined jurisdictional zones of the five Arctic Ocean coastal states (Russia,
Canada, the US, Denmark and Norway) likely cover all but two small areas of deep ocean floor near the
centre.¶ Just as importantly, smaller overlaps in national claims are proving surprisingly easy to resolve.
In 1990, Russia concluded a boundary treaty with the US in the Bering Sea. In 2010, it did likewise with
Norway in the Barents Sea. Russia has also limited its seabed claims in the Central Arctic Ocean, filing an
initial submission, in 2001, with the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf that extended
just halfway across the Arctic Ocean.¶ The US, for its part, has also embraced cooperation, with then-
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telling a 2010 meeting of the Arctic Ocean states that “[w]e need all
hands on deck because there is a huge amount to do, and not much time to do it.” In the same year, the
US withdrew its longstanding opposition to the creation of a permanent secretariat for the Arctic
Council. It also led the negotiation of an Arctic search-and-rescue treaty – an important contribution
given the amount of commercial air traffic traversing the region. Now the US is advocating for a regional
fisheries organization to manage the biological resources of the Central Arctic Ocean in a science-based
manner, consistent with the UN Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.¶
The US no longer opposes Russian – or potential Canadian and Danish – claims to portions of the
Lomonosov Ridge, an underwater mountain range that runs across the centre of the Arctic Ocean. Nor
does the US appear to show as much appetite today as in the past to challenge the Russian and
Canadian claims that the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage constitute internal waters. (To be
sure, this US posture may well change with events and changes in administration.)¶ The embrace of
Arctic cooperation may still credibly be seen, at least in part, in the context of US President Obama’s
sporadic efforts to ‘reset’ the relationship with Russia – an effort that, again, notwithstanding recent
Moscow-Washington tensions related to Syria, may be said to have resulted in the 2010 New START
Treaty, whereby both countries committed to reduce their stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Cooperating
on the Arctic may well have facilitated progress on the nuclear issue, as a 2009 cable sent by the US
ambassador in Moscow, and later released by Wikileaks, explained: “Our continued support of the Arctic
Council and bilateral engagement on the Arctic [...] can help bolster the moderates [in the Kremlin] and
give incentives to the GOR [Government of Russia] to continue cooperation.Ӧ What of Canada in this
emerging cooperative Arctic logic? In Moscow, a map produced by the Canadian Department of Natural
Resources has pride of place in Arctic Ambassador Anton Vasiliev’s office in the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. The choice of wall decor reflects the fact that Canada is manifestly an important Arctic country.
Still, that importance is based almost entirely on geography: Canada cannot compete militarily with
Russia or the US, and has done little to seriously develop its economic and diplomatic power in the
Arctic. It lacks roads and pipelines connecting southern Canada to the Arctic coast, and has just one
railway line to Churchill (Manitoba), on Hudson Bay. Its only other Arctic port is a neglected wharf
located at an abandoned mine at Nanisivik, on northern Baffin Island. Canada also has a glaring shortage
of adequate Arctic airports, search-and-rescue capabilities, and navigation charts – while poor social,
health and education conditions have resulted in a largely unemployable local workforce.¶ Although
Canada should be developing itself into an Arctic gateway, it has kept that door firmly shut. To be sure,
Canada was pivotal in the creation of the Arctic Council in 1996. And yet its diplomatic potential on
northern matters has in recent years been hamstrung by inconsistent federal support for a sustained,
credible northern push and strategy, as well as by the manipulation of Arctic projects for populist
domestic ends at the expense of strategic consequence. Unlike Moscow, Ottawa has been slow to
negotiate its Arctic boundary disputes. Indeed, it was not until 2012 that Ottawa and Copenhagen
announced an agreement in principle on the location of the boundary in the Lincoln Sea. Another
relatively large boundary dispute remains in the Beaufort Sea between Canada and the US – a dispute
that should, in principle, be easy to resolve, given that the two countries share a common energy market
under NAFTA (which reduces the stakes). In short, the other Arctic countries have increasingly bypassed
Canada in addressing northern issues. Even negotiations on sub-strategic matters like search and rescue,
shipping safety, oil spill response, fisheries management, and short-lived climate forcers like black
carbon have been led by the US – often in partnership with Russia.
