Aquarius Negative - Michigan7 2014

Aquarius Reef Base Neg -CHHJPV
Notes
Although the aff is probably not inherent, if you dont want to go for
that then you can use squo solves arguments as a way to mitigate the
risk of case and go for a DA. The asteroids advantage functionally goes
away because of this since it is predicated off of NEEMO enacting
missions, which is happening right now.
Any funding CP definitely solves the aff, but the one included is
Florida state gives money to FIU (the university that owns Aquarius).
The aff answers will be that 1) not enough funding now or 2) funding
not sustainable. To answer these, there are cards that provide
different funding mechanisms included below and also just generic
cards that talk about how Florida has $1.2 billion excess revenue after
the balancing of their budget this year. There are also cards that
support the sustainability of FIU funding (which can also be used as
squo solves cards).
T - its is also a very viable optionFIU is the owner of Aquarius in the
status quo and all the plan does is increase funding for it, not shift
control. If its is defined as ownership, the aff doesnt meet.
There are a lot of advantage CPs included to each advantage, and also
internal link takeouts to the advantages and political will arguments.
Any questions?
Email Sabrina Bajwa brinabree99@gmail.com
Bob Dai (you should bug him even though he is leaving)
bdai87@gmail.com
Ishita Kamboj ishitakamboj816@gmail.com
Good luck!!
***OFFCASE***
T Its violation
Violate Its the projects are OWNED and FUNDED by FIU
not the federal government
Clark 13 - Florida Keys Bureau Chief at The Miami Herald (Cammy, September
18, 2013, FIU begins operating Aquarius Reef Base in the Keys, Miami Herald,
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/09/18/3635620/fiu-has-begun-operatingaquarius.html)//sb
ISLAMORADA -- A year ago, the federally owned Aquarius Reef Base the worlds only operational underwater research
habitat was on life support, doomed by budget cuts to become scrap metal or a museum piece if some entity did not
come to its rescue.
Most of the staff had already been given pink slips. A for sale sign was in front of the canal-side facility in Key Largo that
housed the land operation. After more than 20 years as its operator, the University of North Carolina-Wilmington
declared it was ending its affiliation with the program.
But those who valued the habitat did not give up, including renowned ocean explorer Sylvia Earle, known as Her
Deepness. She led what looked to be Aquarius last mission its 117th to celebrate the 50th anniversary of human
habitation on the sea floor, but mostly to use her fame and reputation to pump up support to save Aquarius.
the dean and associate

dean of the College and Arts and Sciences at Florida International
University were brainstorming on ways for their research institution
to take over the operation of the one-of-a-kind habitat next to the coral reef, one of the worlds most
While all the gloom and doom was going on in the Keys, up the road in Miami
special marine environments.
FIU President Mark B. Rosenberg admitted he was skeptical.

He wanted to make sure there was a sound business plan and safety
protocol to take over an aging underwater laboratory that costs a
minimum of about $1.2 million a year to operate.
At first,
But on Wednesday, in FIUs new Aquarius land base in the former Lady Cyana Divers shop in Islamorada, Rosenberg
gushed about the recent completion of its first saturation mission, NASAs Sea Test II. The mission had four astronauts
from three nations living and working at the 63-foot deep habitat for five days.
This makes it official, he told a group of dignitaries and media.
FIUs Age of Aquarius has
begun.
But for those of us children of the 60s and 70s, this is a different kind of Age of
Aquarius, he continued. One that ultimately will have a huge impact on students. Well provide students with
cutting-edge learning opportunities, worlds ahead experience that we promised at FIU.
Rosenberg said Aquarius will help raise the profile of the university. And Wednesday morning, FIU got a big publicity
boost when a live segment about the habitat aired on NBCs Today.
In November, Fabian Cousteau, the grandson of famed underwater explorer Jacques Cousteau, will undertake a recordbreaking 31-day mission at Aquarius.
But to make the habitat work financially for the long term, FIU will seek multiple funding sources, unlike UNCWilmington which relied mainly on funding provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
NOAA owns Aquarius, but it will be up to FIU to come up with the money to operate it, although NOAA kicked in $1.1
million in grant money this past year to get FIU started.
Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIUs School of Environment, Arts and Society and the associate dean who helped
land the Aquarius operation, said it will be crucial for FIU to land outside funding sources.
As an example, he cited FIUs first mission last month, in which the school-bus sized habitat was used for one day with the
pressure inside set to that of the surface so that the divers did not need to go through the long process of decompression
(when nitrogen is eliminated from the body) before surfacing.
Ben Neal, a PhD candidate at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, wanted to use the habitat for an underwater
photography project in which he compiled images to produce a 3D look at the coral reefs. But he had no funding.
At the same time, a group in Hong Kong was looking to do a documentary at Aquarius on a project that was visual and
interesting.
The Hong Kong group footed the bill for Neals project in exchange for being allowed to do a documentary about it.
There were three winners, Heithaus said. I see a lot of that in the future of the way we fund science.
He also sees a lot of public outreach, education and Teacher in the Sea programs at Aquarius, which can house six
people for missions that can be weeks long.
On Tuesday, Heithaus was inside Aquarius, hooked up by the magic of technology to a class of third-graders in Kansas
City. While looking out the port hole, he told them: We might get to see a shark swim by if were lucky.
The kids shrieked in delight.
With Aquarius we have the ability to spark curiosity and passion for the sea, Heithaus said. We want to inspire not only
the next marine biologists, but nurses, doctors, lawyers. We want all people to understand how important the oceans are.
The possibilities are almost endless. Heithaus envisions students being taught at the habitat and teachers teaching from
there. What better place to teach about the coral reef than at the coral reef? he said.
One graduate student already is working with a faculty member at FIU on a project called the ecology of fear. Heithaus
did a similar project in Australia, where he helped determine that tiger sharks helped sea grass thrive by scaring grazers
such as sea cows and sea turtles from overeating them.
At the reefs, we dont know a lot about how important these big predators are in terms of scaring fish, he said.
FIU agreed to take over operations of Aquarius is because it

has five key members of Aquarius technical and operational
braintrust working for them. The group has a combined 80 years of experience working at the
One big reason
challenging and unforgiving, saltwater habitat.

It includes Otto Rutten, a 19-year veteran who is among the technicians and divers that keep the habitat operational.
Yahoo, was his reaction when he heard that he would still have a job at Aquarius. Were so fortunate to be part of
something so cool and so big, he said. Its tiring [with all the long hours], but it never gets old.
Tom Potts, the director of the reef base, has been the with the program since it relocated from St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin
Islands to Key Largo in 1991.
I always say you can build another habitat with the right type of money, but getting the right personnel to run it and
understand what arena you are operating in is very difficult, Potts said.
When the chiller (an air conditioner inside a waterproof housing) went out for the recent NASA mission, the crew was able
to fix it in 24 hours.
Few people were more happy to see the rescue of Aquarius than Bill Todd, founder of NASAs NEEMO program which
prepares astronauts for space exploration in the extreme living conditions of the sea. NASA has completed 18 missions at
the habitat since 2000.
Its pretty much a turn-key operation for us, Todd said. Weve had almost 50 astronauts go through the program.
Theres no other place like it.
FIU owns Aquarius
Adkins 14 Contributor to FIU Magazine (Joann, Saving Aquarius, FIU Magazine,

4/23/2014, http://news.fiu.edu/2014/04/saving-aquarius-reef-base-the-worlds-onlyunderwater-ocean-laboratory/76146)//sb
Meanwhile, most Americans were unaware of its existence. When Aquarius
appeared on a list of
government programs targeted for elimination, few noticed, except those scientists
who understood its unique potential.
NASA Astronaut Joe Acaba sets out for Aquarius as part of a five-day mission in the undersea research habitat.
It
was a tough time for us, said Aquarius Director Tom Potts. You go to bed thinking about Aquarius.
You wake up thinking about Aquarius. We lived with the uncertainty.

As a graduate student, Potts was first introduced to Aquarius above water in 1990 while it was being prepped for
deployment. Upon graduation, he was named Aquarius science director. By 2009, he became director of Aquarius. It
would be tough to find someone who knows the research facility better.
This is the only job Ive ever had, he said.
Though it operated out of the public eye, Aquarius did have a fan base. Largely comprised of researchers, diving
enthusiasts and environmentalists, a grassroots effort was initiated in 2012 to save the worlds only undersea lab. Among
those supporters was Miami technology entrepreneur Manny Medina, who founded Terremark Worldwide and is now
chairman and CEO of Medina Capital Partners. Medinas involvement would turn out to be key to rescuing the one-of-akind facility.
U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart even made a trip to Aquarius in a public appeal to save the
undersea lab. But the clock was ticking.
In the spring, a
meeting was quietly organized by a group of Aquarius

supporters. A small contingency from FIU was asked to attend . Mike
Heithaus, marine biologist and executive director of FIUs School of Environment, Arts and Society, was among those.
The plan was simple find a host institution to maintain operations

and develop a business model that would not be dependent on
government funding. As the meeting progressed, it became clear to Heithaus that FIU was
being asked to save Aquarius
FIU owns Aquarius research base violates its

4/23/2014, http://news.fiu.edu/2014/04/saving-aquarius-reef-base-the-worlds-onlyunderwater-ocean-laboratory/76146)//sb
Months of discussions, formulating business plans and evaluating

risks were undertaken by university officials. By January 2013, the
decision was clear. Aquarius is an unparalleled resource for finding solutions to some of the worlds most
pressing environmental issues. FIU announced it would assume operations.
FIU students undertook a seven-day research mission at Aquarius last
November.
Aquarius offers tremendous research and educational opportunities, and were ensuring that this investment of American
taxpayers continues to provide critical research results to the country, Heithaus said. For our students, Aquarius offers
fantastic new possibilities. Its a natural fit for the work were doing in the Florida Keys and throughout the world.
Aquarius is more than a 400-square-foot habitat. It is tethered to a life support buoy on the surface that houses power
generators, air compressors and data connections. A short boat trip away is a land-based facility where operations are
monitored. Most importantly, Aquarius is staffed by a small, highly skilled team led by Potts and Roger Garcia, Aquarius
director of operations. The crew has made a seamless transition to FIU.
Garcia, who was born in Cuba and grew up in Miami, spent 20 years in the Navy as a field medic, combat diver and Navy
diver before joining Aquarius. His resume includes marine reconnaissance deployments, two Mediterranean deployments,
a 1980s combat mission during the attacks on Libya and deployments in the Middle East. At Aquarius, Garcias No. 1
priority is the safety of all those who dive to the habitat, but hes also been known to serve as boat captain, maintenance
crew and even housekeeper. With no job too big or small, Garcias management style is simple Get it done.
After spending months preparing for the inevitable shutdown, the crew worked tirelessly throughout the spring and
summer of 2013 to return Aquarius to operations by the fall. Still, there was concern about where the operational support
would come from in the future.
Then, just as dollars were running scarce last fall, Manny Medina, the Miami businessman who believed in the projects
potential, stepped forward. The Medina familys gift of $1.25 million establishes the Medina Aquarius program and gives
Aquarius stability.
AT: Owned/Funded by NOAA

NOAA doesnt OWN Aquarius NOAA ceded ownership of
Aquarius to FIU
FIU News 13 (FIU News, January 15, 2013, FIU to operate Aquarius Reef
Base, http://news.fiu.edu/2013/01/fiu-to-operate-aquarius-reefbase/50646)//sb
FIU has been awarded a grant to continue stewardship of the
Aquarius Reef Base, the worlds only operational underwater research center.
headliner AquariusAs a member of the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Science CIMAS,
FIU
received a grant to continue maintenance and monitoring of the

facility for NOAA in 2013. This will enable FIU to develop a new
business model to fund operations at Aquarius. NOAAs National
Undersea Research Program, including Aquarius, was not included in the
presidents fiscal 2013 proposal, however, NOAA recognizes that the Aquarius Reef Base is a
unique and valuable asset to the scientific community. The new business model would
include research and education activities supported by federal, state and local
government funding, as well as fees for services from science and engineering teams from government and
industry that use the facility. Donations from private benefactors also will be a key to ensuring the future of Aquarius. A
photo of Aquarius can be found here.
Aquarius offers tremendous research opportunities, and were ensuring that the investment of American taxpayers
continues to provide critical research results to the country, said Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIUs School of
Environment, Arts and Society (SEAS). For our students and our marine sciences program Aquarius offers fantastic new
possibilities and is a natural fit for the work we are doing in the Keys and throughout the world.
FIU biology professor Jim Fourqurean is the director of the Marine Education and Research Initiative for the Florida Keys
in SEAS, and he will be overseeing activities at Aquarius Reef Base.
The existing Aquarius team
will become FIU employees.

Rapid changes in the environment that supports the beauty and economy of South Florida make the observation post of
Aquarius even more important, said Fourqurean. It gives us a unique vantage point to understand how changing
climate, fishing pressure and threats from pollution and oil and gas exploration and production will impact our coastal
environment.
Aquarius provides unparalleled means to study coral reefs and the ocean, test state-of-the-art undersea technology, train
specialized divers, and to engage the imagination of students and the public across the globe in ocean science, coral reefs,
conservation, and underwater technology. The undersea lab even offers training opportunities for astronauts headed to
space.
Living and working in Aquarius is perhaps the closest thing on earth to actually being in space, said William L. Todd,
program manager for Exploration Analogs at NASAs Johnson Space Center.
Todd commanded the first-ever NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) at Aquarius in 2001. NEEMO
is a joint NASA-NOAA program to study human survival in the underwater laboratory in preparation for future space
exploration.
Aquarius allows our astronauts to conduct unique undersea missions that closely resemble the tasks, timelines,
operations and even spacewalks that will be conducted on long duration space missions, Todd said.
Florida CP
1NC
Text: The state of Florida should substantially increase
Florida International Universitys funding of the Aquarius
reef base.
Optional - with <insert tax mechanism>
FIU is in control of the Aquarius Reef Base and have a
grant to continue ownershipfunding will come from
state/local governments
Jprenaud, 13(January 15th, 2013, FIU News, FIU to operate Aquarius Reed
Base, http://news.fiu.edu/2013/01/fiu-to-operate-aquarius-reefbase/50646)//IK
FIU has been awarded a grant to continue stewardship of the
Aquarius Reef Base, the worlds only operational underwater research center. As a member of the
Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Science CIMAS, FIU received a grant to
continue maintenance and monitoring of the facility for NOAA in
2013. This will enable FIU to develop a new business model to fund
operations at Aquarius. NOAAs National Undersea Research
Program, including Aquarius, was not included in the presidents fiscal 2013 proposal, however, NOAA recognizes
that the Aquarius Reef Base is a unique and valuable asset to the scientific community . The new business
model would include research and education activities supported by
federal ,
state and local government funding, as well as fees for services
from science and engineering teams from government and industry

that use the facility . Donations from private benefactors also will be a key to ensuring the future of
Aquarius. A photo of Aquarius can be found here.
Floridas budget has been balanced and there is still a

$1.2 billion dollar surplus for the CP
CBS, 4/28(CBS Miami, April 28th, 2014, Florida Legislators Agree On State
Spending, http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/04/28/florida-legislators-agree-onstate-spending/)//IK
TALLAHASSEE (CBSMiami/AP) Florida legislators reached a deal Monday on a
state budget which will boost spending on schools, child welfare and
the cleanup of damaged water bodies across the state. The deal is
roughly $75 billion. The budget deal, which came after several days of haggling and behind-thescenes negotiations, clears the way for the Florida Legislature to end its
session on time this Friday. The election year budget comes with no tuition hikes
for students, but it does rely on a small increase in property taxes in order to
boost public school spending by roughly 2.6 percent. Legislators have
also set aside enough money to cut taxes by $500 million, most of which will
come in the form of a rollback in annual auto registration fees charged to motorists. I think its a balanced
budget that addresses a lot of the needs in Florida, said Sen. Joe Negron, R-Stuart,
who is Senate budget chief. After years when legislators were forced to slice
programs and even raise taxes Floridas slowly recovering economy has
given state legislators a $1.2 billion surplus to use.
2NC
Fed. Funding doesnt solve

The CP solves-all of their 1AC evidence is in the context of
an increase in funding, not federal funding
1AC Withers 13 (Ashley, Star-News (Wilmington, NC) January 9, 2013, lexis)
A lack of federal support and local funding has forced the University of
North Carolina Wilmington to stop operations at Aquarius, the world's only
permanent undersea laboratory - a loss that will take away a key component
of the school's marine science program, a school official said. "Aquarius is
unique. It's the only asset like this in the world," Aquarius director Tom Potts
said of the facility in the Florida Keys. "UNCW does lose a little of what makes it
unique by losing this program." But the program is not completely lost. It will
soon be operated by Miami-based Florida International University. FIU
President Mark Rosenberg discussed the facility in his spring "Welcome Back"
address to students on Jan. 2. "FIU students and faculty go to great depths for
their research. Soon, that will be truer than ever," he wrote. "Aligned with our
strategic commitment to environmental studies, we have submitted a proposal to
assume operations of the Aquarius Reef Base, the world's only operational
underwater research center." UNCW took over Aquarius operations in 1991, but
decided not to pursue renewing the agreement on Dec. 31, 2012, after a long
struggle to find enough funding. Bob Wicklund, UNCW's director of federal
programs, has worked with members of Congress for years to try to maintain
funding for the undersea lab. "Without federal funding, the sustainability of
federal funding, that's going to be a tough deal - not only operating it, but getting
good science out of it," he said. Aquarius sits in about 60 feet of water about four
miles from shore off Key Largo. With about 400 square feet of living and research
space, it allows scientists to live and work underwater 24 hours a day for one or
two week missions. UNCW operated the lab for more than 20 years - "a long time
for a research project to continue on," Wicklund said. "From the standpoint of
what Aquarius has done, it has added a real value of what's happening to the
coral reefs," he said. "Now it's being passed on to another university. We
just hope they can make it work and make it continue." The facility
costs about $1.5 million a year for basic operations, but the cost jumps
to about $3 million when funding research projects, according to
Potts. The federal budget didn't include money for Aquarius this year,
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) consolidated
programs in its ocean exploration program, eliminating the undersea research
program that included Aquarius.
AT Budget
Aquarius only needs 3 million dollars annually
Withers 13 (Ashley, Star-News (Wilmington, NC) January 9, 2013, lexis)

Aquarius sits in about 60 feet of water about four miles from shore off
Key Largo. With about 400 square feet of living and research space, it
allows scientists to live and work underwater 24 hours a day for one
or two week missions. UNCW operated the lab for more than 20 years
- "a long time for a research project to continue on," Wicklund said. "From the
standpoint of what Aquarius has done, it has added a real value of what's happening to the coral reefs," he said. "Now it's
being passed on to another university. We just hope they can make it work and make it continue."
The facility
costs about $1.5 million a year for basic operations, but the cost
jumps to about $3 million when funding research projects ,
according to Potts. The federal budget didn't include money for Aquarius this year, and the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) consolidated programs in its ocean exploration program, eliminating the
undersea research program that included Aquarius.
Florida has a HUGE budget surplusmeans funding for

Aquarius doesnt trade-of
Povich, 4/22(Elaine S., April 22nd, 2014, The Pew Charitable Trusts,
Lawmakers Jockey Over Budget Surpluses,
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-andanalysis/blogs/stateline/2014/04/22/lawmakers-jockey-over-budgetsurpluses//IK
In Florida, for example, the House and Senate each have approved budgets
that would spend some of the state's $1.2 billion surplus on promoting tourism
an economic mainstay for the vacation mecca. The House version of the budget included $71.3 million for VisitFlorida,
the state's tourism promotion entity. The Senate budget gave the agency $75 million. Both
proposals are
less than the $100 million Republican Gov. Rick Scott proposed , but still a
big boost. We are seeing signs of economic recovery, said Senate Appropriations
Chairman Seth McKeel, a Republican. The funding for tourism will certainly be included in the final budget at some level,
he said. We're sorting out the details.
As for the rest of the surplus, Florida

lawmakers are jockeying for dollars for a variety of projects. An analysis by
The Associated Press found that legislators were seeking money for everything from gun ranges and a military museum to
a sexual abstinence course for teenagers. The paper found $10 million for SkyRise Miami, a building that would be the
city's tallest, some $500,000 for a livestock pavilion in Ocala and a request to move a lighthouse at Cape San Blas in the
Panhandle.
Funding Sustainable
Aquarius Foundation and DAN solves collect taxdeductible funds and act as ongoing fiscal sponsors for
the reef base
Divers Alert Network, No Date (Divers Alert Network, Aquarius Reef Base:
Preserving the future, http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/aquarius)//IK
What is the Aquarius Reef Base? Providing an extended human presence in the undersea coral reef environment,
saturation diving from Aquarius makes possible important marine research, technological innovation, and educational
opportunities. Marine Research assess long-term change, study the effectiveness of protected area management,
potential restoration techniques, impact of climate change, ultraviolet radiation, pollution and water quality, and more.
Technical Innovation provide a world-class facility to develop and test cutting edge technologies needed in ocean
observing, forecasting and modeling, training astronauts and development of technology for lunar exploration.
Educational Opportunities window into the undersea world to excite and engage students and the public learning about
the ocean, 114 missions, over 550 scientific publications and educational programs. Aquarius
Foundation
exists to ensure the future of this important scientific resource, a
crucial strategy for sustaining our oceans for future generations. How is
DAN Involved? As a part of its mission to support diving research, DAN has
agreed to act as a fiscal sponsor for the Aquarius Foundation as it
seeks to raise funds for the continued operation of the Aquarius Reef
Base. 100% of funds donated to DAN through this page shall be
earmarked for use by the Aquarius Foundation . Divers Alert

Network, Inc. (DAN) is a tax exempt 501(c)(3) non-profit organization whose
mission is to help divers in need of medical emergency assistance and
promote dive safety through research, education, products and
services. DAN's relationship with the Aquarius Foundation is
evidenced by an agreement between DAN and the Aquarius
Foundation, a copy of which is available for review by donors upon request. You should consult
with your tax counsel to determine what portion of your donation to
DAN (for the benefit of the Aquarius Foundation) is tax deductible on your state and
federal income tax returns.
Aquarius Foundation solves provides sustainable

support in response to termination of federal funding
Aquarius Reef Base Foundation, No date(Aquarius Reef Base
Foundation, About the Foundation, http://aquariusreefbase.org/about/)//IK
The Aquarius Foundation, a not-for-profit a 501(c)3 organization,
supports the continued operation of the Aquarius Reef Base ; the Worlds only
operational undersea research station. Aquarius provides an extended human presence in the undersea coral reef
environment. Saturation diving from Aquarius makes possible important marine research, technological innovation, and
educational opportunities.
Aquarius Foundation exists to ensure the future of
this important scientific resource, a crucial strategy for sustaining

our oceans for future generations. The Aquarius Foundation is
working towards an exciting future of manned exploration and
habitation of the sea floor with a wealth of discoveries to be made
about our ocean planet and exciting adventures to inspire people of
all ages and backgrounds. The Aquarius Foundation was formed in

2012 as a non-profit organization to support the continued operation
of the Aquarius Habitat in response to the planned termination of
federal funding for the Aquarius Reef Base program.
FIU support is sufficienttaxpayer, governmental, and

private funding
PRNewswire, 13(PR Newswire-US Newswire, January 15th, 2013, Unique

underwater research lab to complement research and teaching,
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fiu-to-operate-aquarius-reef-base186970891.html)//IK
Florida International University has been awarded a grant to
continue stewardship of the Aquarius Reef Base, the world's only
operational underwater research center. As a member of the
Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Science CIMAS,
FIU received a grant to continue maintenance and monitoring of the
facility for NOAA in 2013. This will enable FIU to develop a new
business model to fund operations at Aquarius. NOAA's National
Undersea Research Program, including Aquarius, was not included in
the president's fiscal 2013 proposal, however, NOAA recognizes that
the Aquarius Reef Base is a unique and valuable asset to the scientific
community. The new business model would include research and
education activities supported by federal, state and local government
funding, as well as fees for services from science and engineering
teams from government and industry that use the facility. Donations
from private benefactors also will be key to ensuring the future of
Aquarius. A photo of Aquarius can be found here. "Aquarius offers tremendous
research opportunities, and we're ensuring that the investment of
American taxpayers continues to provide critical research results to
the country," said Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIU's School of Environment, Arts and Society (SEAS).
"For our students and our marine sciences program Aquarius offers
fantastic new possibilities and is a natural fit for the work we are
doing in the Keys and throughout the world." FIU biology professor Jim Fourqurean is
the director of the Marine Education and Research Initiative for the Florida Keys in SEAS, and he will be overseeing
activities at Aquarius Reef Base. The existing Aquarius team will become FIU employees. "Rapid changes in the
environment that supports the beauty and economy of South Florida make the observation post of Aquarius even more
important," said Fourqurean. "It gives us a unique vantage point to understand how changing climate, fishing pressure
and threats from pollution and oil and gas exploration and production will impact our coastal environment." Aquarius
provides unparalleled means to study coral reefs and the ocean, test state-of-the-art undersea technology, train specialized
divers, and to engage the imagination of students and the public across the globe in ocean science, coral reefs,
conservation, and underwater technology. The undersea lab even offers training opportunities for astronauts headed to
space.
FIU saved the reef base =the underwater laboratory has

been funded for continued operation
Mission Blue, 13 (Mission Blue: Sylvia Earle Alliance, January 16, 2013,
Mission to Save Aquarius Reef Base a Success,http://missionblue.org/2013/01/mission-to-save-aquarius-reef-base-a-success/)//IK
Yesterday, news that gives us hope for future ocean exploration was confirmed Aquarius Reef Base off
Key Largo has been saved! Through a great deal of work by a great
number of dedicated people, the only underwater laboratory on
earth has been funded for continued operation.
Aquarius is an invaluable tool to
study the ocean environment allowing us to gather knowledge of our changing ocean and its inhabitants. Last July, Dr.
Sylvia Earle and a team of Aquanauts spent a week at Aquarius Reef Base during One World One Oceans Mission
Aquarius focusing worldwide attention on the imminent loss of funding for the deep sea lab. Special guests Fabien
Cousteau of Plant-a-Fish, Bob Weir of Nightline and Dan Orr of DAN joined One World One Ocean and the Mission Blue
team to maximize exposure for the campaign. And
now, 7 months later, it has all paid off,

with FIU (Florida International University) stepping up to the plate
with the needed funds. Writing from inside the habitat one evening last summer, Dr. Earle said, Gone
too, would be a priceless living laboratory, the only place in the world where scientists, artists, poets and others can live
underwater, using the ocean as a laboratory an enduring muse. ~ Ed.
Marijuana Funding Mechanism

Revenue from legalization of marijuana is sufficient to
fund Aquarius
Wozniak 7/22 reporter for the News-Press of Fort Myers (Mary, Medical
marijuana could bring big tax revenue, Florida Today, 7/22/14,

http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/local/2014/07/21/medical-pot-bringwindfall-sales-tax-revenue/12979533/)//BD
Florida could rake in big bucks in sales and tax revenue if

Amendment 2 passes in November and medical marijuana becomes
legal. State projections of sales range from $ 138 million to $5.6
billion . State projections of tax revenue range from $ 8.3 million to
$338 million . The numbers are based on the number of medical marijuana
patients, the amount of pot they may use and the price per ounce. The state
Department of Health estimates there will be 417,000 patients. In
addition, the department estimates 250,351 personal caregivers will be needed as
well as 1,789 "treatment centers," or dispensaries.
CP is sufficient for funding Colorado and Washington

prove
Mann 14 reporter for the Motley fool focusing on economics, politics, and sports
(Jack, National Marijuana Legalization: How Much Tax Revenue Could It Bring In,
The Motley Fool, 7/30/2014,
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/07/30/national-marijuana-legalizationhow-much-tax-reven.aspx)//BD
How much money are Colorado and Washington making?

Colorado and Washington, the only two states that currently allow
marijuana for recreational use by adults, are set to generate millions
in tax revenue from legalization. In Colorado, economists project $30.6
million in taxes will be collected during this fiscal year, The Denver Post
reports. An additional $17.3 million should hit tax coffers from the sale
of medical marijuana during this time, the state forecasts.
Washington, which saw its recreational marijuana market open up earlier this
month, will likely also make eight figures annually from the move.
Despite a tax rate Moody's calls "a major deterrent for consumers [who could
instead obtain a medical card]," the state estimates it will bring in $51.2
million between 2015 and 2017, The Washington Post reports.
CP is popular 88% approval, bipartisan

Henderson 7/30 Reporter for Sunshine State News (Jeff, Medical Marijuana
Wont Be Hit But Amendment 2 Will Be Fair Game, Sunshine State News, 7/30/2014,
http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/medical-marijuana-wont-be-attackedamendment-2-will-be-fair-game)//BD
Opponents of Amendment 2 have their work cut out for them -- any
doubts about medical marijuanas popularity in Florida were
obliterated by a Quinnipiac poll which had 88 percent of voters
supporting it and only 10 percent opposing it. Voters of all types -old, young, Republicans, Democrats, independents -- are in favor of it.
Amazon Tax Mechanism

Diverting tax revenue from Amazon sales tax is sufficient
Griswold 14 Slate writer covering business and economics (Alison, Amazon Is Now
Collecting Sales Tax in Florida, Slate, 5/1/14,
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/05/01/amazon_and_sales_tax_the_onli
ne_retailer_began_collecting_sales_tax_in_florida.html)//BD
Amazon has been avoiding sales tax for years. The 21 states it is now
subject to sales tax in make up less than half of the 45 U.S. states that
collect the tax on traditional brick-and-mortar stores. In some states like
Arkansas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, avoiding sales tax through Amazon
can save consumersand divert from governmental coffersin the
range of 9 percent of the price of purchases. If youre a financially savvy
consumer in one of those states, its foolish not to buy expensive items online.
The addition of sales tax on Amazon in Florida is expected to generate
around $80 million in revenue for the state.
DA links
Politics Link
Aquarius is politically unpopular Obama cut funding
Allen 12 Allen graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a B.A. cum laude. As NPR's Miami correspondent,
Greg Allen reports on the diverse issues and developments tied to the Southeast. (Greg, July 17, 2012, With Funding
Gone, Last Undersea Lab Could Surface, NPR, http://www.npr.org/2012/07/17/156881457/with-funding-gone-lastundersea-lab-could-surface)//sb
Last Of Its Kind
Aquarius Reef Base is owned by the federal government but run by

researchers from the University of North Carolina, Wilmington. The base is an 85ton, cylindrical steel chamber with windows they're called viewports and a "moon pool" entryway where divers
plunge in and out of the pressurized structure.
There are bunks, a galley area and room for six people.
"Typically, our divers stay 10 days [and] make excursions out on the reef for about nine hours down to 95 feet," says
director Tom Potts. "So we get about ... 10 times the productivity over diving from the surface."
Last month, a team of NASA astronauts led by Dorothy Metcalf-Lindenburger spent 11 days at Aquarius Reef training
underwater in conditions that simulate the near-zero gravity of an asteroid. It was NASA's 16th mission at Aquarius Reef
Base.
At one time or another, there
have been about 50 undersea research bases like

Aquarius Reef around the world. Today, it's the last one that remains devoted to
scientific research, and its days might be numbered.
After some years of declining budgets, the Obama administration
eliminated funding for the base , leaving its staff with just two options:
Close up shop, or find their own money. Part of this week's mission is outreach and
education aimed at helping save Aquarius Reef.
NOAA Tradeof DA
Empirically proven that Aquarius trades of with NOAAs
satellite program
Eilperin 12 Juliet, reporter for the Washington Post, covered the impeachment of Bill
Clinton, lobbying, legislation, and four national congressional campaigns. She has
covered the environment for the national desk, reporting on science, policy and politics
in areas including climate change, oceans, and air quality. (Juliet, July 24, 2012,
Aquarius Reef Base, worlds only undersea lab, falls victim to budget ax, Washington
Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/aquarius-reef-baseworlds-only-undersea-lab-falls-victim-to-budgetax/2012/07/24/gJQAKB1U6W_story.html)//sb
Sitting at a table 50 feet under the sea, legendary ocean explorer Sylvia Earle lamented what she believes is a shortsighted
federal decision to cut off funding for the worlds only undersea laboratory.
She was speaking by phone from the Aquarius Reef Base off the coast of Key Largo. She was one of a handful of
researchers participating last week in the last federally funded mission to the Aquarius .
The budget for the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations national undersea research program is
slated to be eliminated, to the dismay of many researchers.
For science, we really need assets to keep eyes on the sea, not just a few glimpses here and there, said Earle, a National
Geographic explorer-in-residence. We need to understand what were doing and how to stabilize the systems that are
keeping us alive.
Deployed in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary two decades ago after a four-year stint in the U.S. Virgin Islands,
the laboratory has hosted 117 missions since 1993. The 81-ton yellow tube holds six bunks, a galley, a bathroom, a science
station and a wet porch, where scuba-diving researchers enter and exit. Visitors can stay for up to two weeks with no
worry of getting the bends, because the air inside the Aquarius is pressurized.
Researchers, who dive up to 12 hours a day, have used the platform to investigate everything from how sponges change the
oceans chemistry to the way water flows over a reef.
But the
federal budget crunch and cost overruns in NOAAs satellite

program have put pressure on the wet side of the agencys budget
its ocean programs. Funding for the national undersea research program
plunged from $7.4 million in fiscal year 2011 to $3.98 million in fiscal 2012, before the
administration slated it for elimination in fiscal year 2013.
By contrast, NOAA
has asked for more than $2 billion to fund its weather

satellite program in 2013 a $163 million increase from the current fiscal year.
Former NOAA administrator Conrad C. Lautenbacher Jr., who headed the agency under George W. Bush, called the
decision to cut off funding for the Aquarius penny-wise and pound-foolish. He said the station which runs on between
$1 million and $4 million a year, depending on the number of missions also gives NASA astronauts a chance to practice
how to operate in space.
It is a national asset. Its not a large expense, but its very valuable for the entire national picture, Lautenbacher said.
You have to have priorities, but to put the oceans at the bottom all the time is a very bad thing to do.
In a statement, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, a marine ecologist by training, said the Aquarius has been a vital
part of the agencys oceans research and we fully recognize its importance.
NOAAs core mission is to conduct and support scientific research and exploration of the oceans, she said.
Unfortunately, our budget environment is very, very challenging and we are unable to do all that we would like.
The lab was vulnerable to the budget ax in part because it is part of a grant program; although the Aquarius is owned by
NOAA, it is run by the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. Thomas Potts, the labs director, said that the program
sustained tremendous cuts in 1996 and 2006, but that this time is different: Now there is actual legislative language
which says boom, lets kill this.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the labs fiercest proponent in the House, went diving Saturday to visit the lab with her
husband, Dexter, and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.). A third lawmaker, Rep. David Rivera (R-Fla.), snorkeled as part of
the same event.
Ros-Lehtinen said that only private donations through the newly created Aquarius Foundation could keep the facility
operating.
As NOAA funding ends for this innovative laboratory, we are all hopeful that an Aquarius Foundation will be able to
reopen the base to continue the important scientific studies undertaken there, she said.
Mark Patterson, a College of William and Mary marine science professor whose visit to the Aquarius last month marked
his eighth visit there, said researchers like himself can learn much more by immersing themselves in an aquatic
environment. For example, working for days at a time underwater, he said, they can attach probes to tiny coral polyps to
monitor such things as the oceans acidity and the way water moves.
Were wiring up the corals to have them tell us their secrets in a way we never can in the lab, Patterson said. Its just
such a better way to do science, to do it in the ocean rather than concoct a caricature microcosm of nature in the
laboratory. ... I hope were not all crying as we turn out the lights, because working underwater is one of the most
interesting things I do.
Before the mission ended Saturday, the Aquarius hosted journalists and a film crew from the group One World One
Ocean, which produced several videos about the lab.
I think a lot of people dont know what we have here, said Shaun MacGillivray, One World One Oceans managing
director, adding that being in the Aquarius feels like youre in outer space.
Potts said he hasnt given up hope, especially after hearing Lubchenco talk about the predicaments of coral reefs at the
International Coral Reef Symposium this month in Cairns, Australia. The Aquarius sits next to Floridas Conch Reef.
Here it is, the case study, so nows not the time to pull the plug on these things, he said. Nows the time to invest.
China Tradeof link

Sending Astronauts into space trades of with Chinas
space exploration program
Pasternack 12 writer and the Founding Editor of Motherboard (Alex, Aug.

20, 2012, Inside NASA's Last Undersea Mission to Save Earth from an Asteroid
MotherBoard, http://motherboard.vice.com/read/motherboard-tv-inside-nasas-spectacular-undersea-mission-to-save-earth-from-an-asteroid)//sb
Of course not everyones a fan of sending humans to a flying rock as
our first real trip into deep space. Obamas astroid announcement
led some to speculate he was simply trying to buy time with a
fantastical idea while the country figured out how to pay for real
human spaceflight again. Perhaps he wanted to distance himself from his predecessors exceedingly
ambitious space plans. And to some astronauts, like Mike Gernhardt, the idea was simply a let-down : the Moon
seemed like a much better way-station to Mars, and it was already in
the sights of the Chinese space program, which intends to send
astronauts there by 2020 .
But Gernhardt, a veteran diver whos now the principal investigator of the NEEMO project, points out that flying to an
asteroid will give us new tools for understanding the solar system and provide us with valuable rare minerals that can be
used as fuel for deep space missions. (Already, Larry Page, Eric Schmidt, Ross Perot Jr., Charles Simonyi and James
Cameron have teamed up to start a company dedicated to asteroid mining.)
And of course, sending humans on a six-month trip to one of the near earth objects that potentially threaten us,
Armageddon style, might be the best chance well have of nudging it out of the path of Earth. (Blowing it up, Gernhardt
points out, isnt the best solution, as it could form chunks that could hit the Earth.)
***CASE***
Solvency (general)
Fed Funding not key

Federal funding not key FIU seeking outside funding
sources
Clark 13 Reporter for the Miami Herald (Cammy, FIU begins operating Aquarius
Reef Base in the Keys, Miami Herald Florida Keys, 9/18/2013,
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/09/18/3635620/fiu-has-begun-operatingaquarius.html)//BD
This makes it official, he told a group of dignitaries and media. FIUs Age of
Aquarius has begun. But for those of us children of the 60s and 70s, this is
a different kind of Age of Aquarius, he continued. One that ultimately will have
a huge impact on students. Well provide students with cutting-edge learning
opportunities, worlds ahead experience that we promised at FIU. Rosenberg
said Aquarius will help raise the profile of the university. And Wednesday
morning, FIU got a big publicity boost when a live segment about the habitat
aired on NBCs Today. In November, Fabian Cousteau, the grandson of famed
underwater explorer Jacques Cousteau, will undertake a record-breaking 31-day
mission at Aquarius. But to make the habitat work financially for the
long term, FIU will seek multiple funding sources , unlike UNCWilmington which relied mainly on funding provided by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA owns Aquarius, but it will be up
to FIU to come up with the money to operate it, although NOAA
kicked in $1.1 million in grant money this past year to get FIU started.
Mike Heithaus, executive director of FIUs School of Environment, Arts and
Society and the associate dean who helped land the Aquarius operation, said it
will be crucial for FIU to land outside funding sources.
Private funding solves the af

Seawolfdiving 12 Contributor at Dive Buddy (Endangered Unique Marine
Technology, DiveBuddy.com, 6/23/12,

http://www.divebuddy.com/blog/10412/endangered-unique-marine-technology/)//BD
Many of you may have heard of the Aquarius Reef Base which is
currently operated by University of North Carolina Wilmington and the
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (under
NURP), and that is located about 4 miles offshore from Key Largo, FL. What you
may not know is that it has become an endangered species of sorts. It appears
that according to Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriation Bills from the
House (H5326) and Senate (S2323). NURP originally terminated in
Presidents FY13 budget. Aquarius not restored in either bill. This is
means that the Aquarius Reef Base Program will not be continued
due to lack of funding. There is currently an effort being made by various
individuals to attempt to save the program by either lobbying congress for
refunding or by possibly privatizing the operation.
Federal funding not key outside investment solves

Earle says the development of sophisticated robots and remote-operated vehicles has done much for ocean exploration.
But interest in technology, she says, shouldn't come at the expense of manned undersea research.
"You can't surprise a machine," she says, "but you certainly can surprise a human being, and a human being can react with
a body of knowledge. That's the joy of exploration.
"If you knew what you were going to find, you wouldn't have to go. But it's the unexpected you have to prepare for, which
is what humans do," she says.
In Key Largo , an independent group, the Aquarius Foundation has

started to raise money to fund the research base's three million
dollar annual budget so that this Aquarius Reef's 117th mission won't be its
last.
Critical for FIU to find funding outside the government
come to its rescue.
While all the gloom and doom was going on in the Keys, up the road in Miami the dean and associate dean of the College
and Arts and Sciences at Florida International University were brainstorming on ways for their research institution to take
over the operation of the one-of-a-kind habitat next to the coral reef, one of the worlds most special marine environments.
At first, FIU
President Mark B. Rosenberg admitted he was skeptical. He wanted to

make sure there was a sound business plan and safety protocol to take over an
aging underwater laboratory that costs a minimum of about $1.2 million a year to operate.
This makes it official, he told a group of dignitaries and media. FIUs Age of Aquarius has begun.
But for those of us children of the 60s and 70s, this is a different kind of Age of Aquarius, he continued. One that
ultimately will have a huge impact on students. Well provide students with cutting-edge learning opportunities, worlds
ahead experience that we promised at FIU.
But to make the habitat work financially for the long term, FIU
will seek multiple funding

sources, unlike UNC-Wilmington which relied mainly on funding provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
NOAA owns Aquarius , but it will be up to FIU to come up with the

money to operate it, although NOAA kicked in $1.1 million in grant money
this past year to get FIU started.
land the Aquarius operation, said
it will be crucial for FIU to land outside funding
sources .
Ben Neal, a
PhD candidate at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, wanted to use the

habitat for an underwater photography project in which he compiled images to
produce a 3D look at the coral reefs. But he had no funding.
At the same time, a group in Hong Kong
Aquarius on a project that was visual and interesting.
was looking to do a documentary at
The Hong Kong group footed the bill for Neals project in exchange for
being allowed to do a documentary about it.
There were three winners, Heithaus said. I see a lot of that in the future of
the way we fund science.
One big reason FIU agreed to take over operations of Aquarius is because it has five key members of Aquarius technical
and operational braintrust working for them. The group has a combined 80 years of experience working at the challenging
and unforgiving, saltwater habitat.
Status Quo solves/not inherent

FIU funding will be sustainable long term programs,
Medina Aquarius program, FIU commitment

4/23/2014, http://news.fiu.edu/2014/04/saving-aquarius-reef-base-the-worlds-onlyunderwater-ocean-laboratory/76146)//BD
While its primary focus is research, FIU is implementing a business plan to

help ensure its long-term viability. The plan relies on a diverse
funding portfolio of educational and government missions, private
industry and philanthropic support.
Just as operational support was running scarce, the Medina Family
Foundation stepped in with a $1.25 million gift to establish the
Medina Aquarius Program. Manuel D. Medina, founding and managing
partner of Medina Capital, says the gift is his familys way of giving back to the
ocean, which has provided them a lifetime of inspiration and enjoyment . For
FIU, the gift helps give Aquarius stability.
FIU is committed to Aquarius because it is a unique resource
allowing our students, faculty and collaborators to better understand
and preserve our environment, said FIU College of Arts & Sciences
Dean Kenneth G. Furton, who along with Heithaus, led the charge to bring
Aquarius to FIU.
While much work remains to ensure Aquarius continues to operate well into the
future, he said, we have renewed confidence due to the substantial local,
national and international organizations and individuals who have shown their
commitment to its growth and longevity.
Current Aquarius missions solve NEEMO

FIU 2014 Florida International University who is in charge of current Aquarius
operations (Current Mission, Florida International University, 2014,
http://aquarius.fiu.edu/currentmission/)//BD
Next Mission: NEEMO 18, a nine-day mission beginning July 21 , will

focus on studies in behavioral health and performance, human health
issues, and habitability. Astronaut Akihiko Hoshide of the Japan
Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) will command NEEMO 18. He will be
joined by NASA astronauts Jeanette Epps and Mark Vande Hei and
European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Thomas Pesquet.
While its primary focus is research, FIU is implementing a business plan to help
ensure its long-term viability. The plan relies on a diverse funding portfolio of
educational and government missions, private industry and philanthropic
support.
Future NEEMO missions solve and prove sufficient funding

FIU 2014 Florida International University who is in charge of current Aquarius
operations (Current Mission, Florida International University, 2014,
http://aquarius.fiu.edu/currentmission/)//BD
Next Mission: NEEMO 19 , a 7 day mission beginning September 7 , will

focus on the evaluation of tele-mentoring operations for ESA. NASA
astronaut Randy Bresnik will command this mission. He will be joined by
Canadian Space Agency astronaut Jeremy Hansen, ESA astronaut
Andreas Mogensen, and Herve Stevenin, ESAs Head of
Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Training at the European Astronaut Center in
Cologne, Germany.
Squo solves robust business plan with multiple funding

streams
Goodhue 13 reporter for The Reporter (David, Undersea lab once again training
astronauts off Key Largo, The Reporter, 9/12/2013, lexis)//BD
Funding comes from a NOAA grant, but FIU is seeking money from other
sources as well.
"FIU has developed a robust business plan that includes research and
education activities supported by federal, state and local government
funding, as well as fees for services from science and government and
industry engineering teams that use the facility," Santana-Bravo said in
an e-mail. "Donations from private benefactors also will be a key to
ensuring the future of Aquarius."
Aquarius has been around for 25 years shouldve already

solved no unique reason why increased investment is
key
Allen 12 Allen graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a B.A. cum
laude. As NPR's Miami correspondent, Greg Allen reports on the diverse issues
and developments tied to the Southeast. (Greg, July 17, 2012, With Funding
Gone, Last Undersea Lab Could Surface, NPR,
http://www.npr.org/2012/07/17/156881457/with-funding-gone-last-undersealab-could-surface)//sb
While you're enjoying your coffee this morning, half a dozen scientists are already at work. They're not sitting at desks,
however, but a few miles off the Florida Keys, 60 feet down on the ocean bottom.
The researchers are
living and working this week at Aquarius Reef Base,

the world's last undersea research laboratory. The 25-year-old facility,
built by the federal government, has hosted everyone from marine biologists studying endangered coral reefs to NASA
astronauts training for weightless missions in space. But the Aquarius Reef Base itself is now endangered.
Among marine researchers, there are few people more distinguished or respected than Sylvia Earle. Former chief scientist
for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and now explorer-in-residence at National Geographic, she's no
stranger to what are called "saturation dives."
Greg Allen/NPR
Those are dives where people spend days, or even weeks, underwater. This dive, Earle says, marks
an important scientific anniversary. It's been 50 years since saturation diving was first pioneered by underwater explorers
Ed Link and Jacques Cousteau.
"This is a historic event, and I was invited," Earle said. "I didn't knock on the door; they knocked on my door, and I said,
'OK.' "
In 1970, Earle led the first team of women to conduct a saturation dive a two-week stay in an undersea lab off the Virgin
Islands. She's now 76 years old, and this week marks her 10th extended stay underwater.
Last week, at Aquarius Reef's training facility in Key Largo, Fla., Earle said she's disappointed that saturation diving and
the undersea research facilities that make it possible are still uncommon today.
For marine researchers, she says, it's all about what she calls "the gift of time."
"This difference in perspective you get when you don't have to bounce in and out you have the ability to stay for hours
and hours and watch that fish do its thing," she says, "or conduct an experiment without constantly looking at your watch
saying, 'I've got three minutes left, I've got to go.' "
Last Of Its Kind
Aquarius Reef Base is owned by the federal government but run by researchers from the University of North Carolina,
Wilmington. The base is an 85-ton, cylindrical steel chamber with windows they're called viewports and a "moon
pool" entryway where divers plunge in and out of the pressurized structure.
There are bunks, a galley area and room for six people.
"Typically, our divers stay 10 days [and] make excursions out on the reef for
about nine hours down to 95 feet," says director Tom Potts. "So we get about ... 10 times the productivity over
diving from the surface."
Last month, a team of NASA astronauts led by Dorothy Metcalf-Lindenburger spent 11 days at Aquarius Reef training
underwater in conditions that simulate the near-zero gravity of an asteroid. It was NASA's 16th mission at Aquarius Reef
Base.
At one time or another, there
have been about 50 undersea research bases like

Aquarius Reef around the world. Today, it's the last one that remains devoted to scientific research, and its days
might be numbered.
After some years of declining budgets, the Obama administration eliminated funding for the base, leaving its staff with
just two options: Close up shop, or find their own money. Part of this week's mission is outreach and education aimed at
helping save Aquarius Reef.
Spreading The Word
On Monday, sitting in his shorts and T-shirt inside the undersea research base, lead researcher Mark Patterson, a marine
science professor at the College of William and Mary, took part in a live Web chat.
"The whole point of the habitat is actually not to be inside," Patterson said from inside the lab. "So, we're chafing at the bit
to get outside into the water and begin doing our science."
Patterson has conducted several missions over the years at Aquarius Reef. Last week, while training in Key Largo, he said
it's one of the world's few underwater ecological observatories. It's a place, he said, where scientists are able to conduct
measurements and experiments using delicate instruments, something not possible on a two-hour dive.
"Some of the things that I've used Aquarius for through the years have involved some very careful setup that took hours to
days to get the experiment going just right," he says. "The neat thing was that the corals or sponges that we were making
measurements on were still in nature."
In Key
Largo, an independent group, the Aquarius Foundation has started to raise money to
so that this Aquarius Reef's
117th mission won't be its last.
fund the research base's three million dollar annual budget
Status quo solves NEEMO missions still occurring

When the chiller (an air conditioner inside a waterproof housing) went out for the
recent NASA mission, the crew was able to fix it in 24 hours.
Few people were more happy to see the rescue of Aquarius than Bill
Todd, founder of NASAs NEEMO program which prepares
astronauts for space exploration in the extreme living conditions of
the sea. NASA has completed 18 missions at the habitat since 2000.
Its pretty much a turn-key operation for us, Todd said. Weve had
almost 50 astronauts go through the program. Theres no other place
like it.
Status quo solves none of their evidence is in the

context of new FIU ownership just undertook a mission
Gore 13 writer for Florida Keys News, (Josh, September 22, 2013, FIU's first
Aquarius mission deemed a success, Florida Keys News,
http://keysnews.com/node/50143)//sb
An underwater research base off Key Largo completed its first
mission under new management last week after being on the brink of closure.
UPPER KEYS --
Before Florida International University took over operation of Aquarius Reef Base in January, effectively forestalling its
closing, the world's only undersea research station was run by the University of North Carolina-Wilmington, which
abandoned it due to budget cuts.
The base, located on the ocean floor near Conch Reef about 6 miles offshore, is owned by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and has a life expectancy of about 10 to 15 more years.
The latest mission, which took place from Sept. 10 to Sept. 14, was dubbed SEATEST II.
Jim Fourqurean,
the FIU researcher overseeing the Aquarius project, said he was

a bit anxious about the first mission, but deemed it a success.
"There were a couple of hiccups here and there," Fourqurean said, but by most accounts everything went as planned.
NASA astronaut Joe Acaba led the crew and was joined by astronauts
Kate Rubins of NASA, Andreas Mogensen of the European Space
Agency, and Soichi Noguchi of the Japan Aerospace Exploration
Agency.
The crew conducted engineering demonstrations and refined techniques in team communication. Fourqurean said the
mission allows astronauts to train on how to explore and retrieve information from asteroids or other planets.
Previous exercises in Aquarius, which allows astronauts to simulate

zero-gravity conditions, have supported 16 NASA missions.
"The NASA guys told me this was as smooth as it's ever been," Fourqurean said.
During the mission, the four astronauts and two FIU techs were stationed in the base. On the topside were 10 FIU workers
and eight NASA employees, as well as three from Japan's space program and two from Europe.
The mission also streamed live, though without audio, on USTREAM. Feeds are accessible at www.aquarius.fiu.edu.
Aquarius' next mission has already garnered its fair share of worldwide media attention.
Filmmaker and oceanographic explorer Fabien Cousteau will

undertake a multimillion-dollar venture this fall -- dubbed "Mission
31" -- to spend 31 days conducting research from the Aquarius.
Initially scheduled for Oct. 1, the mission has been delayed. Fourqurean said a date hasn't yet been set.
Aquarius was fully funded for 20 yearssolvency is

empirically denied
Heithaus their author, 13Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences at

FIU (Michael, Statement of Dr. Michael Heithaus Associate Dean, College of Arts
and Sciences Before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard Subcommittee
Hearing June 13, 2013 Aquarius Reef Base and Partnerships in Ocean
Observations, http://government.fiu.edu/federal/dcdispatches/current/Statement-of-Dr-Michael-Heithaus.html)//IK
Aquarius Reef Base The Aquarius is the only operating undersea
laboratory, 43 feet long by 9 feet in diameter that houses six aquanauts on
the ocean floor 60 feet below the surface for 10-31 days at a time. The
habitat, the worlds only operational marine habitat dedicated to science and
education, is a national treasure owned by NOAA. It has been sited in the

Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary off Key Largo for 20 years and has
proven to be instrumental in the advancement of oceanic research, engaging
Americas future leaders through ocean-inspired learning, and serving as a
catalyst for development of the next generation of marine and extra planetary
explorers and exploration technologies.
Science Diplomacy High

Current science diplomacy solves universities are
creating international institutions and partnerships in
science research
Colglazier and Lyons 7-8 E. William Colglazier is the science and
technology adviser to the U.S. secretary of state. Elizabeth E. Lyons is a senior
adviser in the U.S. Department of States Office of the Science and Technology
Adviser and its Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs. She is on detail with support from the National Science Foundation to the
Department of State. (E. William, Elizabeth E., 2014, The United States Looks to
the Global Science, Technology, and Innovation Horizon, Science and
Diplomacy, http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2014/united-stateslooks-global-science-technology-and-innovation-horizon)//sb
Looking out: To reap the diplomatic, development assistance, scientific, and economic benefits
of collaboration, the United States needs to look out at the rest of the
world for mutually beneficial opportunities for collaboration. Many universities are striving
to do just this, facilitating curiosity-driven international research by
faculty members, providing students with well-mentored international
research experiences, and investing in international partnerships to
add value and strategic focus at the university level. Leaders at U.S. universities are striving
to define their institutions value proposition in a more
international context by considering strengths and potential beyond
the local and U.S. domestic playing fields. There are many examples
of international institution-level STI partnerships, including
international branch campuses, dual degree programs, and research and
education centers, involving one or more U.S. institutions and one or more foreign institutions within a
country or region. U.S. universities are keenly interested in the strategies and
strengths of foreign universities and in the STI opportunities of different countries.9 Outside of
collaborative opportunities in the European Union and in a few individual countries, we find that information on the STI
policies of other countries is not well known in the United States, and there are few mechanisms to share it with the U.S.
STI enterprise. Such insights could help U.S. institutions build strong, productive, and sustainable STI partnerships.
Multiple opportunities for international cooperation are close at hand. As the first U.S. stop for many foreign governments
and institutions, the Department of State regularly receives requests for help in partnering with the U.S. STI community.
Because the United States has more than four thousand degree-granting institutions of higher education, such
matchmaking is a daunting task. Therefore, as the United States looks to engage internationally in STI, it is essential that
potential partners be able to readily access information about the many American STI-relevant institutions and activities.
Science diplomacy high HESN foundation solves
Colglazier and Lyons 7-8 E. William Colglazier is the science and

technology adviser to the U.S. secretary of state. Elizabeth E. Lyons is a senior
adviser in the U.S. Department of States Office of the Science and Technology
Adviser and its Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs. She is on detail with support from the National Science Foundation to the
Department of State. (E. William, Elizabeth E., 2014, The United States Looks to
the Global Science, Technology, and Innovation Horizon, Science and
Diplomacy, http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2014/united-stateslooks-global-science-technology-and-innovation-horizon)//sb
Looking around:
The new global landscape of science is more distributed

and networkedthe United States needs to look around at such
linkages. Many scientific advances are now propelled not just by
individuals working within individual labs, but increasingly by overlapping, fluid,
and largely self-organizing networks of scientists , engineers, technologists, and entrepreneurs.
These networks frequently extend across and beyond research
intensive institutions . Networks of scientists are already being
supported, for example, by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Research Coordination Networks
and through initiatives such as the Higher Education Solutions Network (HESN) undertaken by the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). HESN is building diverse , often
international, teams to tackle significant development challenges,
making more information on development projects available domestically and internationally, and tying together people
and results for stronger impact.
Current science diplomacy solves
Hormats 3/12 - Served Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy,
and the Environment (Robert, Science Diplomacy and Twenty-First Century
Statecraft) AAAS http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2012/sciencediplomacy-and-twenty-first-century-statecraft) (LT)
SCIENCE diplomacy is a central component of Americas twenty-first
century statecraft agenda. The United States must increasingly recognize
the vital role science and technology can play in addressing major
challenges, such as making our economy more competitive, tackling
global health issues, and dealing with climate change. American
leadership in global technological advances and scientific research, and
the dynamism of our companies and universities in these areas, is a major
source of our economic, foreign policy, and national security strength.
Additionally, it is a hallmark of the success of the American system. While some
seek to delegitimize scientific ideas, we believe the United States should
celebrate science and see itas was the case since the time of Benjamin
Franklinas an opportunity to advance the prosperity, health, and
overall well-being of Americans and the global community. Innovation policy
is part of our science diplomacy engagement. More than ever before, modern
economies are rooted in science and technology. It is estimated that Americas
knowledge-based industries represent 40 percent of our economic
growth and 60 percent of our exports. Sustaining a vibrant knowledgebased economy, as well as a strong commitment to educational excellence
and advanced research, provides an opportunity for our citizens to
prosper and enjoy upward mobility. America attracts people from all over
the worldscientists, engineers, inventors, and entrepreneurswho want the
opportunity to participate in, and contribute to, our innovation economy. At the
same time, our bilateral and multilateral dialogues support science, technology,
and innovation abroad by promoting improved education; research and
development funding; good governance and transparent regulatory policies;
markets that are open and competitive; and policies that allow researchers and
companies to succeed, and, if they fail, to have the opportunity to try again. We
advocate for governments to embrace and enforce an intellectual

property system that allows innovators to reap the benefits of their
ideas and also rewards their risk taking. Abraham Lincoln himself held a patent
on an invention, a device for preventing ships from being grounded on shoals. He
said in his Second Lecture on Discoveries and Inventions in 1859 that patents
added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius, in the discovery and production of
new and useful things. The practice of science is increasingly expanding
from individuals to groups, from single disciplines to interdisciplinary, and from
a national to an international scope. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development reported that from 1985 to 2007, the
number of scientific articles published by a single author decreased
by 45 percent. During that same period, the number of scientific
articles published with domestic co-authorship increased by 136
percent, and those with international co-authorship increased by 409
percent. The same trend holds for patents. Science collaboration is exciting
because it takes advantage of expertise that exists around the country and around
the globe. American researchers, innovators, and institutions, as well as their
foreign counterparts, benefit through these international collaborations.
Governments that restrict the flow of scientific expertise and data will find
themselves isolated, cut off from the global networks that drive scientific and
economic innovation. While the scientific partnerships that the United States
builds with other nations, and international ties among universities and
research labs, are a means to address shared challenges, they also contribute
to broadening and strengthening our diplomatic relationships. Scientific
partnerships are based on disciplines and values that transcend politics,
languages, borders, and cultures. Processes that define the scientific
communitysuch as merit review, critical thinking, diversity of
thought, and transparencyare fundamental values from which the
global community can reap benefits. History provides many examples of
how scientific cooperation can bolster diplomatic ties and cultural
exchange. American scientists collaborated with Russian and Chinese
counterparts for decades, even as other aspects of our relationship proved more
challenging. Similarly, the science and technology behind the agricultural Green
Revolution of the 1960s and 70s was the product of American, Mexican, and
Indian researchers working toward a common goal. Today, the United States
has formal science and technology agreements with over fifty
countries. We are committed to finding new ways to work with other
countries in science and technology, to conduct mutually beneficial
joint research activities, and to advance the interests of the U.S.
science and technology community. Twenty-first century statecraft also
requires that we build greater people-topeople relationships. Science and
technology cooperation makes that possible. For example, through the Science
Envoy program, announced by President Obama in 2009 in Cairo, Egypt,
eminent U.S. scientists have met with counterparts throughout Asia, Africa, and
the Middle East to build relationships and identify opportunities for sustained
cooperation. With over half of the worlds population under the age of thirty, we
are developing new ways to inspire the next generation of science and
technology leaders. Over the past five years, the Department of States
International Fulbright Science & Technology Award has brought more than two
hundred exceptional students from seventy-three different countries to the
United States to pursue graduate studies. Through the Global Innovation through
Science and Technology Initiative, the United States recently invited young
innovators from North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia to post YouTube videos
describing solutions to problems they face at home. The top submissions will
receive financial support, business mentorship, and networking opportunities.
Science diplomacy high now recent mission to Cuba

proves
Wren 4-30 writer for AAAS (Kathy, April 30, 2014, Science Diplomacy Visit
to Cuba Produces Historic Agreement, AAAS,
http://www.aaas.org/news/science-diplomacy-visit-cuba-produces-historicagreement)//sb
HAVANA, CUBA On a 90-degree morning in April, a AAAS-led group of U.S. scientists and
policy experts stepped gratefully out of the tropical glare of a Havana
side street and into the elegant, 18th-century headquarters of the
Cuban Academy of Sciences.
As the visitors were welcomed by their Academy hosts, it would have been impossible to guess from the warm hugs and
hearty handshakes that the two groups were from countries whose governments have been at odds for over five decades.
The meeting was the first stop for the AAAS group on its three-day visit to Havana, where it would meet with a
broad assortment of scientists and physicians across the city in an
effort to further scientific collaboration between researchers in Cuba
and the United States. The group also met with Chief of Mission of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana
John Caulfield, who expressed his support for the visit.
"This trip was a wonderful opportunity to reinvigorate the long-standing

friendship between U.S. and Cuban scientists and to form a more specific plan of
action," said AAAS President Gerald Fink, who is also a professor of biology at the Whitehead Institute at MIT.
The discussions that began at the Cuban Academy of Sciences would give rise to a landmark agreement two days later.
Signed by the leaders of the Academy and AAAS, a memorandum of understanding now outlines a plan to advance
scientific cooperation by Cuban and U.S. scientists, in key areas of mutual interest to both countries.
The visiting group also included also included Alan I. Leshner, chief executive officer of AAAS and executive publisher of
Science, Vaughan Turekian, AAAS chief international officer, Joanne Carney, director of the AAAS Office of Government
Relations, and David Shaw, AAAS treasurer and managing partner of the Black Point Group, as well as several others who
have traveled to Cuba on earlier science diplomacy visits: Peter Agre, Nobel laureate and past president of AAAS, Mark
Rasenick, professor of physiology & biophysics and psychiatry at the University of Illinois Chicago College of Medicine,
Maxmillian Angerholzer III, senior advisor and corporate secretary of the Lounsbery Foundation, and Mark Vlasic,
adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center.
A Long History of Cuban Science
Located in Havana's old city, the headquarters of the storied Cuban Academy of Sciences was a fitting launch point for the
visit. In an airy room lined with antique bookcases, the sounds of Cuba's vintage motor vehicles rumbling through the
open windows, Foreign Secretary and Executive Director Sergio Jorge Pastrana began the meeting by introducing the
visitors to some of the luminaries in the history of Cuban science.
Established in 1861, the Academy was the first association of its kind in the New World. Its early members included
Nicols Jos Gutirrez, the physician who introduced anesthesia in Cuba, Felipe Poey y Aloy, Latin America's most famous
ichthyologist at the time, and the renowned physician and scientist, Carlos Finlay, who first determined that yellow fever
was spread by mosquitoes.
Although natural history was an active area of research in the 19th and early 20th centuries much of it in collaboration
with U.S. scientists at the Smithsonian and elsewhere by the 1950s, very little laboratory research was taking place in
Cuba. The country had just three public universities, and the Academy was supported by its own members, according to
Pastrana.
That all changed with the revolution, which was followed by a period of intense capacity building in education, science and
medicine, including a reorganization of the Cuban Academy of Sciences. The revolution's leaders spoke often about the
importance of investing in science and technology: "The basis of continuous development in the future years lies in an
ever-developing scientific endeavor," Che Guevara told the Academy's Council in 1964, after visiting the newly
inaugurated CERN in Switzerland.
Today, Cuba has a hardy biotechnology industry that exports a number of important vaccines, antibody-based drugs and
other biomedical technologies. Its preventative health care is widely regarded as excellent, and both infant mortality rates
and average lifespan are roughly comparable to those in the United States.
The obstacles to scientific collaboration are formidable, however. The Cuban economy, which crashed after the dissolution
of the Soviet Union, is still faltering despite modest economic reforms in recent years. The U.S. embargo blocks federal
research funding from reaching Cuban scientists. And, while non-governmental U.S. scientists are permitted to travel to
Cuba to conduct research under the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control's general license, they must apply for a specific
license to attend or organize most conferences there.
At the Academy and the rest of the AAAS team's stops, the Cubans were clearly proud of what they and their colleagues
have accomplished in a cash-strapped economy, with little access to information and resources from the United States.
But several voiced frustration that U.S. regulations make it so difficult for U.S. scientists to attend most of the scientific
meetings that take place in Cuba.
Such meetings, it was agreed, are an essential element of the scientific process in any part of the world: "In spite of
political differences, scientists can always get together and talk," said Pastrana.
Common Ground in the Life Sciences
Later that afternoon, the AAAS group visited Havana's Hospital Hermanos Ameijeiras, which towers next to the seaside
boulevard known as the Malecn. Leaders at this teaching and research hospital, which performs about 30,000 major
surgeries a year, also expressed pride in the self-reliance of Cuba's science and medical systems. Although though they can
acquire "with much effort" medicines that are produced in the United
States, one official said, some 80 percent of all therapies given to patients
are produced in Cuba.
It was clear that the Cubans are well positioned to detect emerging infectious diseases of concern to the United States,
such as dengue and chikungunya, serious mosquito-borne viral diseases for which no vaccines exist. Hospital leaders told
the U.S. group that Cuba has already implemented surveillance measures for chikungunya, which has just turned up in the
Caribbean in recent months. The virus is spreading rapidly in the region, raising fears among U.S. public health experts
that it may soon make an appearance in the States.
Infectious disease is an excellent example of an area where AAAS should be encouraging cooperation between U.S. and
"One of the charges to a country's scientific

community is to help improve the lives of its citizens," he said. "If a large amount
Cuban scientists, according to Turekian.
of people could potentially be made sick by a disease coming up through the Caribbean, and we didn't speak up about that,
then we wouldn't be doing our job effectively."
Additional areas of common interest emerged the following day, at the Western Havana Bio-Cluster, a collection of over
50 institutions that encompasses both original research and the production and marketing of new technologies. Leaders
from several of the main institutes at this biotechnology hotspot described research highlights in fields spanning
neuroscience, agriculture and immunology.
Many Cuban accomplishments of this sector are well known; for example Cuba produces widely used vaccines for diseases
such as meningitis B and hepatitis B, among others. But the experts also described several new areas of progress. A
scientist at the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB) described a new, injectable drug for treating
severe foot ulcers associated with diabetes, which often lead to amputation. The drug has performed well in clinical trials
and is registered in a number of developed and developing countries, he said. Other CIGB scientists have developed a
vaccine for serious tick infestations that affect cattle in the southwestern United States and Mexico and said they also have
results on other diseases that are impacting U.S. agriculture, such as those affecting citrus crops and soybeans.
At the Center for Molecular Immunology, monoclonal antibodies are yielding positive results in clinical trials for a variety
of cancers, including glioma, lung cancer and prostate cancer. During the AAAS group's visit to this institute, the
importance of scientific meetings re-emerged, as an early-career researcher described an upcoming meeting she had
helped organize. Her enthusiasm was palpable as she described the unusually large number of U.S. scientists who were
expected to attend.
"What Comes Next Is Pivotal"
On the final morning of the trip, in a pink and purple meeting room in the 84-year-old Hotel Nacional, where mobsters
and movie stars once rubbed shoulders with intellectuals and heads of state, Alan Leshner, Gerald Fink, Sergio Jorge
Pastrana, and Ismael Clark Arxer, the president of the Cuban Academy of Sciences, signed the agreement that would carry
the momentum from the visit forward.
The memorandum of understanding identified four areas in the life sciences where AAAS and the Cuban
Academy of Sciences will seek opportunities for sustained cooperation:
emerging infectious diseases, brain disorders, cancer, and
antimicrobial drug resistance.
"With this signing we are providing support for communities dealing with very similar problems," said Pastrana.
Although AAAS has participated in several trips to Cuba before, in 1997, 2009 and 2011, "we had more institutional
participation this time, including AAAS' senior leadership," said Turekian. "The success or failure of this partnership will
now depend on building projects that are much more sustained, and in much greater depth."
"Each of these theme areas has the potential for a workshop or conference that is truly collaborative," where researchers
can share information and make new discoveries together, he said.
For AAAS, a key focus now will be reaching out to U.S. researchers, including those in its 258 affiliated scientific societies,
who may be interested in taking part in these efforts.
"We've opened the door. What comes next is pivotal," said Agre.
Science diplomacy fails