2AC Arctic Perm
Perm solves—reduced tensions in the Arctic specifically—cooperation in the Arctic can
solve
Bernstein 14 [Leandra , Journalist at International News Agency, “Arctic Cooperation May Ease RussiaUS Tensions – Analyst”, 5/22/14, http://en.ria.ru/world/20140522/190037278/Arctic-Cooperation-MayEase-Russia-US-Tensions--Analyst.html] alla
WASHINGTON, May 22 (RIA Novosti), Leandra Bernstein – Tense relations between Russia and the US
and NATO could potentially be cooled through Arctic cooperation, according to the program director at
the George Washington Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies.¶ “I think the Arctic is,
today at least, one of the last places for cooperation with Russia following the Ukrainian crisis,” Marlene
Laruelle said.¶ “US-Russia [Arctic] cooperation will probably be less directed to cooperation on security
issues because of the Ukrainian crisis,” she specified, “but there are several other elements that are still
open for discussion.Ӧ Since 2011 the US has increased its stake in Arctic security and development and
currently holds the chairmanship for the Arctic Council. The US is planning to invest $1.5 billion focusing
on the Arctic, according to former State Department official Heather Conley.¶ However, US assets in the
region are limited and they rely on dated technology and borrowed equipment from other Arctic
nations. Russia is currently the only country employing nuclear-powered icebreakers.¶ “The
securitization trend we see in the Arctic from the Russian side is mostly not an issue of military
aggressiveness , but it is a business issue,” Laruelle said.¶ Concerning Russia’s delimitation of its
continental shelf and control over the North Sea Pass, Laruelle said “Russia is playing by the rules.” The
demarcation of national and international waterways is contested within the Arctic Council, but the first
voyage of a Chinese merchant ship, Hong Xing, through the North Sea Pass last year set a precedent
when the ship adhered to all Russian requirements for passage.
2AC Russia Fails at Sats
Russia fails at ocean satellites—recent tech malfunctions and failed launches
Carbonnel 13 [Alissa de, is a Moscow-based Reuters correspondent, “Russian Arctic-mapping satellite
malfunctions: Ifax”, 6/6/13, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/06/us-russia-satelliteidUSBRE9550D720130606] alla
A Russian satellite launched last year to map the Arctic has stopped working, a space industry source
told the Interfax news agency on Thursday, in the latest disappointment for the country's oncepioneering space program.¶ The orbiter, Zond-PP, was the first of five Earth-mapping satellites being
developed by Russia. Launched in July 2012, it was expected to have a three-year life span.¶ "Zond-PP is
declared lost due to a technical malfunction," the source told Interfax, but added experts were working
to try to revive the probe.¶ The satellite was equipped to monitor ocean salinity levels and land
humidity to help Russian meteorologists model ocean currents and ice floes in the Arctic. It was also
intended to test imaging systems to detect oil and benzene spills.¶ Moscow has boosted space industry
spending and said it wants to redirect energy away from manned flight, which makes up nearly half its
budget, to focus on pioneering Earth-mapping satellites and deep space exploration.¶ But the country
that sent up the world's first artificial satellite has suffered a series of humiliating failed satellite
launches that industry veterans blame on a decade of budget cuts and a brain drain.
Canada
Methane
Canada fails at Methane Hydrates, they’ve dropped out of the race
CBC 13 [ CBC news “ Canada drops out of race to tap methane hydrates”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/canada-drops-out-of-race-to-tap-methane-hydrates-1.1358966]
Canada is abandoning a 15-year program that was researching ways to tap a potentially revolutionary
energy source, just as Japan is starting to use the results to exploit the new fossil-fuel frontier: methane hydrates. Methane hydrates are
crystals full of methane gas found both offshore and under the permafrost. Low temperatures and high pressure cause methane and water to
crystallize into ice-like deposits. They represent an unexploited source of energy estimated to be larger than all the world's known coal, oil and
gas reserves combined. 300px-hydrates-seafloor Offshore hydrates can be formed in large white clusters, but it is more common to find them
mixed in sand on the ocean floor. (Courtesy Scientific Party, RV Atlantis/Alvin Expedition) Methane is considered to be cleaner than other fossil
fuels, and if methane is used instead of oil and coal, significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions could be achieved. Producing gas from
hydrates could also avoid the water pollution issues connected with the extraction of shale gas through "fracking" techniques. The
environmental impact of methane production has yet to be completely assessed, but researchers say they expect the issues would be
comparable to those of offshore conventional natural gas production. Canada
and Japan have been partners in the quest to
extract methane from hydrates. Since 2000, Natural Resources Canada has invested more than $16
million in the venture. Japan spent around $60 million between 2002 and 2008 to finance production tests in the Canadian Arctic. On
March 18 this year the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp. reached a milestone, successfully completing a test to produce
methane gas from offshore hydrate formations for the first time, using extraction techniques pioneered
in Canada. Despite the success, Canadian federal funding from Natural Resources Canada for research
into exploiting methane hydrates was cut as of March 31 — just a couple of weeks after the offshore production tests in Japan.