Dickson, 9 - Director of ScieDev.net (David, Science diplomacy: the case for
caution, SciDev.net 2009,
http://scidevnet.wordpress.com/2009/06/02/science-diplomacy-the-case-forcaution/)//gingE
Science diplomacy: the case for caution There has been much lively discussion on the
value of international collaboration in achieving scientific goals, on
the need for researchers to work together on the scientific aspects of
global challenges such as climate change and food security, and on the
importance of science capacity building in developing countries in
order to make this possible. But there remained little evidence at the end of
the meeting on how useful it was to lump all these activities together under
the umbrella term of science diplomacy. More significantly, although numerous claims
were made during the conference about the broader social and political value of scientific collaboration for example, in
establishing a framework for collaboration in other areas, and in particular reducing tensions between rival countries
little was produced to demonstrate whether this hypothesis is true. If it

is not, then some of the arguments made on behalf of science diplomacy, and in particular its value as a mechanism for
exercising soft power in foreign policy, do not stand up to close scrutiny. Indeed, a case can be made that where
scientific projects have successfully involved substantial international collaboration, such success is often heavily
dependent on a prior political commitment to cooperation, rather than a mechanism for securing cooperation where the
political will is lacking. Three messages appeared to emerge from the two days of discussion. Firstly, where
the
political will to collaborate does exist, a joint scientific project can be
a useful expression of that will. Furthermore, it can be an enlightening experience for all those
directly involved. But it is seldom a magic wand that can secure broader cooperation where none existed before. Secondly,
science
diplomacy will only become recognised as a useful activity if

it is closely defined to cover specific situations (such as the negotiation of major
international scientific projects or collaborative research enterprises). As an umbrella term
embracing the many ways in which science interacts with foreign
policy, it loses much of its impact, and thus its value. Finally, when it
comes to promoting the use of science in developing countries, a
terminology based historically on maximising self-interest the
ultimate goal of the diplomat and on practices through which the
rich have almost invariably ended up exploiting the poor, is likely to
be counterproductive.
In other words, the discussion seemed to confirm that science diplomacy has a
legitimate place in the formulation and implementation of policies for science (just as there is a time and place for
exercising soft power in international relations). But the
dangers of going beyond this

including the danger of distorting the integrity of science itself, and
even alienating potential partners in collaborative projects,
particularly in the developing world were also clearly exposed.
No Political Will
Evidence of worst-case scenario climate threats already
exist and politicians are not incentivized to take action
they try to extract the last benefits from the environment
while it is still intactprefer the most recent political
outlook
Stanley-Becker, 7/27Contributor for Yale Daily News and the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette (Isaac, July 27th, 2014, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The politics of the
climate change debate: What does WWI have to do with, http://www.postgazette.com/news/environment/2014/07/27/The-politics-of-the-climatechange-debate/stories/201407270151)//IK
It may not happen with a bang. No guns or bombs. No political assassinations or ultimatums borne of diplomatic
alliances. The
world's next great conflagration will occur because of the

slow and steady warming of the climate, because of the concentration of greenhouse gases
emitted by humans, argues a retired rear navy admiral in a Friday editorial in Science magazine. David Titley,
now director of Penn State's Center for Solutions to Weather and Climate Risk, finds a parallel between
the choices elected officials face regarding climate change and the
choices political leaders faced in 1914, as the First World War loomed .
Officials in Serbia, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia and France could have quieted the bang from the gun that killed
Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria instead of fanning the flames of war if they had properly assessed risk and
prioritized collective well-being above "short-term gains" and "institutional hubris," Mr. Titley writes, citing the British
historian Max Hastings' "Catastrophe 1914." At the centennial of the war to end all wars, history
offers a
sobering lesson for those who deny human-caused global warming, Mr.
Titley argues in his editorial, titled "Ghosts From the Past." European leaders were similarly in denial, he writes; they
refused to acknowledge imminent loss of life.
He implores today's leaders to imagine

what catastrophe would mean. Indications of the worst-case scenario
already lurk in rising sea levels and ocean acidification,
he said in a recent
interview, moments after he had finished testifying before a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
about the national security implications of energy and climate issues. He's not a lobbyist, he insisted, just an expert and a
concerned citizen. "I
don't see this is a partisan issue. It's just physics ," he said.
"The ice doesn't vote. It doesn't caucus. It doesn't watch Fox or
MSNBC. It just melts." Whether it's partisan, the problem is a political one, said
Joseph Otis Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, based in Philadelphia. He laid blame on
politicians who ignore the counsel of scientists , citing the 2007
report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that said
human actions are "very likely" responsible for global warming. He hailed
Mr. Titley's analogy as "incredibly insightful," offering a historical example of his own: "It's like Nero fiddling while Rome
burns." The
problem, Mr. Minott said, is that each actor is trying to extract the
last benefit from the environment, all at the cost of future well-being.
Meanwhile, the impacts still seem remote.
"If you live next to a refinery, you can see it
and smell it. You feel sick, and cause and effect are easier to talk about," he said. "Otherwise it's
hard for
people to understand the urgency. It's hard to find the political will ."
Understanding is indeed critical, said Tony Novosel, a historian of modern Europe at the University of Pittsburgh. An
unwillingness or inability on the part of many European leaders to
understand the motivations, fears and concerns of the other great

powers was among the factors that led these powers into war in 1914 ,
he said. In the climate change debate, however, it is not simply a clash of opinions but a
dispute over facts, making it more difficult to find common ground .
Certainly among Pennsylvania legislators, global warming is disputed . State
Sen. Gene Yaw, R-Lycoming, chairman of the Senate Environmental Resources
and Energy Committee, said he isn't convinced greenhouse gases are
to blame for warming, asking how bodies of water, such as the Finger Lakes, formed 2 million years ago
without such contaminants in the atmosphere. "I'm not convinced that the underlying
cause is anything but a normal climate cycle of the world," he said.
The issue of global warming has never come before his committee, he
added. He scoffed at Mr. Titley's recommendation that societies must take measures to maintain basic infrastructure
-- water, food and the coastline. "Let's build a wall around New York City -- I have no idea," he said with a laugh. "This is
not a burning issue." State Rep. Ron Miller, R-York, agreed, calling into question the veracity of global warming: "I'm
sitting on my porch near the end of July, and the temperature's in the 70s. Why is no one yelling about global cooling?" He
called Mr. Titley's editorial, which suggests pairing short-term measures with a shift to a no-carbon energy future, a "scare
tactic." Michael Mann, a colleague at Penn State who is meteorology professor and director of the Earth System Science
Center, came to Mr. Titley's defense, calling the science of climate change true whether state leaders believe it or not. He
said the
editorial makes a compelling case that climate change is a

veritable national security crisis, causing competition for diminishing
food, water and land. He called warming a "threat multiplier," pointing to water as a critical factor in the
conflict in Syria. "We ignore what scientists say at our peril," Mr. Mann said. "Sure,
there's a debate to be had about how the reductions should be made .
That's what Sen. Yaw's committee should be talking about."
CO2 is the primary cause of ocean acidification but there

is no political will to tackle the problemgets grouped
with the warming debate means the af doesnt spillover
into political sphere to solve
Welch, 1/22Craig Welch has worked as the environment reporter at The
Seattle Times since 2000. A journalist for two decades, his work has appeared in
Smithsonian magazine, the Washington Post, and Newsweek. (Craig, January
22nd, 2014, The Seattle Times, Struggling Next Steps,
http://apps.seattletimes.com/reports/sea-change/2014/jan/22/struggling-nextsteps/)//IK
When U.S. Rep. Brian Baird tried a few years ago to get his colleagues
to put more money toward ocean-acidification research , few even understood
the issue. One congressman, Baird said, confused souring seas with acid rain, and asked, Didnt we deal with that 20
years ago? The
corrosion of the oceans by carbon-dioxide emissions has

barely made a ripple among Washington, D.C.s power brokers. Little
money gets earmarked for research. Ocean change has inspired few stabs at curbing
CO2. In fact, aside from West Coast lawmakers and scattered others
from coastal regions, few in Congress seem to grasp the scale of the
challenge, said current and retired lawmakers from both parties. So West
Coast states, led by Washington, are now forging ahead largely on their own. This is a profound and
unprecedented threat, said Baird, a Washington Democrat, who stepped down in 2011 and is now
president of Antioch University in Seattle. The existence of marine life as we know it could be profoundly changed by this.
And we are scarcely attending to it. As
the oceans absorb ever more CO2 from cars

and power plants, that is transforming the chemistry of the seas
faster than at any time in tens of millions of years. That CO2 makes
life hard for creatures with shells and skeletons and threatens to
fundamentally transform the entire marine world. Already, acidification has wiped
out billions of oyster larvae in the Pacific Northwest and is causing trouble for tiny see-through creatures called pteropods,
which are critical food for birds and fish. It poses risks for important sea life, including red king crab and many fish. But
since
the source of acidification is also the chief culprit driving climate
change rising CO2 efforts to respond at the national level get

mired in global-warming politics.
So Washington state leaders are suggesting avenues for new
research and are encouraging cleanup of polluted marine environments. They
hope those steps will
at least build resistance to acidification. And Gov. Jay Inslee is seeking to curtail the states
fossil-fuel emissions, hoping to show the federal government that tamping down on CO2 can work. States can set a
precedent, said Brad Warren, a sustainable-fisheries proponent who served on a state panel of acidification experts in
2012. They can provide a way to show what works and what doesnt. But its
not yet clear if even

local curbs are politically possible or if they will make a difference .
During a recent meeting of a group set up by the Legislature to respond to souring waters, committee chair Martha
Kongsgaard urged members to press on even if they felt overwhelmed. Yes, there is a lot of uncertainty lets all admit
we are all flying half blind into an unknowable future, Kongsgaard said. But, she added, One cant get work done in fetal
position. Unclear solutions
The list of ways acidification can impact the

marine world keeps getting longer. Theres budding acceptance even by many commercial
fishermen that it poses risks to jobs and their way of life. Its not that the solution is unclear . If the goal is to
substantially reduce acidification, CO2 emissions need to come down.
If you want a more precise picture of whats happening in the water, more money has to go toward research. Even if both
happen soon, people who rely on the sea should prepare for a different world. Some changes to marine life are coming
whether were ready for them or not. The data show that were seeing the symptoms of acidification arrive and progress at
a much faster rate than we would have expected even just a few years ago, said Kathryn Sullivan, acting administrator of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in a recent interview. The longer-term consequence it
presents is very, very daunting. Yet Congress thus far has taken only baby steps . In 2009,
it passed the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act, pushed initially by New Jerseys Rep. Frank
Lautenberg, then by Baird, then-Congressman Jay Inslee and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. It required an assessment of
acidifications impacts, put money toward marine monitoring to help the Northwests troubled oyster industry, and called
on the National Science Foundation to pay for more research. A team of ocean scientists detailed the need: Once the
program is fully engaged, $50 million to $100 million per year is considered the minimum if scientists are to provide
useful information regarding how the oceans are responding, they wrote in March 2009. The act only authorized $14
million to $35 million a year. Back then, the nation was mired in recession. We were aware at the time that what we were
asking for was inadequate, Baird said. We expected that would change. It has not. Were probably crashing toward a
mass-extinction event unless something changes, said Kristy Kroeker, a research fellow with the Bodega Marine
Laboratory at the University of California, Davis, who has twice in recent years analyzed and reviewed all the research
The
few politicians who understand the problem believe D.C. leaders are
not doing enough. A billion people around the world depend on the ocean for food and were talking about
examining the biological impacts of acidification. And right now there arent enough resources to figure it all out.
opening a hole at the bottom of the ocean-food chain, said former Rep. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., who served 12 years in
Congress before losing his primary race in 2010.Theres
a reason the Pentagon is worried

about CO2, he added. If you have unstable governments and people around the world not able to supply
their protein needs, and you put those together, you get people migrating quickly and friction from that. Its a real toxic
stew. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska whose state drives the countrys most bountiful fishing harvest, providing
half the nations catch spoke of the need for stable research funding and worried aloud about food-web changes. If the
little pteropods that are out there that the salmon gobble on leave us because of whats going on with acidification think
about what that means for our fisheries industry, Murkowski said during an oceans forum in D.C. last spring. It is huge
for the state of Alaska. For many, the chief barrier is ignorance. In part thats because acidification is fairly new and
surfaced first in Washington and Oregon far from the corridors of power. I think (acidification) is a real problem, said
Democratic Congressman Sam Farr, a 20-year House veteran from California who co-chairs an ocean caucus. But the
first thing you have to do is educate people about whats broken and needs fixing. As recently as 2010, only
7
percent of Americans knew ocean acidification was caused by seas
absorbing CO2, according to the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. The vast majority 77
percent had never even heard the term. But even among those who understand, attempts to address acidifications
underlying cause quickly devolve into battles over approach. Murkowski
who does not

dispute human contributions to climate change has fought the
Obama administrations efforts to tamp down on CO2 from coal-fired

power plants. She prefers congressional action, which has not
happened. Much of the easy work is already under way. Globally, the amount of CO2 from land-clearing or timber
harvest never a huge factor has plummeted 25 percent as deforestation declined. The European Union is moving to
cut its CO2 emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. But emissions in China and India seem destined to rise.
And while U.S. emissions fell in recent years as a result of the

recession and a natural-gas boom, they rose again in 2013. Other than
transforming our energy system, Im not sure what we can do, said Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist with Carnegie
Institution for Science at Stanford University, who helped popularize the term ocean acidification. I
think
politicians are rational. Not until they feel that theyre going to lose
votes for not acting will they start dealing with these issues . The real story is
winning the hearts and minds of the average person and convincing them we have to stop using the sky as a sewer.
Congressional leaders are ideologically opposed to

enacting climate change policiesnew data will not
persuade themprefer the most recent description of
congressional mindsets
Deaton, 7/22 Correspondent for Solon Economist, North Liberty Leader, Blog
for Iowa. (Paul, July 22nd, 2014, Climate Change Is Really Political,
http://www.blogforiowa.com/2014/07/22/climate-change-is-reallypolitical/)//IK
If one didnt think the U.S. discussion of climate change was political,
think again. U.S. Rep. David McKinley (R-West Virginia), added an
amendment to a House appropriations bill to fund the Department of
Energy and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that would prohibit the
two agencies from using funds that would design, implement,
administer or carry out specified assessments regarding climate
change. Another way to put it, from McKinleys perspective, is if you dont like
science, ban it. House Republicans took exception to the Department
of Defense addressing the recommendations of the National Climate
Assessment, and have added two agencies whose work is directly
related to mitigating the effects of extreme weather to their list. The
floor debate captured the essence of the politics of climate change:
Spending precious resources to pursue a dubious climate change
agenda compromises our clean-energy research and Americas
infrastructure, McKinley said on the House floor. Congress should not be
spending money pursuing ideologically driven experiments. Speaking
against the amendment, Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) said it disregards the research of the overwhelming majority of
climate scientists. The
Republicans, in general, dont seem to trust the
scientists, Kaptur said. This amendment requires the Department of Energy to assume that carbon pollution isnt
harmful and that climate change wont cost a thing. Thats nothing but a fantasy.
New legislation proves that Congress does not care about

climate change issues- plan will not spark interest
Krauss, 7/23 A theoretical physicist, Krauss is co-chair of the Bulletin's Board

of Sponsors and director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University. The
author of several books, including The Physics of Star Trek, Quintessence: The
Mystery of Missing Mass in the Universe and Fear of Physics: A Guide for the
Perplexed, he has won several honors for translating difficult scientific concepts
into language general readers can understand. His most recent book is A
Universe from Nothing. (Lawrence M., July 23rd, 2014, Climate Change: If we
pretend it isnt happening, will it go away?, http://thebulletin.org/climatechange-if-we-pretend-it-isn%E2%80%99t-happening-will-it-go-away7333)//IK
I happened to be in Canberra last week as the Australian government repealed its tax on carbon emissions, which has
required the countrys biggest emitters to pay as much as 25 Australian dollars (about $23.50, US) per metric ton of
carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere. With the vote in the Australian Senate, following a previous vote in the House
of Representatives, Australiaone of the worlds largest per capita emitters of carbonmoved from being well ahead of
the international curve to the back of the pack when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The
climate
change debate that has raged in the public forum in Australiaand, in
similar form, in the United Stateshas unfortunately been governed
more by politics, ideology, and money than by facts. For example, much to
my dismay, after appearing on a television program in Australia, on
which I ended up debating a senator from the governing Liberal Party
on issues that included climate change, I offered to come to his office
to show him data on climate trends, including sea level rise and ocean
acidification, with the hope that the data might affect the policies he
advocated. He told me that he wasnt interested in such a discussion,
because he had a constituency that supported his current opposition
to carbon emission controls, and that is what mattered to him . Of course, as
a scientist, I feel particularly strongly that the public is ill served by politicians who ignore empirical evidence while
making and speaking out on policy. But as
the dramatic Australian vote made news

worldwide, another, less-publicized set of legislative actions took
place in the United States, and they could wind up being even more
insidious than the Australian climate change retreat. Rather than ignore the
science associated with climate change predictions, one house of the US Congress attempted
to ensure that the appropriate science on climate change would
simply be discontinued. On July 10, the House approved the fiscal 2015 Energy and Water
Appropriations bill on a 253-170 vote. In the bill, Congress unfortunately cut funding for
such things as renewable energy, sustainable transportation, and
energy efficiency; perhaps even more worrisome, however, were a
series of amendments successfully attached to the bill. Each would, in its
own way, specifically prohibit scientists at the Energy Department from
doing precisely what Congress should mandate them to donamely
perform the best possible scientific research to illuminate, for
policymakers, the likelihood and possible consequences of climate
change. Oklahoma Republican Congressman James Lankfords amendment prohibited funding for "proposing or
implementing any executive order related to the 'social cost of carbon.'" In this way, the Energy
Department would presumably be prohibited from embarking on
studies that might calculate the possible benefits of legislation that
limits carbon dioxide emissions or the economic risks associated with
climate change. A second amendment by Arizona Republican Paul Gosar prohibited funding for the Energy
Department's Climate Model Development and Validation program. One of the things that climate
change deniers often pull out of their hats when arguing against
acting to stem climate change is a claimed skepticism about the
validity of existing climate models. I have recently countered one such skeptic on television here
in Australia by accepting this skepticismand then challenging him to present what his models predicted. (Of course he
didnt have any). The point was not merely rhetorical. If there is serious concern about the robustness of ongoing climate
modeling, it is inconsistent with a desire to prohibit scientists from being able to improve their models. A third science-
defunding amendment, this time pushed by West Virginia Republican David McKinley, would prohibit the Energy
Department from supporting climate change activities associated with the National Climate Assessment and the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. That's right: The Energy Department would be prohibited from
responding to the two landmark reports that reflect the best international scientific scholarship available on climate
modeling and the possible impacts of human greenhouse gas production, locally, nationally, and internationally.
Lobbyists pay Congresspeople to hold extreme positions

on climate changepolarization means new data will not
change political will
Wolf, 12 Naomi Wolf is the author, among other books, of The Beauty Myth
and Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries. She is a
graduate of Yale University and New College, Oxford (Naomi, August 8 th 2012,
The Guardian, America's drought of political will on climate change,
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/08/america-droughtpolitical-will-climate-change)//IK
*Modified for ablest language/We do not endorse any ablest language
As the US faces record drought and an Old Testament-level pestilential heatwave in the midwest, American environmental
denialism may be starting to change. The question is: is it too late ?
America has led the world in

climate change denial, a phenomenon noted with amazement by
Europeans, not to mention thinking people around the world . Year after
year, the US has failed to sign global treaties or curb emissions, even as
our status as a source of a third of the world's carbon emissions goes
unchanged. It is fairly well-known what has been behind that climate
change denial in America: vast sums pumped into an ignorance
industry by the oil and gas lobbies. Entire thinktanks to obfuscate
manmade climate change have been funded by these interests, as
have individual congressmen and women. Entirely typical, for instance, is Louisiana
Representative John Fleming, whose campaigns, according to blogger John Henry,
accept about $200,000 a year from oil and gas lobbyists, and who
uses his social media pages to deny global warming. It is weird to live
inside that US denial about climate change. Last year, for example, as tropical storm Irene
approached New York, we duly boarded up windows, put in emergency supplies, and heard endless alarming bulletins
from the mayor's office about which neighborhoods were likely to be submerged if the tides surged without ever hearing
from local officials or the media a word connecting rising sea levels with manmade global warming. All the more weird
because New Yorkers weren't writing off portions of their downtown neighborhoods to overflowing seawater a century
ago. It
is weird, too, to watch the leaves turn red earlier and earlier in the
fall in the American northeast and have absolutely everyone say, "the
weather is strange" yet never see mainstream media reflect any
interest in the connection between human industrial activity and that
strangeness. And this weather map shows how widespread and extensive that extreme weather is in the US. But
could our denial be cracking, this summer, as, in the heartland that most iconic of American landscapes broiling
temperatures injure humans and cook fish in the water? This summer a crisis has occurred (though one that, again, is
seldom reported on in terms of our outsize contribution to the disaster), as midwestern farmers lost vast swaths of their
corn crop to scalding heat and drought. In the American unconscious of wishful ignorance, this disaster and loss was to be
borne, as usual, by other people far away. But we face some serious problems in rising out of our torpor .
In
"Shifting Public Opinion on Climate Change: An Empirical

Assessment of Factors Influencing Concern over Climate Change in
the US, 20022010", John Wihbey shows that Gallup surveys reveal
Americans' level of concern varying widely: "In 2004, 26% of
respondents said they worried "a great deal" about the issue; in 2007
that number rose to 41%; by 2010, it had fallen to 28%. This variation
comes despite consensus among scientists about the underlying data

patterns and virtual unanimity of scientific opinion." Wihbey and
colleagues' study found that this fluctuation was caused by, among
other factors, political polarization. In other words, when one party says
global warming is a crisis and the other says all that is nonsense, and
there is no cooperation between political elites at both ends of the
spectrum, the net result is apathy. "The two strongest effects on public
concern are Democratic congressional action statements and
Republican roll-call votes, which increase and diminish public
concern, respectively. This finding points to the effect of [a] polarized
political elite that is emitting contrary cues, with resulting
(seemingly) contrary levels of public concern." They found, ominously, that the
level and quality of good information in the general media at large
had little effect on people's levels of concern indeed, weather events
themselves had little bearing on people's levels of climate-related
anxiety or interest. Only the combination of media coverage and expressed alarm from political leaders
bumped up public concern. With the oil and gas lobbies pumping money into
Congress to blunt any professed concern among the political class,
that motivating union of genuine concern and honest messaging can
scarcely be relied on. The authors conclude, dispiritedly: "Given the vested economic
interests reflected in this polarization, it seems doubtful that any
communication process focused on persuading individuals will have
much impact." I spent part of this summer looking at glaciers in Alaska; in Juneau, in Tongass National Forest,
park rangers expect that a glacier there will withdraw, from effects of anticipated climate change, in 50 years. So, the
federal government is planning for the effects of manmade climate
change, even as the White House and US Congress remain paralysed
from doing anything to arrest the warming: the very definition of
denial. If we don't snap out of this stasis of stupidity, nothing can change for good.
AT: Sea colonies addon

Savages Aquarius Project is the name of his own utopian
sci-fi colonization project he cooked up while on heroin
its not the Aquarius Reef Base. We should be able to
drop this argument and theyd still get zero risk
And Savages Aquarius Project was based on bad tech
Friedman, 9 executive director of the Seasteading Institute (Patri,

Seasteading: A Practical Guide To Homesteading The High Seas
http://www.seasteading.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/full_book_beta.pdf)//DH
Aquarius Project
Another well-publicized venture during the 1990s was the Aquarius Project,
based on the book The Millenial Project by Mashall Savage [Savage1992]. An
organization was created called the First Millenial Foundation, which later
changed its name to the Living Universe Foundation. Savage proposes
building many large floating cities out of hexagonal cells made from a
material called Sea-crete or alternatively Seament. They would be powered
by OTEC generators, which operate on the temperature differential between
surface and deep water. Income comes from mariculture, hydrogen, magnesium,
and several other sources. Actually, only the first 100 pages of TMP are about
Aquarius, and the remainder discusses the remaining 7 stages necessary to begin
colonizing the galaxy. This is an excellent example of the viewpoint that ocean
cities are a stepping stone to space colonies.
Unfortunately, while the book is stuffed full of technical information, the basic
ideas behind Aquarius are at the very least ahead of their time. They may
even be inaccurate. We discuss the flawed calculations behind seacrete
and the currently nascent state of OTEC in more detail later, when explaining
why those technologies are not currently part of our plan. In addition, Savage is
overly ambitious, focusing on huge cities without any plan for starting
with small ones. Unsurprisingly, without prototypes to demonstrate
that the ideas were sound, there was not enough interest to build an
initial Aquarius settlement.
Acidification Advantage
Case Frontline
AT: Pteropods
Acidification is nonsense pH always varies, CO2 is a
weak acid, pteropods have survived multiple extinctions
Ring 14 science writer for The Nelson Mail (Jim, PH nonsense, The Nelson Mail,
3/28/2014, lexis)//BD
Where on earth did J Black (Mailbox, March 21) get the idea that, ''the pH of the
ocean has already dropped by 0.1 since the industrial revolution''? As the idea
of pH was introduced by Sorensen in 1909, and the modern scale was
formulated in 1924, this is clearly nonsense . There is no such thing as
''pH of the ocean''. The pH of seawater varies by place, by time and
by temperature. ''A move towards acidity of 30 per cent.'' More nonsense''percentage change'' cannot be used with a log scale. ''Availability of
Calcium Carbonate'' does not control shell formation. Rain, entering
the sea directly, or via rivers, is acid. This dwarfs the effect of CO2, a
very weak acid. The ocean floors are basic (alkaline) and this will
ensure sea water stays alkaline for the next few billion years, or as
long as our watery earth lasts. ''Pteropods appeared in the
Palaeocene epoch'' . As Pteropod ''no longer has a scientifically
precise use'' (Wikipedia) it is difficult to evaluate this claim.
<<insert defense and keystone species defense the aff doesnt solve
tbh>>
CCS Adv CP
1NC
Text: The United States federal government should invest
in a national CO2 sequestration pipeline infrastructure for
the purposes of carbon capture and storage.
The counterplan solves emissions solves for biodiversity loss
and warming
Haszeldine, 9-
(R. Stuart, OBE, BSc (Edin), PhD (Strath), CGeol, FRSE Scottish Power Professor of Carbon Capture & Storage, Carbon
Capture and Storage: How Green Can Black Be?, Science Magazine, Science 25 September 2009: Vol. 325 no. 5948 pp.
1647-1652)
Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion are a major

contributor to climate change (1). The current low price of fossil fuel
energy is partly subsidized by unpriced CO2 emissions, exploiting the
degradation of natural atmosphere and ocean. Even if the debate on climate change is
over, the actions to limit CO2 emissions have barely started . One step
toward reducing CO2 emissions is to capture the CO2 generated
during combustion and store it in a suitable place. This process of carbon capture
and storage (CCS) has the potential to reduce future world emissions from
energy by 20% (2). CCS is already operating in trials, with 3 megatons of CO2 (Mt
CO2) per year from power plants or natural gas cleanup being captured and stored. CCS technologies are now in a scale-up
period. Worldwide, large demonstrations are planned on 36 power plants. However, there
is a lamentable
lack of financial commitment to real construction. If design and
construction of these demonstration plants does not start now, they
will not operate by 2014, and learning from these to provide commercial credibility will drift
beyond 2020. The worldwide construction of many tens to hundreds of large CCS
plantsnecessary for a substantial impact on climate mitigation will
then be delayed beyond the deadline set by climate change predictions.
Counterplan solves emissions are the key driving factor

of ocean acidification
Their 1AC Bienkowski, 13 the daily climate, writer @ nature climate change (Brian, U.S. Effort on
Ocean Acidification Needs Focus on Human Impacts, Jan 11, 2013, Scientific American,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/us-effort-on-ocean-acidification-needs-focus-on-human-impacts)//AE
A federal plan to tackle ocean acidification must focus more on how

the changes will affect people and the economy, according to a review of the effort by a
panel of the National Research Council. "Social issues clearly can't drive everything but
when it's possible they should," said George Somero, chair of the committee that wrote the report
and associate director at Stanford University's Hopkins Marine Station. " If you're setting up a
monitoring station, it should be where there's a shellfish industry, for
example." Acidification is one of the larger problems associated with
greenhouse gas emissions , as oceans serve as a giant sponge for
carbon dioxide. When carbon dioxide is dissolved in seawater, water
chemistry changes and acidity increases. More acidic seawater can
hurt ocean creatures, especially corals and shellfish , because it prevents them
from properly developing their skeletons and shells. Shrinking coral reefs could dent ecotourism revenue in some coastal areas. It also could trigger a decline
in fish populations dependent on those reefs. Decreasing shellfish populations
would harm the entire ocean food chain , researchers say, particularly affecting
people who get their protein or paycheck from the sea. Globally, fish represent
about 6 percent of the protein people eat. The acidification blueprint was drafted by nine federal agencies in March 2012.
It establishes guidelines for federal research, monitoring and mitigation of ocean acidification. In reviewing the plan, the
research council, which advises the government on science policy, recommended that federal
research and
action be focused on issues with human and economic consequences .
Pacific Northwest The panel cited the Pacific Northwest as an economic example, where high acidity
levels have hampered oyster hatcheries, worth about $270 million
and 3,200 jobs to coastal communities there. It is unclear if ocean acidification is the
culprit, but it could be a harbinger of things to come, according to the report. In 2011, U.S. commercial fishers caught 10
billion pounds of seafood valued at $5.3 billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The
panel also suggested the plan should have a clearer mission, prioritized goals and ways to measure progress. "This plan
would cost a lot of money so there needs to be priorities and ways to prove impact," Somero said. "The federal budget
simply won't allow for everything that needs to be done." In 2009, Congress passed the Federal Ocean Acidification
Research and Monitoring Act, creating a federal program to deal with ocean acidification. Somero said the agencies will
take the recommendations and "tune up" the plan.
global problem,"
Ocean acidification is an "emerging
according to NOAA. Over the past 250 years,
about one third of the
carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels has ended up

in oceans , according to a 2010 study. Over that time, ocean acidity has increased about
30 percent, according to the National Research Council . Ocean advocacy groups
supported the panel's recommendations. "Ocean acidification is one of the greatest
threats to marine life and fisheries," said Matthew Huelsenbeck, a marine scientist at Oceana.
"We are encouraged that the Council has suggested communicating
this issue to policy makers and the public to increase awareness and
hopefully lead to solutions." Julia Roberson, a director at the Ocean Conservancy, said the original
plan was a good first step and she hopes government will use the council's suggestions. Amid recommendations, the
panel also offered praise for the federal effort, saying the plan does
"an excellent job of covering the breadth of current understanding of
ocean acidification and the range of research that will be required to
advance a broadly focused and effective National Ocean Acidification
Program."
2NC Solvency
Carbon sequestration is key solve biodiversity loss
Mack and Endemann 10 - *partner in the Houston office and global Chair of
the Environmental Transactional Support Practice, provides over 25 years of
experience advising on the transactional, environmental and regulatory issues
associated with all sectors of the oil and gas industry, power (including both fossil
and renewable energy), mining and chemical industries in the United States and
abroad, in addition to the development, financing and entitlements for
telecommunications and other industrial and public infrastructure facilities in
the United States and offshore, **JD, Faculty @ USD Law, provides
comprehensive environmental counseling on energy and infrastructure projects,
and represents clients in related litigation
Joel and Buck, Making carbon dioxide sequestration feasible: Toward federal
regulation of CO2 sequestration pipelines, Energy Policy,
http://lw.com/upload/pubContent/_pdf/pub3385_1.pdf
At present, approximately 50% of the United States base load electrical energy
requirements are met by coal-red resources (ASME, 2005). While substantial
expansion of renewable energy resources will eventually diminish reliance on coal
resources, 1 coal-red power plants provide base load energy resources twentyfour hours per day, seven days a week, all year long. Base load power plants
provide energy even when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining. While
all power plants have the ability to generate a xed amount of full output, or
capacity, expressed in megawatts, technologies vary as to the amount of their
capacity which can be delivered over time, such as over a calendar year; this is also
known as their capacity factor. Base load plants, such as coal-red, nuclear and
many natural gas-red power plants, achieve very high capacity factors (nearly all
of their capacity can be delivered over time subject to normal maintenance,
scheduled outages or equipment failures). Some plants, such as certain natural
gas-red power plants, can be cycled (i.e., turned on or off, or their output can be
increased or decreased on short notice to match peaking loads), will have lower
capacity factors but can be matched more precisely to the demands of energy
consumers. Wind and solar plants, on the other hand, typically have much lower
capacity factors (even if they have the same overall total capacity), because their
output cannot be load-matched and their energy output is dependent on
environmental factors. As a result, a utility serving a load must blend base load,
peaking and renewable resources to meet load requirements, and cannot meet its
load requirements solely on the basis of current wind or solar technologies. 2 In
many regional markets, both energy (a plants actual, delivered product) and
capacity are tradeable commodities with an economic value, with the renewable
energy facilities providing less value in the capacity markets. Indeed, electric
utilities are generally required to maintain substantial capacity reserves to serve
expected load, and renewable resources do not generally qualify to meet these
capacity requirements As a result, and without regard to the relative merits of coal
red power versus other sources of base load power (e.g., nuclear or natural gasred power plants), considering (1) the United States large native coal resources,
(2) the lower cost of coal fuel against other base load technologies, and (3) the
substantial existing investment in coal-red power plants, it is likely that coal-red
power plants will for many decades continue to comprise a substantial part of
the United States energy generation portfolio. Indeed, the United States will have
to make policy choices regarding which base load resources to pursue, as oil, coal,
nuclear and natural gas fuels each have their own economic and environmental
benets and drawbacks. 3 Against this backdrop, both the private and public
sectors have begun to look closely at various technologies to address the high
carbon footprint of traditional coal combustion technologies. In the United States,
the average emission rate of CO2 from coal-red power generation is 2.095 pounds
per kilowatt hour, nearly double the 1.321 pounds per kilowatt hour for natural gas
(DOE, 2000). 4 Among the technologies receiving the most such attention to
reduce CO2s impacts is CO2 sequestration. CO2 sequestration involves removing
the CO2 from the fuel, either before, during, or after combustion, and then doing
something with it to avoid its release to the atmosphere. While other greenhouse
gases (e.g., methane) are more potent in terms of global warming effects per unit of
mass, the CO2 emissions of industrialized economies are so great as to dwarf
the contributions from other gases in terms of overall impact on global warming.
Hence the focus on CO2 sequestration technologies. The size and impact of this
challenge is dauntingwhile coal resources provide approximately half of the
energy generated annually in the United States, coal-red power plants emit
almost 80% (1.8 billion metric tons per year) of the total CO2 emissions from
power plants in the United States (DOE, 2000). The magnitude of this challenge
cannot be underestimated. Using the above production gures, coal-red power
plants in the United States emit approximately 900 billion cubic meters of CO2
annually. 5 The current CO2 pipeline system, though, handles only 45 million
metric tons of CO2 per year over 3500 miles of pipe (Nordhaus and Pitlick, 2009).
6 Thus, to the extent that the United States has a policy goal of sequestering and
transporting any appreciable fraction of CO2 emissions from coal-red power
plants, the required infrastructure investment will require at least a 40-fold
increase. 7 While such an undertaking presents obvious practical and economic
challenges, it demonstrates that a new vision is required if the United States is
going to develop a sequestration infrastructure to meet this challenge on any
time frame that is reasonably coincident with reducing near- to medium-term
impacts from global climate change. 8
CCS solves warming - immediate action is necessary

counterplan should come before the case
Rogers 7 - *CEO of Duke Energy

James, SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE,
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?
FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=96b0a903-32fc-47f8-9a36-b4ddd9805e2b
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) for coal-fired power plants is a critical
technology if we are to achieve our environmental goals while
continuing to use our abundant domestic coal resources . CCS
captures the CO2 from the power plant and channels it underground for
permanent storage in deep geological formations. However, this storage capacity is
not available everywhere and, contrary to some statements Ive seen recently, the
technology itself is not fully developed and ready for deployment. We believe CCS
ultimately will prove to be one of the least-cost ways to reduce CO2, and we are
actively involved in projects to advance the research. Duke Energy is hosting a
small-scale Phase II sequestration demonstration project at its East Bend power
plant in Kentucky, which will involve injection of CO2 into deep saline reservoirs in
the area, between 3,000 and 4,000 feet below the surface. If the site is determined
to be suitable, about 10,000 tons of CO2 would be injected in 2008. The
sequestration will be subject to monitoring, measurement and verification. Duke
Energys commitment to CCS also includes membership in three DOE-funded
carbon sequestration regional partnerships (the Midwest Regional Carbon
Sequestration Partnership, the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium and
the Southeast Regional Carbon Partnership) which are collecting, sharing and
assessing data. DOEs National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) manages a
number of regional sequestration consortia, creating a nationwide network to help
identify the best technologies, regulations and infrastructure needed for carbon
capture and storage. These partnerships will support multiple small-scale projects
that will provide invaluable information on siting, monitoring, evaluation and
public acceptability of carbon sequestration. Expanded federal financial support
will be necessary to continue the process of demonstrating geologic
sequestration. USCAP has advocated that Congress fund at least three full-scale
CO2 injection demonstration projects, each at a scale equivalent to the CO2
emissions produced by a large coal-fired power plant. 7 The MIT Future of Coal
study calls for three to five demonstration projects at a projected cost of $500
million to $1 billion over eight years. 8 In addition to proving the technology and
geology for sequestration, a number of critical regulatory and legal issues will need
to be resolved. As USCAP has stated, Congress should require the EPA to
promulgate regulations promptly to permit long-term geologic sequestration of
carbon dioxide from stationary sources. 9 In addition to developing an
appropriate regulatory system that will specify the ground rules for sequestration
projects and enhance public acceptability, Congress should also provide
appropriate protections against costly litigation and liability claims. The potential
for significant liability claims and litigation defense costs, even when facility
operators comply with all regulatory requirements, will be a significant damper on
the commercial development of sequestration facilities. Given the speed with
which we will need to put sequestration capacity into operation, we cannot simply
wait to see if the common law in each state develops in a way that acceptably
moderates these liability and litigation risks. Instead, I expect that the legal and
liability issues must be settled before any company will feel comfortable moving
forward with a large-scale CCS project. Finally, despite all the seeming activity
described above, CCS development needs a much greater sense of urgency if we
are truly to respond to the climate problem. To paraphrase an MIT economist who
has looked at this problem if CCS doesnt work, we are in big, big trouble. I
would characterize the current focus on CCS as something of a hobby. It should be
an obsession, and receive a great deal more attention and resources.
CCS will happen -
Cyrus Zarraby 12 (J.D., expected May 2012, The George Washington University Law School; B.S., 2003, Clemson
University. The author is a chemical engineer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), April 2012, Vol.
80 No. 3, Regulating Carbon Capture and Sequestration: A Federal Regulatory Regime to Promote the Construction of a
National Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Network, http://groups.law.gwu.edu/lr/ArticlePDF/80_3_Zarraby.pdf)
Although the technology for capturing and storing CO2 has been
proven in operation, 13 the United States does not have adequate
infrastructure to implement CCS on a national scale. Specifically, tens of thousands
of miles of CO2 pipelines must be constructed to transport the CO2 from
the power plants to underground reservoirs. 14 Currently, there is no

comprehensive federal regulation of CO2 pipelines and existing state regulations are limited. 15 The
uncertainty of this regulatory framework will prevent the development of
much-needed CO2 pipelines. 16 Given the harms that will arise because of greenhouse gas emissions
and the continued reliance on coal as a source of electricity, it is imperative that Congress pass
legislation that promotes the construction of new CO2 pipelines . 17
CCS is a critical bridge to a broader portfolio of sustainable

energy
Forbes et al 8 - senior associate at the World Resources Institute, former

member of the National Energy Technology Laboratory
Sarah, CCS Guidelines: Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and
Storage, World Resources Institute, http://pdf.wri.org/ccs_guidelines.pdf
Scenarios for stabilizing climate-forcing emissions suggest atmospheric CO2
stabilization can only be accomplished through the development and deployment
of a robust portfolio of solutions, including significant increases in energy
efficiency and conservation in the industrial, building, and transport sectors;
increased reliance on renewable energy and potentially additional nuclear energy
sources; and deployment of CCS. Slowing and stopping emissions growth from the
energy sector will require transformational changes in the way the world generates
and uses energy. CCS is a broad term that encompasses a number of technologies
that can be used to capture CO2 from point sources, such as power plants and
other industrial facilities; compress it; transport it mainly by pipeline to suitable
locations; and inject it into deep subsurface geological formations for indefinite
isolation from the atmosphere. CCS is a critical option in the portfolio of
solutions available to combat climate change, because it allows for significant
reductions in CO2 emissions from fossil-based systems, enabling it to be used as a
bridge to a sustainable energy future.
CCS is technologically viable plan is key
EPA 10
Report of the Interagency Task Force on Carbon Capture and Storage,
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/downloads/CCS-Task-Force-Report2010.pdf
The Federal government is already pursuing a set of concrete initiatives to speed

the commercial development of safe, affordable, and broadly deployable CCS
technologies in the United States, including: RD&D of CCS technologies; the
development of regulations that address the safety, efficacy, and environmental
soundness of injecting and storing carbon dioxide underground; and the
assessment of the country's geologic capacity to store carbon dioxide. All of this
work builds on the firm scientific basis that now exists for the viability of CCS
technology. Long-term integrated testing and validation programs are needed for
technical, economic, and regulatory reasons. DOE is currently pursuing multiple
demonstration projects using $3.4 billion of available budgetary resources from
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 4 in addition to prior year
appropriations. Various other incentives, such as tax credits and loan guarantees,
are also available to many projects. Up to ten integrated CCS demonstration
projects supported by DOE are intended to begin operation by 2016 in the United
States. These demonstrations will integrate current CCS technologies with
commercial-scale power and industrial plants to prove that they can be permitted
and operated safely and reliably. New power plant applications will focus on
integrating pre-combustion CO2 capture, transport, and storage with Integrated
Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) technology. Power plant retrofit and
industrial applications will demonstrate integrated post-combustion capture.
These projects, plus others supported by Federal loan guarantees, tax incentives,
and State-level drivers, cover a large group of potential CCS options. However,
some proposed demonstration projects may not proceed for economic or other
reasons. Looking toward long-term deployment, additional actions may be
required to help overcome the uncertainty of evolving climate change policy and
the high cost of applying currently available CCS technology, consistent with
addressing market failures.
CCS is technologically proven
Handwerk 12 National Geographic Analyst

Brian, Amid Economic Concerns, Carbon Capture Faces a Hazy Future,
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2012/05/120522-carboncapture-and-storage-economic-hurdles/
In fact, these and other research and development efforts by universities and
organizations continue around the world in hopes of making scaled-up CCS
cheaper and reducing its "energy penalty." (Norway just opened what it is calling
the world's largest test lab for CCS technology.) In operating the technology that
captures carbon, the power plant gobbles up about 20 to 30 percent more energy,
so efficiency is typically lost. "We've proved under small-scale conditions that you
can cut that energy penalty in half," Ciferno said. "That has improved greatly in ten
years, though it's not yet ready for prime time." Some larger projects are still going
forward, like Shell's Quest* project in Alberta, which is supported with $865
million of Canadian provincial and federal funds. Shell CEO Peter Voser, at a
briefing with news media May 16 at a business forum in Rotterdam, the
Netherlands, said government support in Canada had made his company's
investment in the Quest CCS project feasible, but it would be difficult to advance
the technology without global commitment to cut carbon emissions. "I think if you
want as a world to achieve climate goals, then CCS, like energy efficiency, needs
to be part of the solution," Voser said. "In order to actually drive to CCS, we need
pilot projects. We have the technology components, we know they work , and
we need to pilot projects to scale up the technology.
CCS prevents CO2 from getting into the atmosphere solves

warming
Hannah Chalmers 09 (Postgraduate researcher at the Centre for Environmental Strategy at the University of
Surrey, Reuters, 10/16/09, In the fight against climate change, carbon capture is crucial, http://blogs.reuters.com/greatdebate-uk/2009/10/16/in-the-fight-against-climate-change-carbon-capture-is-crucial/)
At the same time, energy
and environment ministers were attending a meeting convened

Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum. Their final communiqu
affirmed CCS as an important element of any effective response to
climate change and described a series of industrial-scale demonstration projects as vital. But, what is
CCS? Why does it matter? And can it deliver? The principle is simple. To avoid dangerous climate
change it is very likely that we need to avoid a significant proportion of the carbon dioxide
by the
emissions that could be produced by fossil fuels that we already know how to access at
reasonable cost. It is, therefore, necessary to either (1) convince countries with fossil fuels to leave them in the ground
unused, essentially forever, or (2) ensure
that the vast majority of carbon dioxide

produced by fossil fuel use does not end up in the atmosphere . CCS
projects implement the second option. They collect carbon dioxide that is produced by
fossil fuels (or biofuels which also contain carbon). In a typical scheme, this captured carbon dioxide is then transported
and injected into a geological formation at least 1 kilometre below the earths surface. Getting CCS to work matters
because it should
make it much easier for countries with large fossil fuel

reserves, and particularly coal-rich countries such as the USA and China,
to sign up to serious global action on climate change. A range of technologies for
CCS are under development and are at different stages of maturity. For the options closest to commercial deployment, the
main technical challenges tend to centre on adapting, enlarging and integrating proven approaches from existing
industries. There are some initial trial units already in operation, but further large-scale demonstration is needed before
CCS can be seen as business-as-usual. Although some engineering challenges remain, most of the significant hurdles to a
successful global rollout of CCS are not technical. CCS adds to the cost of using fossil fuels for the sole purpose of reducing
carbon dioxide emissions, but it typically receives much less support than other developing low carbon options with
similar costs. Implementing CCS also requires that the general public and other key players become comfortable with the
risks and opportunities of a new industry. This takes time, but there is general agreement that we must act quickly on
climate change. As the Copenhagen negotiations approach, a number of commentators are discussing what a
global deal might look like. The ministers at the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum concluded
that the viability of CCS as a key mitigation technology should be

recognized in appropriate international legal frameworks including
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change .
CCS solves warming

CBO 12 (Congressional Budget Office, study was prepared at the request of the Chairman of the Senate Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources, June 2012, Federal Efforts to Reduce the Cost of Capturing and Storing Carbon
Dioxide, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43357-06-28CarbonCapture.pdf)
Concerns about global warming have raised questions about the

United States continued dependence on coal for producing electricity. About 1,400 coalfired generating units located in roughly 600 power plants produce 40 percent to 45 percent of the electricity
generated annually in this country and in so doing release about a third of the carbon
dioxide attributable to human activities in the United States each year. 1 The
consensus among scientific experts is that increasing concentrations of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphereincluding CO2 , which is the most commonare likely to
have extensive, highly uncertain but potentially costly effects on regional climates
throughout the world. 2 The federal government, through the Department of Energy, is seeking ways to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions while preserving the nations ability to continue to rely on coal to produce electricity. A
policy to reduce CO2 emissions would benefit the United States by
lessening the risk of costly changes to the climate. However, such a policy would also
impose costs on the U.S. economy because it would limit activities that produce those emissions. Depending on the type of
policy that lawmakers chose, electric utilities and their customers, coal producers, or certain areas of the country could
bear increased costs or a considerable loss of income and jobs. 3 As a result, policymakers have sought options that would
reduce CO2 emissions but also limit the potential impact on the economy and allow the nation to continue to produce
electricity from coal. Since 2005, lawmakers have provided DOE with about $6.9 billion to develop and demonstrate the
commercial feasibility of technologies that would allow coal-burning power plants to generate electricity without emitting
CO2 into the atmosphere. Instead, the CO2
would be removed from a plants exhaust

stream, compressed into a liquid, and stored underground
indefinitely. Collectively, those processes are usually called carbon capture and storage.
AT: Leakage/Spills
No leakage
Stephenson 8 - Director, Natural Resources and Environment @ GAO
(Federal Actions Will Greatly Affect the Viability of Carbon Capture and Storage
As a Key Mitigation Option, GAO,
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d081080.pdf)
According to the preamble to EPAs proposed rule, improperly operated injection
activities or ineffective long-term storage could result in release of injected CO2 to
the atmosphere, resulting in the potential to impact human health. EPAs
summaries of stakeholder workshops indicate that public health concerns have
been expressed about such issues. One concern is the risk that improperly operated
injections could result in the release of CO2 , and that at very high concentrations
and with prolonged exposure, CO2 can lead to suffocation. Concerns have also
been raised that improperly injected CO2 could raise the pressure in a geologic
formation and, if it became too high, could cause otherwise dormant faults to
trigger seismic events, such as earthquakes. The IPCC has noted, however, that 99
percent of the CO2 stored in appropriately selected and managed formations is
very likely to be retained for over 100 years, 55 and EPA states in the preamble to
its proposed rule that the risk of asphyxiation and other health effects from
airborne exposure to CO2 resulting from injection activities is minimal.
No leaks or spikes
Reisinger 9 JD, Attorney @ Ohio Environmental Council
Will, RECONCILING KING COAL AND CLIMATE CHANGE: A REGULATORY
FRAMEWORK FOR CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE, Vermont Journal of
Environmental Law, http://vjel.org/journal/pdf/VJEL10107.pdf
Because CO2 is toxic at high concentrations, some fear that escaping CO2 from a
non-performing sequestration site could poison surrounding air supplies,
potentially harming humans and animals. 93 The threat of catastrophic escape is
often cited as an argument against CCS demonstration projects. The Lake Nyos
disaster of 1986, in which volcanic activity led to a massive release of naturally
occurring CO2 from beneath an African lake, is often mentioned. 94 The Lake
Nyos incident was an earth science anomaly and not analogous to commercial CCS
storage. At Lake Nyos, volcanic activity beneath the lake led to a buildup of pure
CO2, which was sequestered in the deepest waters of the lake and eventually
escaped in a large poisonous cloud. 95 By contrast, any atmospheric releases of
CO2 at a non-performing CCS site would be small and incremental , not likely
to result in harm like that at Lake Nyos. Captured CO2 is injected while in a
supercritical state (with both gaseous and liquid characteristics) and is stored as it
permeates porous rock. 96 Thus, the stored CO2 is not sequestered in vast
underground reservoirs, and it is unlikely that a massive cloud of CO2 could
escape.
AT: Links to politics

There is political momentum for CCS deployment
Hamilton et al. 9 former Research Assistant at the MIT Industrial

Performance Center (Michael R., Sales Applications Engineer at FlexEnergy,
former Consultant on Irvine Smart Grid Demonstration Project at Southern
California Edison, former Research Assistant in the MIT Energy Initiative,
former Extern at North American Power at Cambridge Energy Research
Associates; Howard J. Herzog, Senior Research Engineer in the MIT Energy
Initiative, principal research engineer at MIT; John E. Parsons, Executive
Director of the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research,
Executive Director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global
Change, Senior Lecturer in the MIT Sloan School of Management; February
2009, Cost and U.S. public policy for new coal power plants with carbon capture
and sequestration, Energy Procedia, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp. 4487-4494,
proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control
Technologies (GHGT-9), p. ScienceDirect)
3.1. Recent US Federal activity affecting CCS The recent US activity
federal activity affecting CCS technology has been a continuation of
research and development programs, pilot-scale demonstrations for
sequestration, and two major investment tax credits. Over the past few years,
the Department of Energy has continued to receive support from
Congress for several programs supporting CCS. The Office of Fossil
Energy continues to implement the research and development
program, mostly through the National Energy Technology Laboratory and the Clean Coal Power Initiative, as well
as grant programs for academic and private R&D projects. The DOE also has seven Regional
Partnerships to demonstrate sequestration at the 1MtCO2/yr level. Currently, these
partnerships are at varying stages, with most in the pilot scale testing phases. The DOE is also working
to demonstrate full-scale integrated CCS for electricity through the
FutureGen project, a major integrated CCS demonstration program still under development. Currently, the
project will support the cost of CCS equipment for several integrated CCS plants. Originally, the project would have been
the first integrated carbon capture and sequestration project in the US and possibly in the world. It would have been a
275MW IGCC coal power plant with saline formation sequestration at a site in Mattoon, IL. As of September 2008, The
FutureGen Alliance, the industry consortium leading the original FutureGen project, is still pursuing US congressional
funding for the project independent of the DOEs restructured FutureGen plans [15]. The
two major
investment tax credits relevant to CCS are the Advanced Coal Project
Investment Credit and the Coal Gasification Investment Credit. Originally
these tax credits were introduced as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This program provided up to $800m for IGCC
projects and $500m for advanced coal-based generation technologies over three years. Details of the awarded projects can
be found at [16]. 3.1.1. CCS and Coal Provisions in Bailout Bill In response to the credit crisis in 2008, the US congress
passed a
bill H.R. 1424 entitled the Emergency Economic Stabilization

Act of 2008. Besides providing authorization for up to $700b to help ease the effect of the credit crisis on the US
financial industry, the bill also included several notable energy provisions with
some specifically relevant to advanced coal and CCS technology. The bill contains a
modification to both the Advanced Coal Project Investment Credit and the Coal Gasification Investment Credit. The
updated Advanced Coal Project Investment Credit program extends the period of application by three years, and provides
an additional $1.25b for advanced coal projects capturing and sequestering at least 65% of their CO2 emissions. Up to
30% of the project cost can be awarded the tax credit. The updated Coal Gasification Investment Credit program provides
an additional $250m for gasification demonstration projects that capture and sequester at least 75% of their CO2
emissions. The new program also allows credit for gasification projects producing liquid fuels for transportation. The
bill also provides a new tax credit for sequestration of CO2 in secure
geological storage or for enhanced oil and gas recovery projects. For
facilities capturing more than 500,000 tonne (t) of CO2 /yr, a $20/tonne tax credit can be applied to sequestration in
secure geological storage which includes deep saline formations and unminable coal seams and a $10/tonne tax credit can
be applied to sequestration for purposes of enhanced oil and gas recovery. This credit will apply for the first 75Mt of CO2
sequestered. This
credit will likely help support some early private-sector

CCS demonstration projects. 3.2. Proposed US legislation There have been numerous attempts to
formulate a winning climate bill in the US congress over the past several years. The policy mechanisms proposed in these
bills to limit greenhouse gas emissions vary widely. Carbon taxes, emissions performance standards, portfolio standards,
cap-and-trade systems, direct subsidies, indirect subsidies such as tax credits, and clean technology R&D have all been
proposed, often in combination with each other. Which policy tools will be politically viable remains to be seen. While it is
common sense to understand that CCS technology will only be deployed in the presence of a price on carbon, there is
much disagreement on what price would be sufficient versus what price would be likely given the current political
atmosphere. Combined with the cost update in Section 2 of this paper, an audit of the major current policy approaches
affecting CCS will allow some conclusions to be reached about the likelihood of CCS to be deployed under these varying
policy scenarios. 3.2.1. US Climate Legislation 3.2.1.1. Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008 The
leading piece of climate legislation being considered in 2008 is

S.3036, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008. This bill would
establish a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions from all major emitting sector including both electricity
and vehicle transportation. The eventual target would be 70% below 2005 emissions levels by the year 2050. This target is
similar to goals recommended by climate scientists to achieve a 450ppm CO2 concentration stabilization. A Carbon
Market Efficiency Board would be established a sort of central bank for carbon markets that could act to contain costs if
needed; the most important function of this board would be to allow expanded borrowing of future allowances and/or
international offsets (such as CDM credits) if the US economy was in a crisis. There
are several notable

details in this bill specific to CCS. Initially, 18% of emissions
allowance would be freely allocated to the power generation sector,
with this amount reduced to zero by 2031. The remainder of emissions allowances would
need to be bought through government auction or private purchase in an emissions allowance market. There will be
bonus allowances given to power generators choosing to use CCS. The bonus will be 4.5x in 2012 reduced to zero by 2033.
These bonus allowances would be valid for the first 10 years of operation of the CCS plant. For example, for each ton of
CO2 sequestered in 2012, the company would receive one allowance plus 4.5 additional emissions allowances to either sell
or use for their other CO2 emitting plants. There is an emissions standard required to receive this bonus. New plants with
CCS must emit less than 800 lbCO2/MWh before 2018, and after 2018, a new plant must emit less than 300 lbCO2/MWh.
Plants choosing to retrofit with CCS must emit less than 1200 lbCO2/MWh. Since this program will likely be generating
hundreds of billions of dollars of auction revenue every year, a major part of S.3036 is the allocation of this massive fund
toward various projects, including CCS technology. In total, 25% of auction proceeds will go to advanced coal and CCS
demonstration, with at least 6.25% to advanced coal and 12.5% to CCS demonstration. In total this bill would likely
support 5-10 CCS demonstration plants through these revenues. 3.2.1.2. Low Carbon Economy Act of 2007
Another major piece of climate legislation is S.1766, the Low Carbon

Security Act of 2008 or the Bingaman-Specter bill. This bill is based upon final
recommendations from the National Commission on Energy Policy. This bill would also establish a cap-and-trade
program for greenhouse gas emissions. The target would be to reach 1990 emissions levels by the year 2030. This bill has
a cost-containment mechanism called TAP Technology Accelerator Payment; if the market price reaches the current
TAP price, then emitters can purchase credits from the government at the TAP price. The TAP starts at $10 in 2012
increasing to ~$25 in 2030 (not including inflation). TAP proceeds would go into a fund to support energy technology
deployment. Initially, 28.6% of emissions allowances would be freely allocated to the power generation sector, with this
amount reduced to zero by 2043. Similarly to S.3036, this
bill also includes bonus

allowances given to power generators choosing to use CCS. The bonus will be
3.5x in 2012 reducing to zero by 2040. These bonus allowances would be valid for the first 10 years of operation of the CCS
plant. Similar to S.3036, there will be billions in auction proceeds available for energy projects. In total, 5.5% of auction
proceeds will go to advanced coal demonstration, 5.5% to commercial CCS deployment, and 11% for early CCS
demonstration projects. 3.2.2. CCS Demonstration Support 3.2.2.1. CCS Trust Fund The
concept of a
trust fund for CCS demonstration projects has been gaining traction
recently. Popularized by Prof. Ed Rubin of Carnegie Mellon, the idea would be to charge a
small fee per kWh to every electricity consumer in the country. The
fee collected would then be put into a trust fund designated for
funding CCS demonstration projects. The first legislative
embodiment of this idea was recently proposed by Rep. Boucher of Virginia as
H.R.6258. This bill would impose a small fee on all fossil power sales for 10 years. The fee would be 0.43 mill/kWh for
coal-fired generation, 0.22 mill/kWh for gas, and 0.32 mill/kWh for oil. This fund would aggregate into about $1 billion
annually, which would be about $10 billion over 10 years. This fund would be managed by a Carbon Storage Research
Corporation, which would be a division of the Electric Power Research Institute. The managing board would be staffed by
power industry representatives, with the mission of supporting 3-5 large-scale commercial demonstrations of CCS. The
major advantage to this approach would be avoiding the political appropriations process, as well as federal procurement
requirements that a DOE-managed project would have to follow. 3.2.2.2. Energy Technology Corporation A second idea
for demonstration is an Energy Technology Corporation. Recently proposed by John Deutch, John Podesta, and Peter
Ogden [17], this corporation would be a semi-private corporation funded by a large single appropriation to fund energy
technology demonstrations for technologies like CCS and cellulosic ethanol production. The corporation would be
managed by a board appointed by President. No detail as to the level of initial funding required has been proposed.
Similar to the CCS trust fund option, this corporation would be independent of federal procurement rules and the yearly
appropriations process. One criticism of this approach is due to the problems encountered by the US Synthetic Fuels
Corporation in the early 1980s. The Synfuels Corporation was created in response to the oil shocks of the 1970s with the
mission of increasing US energy independence through coal-to-liquids technology. The Corporation was created with fixed
production targets, which ultimately led to billions of dollars of spending on projects producing fuel at a cost several times
higher than the then market-price of automotive fuel. Proponents of a new Corporation for energy projects say that
technology progress targets would either be flexible and reviewed periodically, so that demonstration priorities could be
shifted if changing market conditions justified the shift, or they could be based on cost and performance rather than
production targets, which would hopefully help avoid the problems encountered by the Synfuels Corporation. 3.2.2.3.
Clean Energy Investment Bank A
third proposal for CCS demonstration is a Clean