The ministry told CBC News the decision was made in 2012.
AT: MPAs CP
Canada’s MPA’s fail, one of the worst in the world
Nowlan 13 [Linda Nowlan is WWF-Canada’s Director of Pacific Conservation. An environmental lawyer
for more than twenty years With three coasts, the longest coastline of the world, and vast, rich ocean
spaces under our control, where does Canada sit on the world’s ranking of marine protected areas
(MPAs) “Canada, Ocean Nation, Needs More Marine Protected
Areas”http://blog.wwf.ca/blog/2013/09/10/canada-ocean-nation-needs-marine-protected-areas/]
With three coasts, the longest coastline of the world, and vast, rich ocean spaces under our control,
where does Canada sit on the world’s ranking of marine protected areas (MPAs)? First? Tenth? Nope,
we rank 100 out of the 172 nations according to the Protected Planet Report 2012. We’re slipping
behind many other countries around the world. Our friends at the Living Oceans Society calculated that
Canada has fallen from 66th place (of the 172 signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity with
coastlines) with only 0.63 percent of our territorial waters protected in 1990, to 100th place with the
nominal increase to 1.25 percent in 2010. Most countries lag far behind in MPAs compared to parks on
land. You know the situation is dire when National Geographic asks if it’s too late to save our oceans.
Bowie Seamount, Pacific Ocean, Canada Bowie Seamount, off the coast of British Columbia, Canada, is
one of the most biologically rich seamounts in the northeast Pacific. It was designated a Marine
Protected Area (MPA) on 21 April 2008. Only 1.25% of our ocean area is protected. That’s a long way
from the target set by the global community a few years ago: to conserve 10% of the world’s marine
areas to be effectively and equitably protected and managed by 2020. For some inspiration, look at how
Australia is doing with MPAs.
South Korea
Fishing
Fishing
South Korean fishing doesn’t solve, new boating laws.
WF 13 [ World fishing World Fishing is dedicated to all aspects of commercial fishing. It provides readers
with the latest news and product launches, alongside country profile features, interviews and regular
columns from fishery experts. “Challenging times for South
Korea”http://www.worldfishing.net/news101/regional-focus/challenging-times-for-south-korea
South Korea’s fishing industry is navigating a challenging period as the government seeks a further
reduction in fishing boat numbers along with further expansion of aquaculture production to ensure the
long term sustainability of the fisheries sector, reports David Hayes. According to the Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, South Korea’s total fishery production reached 3.1 million tonnes in
2010, accounting for 2.1% of total world production. This positions South Korea as the world’s 12th
largest fishery producer after Russia. Marine capture fisheries amounted to 1.84 million tonnes,
accounting for 58% of the country’s total fisheries output. Coastal and offshore fisheries production
total 1.23 million tonnes annually, representing two thirds of marine capture fisheries production and
40% of South Korea’s total fisheries production. The major species caught are mackerel, hairtail,
anchovy, squid, croaker, blue crab and clams. Distant water fisheries production is 612,000 tonnes
representing one third of marine capture fisheries production and 20% of South Korea’s total fisheries
output. The main species caught are tuna, saury, Alaska Pollack, squid and krill. Aquaculture output,
meanwhile, was 1.31 million tonnes in 2010 representing 42% of total fisheries production. The main
species are flounder, rockfish, oysters, laver, kelp and abalone. Changes South Korea’s fisheries industry
has seen a number of major changes during the past three decades according to the Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries figures, with marine fisheries declining in output while aquaculture
production has doubled as a proportion of total fishery production from about 20% in 1980 to over 40%
today. Marine capture fisheries has declined from about 57% of total production in 1980 to account for
around 37% of output at present after the share remained stable at almost 50% of total fisheries output
during most of the 1990s. Distant water fisheries have declined as a proportion of total fisheries
production during the past two decades and represents around 20% of fisheries output today. Distant
water fisheries decline in importance has followed earlier growth in the 1980s as a result of which the
share of distant waters fishery catch rose to around 30% of the nation’s total fishery production in 1990.
This resulted from South Korean fishing fleet owners expanding their distant waters fishing activities to
offset the concurrent decline in marine capture fisheries in the country’s own territorial waters. Located
in the south of the Korean peninsular with the Yellow Sea to the west and the East Sea to the east of the
country, South Korea has a 11,540km coastline and relies on the fisheries sector for a growing share of
its animal protein consumption needs.