Energy Investment Bank. As proposed in S.2730 by Sen. Pete
Domenici of New Mexico, this would be a federally-funded bank to
provide financial services for clean energy projects. After receiving a large initial
endowment for a clean energy investment bank fund from the federal government, it would act as normal investment
bank acts, by providing loan guarantees, insurance, loans, equity and security investment, and other services. This bank
would be backed by full faith and credit of US government. The bank will be managed as a bank by an executive board
appointed by the President. This bank would also modify the loan guarantee program as defined by Energy Policy Act of
2005 by taking control of this function from DOE. This bank would support several large CCS demonstrations, as well as
other promising energy technology development and demonstration. Just like the first two options, this bank would also
avoid the federal appropriations process but may not avoid the potentially difficult federal procurement rules. 3.2.2.4.
Cost Sharing - CCS Technology Act of 2008 There
are several proposals using the

government cost sharing method to support CCS demonstration. One
recent proposal is S.2323 proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. This
bill would provide $1.6 billion to support 3-5 sequestration demonstration projects, as well as $2.4b to support 3-5
capture demonstration projects. Up to 50% of the cost of the project could be supported by government funds. The bill
also would provide increased levels of CCS R&D up to $350m for the 2008- 2012 period.
CCS has political support now and its a popular way to

mitigate warming
Stephens 6 Assistant Professor of Environmental Science and Policy at Clark
University (Jennie C., Ph.D. in Environmental Science and Engineering at the
California Institute of Technology, associate with the Energy Technology
Innovation Policy research group in the Belfer Center for Science and
International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard
University, Fall 2006, Growing interest in carbon capture and storage (CCS) for
climate change mitigation, Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, Volume 2,
Issue 2, pp. 4-13, http://sspp.proquest.com/static_content/vol2iss2/0604016.stephens-print.html)
A political position that supports the advancement of CCS technology
as an alternative to regulations to limit CO2 emissions has clearly
influenced CCS development. Nevertheless, proposed CCS approaches were not developed with the
intent of eliminating the need for emissions regulations, but, given the magnitude of the CO2 problem, are largely viewed
as a supplement (Pacala & Socolow, 2004). Within
the political arena, however, support for

CCS is often perceived as an alternative to regulating CO2 releases.
The current United States administration has opposed any national
regulation to reduce CO2 emissions (see e.g., Abraham, 2004), but growing
public concern about climate change has forced it to confront the
issue and to define actions to mitigate the problem. Supporting CCS
as part of the Presidents Advanced Energy Initiative appears to be a
politically convenient way to demonstrate action on climate change
without making policy decisions to ensure actual CO2 emissions
reduction (NEC, 2006). The leadership of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is another important factor contributing
to interest in CCS technologies. In addition to being the world leader pushing hardest to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions,
in his role as G8 chairman in 2005, Blair advocated for increased governmental support for carbon abatement as a critical
part of addressing climate change (Blair, 2003). Recognizing the importance of American involvement in any strategy to
tackle the global problem of climate change, Blair has persistently tried to change the Bush administrations position.
This focus on advancing technology rather than pushing for emissionreduction policies can be interpreted as an attempt to find common
ground with the United States. Governmental Support of Research and Development
Governmental efforts to advance the development of CCS technologies through R&D support vary considerably among
countries. The potential impact of the successful deployment of CCS systems is related to a regions endemic fossil-fuel
resources and level of fossil-fuel energy reliance. As a result, different national priorities are apparent when looking at
government-supported CCS research programs. In
the coal-rich, energy-hungry United

States, CCS provides the only way to reconcile increased use of
domestic coal with climate-change mitigation, so the American
government increasingly touts CCS as part of the future energy
infrastructure. The federal government currently supports a suite of
CCS R&D programs and has also initiated a large-scale demonstration
project named FutureGen. The primary goal of the core CCS R&D program in the United States is to
support technological developments that will reduce costs; the Regional Sequestration Partnership Program supports
region-specific studies to determine the most suitable CCS technologies, regulations, and infrastructure. The FutureGen
initiative is a US$1 billion project planned as the first demonstration of a commercial scale coal-fired power plant that
captures and stores CO2. The
goal is to establish technical feasibility and

economic viability for integrating coal gasification technology (IGCC)
with CCS. Although the FutureGen project began in 2003, selection of the location for this power plant is not due to
occur until late 2007. European governments have also supported CCS technology advancement in several ways. The
European Community (EC) contributed funds to several CCS projects through its Sixth Framework Programme (FP6,
totaling an EC contribution of 35 million during the first proposal round) building on the research done under FP4 and
FP5 during the early 1990s that initiated European R&D into CCS. This support includes contributions to the Sleipner
project as well as to some other R&D and small-scale demonstration projects. Independently of Brussels, EC member
states are also providing modest support for CCS R&D. For instance, the British government recently announced a 40
million fund to support CO2 storage in depleted North Sea oil and gas fields. Japan is another country that has been
actively encouraging CCS. Interestingly, lacking suitable land-based geologic reservoirs, Japan has focused most of its
investment on the potential and limitations of oceanic CO2 storage. Most developing countries have not begun to seriously
consider the potential of CCS technologies as a climate change mitigation strategy, so government support for advancing
this set of technologies has been minimal or nonexistent.2 Recognizing
the varied efforts in

advancing CCS technology around the world, the United States
initiated an international body, the Carbon Sequestration Leadership
Forum (CSLF), in 2003. The CSLF provides a forum for collaboration
by facilitating joint projects, as well as providing a mechanism for
multilateral communication regarding the latest CCS developments and
a venue for formulating strategies to transfer technology to developing countries.
Asteroids Advantage
Case Frontline
No impact to asteroids big asteroids are rare and the
Earths oceans absorb the impact
Plait 2-13 Phil Plait is an astronomer, public speaker and writer for Slate.
(Phil, February, 13, 2014, When will the Earth get hit by another asteroid? Slate
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/mysteries_of_the_universe/
2014/02/anniversary_of_chelyabinsk_asteroid_impact_we_need_to_test_a_d
eflector_mission.html)//sb
Your odds of dying in an asteroid impact are about one in 700,000.
Surprising, isnt it? Thats about the same chance you have of dying in a flood or a
fireworks accident over your lifetime. It may be even more surprising when you consider that there
has never even been a confirmed human death resulting from an
impact . But this number involves something of a trick: A big enough impact will kill everyone on Earth. A smaller
impact might devastate a local region on Earth, but a big one can wipe out entire species. Just ask the dinosaurs
For a global event, you get these odds roughly by dividing the time between impacts by the average human lifespan. But
its still a little misleading because its similar to the lottery: The chance is 100 percent that someone will win the lottery,
but the chances are extremely low that you specifically will. Your odds of dying in an impact event are pretty low, but the
odds of some random person somewhere getting killed are higher.
Of course, asteroid
impacts are a lottery you get to play whether you want to or not.
Chelyabinsk impact over
Today is a good day to think about all this: Its the first anniversary of the
Russia. On Feb. 15, 2013 (it was still Feb. 14 in U.S. time), a rock the size of a house came screaming in from space. In
a single moment, its huge energy of motion was converted into light and heat. The resulting explosion was the equivalent
of a half-million tons of TNT detonating all at once. Even though it exploded
dozens of kilometers
above the Earths surface, the shock wave shook the ground, set off car alarms, and shattered windows.
More than 1,000 people were injured, some seriously, by flying glass.
Amazingly,
no one was killed , but it shows quite vividly that the threat of asteroid impacts is quite real.
So when will the Earth get hit again? And what can we do about it?
***
The Earth gets hit by about 100 tons of material every day, but thats in the form of tiny pebbles that burn up high in the
atmosphere and produce shooting stars.
Big impacts are rare . The Chelyabinsk asteroid was 19 meters (62 feet) in diameter, and, on average, we
should expect an impact from an object that size somewhere on Earth about once every 25 years. (Because most of
the planet is covered in water, many of these go unnoticed .)
Bigger impacts are more rare. In 1908 an object 30 meters or so in diameter came across the Earth, exploding high over a
swampy region of the Russian countryside near the Tunguska River. The yield was equivalent to a 15 megaton nuclear
bomb! Something like this Tunguska event (as its now called) happens every few centuries on average.
You probably know that the dinosaurs were taken out by an asteroid or comet
about 10 kilometers wide. Happily, those events are extremely rare, occurring on a
timescale of tens of millions of years . As it happens, were pretty sure theres
no dinosaur-killer on its way to Earth for the next few centuries . But the
lesson of Chelyabinsk and Tunguska is that it doesnt take a flying mountain to ruin your whole day. A hill will do nicely.
If we want to prevent asteroid impacts from happening, the first thing we need to do is spot these threats. And were
working pretty hard on that.
Astronomers have built quite a few observatories dedicated to patiently scanning the heavens looking for blips of light.
Thousands of near-Earth asteroids have been found this way, their orbits meticulously calculated, projected into the
future, and determined to be potentially threatening or not.
As things stand now, we dont have the capability to find them all. But we will, soon. The huge Pan-STARRS telescope is
looking deep for threats and is already producing data. LSST is a planned monster 8-meter telescope specifically designed
to look for near-Earth objects and is expected to catalog hundreds of thousands of them.
Status quo solves Pan STARRS telescope is producing

data to track asteroids
Plait 2-13 Phil Plait is an astronomer, public speaker and writer for Slate.
(Phil, February, 13, 2014, When will the Earth get hit by another asteroid? Slate
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/mysteries_of_the_universe/
2014/02/anniversary_of_chelyabinsk_asteroid_impact_we_need_to_test_a_d
eflector_mission.html) //sb
Your odds of dying in an asteroid impact are about one in 700,000.
Surprising, isnt it? Thats about the same chance you have of dying in a flood or a fireworks accident over your lifetime. It
may be even more surprising when you consider that there has never even been a confirmed human death resulting from
an impact. But this number involves something of a trick: A big enough impact will kill everyone on Earth. A smaller
impact might devastate a local region on Earth, but a big one can wipe out entire species. Just ask the dinosaurs
For a global event, you get these odds roughly by dividing the time between impacts by the average human lifespan. But
its still a little misleading because its similar to the lottery: The chance is 100 percent that someone will win the lottery,
but the chances are extremely low that you specifically will. Your odds of dying in an impact event are pretty low, but the
odds of some random person somewhere getting killed are higher.
Of course, asteroid impacts are a lottery you get to play whether you want to or not.
Today is a good day to think about all this: Its the first anniversary of the Chelyabinsk impact over Russia. On Feb. 15,
2013 (it was still Feb. 14 in U.S. time), a rock the size of a house came screaming in from space. In a single moment, its
huge energy of motion was converted into light and heat. The resulting explosion was the equivalent of a half-million tons
of TNT detonating all at once. Even though it exploded dozens of kilometers above the Earths surface, the shock wave
shook the ground, set off car alarms, and shattered windows. More than 1,000 people were injured, some seriously, by
flying glass.
Amazingly, no one was killed, but it shows quite vividly that the threat of asteroid impacts is quite real.
So when will the Earth get hit again? And what can we do about it?
***
The Earth gets hit by about 100 tons of material every day, but thats in the form of tiny pebbles that burn up high in the
atmosphere and produce shooting stars.
Big impacts are rare. The Chelyabinsk asteroid was 19 meters (62 feet) in diameter, and, on average, we should expect an
impact from an object that size somewhere on Earth about once every 25 years. (Because most of the planet is covered in
water, many of these go unnoticed.)
Bigger impacts are more rare. In 1908 an object 30 meters or so in diameter came across the Earth, exploding high over a
swampy region of the Russian countryside near the Tunguska River. The yield was equivalent to a 15 megaton nuclear
bomb! Something like this Tunguska event (as its now called) happens every few centuries on average.
You probably know that the dinosaurs were taken out by an asteroid or comet about 10 kilometers wide. Happily, those
events are extremely rare, occurring on a timescale of tens of millions of years. As it happens, were pretty sure theres no
dinosaur-killer on its way to Earth for the next few centuries. But the lesson of Chelyabinsk and Tunguska is that it doesnt
take a flying mountain to ruin your whole day. A hill will do nicely.
If we want to prevent asteroid impacts from happening , the first thing we

need to do is spot these threats. And were working pretty hard on that.
Astronomers have built quite a few observatories dedicated to patiently
scanning the heavens looking for blips of light. Thousands of near-Earth
asteroids have been found this way, their orbits meticulously
calculated, projected into the future, and determined to be potentially
threatening or not.
As things stand now, we dont have the capability to find them all. But we will, soon. The huge PanSTARRS telescope is looking deep for threats and is already
producing data. LSST is a planned monster 8-meter telescope specifically designed to look for near-Earth
objects and is expected to catalog hundreds of thousands of them.
Status quo solves UN committee on asteroids will solve

and prevent threats
Moskowitz 13 (Clara, December 17, 2013, U.N. Heeds Astronaut Advice on Shielding
Earth from Asteroids, Scientific American,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/un-heeds-astronaut-advice-on-shieldingearth-from-asteroids/)//sb
When a meteor exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia, last February, the world's space agencies found out along with the rest
of us, on Twitter and YouTube. That, former astronaut Ed Lu says, is unacceptableand the United Nations agrees.
In October the U.N.
General Assembly approved a set of measures to limit

the dangers of rogue asteroids. The U.N. plans to set up an
International Asteroid Warning Group for member nations to share
information about potentially hazardous space rocks. If astronomers detect a
threatening asteroid, the U.N.'s Committee on the Peaceful Uses of
Outer Space will help coordinate a mission to deflect it.
Lu and other members of the Association of Space Explorers (ASE) had recommended that the U.N.
take those first steps toward addressing the problem of wayward
asteroids. The ASE has also asked the U.N. to coordinate a practice asteroid-deflection mission to test the
technologies for pushing a rock off course before such tactics become necessary.
The ASE urges that each country delegate asteroid duties to a specific internal agency. No government in the world today
has explicitly assigned the responsibility for planetary protection to any of its agencies, said ASE member and Apollo 9
astronaut Rusty Schweickart during a public discussion in October at the American Museum of Natural History in New
York City.
The next key step in defending Earth is to identify the menacing objects. There are about one million asteroids large
enough to destroy New York, Lu said at the meeting. Our challenge is to find these asteroids first, before they find us.
The B612 Foundation, a nonprofit Lu created to tackle the problem of asteroid impacts, is developing a privately funded
space telescope called Sentinel. The telescope's sensitivity to infrared lightthe heat given off by objects warmed by the
sunshould enable it to spot a large number of truly menacing asteroids, but smaller bodies, such as the one that hit over
Chelyabinsk, will remain mostly unseen.
Early detection is important because it increases the chance of being able to deflect a giant asteroid before impact. If a
spacecraft were rammed into an asteroid five or 10 years before the rock was due to hit Earth, the slight orbital alteration
should be enough to ensure a miss.
The impact over Chelyabinsk, which injured 1,000 people, was a warning shot, American Museum of Natural History
astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson said at the discussion. Now it's time for Earth's citizens to take action.
Status quo solves already training centers for

astronauts no unique reason why Aquarius is key
Aquarius Reef Base
The missions are part of a space analog tradition that also sends
prospective astronauts into the desert and ice caves, tooling around in
futuristic space vehicles, and swimming in a giant swimming pool at
NASA headquarters in Houston, all for the purpose of training for life
out of Earths atmosphere. Since 2009 , when Barack Obama came to
NASA to describe Americas new deep-space mission not back to the
moon but to an asteroid, in anticipation of a trip to Mars the focus of
NEEMO has shifted from the Moon and Mars to one of the most
challenging space missions ever imagined. And its precisely the kind of
mission that science boosters like Neil deGrasse Tyson consider to be valuable:
re-upping the inspirational power of space exploration while buying the Earth a
little asteroid insurance.
Asteroids Turn
Sending Astronauts to asteroids will ensure that they
blow up the asteroid causes more danger and turns the
case
The possibility that Earth will be hit by an asteroid in our lifetime isnt
huge. But heres the thing: the threat is so potentially catastrophic that even a small chance of impact and the utterly
apocalyptic waves that could subsequently erase entire coastlines makes an asteroid one of those things that someone
should probably be thinking about.
a little-known NASA project has been doing, 20 meters

beneath the ocean surface, some four kilometers off the coast of the Florida Keys . Each summer, groups of
aquanauts descend to Aquarius Reef Base, the worlds last true sea lab, run
by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to live
underwater for two weeks at a time, as part of a project called
NEEMO, or NASAs Extreme Environment Mission Operations.
For years, thats precisely what
And because of fresh budget cuts, the most recent installment of the mission, which we visited in June, may well be the
last.
Aquarius Reef Base
The missions are part of a space analog tradition that also sends prospective astronauts into the desert and ice caves,
tooling around in futuristic space vehicles, and swimming in a giant swimming pool at NASA headquarters in Houston, all
for the purpose of training for life out of Earths atmosphere. Since 2009, when Barack Obama came to NASA to describe
Americas new deep-space mission not back to the moon but to an asteroid, in anticipation of a trip to Mars the focus
of NEEMO has shifted from the Moon and Mars to one of the most challenging space missions ever imagined. And its
precisely the kind of mission that science boosters like Neil deGrasse Tyson consider to be valuable: re-upping the
inspirational power of space exploration while buying the Earth a little asteroid insurance.
Of course not everyones a fan of sending humans to a flying rock as

our first real trip into deep space. Obamas astroid announcement
led some to speculate he was simply trying to buy time with a
fantastical idea while the country figured out how to pay for real
human spaceflight again. Perhaps he wanted to distance himself from his predecessors exceedingly
ambitious space plans. And to some astronauts, like Mike Gernhardt, the idea was simply a let-down: the Moon
seemed like a much better way-station to Mars, and it was already in the sights of the
Chinese space program, which intends to send astronauts there by 2020.
But Gernhardt, a veteran diver whos now the principal investigator of the NEEMO project, points out that flying to an
asteroid will give us new tools for understanding the solar system and provide us with valuable rare minerals that can be
used as fuel for deep space missions. (Already, Larry Page, Eric Schmidt, Ross Perot Jr., Charles Simonyi and James
Cameron have teamed up to start a company dedicated to asteroid mining.)
And of course, sending humans on a six-month trip to one of the near

earth objects that potentially threaten us, Armageddon style, might be the
best chance well have of nudging it out of the path of Earth. ( Blowing it up,
Gernhardt points out, isnt the best solution, as it could form chunks
that could hit the Earth.)
B612 Adv CP
1NC
Text: The B612 Foundation should deploy the Sentinel
Infrared Space Telescope to mirror Venus orbit in order to
survey asteroids and other near-earth objects.
Sentinel Infrared Space Telescope solves better would
be able to detect and calculate the trajectory of asteroids
Hart 4-19 Benjamin Hart is a front-page editor at The Huffington Post.
(Benjamin, 4/19/2014, Far More Asteroids Have Hit The Earth Than We
Thought, Astronauts Say, The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/19/asteroidscities_n_5178708.html)//sb
Bad news, earthlings. A former
NASA scientist says it's mere happenstance that

an Armageddon-style asteroid hasn't hit a densely populated area in the last
few years.
On Tuesday, the B612 Foundation, which is devoted to preventing the next deep
impact, will present data from a nuclear-weapons test warning
satellite showing that far more asteroids have hit earth in the past few
years than previously thought, the organization announced on its website.
The data, collected from a nuclear missile detection system that picks
up large blasts on earth, shows that since 2001, asteroids have caused 26
explosions on the scale of an atomic bomb.
This data shows that asteroid impacts are NOT rare , but actually 3-10 times more
common than we previously thought, Ed Lu, one of the astronauts working on the project, said in a statement. "The fact
that none of these asteroid impacts shown in the video was detected in advance is proof that the only thing preventing a
catastrophe from a 'city-killer' sized asteroid is blind luck."
The silver lining? Scientists
are working to deflect any future space rocks
from our planet.

Lu, along with fellow ex-astronauts Tom Jones and Bill Anders, has been
attempting to develop a better asteroid early-warning system, the
Sentinel Infrared Space Telescope, which they hope will become "the principal means by which
nearly all asteroid discoveries will be made." In an interview with Wired, Lu explained that the telescope will
work by scanning the sky in infrared, which will allow it to calculate
the trajectory and velocity of asteroids.
NASA has made efforts to track asteroids, but they haven't been as aggressive as the B612
scientists would like. In 1998, NASA established the Near-Earth Object Program Office to detect potentially
hazardous comets and asteroids. In March, the agency announced a contest for scientists to develop asteroid-detecting
algorithms, a year after a meteorite explosion in Russia made international headlines.
You can read more about B612 and its mission from Slate's Phil Plait here.
2NC Solvency
Sentinel solves yields information about asteroids
orbits and their potential risks
Plait 13 Phil Plait is an astronomer, public speaker and writer for Slate. (Phil,
July 5, 2013, How toLiterallyHelp Save the World from Asteroid Impacts
Slate,
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/07/05/asteroid_impacts_b6
12_foundation_wants_to_save_the_world.html)//sb
The B612 Foundation is a group of scientists, engineers, and astronauts who want to literally save the
world from asteroid impacts. They know the first step in doing so is to build a telescope
that can spot space rocks, map their orbits, and compile a list of
potential Earth-whackers. Their Sentinel mission will do just that: It
will circle the Sun near the orbit of Venus, surveying the sky to look for potentially threatening
rocks (it will actually do some of its best prospecting right after launch, while its still near Earth). The mission is
ambitious, and funded through private donations.
Thats where you come in. B612 is using various methods to raise the funds, including auctioning some pretty cool items:
medallions, pins, and patches, some of which have flown in space! My favorite is a small flag that orbited the Earth for ten
days in 1969 on the Apollo 9 mission with astronaut (and B612 scientist) Rusty Schweickart.
Im a big supporter of B612 (along with a proposed complementary NASA mission called NEOCAM). I think this is so
important that when B612 asked me to make a short video for them about it, I happily and immediately agreed:
They also have an introductory video by my friend, astronaut Ed Lu, who is the Chairman and CEO of B612.
1908 Tunguska blast pattern on a map of Washington DC
The 1908 Tunguska asteroid impact blast pattern superposed over the Washington, DC area, to show the extent of damage
from a "small" asteroid impact..
Statistically speaking, asteroid impacts present a fairly small danger in the short term (like, in the next few decades), but
over enough time the
odds go up to certainty that one big enough to do serious damage will occur.
Because we havent mapped all the near-Earth asteroids, we simply
cant know when the next impact will be. Yet. The lesson of Chelyabinsk is that even small
rocks can be a threat, and we need to keep an eye on the sky for them.
Missions like Sentinel and NEOCAM will yield a treasure trove of information
about hazardous asteroids, giving us not just their orbits and potential
impact risks, but also scientifically valuable information about them
as well. Asteroids are fascinating, many of them as old as the solar system itself, and can tell us a lot about our
astronomical history. Some are also literal treasure troves, filled with materials astronauts on future missions can use to
survive; water, air, and other supplies can be generated from this raw matter.
These rocks are one of the biggest ironies of the solar system: If we do nothing about them, they can destroy us, but if we
take action, soon, they can open up the exploration of space and possibly provide substantial wealth in the process. Its a
win-win situation, and all we have to do is get moving. B612
is a solid step in that direction.
Counterplan solves better than the case Sentinel is key

to obtaining warnings of impending asteroid strikes
decades ahead
Goddard 4-19 - Jacqui Goddard is a freelance foreign correspondent for British
national newspapers including The Times, Sunday Telegraph, and The Scotsman. Based
in Florida since 2002, she has also written for publications including the South China
Morning Post, The Australian, The Christian Science Monitor, The Globe and Mail
(Canada), and has reported for BBC radio. (Jacqui, 19 Apr 2014, Astronauts plan $250
million asteroid telescope 'to stop disaster', The Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/10776057/Astronauts-plan-250-millionasteroid-telescope-to-stop-disaster.html)//sb
As members of an elite band of cosmic explorers, they are among the few to have gone beyond the final frontier and looked
down on the Earth from space.
Now, inspired by the unique perspective they gained of their home planet and armed with startling new data about the
scale of the threat it faces from asteroid strikes a
group of former Nasa astronauts are on
an extraordinary mission to save the world.
Fourteen months after an asteroid exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia, on a scale equivalent to 30 Hiroshima bombs, the
B612 Foundation, a non-profit group founded by Apollo 9 astronaut Rusty Schweickart and space shuttle
astronaut Ed Lu, are warning that only "blind luck" has so far saved it from
worse.
"It's a giant game of chance we're playing . It's cosmic roulette," said Dr Lu,
whose group is working towards building and launching Sentinel, a
$250 million telescope that would spot space rocks on a collision
course with the earth, giving several years or even decades worth of
notice to deflect a disaster .
"There's a saying in Vegas that 'The house never loses'. It's true; you can't just keep playing a game of chance and expect to
keep winning," added Dr Lu, the group's chief executive officer.
Data obtained by Dr Peter Brown, a planetary scientist and asteroid expert at the University of Western Ontario, in
Canada, revealed that since
2001 the earth has been rocked by atomic bombscale asteroid impacts 26 times; up to ten times more frequently than
previously thought.
On Tuesday, which is Earth Day, the B612 Foundation will hold a press conference to unveil more critical details,
including a video presentation that will for the first time reveal the locations and sizes of the multi-kiloton impacts.
"We are literally in a shooting gallery," said Mr Schweickart. "That's the message we want people to understand. It's
happening, it's ongoing, and the big ones will come. It's just a matter of when."
The video is based on information from the International Monitoring System, a network of sensors set up around the
world to verify compliance with the global ban on nuclear weapons testing. The technology detects sound waves and shock
waves above and below Earth's surface.
Since only 28 per cent of the planet's surface is land, and only one per cent is populated, the majority of asteroid strikes
are in remote regions, deserts and oceans.
"The fact that none
of these asteroid impacts represented in the video was

detected in advance, is proof that the only thing preventing a
catastrophe from a 'city-killer' sized asteroid is blind luck," said Dr Lu, who flew three space shuttle
missions and served a six-month stint aboard the International Space Station during his 12-year Nasa career.
He added: "I think people are going to be pretty shocked. Many
have this misconception that

asteroid impacts are rare. They are not. But we have it in our power to make them rare."
The Chelyabinsk asteroid ripped through the earth's atmosphere as a 42,000mph fireball, exploding nearly 19 miles
(30kms) above the ground. It damaged 7,200 properties in six cities and injured 1,500 people across a 26-mile radius.
In an uncanny coincidence, astronomers' attention was to have been focused that day on another asteroid a 45 metrewide rock tagged DA14 which had been identified through ground-based telescopes one year previously as being on a
"near miss" trajectory towards the earth.
But just 16 hours before DA14 made its closest approach, passing by the planet at a distance of 17,200 miles, came
Chelyabinsk's unexpected visitor, a 65-foot wide rock weighing more than the Eiffel Tower. It had
gone undetected for years because it came from the same direction as the
Sun's glare, making it impossible for ground-based optical telescopes
to see it.
Sentinel, which the B612 Foundation is aiming to launch in 2018, will be positioned up to 170 million
miles from the earth, near Venus, from where its lenses would point away from
the Sun. In the first month of operation alone, it is expected to detect and track more
than 20,000 near-Earth asteroids, exceeding the discoveries made by
all other telescopes combined over the course of the last 30 years.
Over six and a half years, it will make an inventory of 98 per cent of near-Earth asteroids; the current detection level
stands at only one per cent.
Mr Schweickart, who as an astronaut on Nasa's Apollo 9 mission in March 1969 played a critical role in paving the way for
man's first landing on the Moon four months later, co-founded the B612 Foundation and now serves as chairman
emeritus.
The group first worked on designing technologies to deflect asteroids from

collisions with Earth, before launching the Sentinel early-warning project.
It is having to raise the $250 million to build Sentinel, and the further $200 million to operate it for 6.5 years, itself.
The failure by the US government to do the job itself irks Schweickart.
"Scientific projects such as understanding that there's an ocean under the ice on Europa is a really wonderful thing, but it
shouldn't compete in terms of government funding priorities with ensuring the safety and security of people here on
Earth," he said.
"The fact is, the government just isn't doing its job. It's not all that much money when you compare it to the cost of
building a university or a freeway over-pass."
On Tuesday, Dr Lu will be joined at the B612 Foundation's press conference in Seattle by Tom Jones, a four-time space
shuttle astronaut and president of the Association of Space Explorers.
Also present will be Bill Anders, a member of the three-strong Apollo 8 crew that in 1968 became the first to fly around the
Moon. Mr Anders' famous "Earthrise" photograph, which gave mankind its first ever glimpse of a fragile Earth rising over
the Moon's crater-strewn surface, will provide the backdrop.
"We began Apollo 8 thinking we were going to learn about the Moon," said Mr Anders. "Instead, we began a new
understanding of our Earth."
Dr Lu added: "For those of us who've seen the Earth from space, you can't help but make that realisation of what a fragile
and beautiful place we live in. If I could get one million people to see that view of Earth, then I could just pass the hat and
we could build Sentinel tomorrow."
Sentinel telescope is sufficient to solve
Griggs 13 writer for USA Today and a freelance science journalist (Mary Beth,
October 6, 2013, Avoiding Armegeddon: The hunt is on for dangerous
asteroids, USA Today,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/10/06/hunt-for-dangerousasteroids/2924333/)//sb
More than 1,000 people were injured last February in Chelyabinsk, Russia, when a meteor exploded over the city. The
collision shattered windows and pelted startled residents with shards of glass and debris. In the aftermath, the world was
transfixed by extraordinary videos of the huge fireball as it streaked across the sky. Many wondered, why on earth did no
one see it coming?
"The
odds of asteroid impacts are much higher than people realize, " said
Ed Lu, a former astronaut and chief executive officer of the B612 Foundation, which searches for
asteroids that could potentially hit the Earth and cause human
devastation. He said that there is a 30 percent chance of a city-destroying
asteroid hitting the Earth in the next 100 years.
The primary source of meteors like the one that exploded over Russia is the asteroid belt between the orbits of Jupiter and
Mars. The gravitational pull of giant Jupiter causes space debris to collide repeatedly, breaking into smaller and smaller
fragments that became asteroids.
Jupiter interacts with these asteroids gravitationally, periodically throwing them out of their orbit and sending them
further out into the reaches of the solar system. Or they can be tossed inward, toward the sun and Earth. These projectiles
are the asteroids that pose a threat to Earth.
It's only recently that scientists even knew the scope of the threat posed by asteroids. "Fifty years ago, scientists, when they
looked at the moon, they thought those craters were volcanic," said James Green, director of planetary science at NASA.
Now, common knowledge holds that most of the craters on the moon were caused by asteroids. If they can hit the moon,
they can hit the Earth, too.
But how
will we know where the asteroids are in space ? That's a

question that has plagued scientists for a generation. Computer models were
able to give estimates of how many asteroids were out there and with what
frequency they were likely to hit the Earth. But simulations can't always tell us where actual asteroids are, nor when they
will show up. Unlike stars or planets, asteroids are incredibly difficult to seemost look like dark lumps of rock or metal
set against the shadowy backdrop of space.
In 1998, NASA began searching for potentially dangerous "near-Earth objects" such as asteroids and comets. The agency
identified more than 90 percent of objects that are larger than one kilometer, and at least 90 percent of debris that spans
more than 140 meters. Luckily, the trajectories of those asteroids aren't due to menace Earth for another 200 years.
The hunt is now on for smaller asteroids that can still cause immense amounts of damage. So far, scientists have found
only a fraction of the city-destroying asteroids that are larger than 40 meters. There are estimated to be about 1 million of
them in our area of the solar system.
One of those caused the Tunguska event in 1908. An asteroid approximately 37 meters in diameter exploded over the
Siberian Wilderness, leveling more than 1,000 square miles of forest, an area larger than Washington, D.C., or New York.
The recent Chelyabinsk meteor, by comparison, was only 17 meters in diameter and still caused considerable damage.
The likelihood of one of these city-killing asteroids actually hitting a city is low (most of the Earth is covered by oceans, not
major metropolitan areas) but the effects could be devastating regardless. If an asteroid of that size did hit the ocean, it
would certainly have the potential to cause a tsunami, but scientists are still trying to create accurate models for such an
event.
To try to prevent such an incident, the
nonprofit B612 Foundation is currently

raising $450 million to send the Sentinel Space Telescope to orbit.
Designed to search for asteroids, the telescope will be positioned in a
way that mirrors Venus' orbit. The launch is planned for 2017-18.
The Sentinel is an infrared telescope that will search for heat
signatures of asteroids, instead of relying on the faint reflections of
sunlight cast off an asteroid's surface. Once in place, the telescope should be capable of locating nearly all of the
million or so asteroids within range of Earth. By mapping their trajectories, scientists will be able to
figure out which asteroids are capable of doing damage to the Earth.
"We're going to have far and away the most capable telescope in the world, and that's because it has been optimized for
finding asteroids," Lu said.
Lu compares the need for these asteroid-detecting programs to the need for hurricane preparedness in cities like New
Orleans.
City leaders and the Army Corps of Engineers once claimed that it was unnecessary to fix levees for 100-year floods. Then
Hurricane Katrina struck.
In the same way, we need to prepare now for an asteroid event. "A hurricane is really child's play compared to an asteroid
impact," Lu said. "You can't just hope for the best every year."
In August, NASA announced plans to reactivate the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer and take up the hunt for
asteroids. While not as specialized as the proposed Sentinel, the WISE telescope has already had asteroid-hunting success
as part of a project called NEOWISE. The telescope was originally built to create a map of the night sky but has since been
tasked with finding near-Earth objects. The NEOWISE mission ended in 2011. In the next mission, NASA hopes the
telescope will locate 150 more near-Earth objects.
NASA also announced the Asteroid Grand Challenge. The agency hopes this program will be an interdisciplinary venture
that brings together private businesses, amateur astronomers, space agencies and universities around the world to tackle
the threat of asteroids.
"This is one of the only natural disasters that we have the ability to solve. We have the ability to prove that we are smarter
than the dinosaurs," said Jason Kessler of NASA's Office of the Chief Technologist.
Kessler hopes to inspire people around the world by merging two topics that are almost universally beloved in science
classrooms: dinosaurs and space.
"This is a marrying of the two. We can prove that we are smarter than the dinosaurs, and take our fate into our own
hands," Kessler said. "They (the dinosaurs) didn't have the technology to defend themselves from planetary threats of this
nature."
NASA's ASTEROID RETRIEVAL MISSION
The NASA plan to lasso an asteroid might seem to be a punchline to a space cowboy joke, but the people at work on the
program are serious about it.
"The president has set an objective that Mars is our ultimate destination, and asteroids are along that path," said James
Green, NASA's director of planetary science.
Instead of hunting one down in the asteroid belt, the plan would be to find an asteroid in near-Earth orbit, target it and
bring it between the Earth and the moon. It would be located and harnessed initially by an unmanned spacecraft. Once
securely in place between the Earth and the moon, astronauts would be sent up to visit the asteroid, taking samples and
bringing them back to Earth. The exercise might seem frivolous, but the astronauts would be practicing with technologies
and developing skills essential to any future Mars missions, when explorers would have to rely on resources gathered from
asteroids or the surface of Mars.
Budget decisions made by Congress this summer have stymied work on NASA's Asteroid Retrieval Mission.
The House Appropriations committee, concerned about the feasibility and cost of such a mission, called the proposed
mission "premature" and refused to include any budget increases associated with the mission. They recommended that
NASA "complete further concept studies, pursue the support of Congress through the authorization process and line up
support from potential international partners before seeking new resources to carry out the mission."
B612s mission is a step in the right direction key to

future space exploration
Maria 4-14 reporter for the Weather Network. (Cheryl Santa, April 14, 2014,
Ex NASA astronauts hope to save the world from asteroid strikes, The Weather
Network, http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/ex-nasaastronauts-hope-to-save-the-world-from-asteroid-strikes/25266/)//sb
Former NASA astronaut Ed Lu thinks that the biggest threat to

mankind is asteroids -- and that has prompted him, in partnership
with Apollo 9 astronaut Rusty Schweickart, to set up the B612
Foundation.
Together they hope to build a sort of "defense perimeter" around the
planet, beginning with the construction of a high-tech telescope called Sentinel.
It all started in 2012 when Lu gave a tech talk at the Google offices. He argued that the planet isn't
sufficiently protected against asteroids, because we haven't developed technology that can
properly search for them.
Shortly after that Lu set out to do it on his own.
"I spent six months aboard the International Space Station," he told Wired.com.
"From there, you notice a stark difference between the moon and the Earth: The moon is covered in craters. But Earth has
craters too -- you just cant see them, because theyre underneath the oceans. So anybody who knows anything about space
and probability knows that this is something you have to solve. Nothing
else matters at all if

youre going to get wiped out. Since 2000, there have been eight
impacts roughly the size of Hiroshima or larger."
Lu says that Sentinel is a step in the right direction .
Asteroids are dark and don't reflect a lot of light, but the specially-designed telescope would
be able to scan the skies for signs of infrared light.
It would then analyse multiple images to measure the velocities of visible space rocks, which scientists could then use to
calculate trajectory and point of impact.
"The
Sentinel mission will create the first comprehensive dynamic

map of the inner solar system showing the positions and orbital tracks
of the hundreds of thousands of Near Earth Asteroids as they orbit the Sun," Lu
writes on his website.
"Not
only is this map needed to protect the future of planet Earth, but mapping
the inner solar system is the first step to exploring our own solar
system. Just as the U.S. geological surveys and the mapping expedition of Lewis and Clark were instrumental in the
development of the American frontier, the Sentinel Map will be instrumental as humanity opens up the new frontier that
is the inner solar system. Our solar system currently is an uncharted wilderness."
Sentinel will, obviously, be an expensive endeavour.
Lu and Schweickart are being backed by corporate donors at Google and the news-sharing site reddit -- but they're
accepting donations from all members of the public.
Visit the B612 Foundation to learn more.
Counterplan solves can detect and deflect asteroids

Baig 1-22 - Butler-Koshland Fellow, The Commonwealth Club
(Mehroz, Saving the World With Science Huffington Post,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mehroz-baig/saving-the-world-withscience_b_4638982.html)//sb
As someone who's taken a fair share of science classes, I know that it can be difficult to tie the daily homework
assignments of configuring compounds in chemistry or calculating velocity in physics to a broader world perspective. But
that's precisely what science does: It
allows us to understand how our world

works and use that understanding to shape how we can address global
issues.
Science enables us to go to doctors and be treated for diseases, understand changing weather patterns and the influence of
human beings on our environment, and send astronauts into space to walk on the moon, among many other things.
Science has allowed us to explore our own terrain and that which is millions of miles away. And the most fascinating
aspect of scientific discovery is that it keeps going -- the potential to find more cures, explore more of our oceans and solar
system, and solve the problems that we face today is never ending.
But it takes more than scientific ability to tackle the world's most pressing concerns: It takes expertise and resources.
That's where Dr. Ed Lu comes into the picture. Lu,
a former NASA astronaut who is the CEO and co-
founder of the B612 Foundation,
is on a mission to literally save the world. Dr. Lu

spoke at the Commonwealth Club about his project to build an infrared telescope
that can go out into space, detect asteroids and track them. His reason for
taking on this project was because no one else was doing it. "Our current strategy for
dealing with asteroid impacts is luck," he said. "I think that's unacceptable."
Dr. Lu noted that as of today, we have the capability to stop asteroids from hitting
the Earth, but without the technology in place to track and detect
them as they get closer, we can't do anything to stop them . He explained that
once we know the location and speed of an asteroid, it's fairly simple to ensure that
it won't hit: If we have about a decade's notice of an impact between an asteroid and our planet, all we
have to do is shift the asteroid's trajectory by nudging it , by one millimeter per
second, or as Dr. Lu put it, "the speed that an ant walks."
This isn't new territory. NASA's Deep Impact mission in 2005 included hitting a comet. Though the objective for that
mission was to gather more information about comets, the same technology can be applied to reorient asteroids. The only
problem is that we have to know where they are. According to Dr. Lu, currently
less than one

percent of the asteroids in space are being tracked. That's the problem he's hoping
to solve. Once information on asteroid location and speed is available, more can be done to prepare for their impending
arrival. And all this happens over many years: Dr. Lu mentioned that if an asteroid were coming toward the Earth, we
could have as much as a 10-year notice before its potential impact. That's enough time to put together a mission to divert
its path.
Dr. Lu is adamant that asteroid impacts are "the only global natural disaster that we know how to prevent." And they're
going to continue happening. Most recently, as the world was celebrating the new year, a small asteroid named 2014 AA,
was spotted close to the Earth and is thought to have made impact over the Atlantic Ocean. Dr. Lu noted in his talk that
most of the Earth's surface consists of oceans, so if an asteroid comes into the Earth's atmosphere, it's more likely that it
will hit water. But can we really afford to take that risk? Dr. Lu doesn't think so. His belief is, "Let's not go the way of the
dinosaurs because we didn't bother looking."
Internal Net-benefit Government funding bad

Government funding empirically fails with science
projects trades of with safety and security
Goddard 4-19 - Jacqui Goddard is a freelance foreign correspondent for British
national newspapers including The Times, Sunday Telegraph, and The Scotsman. Based
in Florida since 2002, she has also written for publications including the South China
Morning Post, The Australian, The Christian Science Monitor, The Globe and Mail
(Canada), and has reported for BBC radio. (Jacqui, 19 Apr 2014, Astronauts plan $250
million asteroid telescope 'to stop disaster', The Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/10776057/Astronauts-plan-250-millionasteroid-telescope-to-stop-disaster.html)//sb
The group first worked on designing technologies to deflect asteroids from

collisions with Earth, before launching the Sentinel early-warning project.
It is having to raise the $250 million to build Sentinel, and the further $200 million to operate it for 6.5 years, itself.
The failure by the US government to do the job itself irks Schweickart .

"Scientific projects such as understanding that there's an ocean under the ice on Europa is a really
wonderful thing, but it shouldn't compete in terms of government
funding priorities with ensuring the safety and security of people
here
on Earth," he said.
"The fact is, the government just isn't doing its job . It's not all that much money when you
compare it to the cost of building a university or a freeway over-pass."
On Tuesday, Dr Lu will be joined at the B612 Foundation's press conference in Seattle by Tom Jones, a four-time space
shuttle astronaut and president of the Association of Space Explorers.
Also present will be Bill Anders, a member of the three-strong Apollo 8 crew that in 1968 became the first to fly around the
Moon. Mr Anders' famous "Earthrise" photograph, which gave mankind its first ever glimpse of a fragile Earth rising over
the Moon's crater-strewn surface, will provide the backdrop.
"We began Apollo 8 thinking we were going to learn about the Moon," said Mr Anders. "Instead, we began a new
understanding of our Earth."
Dr Lu added: "For those of us who've seen the Earth from space, you can't help but make that realisation of what a fragile
and beautiful place we live in. If I could get one million people to see that view of Earth, then I could just pass the hat and
we could build Sentinel tomorrow."

Doesnt link to politics privately funded and owned
Astrobiology 12 (Astrobiology, Astrobiology magazine, B612 Foundation

Funds Deep Space Mission Jun 29, 2012,
http://www.astrobio.net/topic/exploration/missions/b612-foundation-fundsdeep-space-mission/)//sb
Sentinel will be deployed into a
Venus-like orbit around the Sun, from where it can continuously scan Earths orbit for asteroids.
B612 Foundation
unveiled its plans to build, launch, and operate the first privately
In a press conference at the California Academy of Sciences Thursday morning, the
funded deep space mission Sentinel a space telescope to be

placed in orbit around the Sun, ranging up to 170 million miles from Earth, for a
mission of discovery and mapping. The Foundation leadership and technical team include some
of the most experienced professionals in the world to lead this effort.
The orbits of the inner Solar System where Earth lies are populated with a half million asteroids larger than the one that
struck Tunguska (June 30, 1908), and yet weve identified and mapped only about one percent of these asteroids to date,
said Ed Lu, Space Shuttle, Soyuz, and Space Station astronaut, now Chairman and CEO of the B612 Foundation. During
its 5.5-year mission survey time, Sentinel will discover and track half a million near earth asteroids, creating a dynamic
map that will provide the blueprint for future exploration of our solar system, while protecting the future of humanity on
Earth.
Asteroids are a scientific and economic opportunity in that they contain the original building blocks of the Solar System.
They are targets for future human exploration, and may contain valuable raw materials for mining. These asteroids are
also a threat in that they can pose great risk to humanity here on Earth. Taking advantage of these opportunities and
dealing with these threats require not only knowing where each of these individual asteroids is now, but also projecting
where they will be in the future.
AT: Fed Funding Key

Federal funding not key outside investment solves
In Key Largo , an independent group, the Aquarius Foundation has

started to raise money to fund the research base's three million
dollar annual budget so that this Aquarius Reef's 117th mission won't be its
last.
Critical for FIU to find funding outside the government

come to its rescue.
While all the gloom and doom was going on in the Keys, up the road in Miami the dean and associate dean of the College
and Arts and Sciences at Florida International University were brainstorming on ways for their research institution to take
over the operation of the one-of-a-kind habitat next to the coral reef, one of the worlds most special marine environments.
At first, FIU
President Mark B. Rosenberg admitted he was skeptical. He wanted to

make sure there was a sound business plan and safety protocol to take over an
aging underwater laboratory that costs a minimum of about $1.2 million a year to operate.
This makes it official, he told a group of dignitaries and media. FIUs Age of Aquarius has begun.
But for those of us children of the 60s and 70s, this is a different kind of Age of Aquarius, he continued. One that
ultimately will have a huge impact on students. Well provide students with cutting-edge learning opportunities, worlds
ahead experience that we promised at FIU.
But to make the habitat work financially for the long term, FIU
will seek multiple funding
sources, unlike UNC-Wilmington which relied mainly on funding provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
NOAA owns Aquarius , but it will be up to FIU to come up with the

money to operate it, although NOAA kicked in $1.1 million in grant money
this past year to get FIU started.
land the Aquarius operation, said
it will be crucial for FIU to land outside funding
sources .
Ben Neal, a
PhD candidate at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, wanted to use the

habitat for an underwater photography project in which he compiled images to
produce a 3D look at the coral reefs. But he had no funding.
At the same time, a group in Hong Kong
Aquarius on a project that was visual and interesting.
was looking to do a documentary at
The Hong Kong group footed the bill for Neals project in exchange for
being allowed to do a documentary about it.
There were three winners, Heithaus said. I see a lot of that in the future of
the way we fund science.
One big reason FIU agreed to take over operations of Aquarius is because it has five key members of Aquarius technical
and operational braintrust working for them. The group has a combined 80 years of experience working at the challenging
and unforgiving, saltwater habitat.
Stem Advantage
Case Frontline
STEM high now new data proves
Jaschik 4-7 - Scott Jaschik, Editor, is one of the three founders of Inside Higher Ed.
With Doug Lederman, he leads the editorial operations of Inside Higher Ed, overseeing
news content, opinion pieces, career advice, blogs and other features. Scott is a leading
voice on higher education issues, quoted regularly in publications nationwide, and
publishing articles on colleges in publications such as The New York Times, The Boston
Globe, The Washington Post, Salon, and elsewhere. He has been a judge or screener for
the National Magazine Awards, the Online Journalism Awards, the Folio Editorial
Excellence Awards, and the Education Writers Association Awards. Scott served as a
mentor in the community college fellowship program of the Hechinger Institute on
Education and the Media, of Teachers College, Columbia University. He is a member of
the board of the Education Writers Association. From 1999-2003, Scott was editor of
The Chronicle of Higher Education. Scott graduated from Cornell University. (Scott,
April 7, 2014, The STEM Enrollment Boom, Insider Higher Ed,
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/04/07/study-finds-increased-stemenrollment-recession#sthash.PxdMLi61.dpbs)//sb
PHILADELPHIA Policy makers regularly talk about the need to encourage more undergraduates to pursue science and
technology fields. New
data suggest that undergraduates at four-year institutions in fact

have become much more likely to study those fields , especially
engineering and biology.
And while much of the public discussion of STEM enrollments has suggested a STEM vs. liberal arts dichotomy (even
though some STEM fields are in fact liberal arts disciplines), the new study suggests that this is not the dynamic truly at
play. Rather, STEM enrollments are growing while professional field enrollments (especially
business and education) are shrinking.
The research, presented here Saturday at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, is by
Jerry A. Jacobs, professor of sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, and Linda Sax, professor of education at the
University of California at Los Angeles.
Much of the data typically discussed on student enrollment patterns come from the National Center for Education
Statistics. But the
new study is based in large part on the freshman survey

conducted annually by UCLA on a national pool of freshmen at fouryear institutions. In their paper, Jacobs and Sax write that this data set enables them to spot trends much
earlier than is possible with the federal database, since that information is based on graduation (which comes much later
than enrollment) and because government cuts have led to delays in federal data.
Using data collected by UCLA, Jacobs and Sax write that from 1997 through 2005, the proportion of freshmen planning to
enroll in STEM fields declined, hitting a low in 2005 of 20.7 percent. After modest gains in 2006 and 2007, real increases
started to show up in 2008. The
percentage of freshmen planning to major in

STEM increased from 21.1 percent in 2007 to 28.2 percent in 2011, just as the recession was prompting
many students and families to focus on the job potential of various fields of study. That represents a 48
percent increase in just a few years.
The growth was not consistent across STEM fields. Engineering saw a 57.1 percent increase (consistent with findings from
the American Society for Engineering Education) and biology saw gains of 28.2 percent. But the physical sciences saw
gains of 11.1 percent, and mathematics was up by 12.6 percent.
Generally, the STEM gains were seen for both male and female students, so gender gaps that remain in some STEM fields
werent significantly changed.
The paper notes that disciplines such as biology and mathematics, while STEM fields, are located in arts and sciences at
many institutions, so that a STEM vs. liberal arts comparison doesnt make sense.
But the fields showing declines during this period were not traditional liberal arts fields, but applied fields. The paper
notes that business and education saw declines of 5.9 percent, suggesting that they -- more than the liberal arts -- are
losing freshmen.
Jacobs said in an interview that those concerned about STEM education shouldn't pursue that goal at the expense of the
humanities. He said that the critical thinking skills associated with the humanities are needed by all kinds of students.
Those who want more STEM students should focus on attracting more female students, some of whom may not feel
encouraged in the area, rather than offering "criticism of the humanities," as a number of politicians have done lately.
He said he was pleased to find that the increase in STEM enrollments was coming from professional programs, rather
than liberal arts programs.
Small internal link even if the Aquarius excites the

youth, teachers are the critical internal link dont solve
PCAST 10- Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and Technology- (PCAST) is an advisory group of the nations
leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice available to
him from inside the White House and from cabinet departments and other Federal agencies. PCAST is consulted about
and often makes policy recommendations concerning the full range of issues where understandings from the domains of
science, technology, and innovation bear potentially on the policy choices before the President. (September 2010,:
Prepare and Inspire: K-12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (Stem) for Americas Future
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf)//sb
Teachers are arguably the single most important component of education that
can be influenced by policy. We know that teachers are not all the same, and that great teachers
expand how much and improve how well students learn. Yet, there are vast gaps in our knowledge about how to produce
great teachers and retain them. Many studies are not directly useful in policymaking, owing to inadequate or inconsistent
research design or data collection. Based on what research has emerged over the past two decades, however, we know the
most about how students learn, the next most about the characteristics of effective teaching, and the least about
characteristics of programs that are effective in producing effective teachers let alone great teachers. We briefly
elaborate on these points below. That
teachers have a large, measurable impact on student

learning and achievement is clear. A National Research Council panel recently completed a five-year
study, entitled Preparing Teachers: Building Evidence for Sound Policy, which examines what is known about effective
teacher preparation in mathematics, science, and reading. The report notes that there is broad agreement and clear
evidence that teachers have enormously important effects on students learning, and that the quality of teaching explains
a meaningful proportion of the variation in achievement among children.112 Various studies have demonstrated this
impact in different ways. For example, researchers have shown that teachers
who see gains in student

achievement in their classes tend to see them repeatedly over time .113 Also, students
taught by a series of teachers deemed exemplary for previously raising test scores learn and achieve more.114 115 Research
indicates that a teacher who has consistently raised student achievement can make a greater difference in student
outcomes than more costly interventions such as reducing class size.116 The National Mathematics Advisory Panel has
pointed to evidence showing that variation in teacher quality could account for a substantial fraction of the total variation
(as much as 12 to 14 percent) in mathematics learning by elementary students in a given school year.117 Despite the broad
agreement on the importance of teachers, the NRC report concluded that there is little solid research about precisely how
and why teachers influence student outcomes and about how teacher preparation programs should be designed to train
great teachers. How much students learn depends on many factors, both internal and external to the education system,
and it is difficult to carry out research that can definitively distinguish causation from correlation to identify the effects of
teaching. Many studies about connections between teachers and student outcomes have not yielded truly meaningful
conclusions. (We address the need for improved education implementation research in Chapter 3.)
No STEM Crisis impact is empirically denied
Galama AND Hosek, 08 Ph.D. and M.Sc. in physics AND .D. and M.A. in economics [Titus Galama Ph.D. and
M.Sc. in physics, University of Amsterdam; M.B.A. in business, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France, James Hosek Ph.D.
and M.A. in economics, University of Chicago; B.A. in English, Cornell University, U.S. Competitiveness in Science and
Technology, 2008, http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG674.pdf,)//sb
Despite the rhetoric and the intensive action on the Hill, some voices called for restraint. The reports and testimony
making a case for or arguing against an S&T crisis are part of an ongoing policy debate.
One line of counterargument is that such warnings are far from unprecedented and have never
resulted in the crisis anticipated. The author of a Washington Watch article noted that
similar fears of a STEM workforce crisis in the 1980s were ultimately unfounded (Andres,
2006). Neal McCluskey, a policy analyst from the Cato Institute, noted that similar alarm
bells were sounded decades earlier (and in his view, have had underlying political agendas):
Using the threat of international economic competition to bolster federal control of
education is nothing new. It happened in 1983, after the federally commissioned report A Nation at Risk
admonished that our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is
being overtaken by competitors throughout the world, as well as the early 1990s, when George Bush the elder
called for national academic standards and tests in order to better compete with Japan. (McCluskey, 2006)
Roger Pielke
of the University of Colorado observed that such issues as poor student

performance have an even longer history, with no negative outcomes. Arguments that
certain other countries produce a greater proportion of scientist and engineering
students or that those students fare better on tests of achievement . . . have been made
for almost 50 years, he stated, yet over that time frame the U.S. economy has done
quite well (Pielke, 2006).
Cant solve alt causes - no enough women/minorities in

STEM and Public private partnerships are key to boost
support for STEM
Alphonse 4-28 - Lylah M. Alphonse is the Managing Editor of News for U.S.
News & World Report. (Lylah, April 28, 2014, Project-Based Education Is Key to
Increasing STEM Interest US News, http://www.usnews.com/news/stemsolutions/articles/2014/04/28/project-based-education-is-key-to-increasingstem-interest)//sb
The public-private partnership boosting support for science, technology and
engineering (STEM) achievement must continue and expand , oil industry executives
said at the final keynote of the U.S. News STEM Solutions Conference in Washington, D.C.
Steve Green, vice president of government affairs at Chevron, and Jack N. Gerard, president and CEO of the American
Petroleum Institute, took to the stage at the Water E. Washington Convention Center on April 25 to talk about what
industry and educators can do to prepare todays students for STEM careers. Dean Kamen, founder of FIRST, an
organization dedicated to fostering the development of science and technology leaders, joined the conference remotely to
share the latest from the FIRST Championship, a robotics competition taking place in St. Louis.
Both Green and Gerard emphasized that industry must be a stalwart

advocate and supporter of initiatives to help kids succeed in STEM subjects.
[SPECIAL REPORT: The U.S. News/Raytheon STEM Index]

To that end, Green announced that Chevron will invest another $30 million to support STEM focused organizations
bringing their total financial support to this endeavor to $130 million since 2011. With the $30 million, Chevron plans to
partner with Achieve, The Fab Foundation, the National Academy of Engineering and Project Lead the Way. In particular,
this investment aims to promote project-based education.
With Chevron STEM
initiatives, we try to emphasize application, not just

memorization, Green said.
Chevron chose these organizations for their record of success and
longstanding relationship with the oil company, Green told U.S. News. He hopes Chevrons support
translates into better scores of students in science and engineering related fields.
[SPECIAL REPORT: U.S. News STEM Solutions]
Both executives also discussed the urgency of helping minorities and women enter STEM careers.
Reducing the deficit of women and minorities in STEM careers is the

fundamental recommendation of the American Petroleum Institute
and should be a national priority, Gerard said.
While the oil industry is compelled to be involved in this issue to meet their workforce needs, both executives argued that
developing a healthy STEM workforce is an issue that everyone should care about.
Continued American global leadership is at stake here, Gerard said.
The keynote panel following the speakers featured Omar Abudayyeh, a student at Harvard Medical School; Jack Andraka,
first place winner of the Intels International Science and Engineering Fair; Parker Liautaud, a Yale undergrad studying
geophysics; and Ritankar Das, chairman of See Your Future, a nonprofit aiming to help underrepresented populations
achieve STEM careers. Nate Ball, host of PBS Kids Design Squad, moderated the discussion.
The young achievers discussed their experiences with learning in these subjects. Here are some key takeaways from the
panel:
Families can play an important role in encouraging kids to become

involved in STEM subjects. We shouldnt solely pin the responsibility of a childs education on the school, its
also complimented by the parents, Andraka said.
Learn to accept failure as part of learning, its key to STEM fields and science in particular.
There is so much left to discover.
Believe in yourself before anybody else does.
Be humble.
Even with a lack of Congressional action to improve STEM,

the US still exceeds its goals for STEM
Mervis 6-30 - Jeff reports on science policy in the United States and he's
covered science policy for more than 30 years, including a stint at Nature, and
joined Science in 1993. (Jeffrey, June 30, 2014, Data check: U.S. producing more
STEM graduates even without proposed initiatives, Science Insider,
http://news.sciencemag.org/education/2014/06/data-check-u-s-producingmore-stem-graduates-even-without-proposed-initiatives)//sb
The United States appears to be on pace to meet the Obama
administrations goal of churning out more college graduates in the socalled STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields.
That conclusion, based on an analysis by ScienceInsider of recent education statistics, may surprise
many people. And it is unlikely to cause scientific organizations to hold a ticker tape parade or the White House
to issue a self-congratulatory press release.
Thats because the growth
has occurred despite the failure of Congress to

approve most of the new programs and hefty federal investments recommended by high-profile
panels and requested by the White House. The news also comes with a caveat: The goal has been a moving target, and the
total includes those with a 2-year degree. So some may take issue with the analysis that follows.
U.S. academic and business leaders have long argued that the country needs a larger tech-savvy workforce to maximize
economic growth. The current campaign began in earnest in 2005 when a coalition of pro-research organizations issued a
report titled Tapping Americas Potential (TAP). It called for a doubling, by 2015, of the number of STEM bachelors
degrees awarded annually by U.S. institutions.
The doubling would mean an increase from 200,000 a year to 400,000, the report explains. Curiously, it chose 2001 as its
baseline yearmeaning the decadal doubling would actually occur over 14 years (remedial math, anyone?). If the number
rose at a steady pace, by 2015 there would be 1.1 million more STEM graduates
than would have been the case under previous production levels.
Six months later, a prestigious panel assembled by the National Academies warned Congress that retaining U.S. global
competitiveness would require more and better STEM teachers. Its report, called Rising Above the Gathering Storm
(RAGS), resulted in a 2007 law that promised to augment STEM teacher training (as well as double research funding in
the physical sciences). Congress didnt keep its promise, however. And RAGS didnt address whether additional STEMtrained workers were needed, although it said that the 10,000 additional elementary and secondary school STEM teachers
that would be trained would touch 10 million minds.
The Obama administration saw a link, however, and its Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST) issued two related reports that, together, recommended
increasing both the number of STEM teachers and the number of
STEM graduates. In particular, its 2012 report, Engage to Excel, called for producing one million additional
college graduates with bachelor or associate degrees in STEM fields over the next decade.
For PCAST, the clock started in 2010, when the number of such graduates stood at 300,000. President Barack Obama has
cited the reports frequently in lobbying Congress for increasing federal investments in STEM education, including a
mention in his 2011 State of the Union address of the need for more STEM teachers.
Neither the PCAST report nor the TAP report explains how or why it chose a particular number of additional STEM
graduates as a goal. And both reports are supply-driven rather than demand-driven; that is, they address the production of
STEM graduates but not the likelihood of their finding good jobs. Thats a sore point for those who argue that the nation is
actually producing too many graduates in many STEM fields, which keeps wages low and creates underemployment.
Leaving aside those points, however, an
analysis of data compiled by the National

Science Foundation (NSF) shows strong evidence of the desired
growth despite the general lack of action on the reports . Specifically, the
number of degrees awarded annually in the natural sciences and engineeringNSFs equivalent of
what is normally defined as a STEM fieldgrew from 241,000 in 2000 to 355,000 in 2012 (see
graph). In absolute terms, the 2012 figure is 114,000 more than the 2000 figure. Even if that number
grows no larger for the rest of the decade an extremely conservative estimate, most
would say the
additional number of STEM graduates in the overall
workforce would exceed the 1 million goal set
explicitly by the PCAST report and
implicitly by TAP.
(Those who think the augmented number of graduates should be based on a strict 10-year span may want to start with the
263,000 STEM graduates produced in 2002. Using that base year, the size of the expanded pool falls just shy of the
100,000-a-year level needed to add 1 million over a decade.)
To be sure, these totals use PCASTs definition of a college degree, which encompasses both the bachelors and associate
level. The split is roughly six or seven to one: In 2012, for example, there were 53,000 associate degrees in STEM fields out
of the total of 355,000 graduates. (Four-fifths of the 2-year STEM degrees awarded were in computer science.)
The PCAST report does not suggest what rate of growth is preferred. In particular, it doesnt opine on whether spikes and
troughs matter. However, front-loading the increase makes it much easier to achieve the overall goal.
For example, a surge of 100,000 graduates in the first few yearssay, an extra 40,000 the first year, and then an
additional 60,000 in the second yearwould then require only miniscule increases in subsequent years to achieve the
target. In contrast, flat production for the first several years would require a huge leap in output in the latter years of the
decade.
It turns out that the steady rise in actual production over the past decade may also get you where you want to go. Based on
the NSF data, that seems like a reasonable beteven if it runs counter to the conventional narrative. For whatever reason,
it appears, U.S. students are finding their own way to a STEM degree.
The STEM crisis is false you dont need a STEM degree to

get a STEM job their evidence is just cherry-picking
Charette 13 Charette investigates the impact of risk on technology and society
and is an IEEE Spectrum contributing editor, (Robert N., August 30, 2013, The
STEM Crisis Is a Myth IEEE Spectrum,
http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-is-a-myth)//sb
Such inconsistencies dont just create confusion for numbers junkies like me; they also make rational policy discussions
difficult. Depending on your point of view,
you can easily cherry-pick data to bolster
your argument.
Another surprise was the apparent mismatch between earning a STEM
degree and having a STEM job. Of the 7.6 million STEM workers counted by the
Commerce Department, only 3.3 million possess STEM degrees. Viewed another way, about
15 million U.S. residents hold at least a bachelors degree in a STEM discipline, but three-fourths of them11.4 million
work outside of STEM.
The departure of STEM graduates to other fields starts early. In 2008, the NSF surveyed STEM graduates whod earned
bachelors and masters degrees in 2006 and 2007. It found that 2 out of 10 were already working in non-STEM fields.
And 10 years after receiving a STEM degree, 58 percent of STEM graduates had left the field, according to a 2011 study
from Georgetown University.
The takeaway? At least in
the United States, you dont need a STEM degree to get

a STEM job, and if you do get a degree, you wont necessarily work in that field after you graduate. If there is in
fact a STEM worker shortage, wouldnt you expect more people with STEM degrees to be filling those jobs? And if
many STEM jobs can be filled by people who dont have STEM degrees ,
then why the big push to get more students to pursue STEM ?
STEM crisis is false multiple studies prove

Whats perhaps most perplexing about the claim of a STEM worker shortage is that many
studies have
directly contradicted it, including reports from Duke University, the
Rochester Institute of Technology, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation,
and the Rand Corp. A 2004 Rand study, for example, stated that there was no evidence
that such shortages have existed at least since 1990, nor that they
are on the horizon.
That report argued that the best indicator of a shortfall would be a widespread rise in salaries throughout the STEM
community. But the price of labor has not risen, as you would expect it to do if STEM workers were scarce. In computing
and IT, wages have generally been stagnant for the past decade, according to the EPI and other analyses. And over the past
30 years, according to the Georgetown report, engineers and engineering technicians wages have grown the least of all
STEM wages and also more slowly than those in non-STEM fields; while STEM workers as a group have seen wages rise
33 percent and non-STEM workers wages rose by 23 percent, engineering salaries grew by just 18 percent. The situation
is even more grim for those who get a Ph.D. in science, math, or engineering. The Georgetown study states it succinctly:
At the highest levels of educational attainment, STEM wages are not competitive.
Given all of the above, it
is difficult to make a case that there has been, is, or

will soon be a STEM labor shortage. If there was really a STEM labor
market crisis, youd be seeing very different behaviors from
companies, notes Ron Hira, an associate professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, in
New York state. You wouldnt see companies cutting their retirement
contributions, or hiring new workers and giving them worse benefits
packages. Instead you would see signing bonuses, youd see wage
increases. You would see these companies really training their incumbent workers.
None of those things are observable, Hira says. In fact, theyre operating in the opposite way.
STEM crisis is manufactured by the US government

empirics prove

So why the persistent anxiety that a STEM crisis exists? Michael S. Teitelbaum, a
Wertheim Fellow
at Harvard Law School and a senior advisor to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, has studied the
phenomenon, and he says that in the United States the anxiety dates
back to World War II. Ever since then it has tended to run in cycles that he
calls alarm, boom, and bust. He says the cycle usually starts when someone or some group sounds
the alarm that there is a critical crisis of insufficient numbers of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians and as a result
In the 1950s, he
notes, Americans worried that the Soviet Union was producing 95 000
scientists and engineers a year while the United States was producing
only about 57 000. In the 1980s, it was the perceived Japanese
economic juggernaut that was the threat, and now it is China and
India.
the country is in jeopardy of either a national security risk or of falling behind economically.
Youll hear similar arguments made elsewhere. In India, the director general of the Defence Research and Development
Organisation, Vijay Kumar Saraswat, recently noted that in his country, a meagre four persons out of every 1000 are
choosing S&T or research, as compared to 110 in Japan, 76 in Germany and Israel, 55 in USA, 46 in Korea and 8 in China.
Leaders in South Africa and Brazil cite similar statistics to show how they are likewise falling behind in the STEM race.
The government responds either with money [for research] or, more recently, with visas to increase the number of STEM
workers, Teitelbaum says. This continues for a number of years until the claims of a shortage turn out not to be true and
a bust ensues. Students who graduate during the bust, he says, are shocked to discover that they cant find jobs, or they
find jobs but not stable ones.
At the moment, were in the alarm-heading-toward-boom part of the cycle. According to a recent report from the
Government Accountability Office, the
U.S. government spends more than US $3

billion each year on 209 STEM-related initiatives overseen by 13
federal agencies. Thats about $100 for every U.S. student beyond primary
school. In addition, major corporations are collectively spending millions to support STEM educational programs.
And every U.S. state, along with a host of public and private universities, high schools, middle schools, and even primary
schools, has its own STEM initiatives. The result is that many peoples fortunes are now tied to the STEM crisis, real or
manufactured.
Immigration Adv CP
1NC
Text: The United States Federal Government should
provide employment-based visas to graduates who earn a
Masters/PhD degree from a U.S. university in a STEM field
of study.
Counterplan solves STEM
Fitz and Halpinnov 11 (Marshall and John, 2011, " Entrepreneurs, Stay Out!
The Utter Idiocy of U.S. Immigration Law The Atlantic,
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/11/entrepreneurs-stay-outthe-utter-idiocy-of-us-immigration-law/248286/)//sb
THROWING AWAY OUR INVESTMENT IN MINDS
At the same time we
must recognize that our university system already attracts

the best and brightest minds from around the world and then forces
these immigrant students
into a difficult choice upon graduation-- go
home or find an
employer to sponsor their entry into what amounts to a lottery that

might allow them to stay and work. This makes no sense.
Why subsidize the education and training of foreign-born students--many of whom want to stay in
the United States--and then thrust them into an immigration system that
prevents us from capitalizing on their collective knowledge and skills ?
In a globalized economy we cannot expect to fill all of our labor needs with a
homegrown workforce
alone. In fact, our current educational demographics point to growing shortfalls
in some of the skills needed in the modern economy. As global economic integration deepens, the source points for skill
sets will spread, such as green engineering in Holland or nanotechnology in Israel, so the breadth of skills needed to drive
innovation will expand and global labor pools must become more mobile.
Even with today's abysmal job market there is a need to access this
human capital. With national unemployment at 9%, unemployment rates in the technology industry hover far
lower at around 4%. Facilitating access to international talent and putting Americans back to work are not mutually
exclusive goals. The purpose of harnessing that talent is to fuel economic growth in industries that will create jobs. For
example, a 2010 study by the University of Washington's Economic Policy Research Center found that every job at
Microsoft supported 5.81 jobs elsewhere in the state's economy.
Arbitrary limitations on our ability to access skill sets from across the globe are
clearly self-defeating. Companies will lose out to their competitors making them
less profitable, less productive, and less able to grow; or they will move their operations abroad with all the attendant
negative economic consequences. And the federal treasury loses tens of billions of dollars in tax revenues by restricting the
opportunities for high-skilled foreign workers to remain in the United States and contribute to the national economy.
What is needed to fix the related problems of immigration and innovation?
LOOKING FOR THE NEXT EINSTEIN
The overall end goal must be a system that inherently preferences the hiring of U.S. workers but
streamlines access to foreign workers with needed skills; welcomes entrepreneurs who can garner financial backing; and
treats all workers employed in the United States on a level plane. Reforms
that enhance legal

immigration channels for high-skilled immigrants and entrepreneurs-- such
as increases in employment-based green cards and new visas for
immigrants with good business plans backed by capital -- must be paired with
to ensure that a worker's immigration status cannot be used to
manipulate wages and working conditions.
Similarly, our existing enforcement mechanisms are too weak to adequately prevent fraud and gaming of the immigration
system. Current regulations tie foreign workers too tightly to a single employer, which empowers employers with
disproportionate control over one class of workers. That control enables unscrupulous employers to deliberately pit one
group of workers against another to depress wage growth. Even when there is no malicious employer intent or worker
mistreatment, the restriction of labor mobility inherently affects the labor market by preventing workers from pursuing
income maximizing opportunities.
Innovation requires talented people with good ideas and a solid support network. If we want more innovation that will
create more jobs, we need to do a better job of welcoming the world's brightest and most inventive people and ensuring
that they have a chance, if desired, to put their skills and ambitions to work in our economy.
As we continue to cultivate the next homegrown Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, we should also keep in mind that the next Albert
Einstein, Jonas Salk, Andrew Grove or Sergey Brin could be right under our nose.
2NC Solvency
The counterplan solves - high-skilled immigrants are
critical to improving economic competitiveness and kickstarting new companies
Fitz and Halpinnov 11 (Marshall and John, 2011, " Entrepreneurs, Stay Out!
The Utter Idiocy of U.S. Immigration Law The Atlantic,
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/11/entrepreneurs-stay-outthe-utter-idiocy-of-us-immigration-law/248286/)//sb
If America wants to solve its innovation problem, solving its immigration
problem would be a good start.
People with creative ideas, intellectual talents and personal ambition drive innovation. From advances in science,
mathematics and health care to new technologies, products and companies, America
has always relied

on individual and collective breakthroughs in human knowledge and
production to enhance our lives and our economy. As the nation continues to find ways to improve the
educational and life opportunities of its own citizens to help spark innovation, we should not ignore an
obvious source of human capital--those from other nations.
If America wants to solve its innovation problem, solving its
immigration problem would be a good start.
Immigrants founded 1 in 4 public companies between 1990 and 2005, like Intel, Yahoo, and Google.
Although clichs about smart and eager immigrant children and their "Tiger mothers" abound in popular discourse, it is
worth acknowledging that the foreign born and their families are a powerful source of new ideas. Immigrant-led
innovation is a core part of our history and our current economic reality. From the farmer and merchant entrepreneurs
America
always has been a place where skilled and inventive people from
around the world come to realize their dreams. What's more, an
impressive body of literature indicates that diversity is positively
correlated with innovation.
Immigrants who come to the United States to study at our best
who first settled here to the multitudes of immigrant small business owners and startup founders today,
universities and then go to work at our nation's leading companies

contribute directly and immediately to our nation's global economic
competitiveness. High-skilled immigrants who have started their own high-tech
companies have created hundreds of thousands of new jobs and achieved company
sales in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Where great ideas really come from. A special report
All of us benefit greatly from this surge of human energy and aptitude. Consider the following: immigrants
founded 1 in 4 of the publicly traded companies created between 1990

and 2005. Prominent companies founded by immigrants and their families include Intel, Solectron, Sun, eBay,
Yahoo, and Google. And foreign nationals in U.S. were inventors or co-inventors of 25 percent of all patents filed in U.S. in
2006.
To be certain, improving our high-skill immigration policies must not be considered a substitute for investing in our
homegrown workforce. Improving access to top-flight education for everyone in this country is a national imperative. It is
true, as is often pointed out, that two thirds of doctorates from U.S. universities in engineering and computer science are
awarded to foreign born students. But it is also true that some 96 percent of all Bachelor's degrees in the sciences and
engineering fields go to U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Making it easier financially for these homegrown engineers
and scientists to pursue advanced degrees will be the foundation for our continued global leadership and prosperity.
Nor are high skill reforms a substitute for the manifold problems that afflict our immigration system. Broader reforms
that bring undocumented workers in to the legal fold and keep families together are crucial to spurring economic growth
and protecting American workers. Moreover, immigrants at all skill levels carry the potential for important
entrepreneurial and innovative contributions.
High-skilled immigrants maintain competitiveness empirically proven
Fitz 9 Marshall Fitz is Director of Immigration Policy at American Progress, where he

directs the organizations research and analysis of the economic, political, legal, and
social impacts of immigration policy in America and develops policy recommendations
designed to further Americas economic and security interests. Marshall is a graduate of
the University of Virginia School of Law and served on the Virginia Law Review.
(Marshall, December 8, 2009, Prosperous Immigrants, Prosperous Americans, Center
for American progress,
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2009/12/08/7081/prosp
erous-immigrants-prosperous-americans/)//sb
Immigrants who come to the United States to study at our best universities and then go to work at our nations leading
companies contribute directly and immediately to our nations global economic competitiveness. High-skilled
immigrants who have started their own high-tech companies have

created hundreds of thousands of new jobs and achieved company sales in the hundreds
of billions of dollars.
Yet despite
the critical importance of such immigrants to the nations economic

current high-skilled immigration system is a twofold failure: arbitrary restrictions prevent companies from effectively
tapping the full potential of this talent pool, while inadequate
safeguards fail to prevent against wage depression and worker
mistreatment. The reforms outlined in this paper will help establish a 21st century immigration system that
success in a global economy, our
serves the nations economic interests and upholds our responsibilities in a global economy.
Of course, our current immigration policies have failed the country on many fronts beyond the high-skilled policy arena.
And the urgent need for comprehensive, systemic reforms is beyond question. The national debate has understandably
focused up to this point on the most visible and most highly charged issueending illegal immigration. Solving that riddle
and ending illegal immigration is indisputably a national imperative and must be at the heart of a comprehensive overhaul
of our system.
But reforms to our high-skilled immigration system are an important component of that broader reform and integral to a
progressive growth strategy. Science,
technology, and innovation have beenand will

to U.S. economic growth. The United States must
remain on the cutting edge of technological innovation if we are to continue
driving the most dynamic economic engine in the world, and U.S. companies must be able to
recruit international talent to effectively compete in the international innovation
continue to bekeys
arena.
To be certain, educating and training a 21st century U.S. workforce is a paramount national priority and the cornerstone of
progressive growth. Improving access to topflight education for everyone in this country will be the foundation for our
continued global leadership and prosperity. But it
is shortsighted in a globalized economy to expect

that we can fill all of our labor needs with a homegrown workforce . In
fact, our current educational demographics point to growing shortfalls in some of the skills needed in todays economy.
And as
global economic integration deepens, the source points for skill

sets will spreadsuch as green engineering in Holland or nanotechnology in Israelthe breadth of skills
needed to drive innovation will expand, and global labor pools must become more mobile.
Reforming our high-skilled immigration system will stimulate

innovation, enhance competitiveness , and help cultivate a flexible, highlyskilled U.S. workforce while protecting U.S. workers from globalizations destabilizing effects. Our
economy has benefitted enormously from being able to tap the international pool of human capital. Arbitrary limitations
on our ability to continue doing so are ultimately self-defeating: Companies will lose out to their competitors making them
less profitable, less productive, and less able to grow; or they will move their operations abroad with all the attendant
negative economic consequences. And the
federal treasury loses tens of billions of
dollars in tax revenues by restricting the opportunities for highskilled foreign workers to remain in the United States.
Access to high-skilled foreign workers is critical to our economic competitiveness and growth, but facilitating such access
triggers equally critical flip-side considerations, in particular the potential for employers to directly or indirectly leverage
foreign workers interests against the native workforce. Current enforcement mechanisms are too weak to adequately
prevent fraud and gaming of the system. And current regulations tie foreign workers too tightly to a single employer,
which empowers employers with disproportionate control over one class of workers. That control enables unscrupulous
employers to deliberately pit one group of workers against another to depress wage growth. Even when there is no
malicious employer intent or worker mistreatment, the restriction of labor mobility inherently affects the labor market by
preventing workers from pursuing income maximizing opportunities.
The end goal must be a system that inherently preferences the hiring of U.S. workers, but streamlines access to needed
foreign workers and treats all workers employed in the United States on a level plane. Reforms that enhance legal
immigration channels for high-skilled immigrants must be complemented with reforms to ensure that a workers
immigration status cannot be used to manipulate wages and working conditions. This paper digs deeper into the structural
deficiencies and enforcement shortcomings in our high-skilled immigration system and offers a number of legislative
solutions designed to:
Target employer fraud and abuse.
Enhance worker mobility.
Establish market-based mechanism to set H-1B levels.
Raise green card caps and streamline process.
Strengthen recruitment requirements.
Restrict job shops.
The recommendations detailed in this report will enhance labor market mobility and promote economic growth while
advancing workforce stability through enforceable labor standards and protections.
STEM is key become increasingly important in the global

spectrum
AeroTek 2-4 (AeroTek, February 4, 2014, STEM importance, education both
increasing http://www.aerotek.com/employment-agency/stem-importanceeducation-both-increasing/551)//sb
In recent years, the importance of science, technology, engineering

and mathematics education has been stated regularly, but the significance of the
field remains hugely vital to the coming future. Not only can STEM knowledge give workers and students valuable
experience and information, but the disciplines can provide people with a deeper understanding of the world at large,
creating new ways to innovate and discover solutions to worldwide problems.
According to the Dallas Morning News, STEM will only become more
important in the near future. Workforce experts have predicted that more than eight million new
STEM jobs will be available in the United States through 2018. It's also expected that
many of these jobs will be difficult to fill as they will likely have highly specialized skills necessary to perform them, which
bodes well if education efforts remain as high as possible.
What's more, STEM is becoming increasingly intertwined across the globe as
new technology continues to transform job roles in an increasing number of industries. The National Science Foundation
has said that more jobs in the near future that aren't normally considered to be related to STEM will require new science
and engineering skills. These fields can include anything from aerial robotics to 3D printing. This only further shows not
only the importance but the long-term effects that experience in these fields will have, further proving the importance of
early and detailed knowledge.
Education efforts rising
This information is made all the more important in the light of recent
educational efforts working to fight back against lower-than-hoped STEM
knowledge. The Huffington Post, in connection with CISCO, recently found that United States test scores
regarding STEM fields are lower than expected, and falling instead of rising. The Programme for International Student
Assessment scores, which measures 15-year-olds' skills in science, reading and math, found that United States scores have
remained relatively stagnant in all three fields. Specifically, the country currently ranks 28th in the world in science, while
it has fallen to 36th place in math skills.
To revamp students' skills and interests in STEM, a variety of different strategies are being deployed. For instance, schools
in Dallas are quickly adapting to the times, with one high school introducing an Academy of Engineering to its different
opportunities. Other efforts, according to The Hill, include showing students opportunities and building up standards
commonly called the "Common Core." By doing this, and investing in future STEM growth, The Hill says that it would be
easy to see returns, as such investments would create both economic value and societal value. Businesses that make
investments not only would see new pipelines of talent to fill critical jobs, but could also help societal knowledge by
sponsoring new research and equipment means.
Only becoming more important

Department of Commerce figures only revitalize the importance of STEM. Through 2018, STEM occupations are expected
to see their employment opportunities grow by about 17 percent, in contrast to non-STEM prospects, which would only
rise by less than 10 percent in that time. What's more, in STEM fields, there are about 1.9 positions made available for
every unemployed person - comparatively, non-STEM fields see one job available for every four or so people on the
market. STEM investments will likely help reduce the unemployment rate further.
The importance of STEM education was highlighted at the BEYA conference February 6-8 in Washington, D.C. Sponsored
by Aerotek, the BEYA conference did not only award STEM leaders for their achievements in their fields, but enabled
professionals and students alike to network, learn and train themselves for a successful STEM career.
H1B Visas CP
1NC
Text: The United States Federal Government should
increase its H-1B visas given to immigrants in STEM fields.
USs current cap on H-1B visas is insufficient raising the
cap would allow for increasing productivity and would
benefit the economy
Russell 5-9 Jason Russell is a research associate at Economics21 at the Manhattan

Institute for Policy Research. (Jason, STEM Immigrants Raise American Wages and
Increase Economic Growth, Economic Policies for the 21 st century at the Manhattan
institute, http://economics21.org/commentary/stem-immigrants-raise-american-wagesand-increase-economic-growth)//sb
Immigrants in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields have been

responsible for higher wages among American workers, according to a new
National Bureau of Economic Analysis working paper by economists Giovanni Peri
(University of California, Davis), Chad Sparber (Colgate University), and Kevin Shih (University of California, Davis).
They looked at 219 U.S. cities from 1990 to 2010, the number of H-1B STEM workers
in a city, and the effect on wages, employment, and productivity for collegeand non-college-educated native workers.
In a given city, a one percentage point increase in foreign STEM workers share of total employment raised the wage
growth of native-born Americans with a college degree by seven to eight percentage points. The wages of Americans
without a college degree rose by three to four percentage points. This translates into tens of thousands of additional
earnings over the span of a career. The authors say a one percentage point increase in foreign STEM workers share of
total employment reflects the change over the period 1990 to 2010.
Peri and his coauthors cite a vast literature that explains how important STEM advances are in creating economic growth.
They conclude that foreign STEM growth can explain between a third and a half of the average productivity growth in the
period 1990-2010.
The paper found no effect of foreign STEM workers on employment prospects for Americans. However, past research by
Peri found that increasing
legal immigration, regardless of education or occupation, would

improve job prospects for American workers more than increasing
deportation or border control.
Peri et al. had a very specific reason for analyzing the effect of STEM immigrants on cities instead of the nation as a whole.
They write, Tacit knowledge and face to face interactions still make a difference in the speed at which new ideas are
locally adopted. Innovative workers are more productive when they are concentrated in the same city. This is why hightech startups tend to flock toward Silicon Valleythere are positive effects to clustering around the best and brightest in
the field.
The city-based focus of the authors research could be seen by immigration advocates as reason to decentralize
immigration from the federal government. With Congress dragging its feet on comprehensive immigration reform, cities
and states in need of economic growth are looking to break the status quo on immigration.
One such state is Michigan, where Republican Governor Rick Snyder requested 50,000 special federal immigration visas
over five years to attract foreign professionals to Detroit. The city has lost over 1 million residents in the past 60 years, and
50,000 STEM immigrants would boost the struggling citys population, wages, and productivity, all without harming
locals.
Massachusetts Democratic Governor Deval Patrick proposed the Global Entrepreneur in Residence Program,
which would allow some foreign students who studied in Massachusetts to work at a participating university.
Colleges and universities are exempt from the arbitrary H-1B visa
caps and can employ as many H-1B employees as they desire . Though it
would be preferable for these immigrants to have more private sector options, the Global Entrepreneur in Residence
Program would allow them to remain in the country and increase

their chances of future H-1B sponsorship through private employers .
The current H-1B visa cap
of 65,000 foreign nationals, plus 20,000 more for those with advanced
is insufficient . The limit was reached a week after applications

for 2015 were open on April 1, 2014. The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization
degrees,
Act of 2013, passed out of the Senate last June with bipartisan support, would keep the yearly H-1B cap but increase it
significantly to 205,000. The Act is flawed in several ways, but would still represent an improvement on the status quo.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Americas
restrictive immigration laws are
holding back the U.S. economy. While Congress slow-walks this exceptional economic opportunity
for immigration reform, states are taking matters into their own hands. The latest NBER study provides yet another
reason for taking action now and expanding the number of legal visas.
2NC Solvency
H-1B visas solve allows companies to employ foreign
workers in STEM fields
Patrick 13 - Michael D. Patrick is a Partner at Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen &
Loewy, LLP, resident in its New York office. (Michael, Dec. 18, 2013, Raising the
Cap: The Need For Increased Numbers Of H-1B Visas For Skilled Workers
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/26825/raising-cap-need-increasednumbers-h-1b-visas-skilled-workers)//sb
Michael D. Patrick
Companies across the United States are now beginning to assess their
H-1B visa needs for the FY 2015 (10/1/14 - 9/30/15) filing season and are expecting even greater
competition for the limited number of available H-1B cap slots. Raising the number of H-1B visas available each year
would help to alleviate the growing disparity between insufficient H-1B visa availability and ever-growing U.S. business
needs. The
H-1B visa allows U.S. companies to employ foreign workers in

specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise in specialized fields, such as in
architecture, engineering, mathematics, science and medicine . The workers must
possess at least a bachelors degree and can be employed for up to six years with the visa.
Under the current U.S. immigration system, there is a cap on the
number of H-1B visa petitions that the government accepts each fiscal year, commonly referred to as
the H-1B cap. Since 2005, the H-1B cap has been set at 85,000 , with 20,000 reserved for those
with advanced degrees from U.S. academic institutions. There are some H-1B visa petitions that do not count against this
cap, such as those for extensions, amendments, and for work at higher education institutions or nonprofit and government
research organizations. However, there is clearly a need for the availability of more H-1B visas to meet the demands of the
U.S. labor market.
Each year USCIS begins accepting H-1B visa petitions during an initial filing period in April for the following fiscal year,
which begins on October 1. If the H-1B cap is reached within five business days, the government runs a random selection
of all cap-subject H-1B petitions received in that period. This was the case this year, when over 124,000 H-1B visa
petitions were filed by U.S. employers by April 5, 2013, and then approximately one-third were rejected through the
lottery. In fact, the H-1B cap has been reached earlier and earlier each year since FY 2011, and it is expected to be reached
during the initial five-day filing period again for FY 2015. This indicates that the H-1B cap is set too low to meet the needs
of U.S. employers.
Raising the H-1B cap will not necessarily result in an influx of foreign-born skilled workers, as some critics suggest. In fact,
when the H-1B cap was 195,000 from 2001 to 2003, it was never even met. In 2001 there were approximately 163,200
cases counted against the H-1B cap, and only 79,000 for 2002 and 78,000 for 2003. Further, the number of H-1B
specialty occupation workers is infinitesimal compared to the number of U.S. professionals in the workforce. The Bureau
of Labor Statistics estimates that in 2012 there were 31,365,000 workers in the U.S. in professional and related
occupations. The current H-1B cap number of 85,000 is less than 0.3 percent of this number, and even the previous level
of 195,000 would only be approximately 0.6 percent of this figure. Therefore, raising the H-1B cap to address the shortage
of skilled workers in the U.S. will not have a drastic negative effect on U.S. workers.
On the contrary, studies have shown that foreign-born skilled workers help the economy and actually create jobs for U.S.
citizens. Many of those rejected H-1B petitions were filed by U.S. employers on behalf of foreign nationals who were
educated in the U.S. in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields while on a student visa. These
educated skilled workers are highly sought after by U.S. companies, and they help these companies to grow and hire more
workers, including U.S. citizens. A 2012 report co-sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that every foreignborn student who graduates with an advanced degree from a U.S. university and stays to work in a STEM field creates on
average 2.62 jobs for U.S. workers, often because they help lead in innovation, research and development. However, due
to limited H-1B visa availability, these foreign-born U.S. graduates are often forced to leave the U.S.
Other countries have benefitted from more flexible immigration systems that adjust to meet the needs of their labor
markets. For example, Australia has enacted a points-based system to attract foreign-born skilled workers to reduce its
reliance on the mining industry. Under Australias skilled immigration program, applicants complete a survey that
allocates points based on age, education and work history. If an applicant earns enough points, he/she may be asked to
apply for a visa. This system has enabled technology-related industries to expand in Australia and has benefitted its
overall economic outlook. On the other hand, the UK is suffering from a strict immigration policy designed to reduce the
number of non-EU highly skilled immigrants by half, which is stifling economic growth. These restrictive policies have
coincided with a decrease in foreign investment and a sharp decline of 0.7 percent in the UKs GDP, resulting in the
countrys worst recession in more than 50 years.
There is now a great need in the U.S. for a dramatic increase in H-1B
visa availability in order to meet the demand of U.S. businesses for skilled
workers. Comprehensive Immigration Reform promises some relief, as the bill passed in the Senate would increase
the baseline H-1B cap to 115,000, with 25,000 reserved for holders of U.S. advanced degrees in STEM fields, and allow for
increases in the cap up to 180,000. Similarly, the House bill raises the standard H-1B cap to 155,000, with a STEM U.S.
advanced degree exemption of 40,000. At least there is hope that Congress
understands that an
increase in the number of H-1B visas is simply good for U.S. business.
Counterplan solves STEM - solves the economy

Telford 13 - Erik Telford is Vice-President for Strategic Initiatives and Outreach. (Erik, Aug. 20, 2013, STEM visas
should be no-brainer in immigration debate, Town Hall.com,
http://townhall.com/columnists/eriktelford/2013/08/20/stem-visas-should-be-nobrainer-in-immigration-debaten1668505/page/full)//sb
Although the conversation on immigration reform tends to unfold in terms of border security, enforcement of laws, and
pathways to citizenship there is one critical aspect this debate that has failed to break through all of the other noise.
Immigration reform could help the economy grow--if done the right way.
Instead of getting bogged down in negotiations about amnesty and its various forms, conservatives should
drive the conversation toward STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and
H1-B visas. These visas can help bring the worlds best and brightest
to America-- the kind of people who will start businesses, buy homes,
pay taxes, and contribute to society.
Conservatives can take a solutions-oriented lead in driving economic growth in Americas high-tech sector by pushing
through Rep. Darrell Issas (R-CA) Skills Visa Act independent of other legislation. The bill would make more H1-B visas
available to foreign graduates of U.S. universities with advanced STEM degrees who are already in America, allowing us to
capitalize on the investment we have made in educating these young people. By bringing this legislation to an immediate
floor vote and pressuring the Senate to do the same, House
Republicans can set the

narrative on the immigration debate.
At a briefing on immigration reform at Microsofts offices in Washington, DC, this week, some of the brightest minds in
the conservative movement discussed the tricky intersection between technology, immigration, economic growth, and
electoral politics.
Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the conservative think tank American Action Forum, presented on the potential economic
we
are increasingly reliant on immigrants to keep our population--and
accordingly, our labor force, GDP, and economy--from declining.
benefits of immigration reform. With birth rates in America slipping toward the low levels of continental Europe,
Holtz-Eakin cautioned, however, that immigration reform must be designed to attract more skilled immigrants looking for
work. Among the industrialized nations, the U.S. grants comparatively few visas for economic reasons and by far the most
visas for family reunification reasons. For immigration reform to work, he argued, America should follow nations like the
U.K. in prioritizing work visas for immigrants with specialized knowledge.
Nowhere is this specialized knowledge more needed than in the STEM fields, where despite the Obama economys high
unemployment, there are more jobs available than qualified applicants.
According to BLS statistics, the economy creates 3 jobs requiring a B.S. in computer science for every one college student
graduating with a B.S. in computer science. These fields represent an opportunity for the brightest tech minds of the world
to help jumpstart our economy here in America.
Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the CATO Institute, remarked that the system that many of our
ancestors used to enter the country in the early 20th century no longer exists. Finding a modern-day answer to Ellis Island
could help streamline legal immigration and fix our broken system.
Immigration reform also represents a ticking time bomb for the Republican Party. Whit Ayres, director of Resurgent
Republic, showed charts detailing the decreasing percentage of whites in the electorate, and the Hispanic communitys
increasing preference for Democrats. With non-Hispanic whites expected to become a minority of the population by 2040
and the Hispanic populations continued growth, Republicans simply must make inroads with nonwhite immigrants to
remain a national party.
On this point, it was encouraging to hear Dr. Barret Duke of The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern
Baptist Convention talk about his efforts to engage his membership in the immigration debate, and discuss the importance
of the evangelical communitys support to the success of broad immigration reform.
STEM visas may not be a magic bullet to drive minority voters to the GOP, but they represent a facet of immigration
reform that conservatives can embrace. The panelists at this event explained the multitude of reasons why these visas are
good, conservative policy, and by promoting a plan to reform immigration based around STEM, Republicans can show the
nonwhite community that they are serious about reaching out and welcoming them into the party.
Counterplan solve the time is now

Lee 6-17 writer for Breitbart. (Tony, Jun 17, 2014, WH TO CONGRESS: PASS
AMNESTY, INCREASE HIGH-TECH VISAS BY AUGUST,
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/17/WH-to-Congress-PassAmnesty-Increase-High-Tech-Visas-by-August)//sb
Despite evidence that America has a surplus of high-tech workers , the White House
pushed Congress to pass amnesty and an increase in high-tech visas by August.
"As the economic costs of inaction continue to grow, now is the time for the House of Representatives to do its part to get a
commonsense immigration reform bill to the Presidents desk. Simply put: The
House can and should act

before August," White House Chief Technology Adviser Todd Park wrote on the White House's official blog on
Monday.
The White
House said it would "highlight the urgency and importance of

attracting the best and brightest talent from around the world,
especially in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math
(STEM)," throughout the week.
"It doesnt take a Nobel Prize winner to understand that the time is now," the White House said of
immigration legislation.
Numerous scholars and studies by partisan and nonpartisan organizations have found that the nation has a surplus of
high-tech workers, and importing more would only lower the wages of American workers.
Hal Salzman, a Rutgers University public policy professor, said "average wages in IT today are the same as they were when
Bill Clinton was president well over a decade ago."
"So one has to wonder if there is in fact a shortage, why doesn't that reflect in the market?" he asked. "Why don't wages go
up?"
IT guest
workers are on pace to make up 30-40% of the entire IT workforce, even when there
Norm Matloff, a professor of computer science at University of California at Davis, "mentioned that
are 50% more graduates than job openings in the STEM fields."
A Center for Immigration Studies report found that from 2007-2012, STEM
employment "averaged
only 105,000 jobs annually," while the U.S. admitted about 129,000
immigrants with STEM degrees. As Breitbart News reported, that means "the number of new
immigrants with STEM degrees admitted each year is by itself higher than the total growth in STEM employment." In
addition, "during that time period, the number of U.S.-born STEM graduates grew by an average of 115,00 a year."
Before House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-VA) stunning defeat last week, Republicans and Democrats were signaling
that immigration legislation could come on the House floor before August. Cantor's
amnesty legislation, but it has not
continuing to
loss has jeopardized
stopped amnesty advocates on both sides of the aisle from

push for a bill this year.

Doesnt link to politics members in Congress understand
that raising the cap is key to spur business growth
Patrick 13 - Michael D. Patrick is a Partner at Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen &
Loewy, LLP, resident in its New York office. (Michael, Dec. 18, 2013, Raising the
Cap: The Need For Increased Numbers Of H-1B Visas For Skilled Workers
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/articles/26825/raising-cap-need-increasednumbers-h-1b-visas-skilled-workers)//sb
There is now a great need in the U.S. for a dramatic increase in H-1B
visa availability in order to meet the demand of U.S. businesses for skilled
workers. Comprehensive Immigration Reform promises some relief, as the bill passed in the Senate would increase
the baseline H-1B cap to 115,000, with 25,000 reserved for holders of U.S. advanced degrees in STEM fields, and allow for
increases in the cap up to 180,000. Similarly, the House bill raises the standard H-1B cap to 155,000, with a STEM U.S.
advanced degree exemption of 40,000. At least there is hope that Congress
understands that an
increase in the number of H-1B visas is simply good for U.S. business.
Doesnt link to politics Republicans need to support H1B visas in order to include non-whites into their voting
base
Telford 13 - Erik Telford is Vice-President for Strategic Initiatives and Outreach. (Erik, Aug. 20, 2013, STEM visas
should be no-brainer in immigration debate, Town Hall.com,
http://townhall.com/columnists/eriktelford/2013/08/20/stem-visas-should-be-nobrainer-in-immigration-debaten1668505/page/full)//sb
Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the CATO Institute,

remarked that the system that many of our ancestors used to enter the country in the early
20th century no longer exists. Finding a modern-day answer to Ellis Island could
help streamline legal immigration and fix our broken system.
Immigration reform also represents a ticking time bomb for the
Republican Party. Whit Ayres, director of Resurgent Republic, showed charts detailing the decreasing
percentage of whites in the electorate, and the Hispanic communitys increasing preference for Democrats. With
non-Hispanic whites expected to become a minority of the population
by 2040 and the Hispanic populations continued growth , Republicans
simply must make inroads with nonwhite immigrants to remain a
national party.
On this point, it was encouraging to hear Dr. Barret Duke of The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern
Baptist Convention talk about his efforts to engage his membership in the immigration debate, and discuss the importance
of the evangelical communitys support to the success of broad immigration reform.
STEM visas may not be a magic bullet to drive minority voters to the GOP, but they represent a
facet of immigration reform that conservatives can embrace . The panelists at
this event explained the multitude of reasons why these visas are good, conservative policy, and by promoting a plan to
reform immigration based around STEM, Republicans
can show the nonwhite

community that they are serious about reaching out and welcoming
them into the party.
Random
Gendered-Language
Links from 1AC evidence
From the 1AC evidence
Rockefeller evidence uses the word manned
Rockefeller 13Senator for West Virginia, Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation (Senator John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, Jun 11 2013,
Deep Sea Challenge: Innovative Partnerships in Ocean Observation,
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=29496bc2-fdb7-47c7-93ef0def99cf9d6c&Statement_id=e7a711a0-2ddd-48ac-b9e4-de831953b9e7&ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d3556cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&MonthDisplay=6&YearDisplay=2013//cc)
Oceans cover more than two-thirds of the Earths surface, so one would expect that we might understand their complex
ecosystems and environments. But vast depths of the ocean remain complete mysteries to us. We know more about the
surface of Mars than we do about the deepest depths of our oceans. Todays hearing is about bringing the best science and
data together from private companies, research institutions, colleges and universities, and public agencies to improve
our knowledge and understanding of the ocean.
The federal government has a proud and

successful history of scientific research that has given us manned
missions to the Moon and exciting potential alternative energy sources. We know that the federal
government can support research that goes straight to our understanding of difficult problems. Our oceans and
environment are facing a crisis. As carbon dioxide increases in our atmosphere, it simultaneously increases in our ocean.
This is making the seas more acidic, which has adverse ramifications for our ecosystems, communities, and maritime
industries like commercial fishing and tourism. Research into our oceans changing chemistry must be a priority. With
better information about ocean acidification, we can begin to understand how our marine resources and coastal
communities will be affected. This Committee has fought to increase coordination among federal agencies to monitor
ocean acidification, and will consider additional legislation during this congressional session. Current federal investments
in ocean observation are woefully inadequate and the self-inflicted budget wounds that Washington is grappling with do
not help. So we need to look for new and innovative ways to fund research that supports and improves the livelihoods of
those who rely on our oceans and also supports and improves the future of ocean research. Already the public-private
partnership model is being successfully applied to ocean research, and that is what two of our witnesses are here today to
discuss. Mr. Camerons ocean expeditions have captured Americas attention and given the ocean observation community
incredible samples that aide scientific research. He has 72 previous dives to his credit, but his dive to the Mariana Trench
is perhaps the most impressive. His expedition has potentially resulted in the discovery of several new species I dont
think many people can add that to their list of accomplishments. The one thing that might be more impressive is that Mr.
Cameron isnt satisfied with simply diving deeper than any other human. He is donating the submersible to make the
technological advances from his expeditions available for future scientific study. Given the general lack of research in
many areas of ocean observation, it is encouraging to see that private groups are forging ahead to fill in the scientific gaps.
The burden should not be on private institutions however. The federal government has a critical role to play. The first dive
to the Mariana Trench was piloted by a Navy Lieutenant more than 50 years ago. The government used to be at the
forefront of ocean observation and discovery. But fights to blindly reduce government spending have taken many victims,
including scientific research. Until we prioritize spending that will benefit future generations in this country, we will
continue to unnecessarily take victims. The private sector continues to make important investments in research to better
understand vital scientific issues. But the federal government has yet to receive the potential benefits of signing on to
public-private partnerships. These public-private partnerships present opportunities to advance scientific research,
despite our budget issues. Unfortunately, the governments unwillingness at this point to signal a serious commitment to
scientific research has turned off some potential partners. We all have a responsibility when it comes to conserving our
oceans for future generations. This responsibility begins with a commitment to federal investments in scientific research
that can help us understand how the oceans are changing. We are missing opportunities to gain crucial knowledge and
without it, we will not be able to stem the tide and reverse environmental problems that threaten ecosystems and the
economic backbones of our coastal communities.
The Heithaus evidence uses the word manned -
Heithaus 13Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences at FIU (Michael, Statement
of Dr. Michael Heithaus Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Before the Senate Commerce, Science and
Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard Subcommittee Hearing June 13,
2013 Aquarius Reef Base and Partnerships in Ocean Observations, http://government.fiu.edu/federal/dcdispatches/current/Statement-of-Dr-Michael-Heithaus.html//cc)
National Needs for Ocean Science and Education Coastal marine habitats such as coral reefs, seagrass beds and
mangroves support the highest marine biodiversity in the world. More than 500 million people worldwide depend upon
them for food (fisheries), storm protection, jobs and recreation. Their resources and services are worth an estimated 375
billion dollars each year to the global economy, yet they cover less than one percent of the Earth's surface. There is an
urgent need to develop scientifically based tools for conserving these habitats and where feasible restoring the ecosystem
services they deliver.to millions of people around the world. While the Deepwater Horizon Incident highlighted the
interconnectedness and susceptibility of marine ecosystems to human activities, global threats including climate change
and ocean acidification have the potential to cause even more wide-spread and profound damage. Coral reefs and other
coastal ecosystems that provide huge economic benefits are particularly susceptible to climate change and other human
caused stresses. The next decade will be pivotal in whether society can successfully chart a path to a sustainable ocean
future with thriving ecosystems and coastal human communities. Overcoming the threats facing ocean ecosystems while
ensuring that human needs for ocean resources are met requires a multidisciplinary approach that involves coastal ocean
observing systems to monitor ecosystems, in-ocean experiments to understand the nature of threats and to develop
solutions, development on new technologies for ocean observing and underwater industrial activities, high-value public
outreach to communicate the importance of ocean ecosystems and solutions to threats to their health, and K-12 education
programs and teacher development to inspire the next generation of STEM professionals and marine scientists. How do
we move forward to ensure that we, as a country, are able to accomplish this approach? The answer lies in diverse
partnerships, innovative technology, and human exploration and imagination. Aquarius Reef Base The Aquarius is the
only operating undersea laboratory, 43 feet long by 9 feet in diameter that houses six aquanauts on the ocean floor 60 feet
below the surface for 10-31 days at a time. The habitat, the worlds only operational marine habitat dedicated to science
and education, is a national treasure owned by NOAA. It has been sited in the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary off Key
Largo for 20 years and has proven to be instrumental in the advancement of oceanic research, engaging Americas future
leaders through ocean-inspired learning, and serving as a catalyst for development of the next generation of marine and
extra planetary explorers and exploration technologies. Research at Aquarius has directly guided the stewardship of not
just the Florida Keys National marine Sanctuary, but other coral reef ecosystems both in the US and worldwide. An ocean
observatory Aquarius provides an ideal platform for long-term monitoring of coastal oceans and coral reefs. It will serve as
a permanent station, providing real-time and long-term data on the marine environment, which will serve as an earlywarning system for impacts to ocean ecosystems both locally and globally. Because it can provide stable power, has a
IT infrastructure that facilitates innovative sensor deployment,

utilizes the latest industry communication technology that offers a
reliable means to transmit data and video, and is the only manned
ocean observing platform that allows for data ground-truthing and
sensor design and testing Aquarius will become a world-class ocean observation platform that will facilitate
scalable
monitoring and experimentation on, among other issues, the impacts of ocean acidification on coral reefs, seagrass
meadows and a diverse array of ocean organisms. The position of Aquarius makes it particularly well-suited for studies of
ocean acidification because it sits between seagrass meadows, which remove CO2 that causes acidification, and the coral
reefs and open ocean that will be most impacted. The data generated by Aquarius will be critical for guiding policy and
conservation management to preserve these critical ecosystems and potentially mitigate acidification worldwide. Finally,
Aquarius Reef Base is, quite simply, the best platform for observing the condition of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary (FKNMS). The National Marine Sanctuaries Act was intended to identify, designate, and comprehensively
manage marine areas of national significance. National marine sanctuaries are established for the public's long-term
benefit, use, and enjoyment. As home to the largest continental coral reef ecosystem in the US, upon which the economy of
south Florida is based, the FKNMS was designated. Sanctuary status is designed, among other things, to: Enhance
resource protection through comprehensive and coordinated conservation and ecosystem management that complements
existing regulatory authorities. Support, promote, and coordinate scientific research on, and monitoring of, the marine
resources of the Florida Keys to improve management decision-making Enhance public awareness, understanding, and
the wise use of the marine environment through public interpretive, educational, and recreational programs. Aquarius is
superbly enabled to facilitate all of these goals of the FKNMS with a special emphasis on the unique interpretive and
educational programs it allows.
A manned presence on the sea floor and the ability of
citizens to share in that experience through traditional media outlets as well as live over the internet, ignites the
imaginations of future scientists and educators like nothing else!
Mcguire evidence uses man-made McGuire 2002 (Bill, Professor of Geohazards at University College London and is one of Britain's leading
volcanologists, A Guide to the End of the World, p. 159-168//cc)
The Tunguska events pale into insignificance when compared to what happened off the coast of Mexico's Yucatan
Peninsula 65 million years earlier. Here a 10-kilometre asteroid or cometits exact nature is uncertaincrashed into the
sea and changed our world forever. Within microseconds, an unimaginable explosion released as much energy as billions
of Hiroshima bombs detonated simultaneously, creating a titanic fireball hotter than the Sun that vaporized the ocean and
excavated a crater 180 kilometres across in the crust beneath. Shock waves blasted upwards, tearing the atmosphere apart
and expelling over a hundred trillion tonnes of molten rock into space, later to fall across the globe. Almost immediately
an area bigger than Europe would have been flattened and scoured of virtually all life, while massive earthquakes rocked
the planet. The atmosphere would have howled and screamed as hypercanes five times more powerful than the strongest
hurricane ripped the landscape apart, joining forces with huge tsunamis to batter coastlines many thousands of kilometres
distant. Even worse was to follow. As the rock blasted into space began to rain down across the entire planet so the heat
generated by its re-entry into the atmosphere irradiated the surface, roasting animals alive as effectively as an oven grill,
and starting great conflagrations that laid waste the world's forests and grasslands and turned fully a quarter of all living
material to ashes. Even once the atmosphere and oceans had settled down, the crust had stopped shuddering, and the
bombardment of debris from space had ceased, more was to come. In the following weeks, smoke and dust in the
atmosphere blotted out the Sun and brought temperatures plunging by as much as 15 degrees Celsius. In the growing
gloom and bitter cold the surviving plant life wilted and died while those herbivorous dinosaurs that remained slowly
starved. global wildfires and acid rain from the huge quantities of sulphur injected into the atmosphere from rocks at the
site of the impact poured into the oceans, wiping out three-quarters of all marine life. After years of freezing conditions the
gloom following the so-called Chicxulub impact would eventually have lifted, only to reveal a terrible Sun blazing through
the tatters of an ozone layer torn apart by the chemical action of nitrous oxides concocted in the impact fireball: an
ultraviolet spring hard on the heels of the cosmic winter that fried many of the remaining species struggling precariously
to hang on to life. So enormously was the natural balance of the Earth upset that according to some it might have taken
hundreds of thousands of years for the post-Chicxulub Earth to return to what passes for normal. When it did the age of
the great reptiles was finally over, leaving the field to the primitive mammalsour distant ancestorsand opening an
evolutionary trail that culminated in the rise and rise of the human race. But could we go the same way1?To assess the
chances, let me look a little more closely at the destructive power of an impact event. At Tunguska, destruction of the
forests resulted partly from the great heat generated by the explosion, but mainly from the blast wave that literally pushed
the trees over and flattened them against the ground. The strength of this blast wave depends upon what is called the peak
overpressure, that is the difference between ambient pressure and the pressure of the blastwave. In order to cause severe
destruction this needs to exceed 4. pounds per square inch, an overpressure that results in wind speeds that arc over twice
the force of those found in a typical hurricane. Even though tiny compared with, say, the land area of London, the
enormous overpressures generated by a 50-metre object exploding low overhead would cause damage comparable with
the detonation of a very large nuclear device, obliterating almost everything within the city's orbital motorway. Increase
the size of the impactor and things get very much worse. An asteroid just 250 metres across would be sufficiently massive
to penetrate the atmosphere; blasting a crater 5 kilometres across and devastating an area of around 10,000 square
kilometres that is about the size of the English county of Kent. Raise the size of the asteroid again, to 650 metres, and
the area of devastation increases to 1oo,ooo square kilometresabout the size of the US state of South Carolina. Terrible
as this all sounds, however, even this would be insufficient to affect the entire planet. In order to do this, an impactor has
to be at least 1 kilometre across, if it is one of the speedier comets, or 1.5 kilometres in diameter if it is one of the slower
asteroids. A collision with one of these objects would generate a blast equivalent to 100.000 million tonnes of TNT, which
would obliterate an area 500 kilometres across say the size of Englandand kill perhaps tens of millions of people,
depending upon the location of the impact. The real problems for the rest of the world would start soon after as dust in the
atmosphere began to darken the skies and reduce the level of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface. By comparison with
the huge Chicxulub impact it is certain that this would result in a dramatic lowering of global temperatures but there is no
consensus on just how bad this would be. The chances are, however, that an impact of this size would result in appalling
weather conditions and crop failures at least as severe as those of the 'Year Without a Summer'; 'which followed the 1815
eruption of Indonesia's Tambora volcano. As mentioned in the last chapter, with even developed countries holding
sufficient food to feed their populations for only a month or so, large-scale crop failures across the planet would
undoubtedly have serious implications. Rationing, at the very least, is likely to be die result, with a worst case scenario
seeing widespread disruption of the social and economic fabric of developed nations. In the developing world, where
subsistence farming remains very much the norm, wide-spread failure of the harvests could be expected to translate
rapidly into famine on a biblical scale Some researchers forecast that as many as a quarter of the world's population could
succumb to a deteriorating climate following an impact in the 11.5 kilometre size range. Anything bigger and
photosynthesis stops completely. Once this happens the issue is not how many people will die but whether the human race
will survive. One estimate proposes that the impact of an object just 4- kilometres across will inject sufficient quantities of
dust and debris into the atmosphere to reduce light levels below those required for photosynthesis. Because we still don't
know how many threatening objects there are out there nor whether they come in bursts, it is almost impossible to say
when the Earth will be struck by an asteroid or comet that will bring to an end the world as we know it. Impact events on
the scale of the Chicxulub dinosaur-killer only occur every several tens of millions of years, so in any single year the
chances of such an impact arc tiny. Any optimism is, however, tempered by the fact that should the Shiva hypothesis be
truethe next swarm of Oort Cloud comets could even now be speeding towards the inner solar system. Failing this, we
may have only another thousand years to wait until the return of the dense part of the Taurid Complex and another
asteroidal assault. Even if it turns out that there is no coherence in the timing of impact events, there is statistically no
reason why we cannot be hit next year by an undiscovered Earth-Crossing Asteroid or by a long-period comet that has
never before visited the inner solar system. Small impactors on the Tunguska scale struck Brazil in 1931 and Greenland in
1097, and will continue to pound the Earth every few decades. Because their destructive footprint is tiny compared to the
surface area of the Earth, however, it would be very bad luck if one of these hit an urban area, and most will fall in the sea.
Although this might seem a good thing, a larger object striking the ocean would be very bad news indeed. A 500-metre
rock landing in the Pacific Basin, for example, would generate gigantic tsunamis that would obliterate just about every
coastal city in the hemisphere within 20 hours or so. The chances of this happening arc actually quite highabout 1 per
cent in the next 100 yearsand the death toll could well top half a billion. Estimates of the frequencies of impacts in the 1
kilometre size bracket range from 100,000 to 333,000 years, but the youngest impact crater produced by an object of this
size is almost a million years old. Of course, there could have been several large impacts since, which cither occurred in the
sea or have not yet been located on land. Fair enough you might say, the threat is clearly out there, but is there anything on
the horizon? Actually, there is. Some 13 asteroidsmostly quite smallcould feasibly collide with the Earth before 2100.
Realistically, however, this is not very likely as the probabilities involved arc not much greater than 1 in io;ooo although
bear in mind that these arc pretty good odds. If this was the probability of winning the lottery then my local agent would
be getting considerably more of my business. There is another enigmatic object out there, however. Of the 40 or so Near
Earth Asteroids spotted last year, one designated 2000SG344looked at first as if it might actually hit us. The object is
small, in the 100 metre size range, and its orbit is so similar to the earth that some have suggested it may be a booster
rocket that sped one of the Apollo spacecraft on its way to the Moon. Whether
hunk of rock or lump

of man-made metal, it was originally estimated that 2000SG344 had
a 1 in 500 chance of striking the Earth on 21 September 2030. Again, these
may sound very long odds, but they are actually only five times greater than those recently offered during summer 2001
for England beating Germany 5-1 at football. We can all relax now anyway, as recent calculations have indicated that the
object will not approach closer to the Earth than around five million kilometres. A few years ago, scientists came up with
an index to measure the impact threat, known as the Torino Scale, and so far 2000SG2144 is the first object to register a
value greater than zero. The potential impactor originally scraped into category 1, events meriting careful monitoring.
Let's hope that many years elapse before we encounter the first category 10 eventdefined as 'a certain collision with
global consequences'. Given sufficient warning we might be able to nudge an asteroid out of the Earth's way but due to its
size, high velocity, and sudden appearance, wc could do little about a new comet heading in our direction.
Brownfield evidence uses mankind Brownfield 4 (Roger, Gaishiled Project, A Million Miles a Day, Presentation at the Planetary Defense
Conference: Protecting Earth From Asteroids, 2-26, http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=406&gTable= Paper&g
ID=17092//cc)
Once upon a time there was a Big Bang... Cause/Effect - Cause/Effect -Cause/Effect and fifteen billion years later we have
this chunk of cosmos weighing in at a couple trillion tons, screaming around our solar system, somewhere, hair on fire at a
million miles a day, on course to the subjective center of the universe. Left to its own fate -- on impact -- this Rock would
release the kinetic energy equivalent of one Hiroshima bomb for every man, woman and child on the planet. Game Over...
No Joy... Restart Darwin's clock again. No happy ever after. There is simply no empirical logic or rational argument that
this could not be the next asteroid to strike Earth or that the next impact event could not happen tomorrow. And as things
stand we can only imagine a handful of dubious undeveloped and untested possibilities to defend ourselves with. There is
nothing we have actually prepared to do in response to this event. From an empirical analysis of the dynamics and
geometry of our solar system we have come to understand that the prospect of an Earth/asteroid collision is a primal and
ongoing process: a solar systemic status quo that is unlikely to change in the lifetime of our species. And that the
distribution of these impact events is completely aperiodic and random both their occasion and magnitude. From
abstracted averaged relative frequency estimates we can project that over the course of the next 500 million years in the
life of Earth we will be struck by approximately 100,000 asteroids that will warrant our consideration. Most will be
relatively small, 100 to 1,000 meters in diameter, millions of tons: only major city to nation killers. 1,000 or so will be over
1,000 meters, billions of tons and large enough to do catastrophic and potentially irrecoverable damage to the entire
planet: call them global civilization killers. Of those, 10 will be over 10,000 meters, trillions of tons and on impact massive
enough to bring our species to extinction. All these asteroids are out there, orbiting the sun... now. Nothing more needs to
happen for them to go on to eventually strike Earth. As individual and discrete impact events they are all, already, events
in progress. By any definition this is an existential threat. Fortunately, our current technological potential has evolved to a
point that if we choose to do so we can deflect all these impact events. Given a correspondingly evolved political will, we
can effectively manage this threat to the survival of our species. But since these events are aperiodic and random we can
not simply trust that any enlightened political consensus will someday develop spontaneously before we are faced with
responding to this reality. If we would expect to deflect the next impact event a deliberate, rational punctuated equilibrium
of our sociopolitical will is required now. The averaged relative frequency analysis described above or any derived
random-chance statistical probabilistic assessment, in itself, would be strategically meaningless and irrelevant (just how
many extinction level events can we afford?). However, they can be indirectly constructive in illuminating the existential
and perpetual nature of the threat. Given that the most critically relevant strategic increment can be narrowly defined as
the next evergreen 100 years, it would follow that the strategic expression of the existent risk of asteroid impact in its
most likely rational postulate would be for one and only one large asteroid to be on course to strike Earth in the next 100
years... If we do eventually choose to respond to this threat, clearly there is no way we can address the dynamics or
geometry of the Solar System so there is no systemic objective we can respond to here. We can not address 'The Threat of
Asteroid Impact' as such. We can only respond to this threat as these objects present themselves as discrete impending
impactors: one Rock at a time. This leaves us the only aspect of this threat we can respond to - a rationally manifest firstorder and evergreen tactical definition of this threat Which unfortunately, as a product of random-chance, includes the
prospect for our extinction. Asteroid impact is a randomly occurring existential condition. Therefore the next large
asteroid impact event is inevitable and expectable, and that inevitable expectability begins... now. The Probability is Low:
As a risk assessment: The probability for large asteroid impact in the next century is low... is irrelevant. Say the daily
random-chance probability for large asteroid impact is one in a billion. And because in any given increment of time the
chance that an impact will not happen is far greater than it will, the chance that it will happen can be characterized as low.
However, if we look out the window and see a large asteroid 10 seconds away from impact the daily random-chance
probability for large asteroid impact will still be one in a billion... and we must therefore still characterize the chance of
impact as low... When the characterization of the probability can be seen to be tested to be in contradiction with the
manifest empirical fact of the assessed event it then must also then be seen to be empirically false. Worse: true only in the
abstract and as such, misleading. If we are going to respond to these events, when it counts the most, this method of
assessment will not be relevant. If information can be seen to be irrelevant ex post it must also be seen to be irrelevant ex
ante. This assessment is meaningless. Consider the current threat of the asteroid Apophis. With its discovery we abandon
the average relative frequency derived annual random-chance probability for a rational conditional-empiric probabilistic
threat assessment derived from observing its speed, vector and position relative to Earth. The collective result is expressed
in probabilistic terms due only to our inability to meter these characteristics accurately enough to be precise to the point of
potential impact. As Apophis approaches this point the observations and resulting metrics become increasingly accurate
and the conditional-empiric probability will process to resolve into a certainty of either zero or one. Whereas the randomchance probability is unaffected by whether Apophis strikes Earth or not. These two probabilistic perceptions are
inherently incompatible and unique, discrete and nonconstructive to each other. The only thing these two methodologies
have in common is a nomenclature: probability/likelihood/chance, which has unfortunately served only to obfuscate their
semantic value making one seem rational and relevant when it can never be so. However, merely because they are non
rational does not make averaged relative frequency derived random-chance probabilities worthless. They do have some
psychological merit and enable some intuitive 'old lady' wisdom. When we consider the occasion of some unpredictable
event that may cause us harm and there is nothing tangible we can do to deflect or forestall or stop it from happening, we
still want to know just how much we should worry about it. We need to quantify chance not only in in case we can prepare
or safeguard or insure against potentially recoverable consequences after the fact, but to also meter how much hope we
should invest against the occasion of such events. Hope mitigates fear. And when there is nothing else we can do about it
only then is it wise to mitigate fear... The probability for large asteroid impact in the next century is low does serve that
purpose. It is a metric for hope. Fifty years ago, before we began to master space and tangibly responding this threat of
asteroid impact became a real course of action, hope was all we could do. Today we can do much more. Today we can hold
our hope for when the time comes to successfully deflect. And then, after we have done everything we can possibly do to
deflect it, there will still be of room for hope... and good luck. Until then, when anyone says that the probability for large
asteroid impact or Extinction by NEO is low they are offering nothing more than a metric for hope -- not rational
information constructive to metering a response or making a decision to do so or not. Here, the probability is in service to
illusion... slight-of-mind... and is nothing more than comfort-food-for-thought. We still need such probabilistic comfortfood-for-thought for things like Rogue Black Holes and Gamma Bursts where we are still imaginably defenseless. But if we
expect to punctuate the political equilibrium and develop the capability to effectively respond to the existential threat of
asteroid impact, we must allow a rational and warranted fear of extinction by asteroid impact to drive a rational and
warranted response to this threat forward. Forward into the hands and minds of those who have the aptitude and training
and experience in using fear to handle fearful things. Fear focuses the mind... Fear reminds us that there are dire negative
consequences if we fail. If we are going to concern ourselves with mounting a response and deflecting these objects and no
longer tolerate and suffer this threat, would it not be far more relevant to know in which century the probability for large
asteroid impact was high and far more effective to orient our thinking from when it will not to when it will occur? But this
probabilistic perspective can not even pretend to approach providing us with that kind of information. As such, it can
never be strategically relevant: contribute to the conduct of implementing a response. The same can be said when such
abstract reasoning is used to forward the notion that the next asteroid to strike Earth will likely be small... This leads us to
little more than a hope based Planetary Defense. If we are ever to respond to this threat well then we must begin thinking
about this threat better. Large Asteroid Impacts Are Random Events. Expect the next one to occur at any time.
Strategically speaking, this means being at DefCon 3: lock-cocked and

ready to rock, prepared to defend the planet and mankind from the worst
case scenario, 24/7/52... forever. Doing anything less by design, would be like planning to bring a knife to a gunfight. If
we expect our technological abilities to develop and continue to shape our nascent and still politically tacit will to respond
to this threat: if we are to build an effective Planetary Defense, we must abandon the debilitating sophistry of The
probability for large asteroid impact in the next century is low in favor of rational random inevitable expectation... and its
attendant fear.
Impacts
The term man to mean human beings is sexist and
discriminatory
Word reference No date (http://www.wordreference.com/definition/manned)//sb
The use of man to mean human beings in general is often considered sexist.
Gender-neutral alternatives include human beings, people and
humankind. The verb to man can also often be replaced by to staff, to operate and related words.
The terms mankind, man-made and manned

reinforce the patriarchal system and indicate that men
should be privileged over women
Kleinman 2 Professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina - (Sherryl, Why Sexist Language
Matters, Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 25, No. 2, Summer 2002,
http://uncadvocatesformdphdwomeninscience.web.unc.edu/files/2014/03/Kleinman_QualitativeSociology_2002.pdf)//
sb
*has an imbedded answer to discourse doesnt shape reality
For eleven years Ive been teaching a sociology course at the University of North Carolina on gender inequality. I cover
such topics as the wage gap, the second shift (the disproportionate amount of housework and child care that
heterosexual women do at home), the equation of womens worth with physical attractiveness, the sexualizing of women in
the media, lack of reproductive rights for women (especially poor women), sexual harassment, and mens violence against
women. But the issue that both female and male students
have the most trouble

understandingor, as I see it, share a strong unwillingness to understandis sexist language.
Im not referring to such words as bitch, whore, and slut. What I focus on instead are words
that most people consider just fine: male (so-called) generics. Some of these words
refer to persons occupying a position: postman, chairman, freshman, congressman, fireman. Otherwords
refer to the entire universe of human beings: mankind or he. Then weve got manpower, manmade
lakes, and
Oh, man, where did I leave my keys? Theres manning the tables
in a country where we learn that all men are created equal.
The most insidious, from my observations, is the popular expression you guys. People like to tell me its a
regional term. But Ive heard it in Chapel Hill, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Montreal. Ive seen it in print in
national magazines, newsletters, and books. Ive heard it on television and in films. And even if it were regional, that
doesnt make it right. I bet we can all think of a lot of practices in our home regions wed like to get rid of.
Try making up a female-based generic, such as freshwoman, and using it with a group of male students, or calling your
male boss chairwoman. Then again, dont. There
could be serious consequences for

referring to a man as a womana term that still means lesser in our
society. If not, why do men get so upset at the idea of being called
women?
Whats the big deal? Why does all this man-ning and guys-ing deserve a place on my list of items of gender inequality?
The answer is because
importantly,
male-based generics are another indicator and, more
a reinforcerof a system in which man in the abstract and
men in the flesh are privileged over women . Some say that language merely reflects
reality and so we should ignore our words and work on changing the unequal gender arrangements that are reflected in
our language. Well, yes, in part. Its no accident that man is the anchor in our language and woman is not. And of
course we
should make social change all over the place. But the words we use can
also reinforce current realities when they are sexist (or racist or heterosexist).
Words are the tools of thought. We can use words to maintain the status quo or to
think in new wayswhich in turn creates the possibility of a new
reality. It makes a difference if I think of myself as a girl or a woman; it makes a difference if we talk about
Negroes or African Americans. Do we want a truly inclusive language or one that just pretends?
For a moment, imagine a worldas the philosopher Douglas R. Hofstadter did in his 1986 satire on sexist language
where people used generics based on race rather than gender. In that world, people would use freshwhite, chairwhite,
and, yes, you whiteys. People of color would hear all whites are created equal and be expected to feel included. In an
addendum to his article, Hofstadter says that he wrote A Person Paper on Purity in Language to shock readers: Only by
substituting white for man does it become easy to see the pervasiveness of male-based generics and to recognize that
using man for all human beings is wrong. Yet, women are expected to feel flattered by freshman, chairman, and you
guys.
And why do so many women cling to freshman, chairman, and you guys?
I think its because women want to be included in the term that refers to the higher-status group: men. But while being
labeled one of the guys might make women feel included, its only a guise of inclusion, not the reality. If women were
really included we wouldnt have to disappear into the word guys. At the same time that women in my classes throw
around you guys even here in the southern United States, where yall is an alternativethey call themselves girls.
Im not sure if this has gotten worse over the years or Ive just noticed it more. When Iwas an undergraduate in the early to
mid 1970s, wewanted to bewomen. Whowould take us seriously at college or atwork if we were girls? To many of my
students today, woman is old enough to be over the hill. A girl is youthful and thus more attractive to men than a
woman. Since they like the term so much, I suggest that we renameWomens Studies Girls Studies. And since the
Womens Center on campus provides services for them, why not call it The Girls Center. They laugh. Girls sounds
ridiculous, they say. The students begin to see that girlas a label for twenty-one-year-oldsis infantilizing, not
flattering.
The impact is the endless devaluation of women until they

are symbolically annihilated
sb
We know from history that making
a group invisible makes it easier for the

powerful to do what they want with members of that group. Perhaps thats why linguists
use the strong language of symbolic annihilation to refer to the
disappearance of women into male-based terms. And we know, from too many past
and current studies, that far too many men are doing what they want with
women. Most of us can see a link between callingwomen sluts and whores and mens sexual
violence against women. We need to recognize that making women
linguistically a subset of man/men through terms like mankind and
guys also makes women into objects. If we, as women, arent worthy of such true generics as
first-year, chair, or you all, then how can we expect to be paid a mans wage, be respected as people rather than
objects (sexual or otherwise) on the job and at home, be treated as equals rather than servers or caretakers of others, be
considered responsible enough to make our own decisions about reproduction, and define who and what we want as
sexual beings? If we arent even deserving of our place in humanity in language, why should we expect to be treated as
decent human beings otherwise?
AT: We dont endorse/saying sorry

Also extend the first piece of Kleinman evidence its says that our
language shapes reality which also answers discourse doesnt come
first
Saying sorry is not enough they need to be voted down

in order to set a precedent Even if they didnt mean it,
they are still reinforcing the message that women should
be subsumed by males which still triggers our impacts
sb
The students, like most
people who use male generics, dont have bad

intentions. But as sociologists, we know that its important to look at the
consequences. All those man wordssaid many times a day by
millions of people every day cumulatively reinforce the message that
men are the standard and that women should be subsumed by the male category.
I worry about what people with the best of intentions are teaching our children. A
colleagues five-year-old daughter recently left her classroom crying
after a teacher said, What do you guys think? She thought the
teacher didnt care about what she thought. When the teacher told her that of course she
was included, her tears stopped. But what was the lesson? She learned that her
opinion as a girl mattered only when shes a guy. She learned that
men are the norm.

Aquarius Negative - Michigan7 2014

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Aquarius Negative - Michigan7 2014

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Aquarius Reef Base Neg -CHHJPV

the dean and associate

special marine environments.

FIU President Mark B. Rosenberg admitted he was skeptical.

FIUs Age of Aquarius has

FIU agreed to take over operations of Aquarius is because it

challenging and unforgiving, saltwater habitat.

FIU owns Aquarius

Adkins 14 Contributor to FIU Magazine (Joann, Saving Aquarius, FIU Magazine,

You wake up thinking about Aquarius. We lived with the uncertainty.

meeting was quietly organized by a group of Aquarius

The plan was simple find a host institution to maintain operations

FIU owns Aquarius research base violates its

Adkins 14 Contributor to FIU Magazine (Joann, Saving Aquarius, FIU Magazine,

Months of discussions, formulating business plans and evaluating

AT: Owned/Funded by NOAA

received a grant to continue maintenance and monitoring of the

The existing Aquarius team

will become FIU employees.

state and local government funding, as well as fees for services

from science and engineering teams from government and industry

Floridas budget has been balanced and there is still a

Fed. Funding doesnt solve

Withers 13 (Ashley, Star-News (Wilmington, NC) January 9, 2013, lexis)

Florida has a HUGE budget surplusmeans funding for

As for the rest of the surplus, Florida

earmarked for use by the Aquarius Foundation . Divers Alert

Aquarius Foundation solves provides sustainable

Aquarius Foundation exists to ensure the future of

this important scientific resource, a crucial strategy for sustaining

all ages and backgrounds. The Aquarius Foundation was formed in

FIU support is sufficienttaxpayer, governmental, and

PRNewswire, 13(PR Newswire-US Newswire, January 15th, 2013, Unique

FIU saved the reef base =the underwater laboratory has

Aquarius is an invaluable tool to

now, 7 months later, it has all paid off,

Marijuana Funding Mechanism

marijuana could bring big tax revenue, Florida Today, 7/22/14,

Florida could rake in big bucks in sales and tax revenue if

CP is sufficient for funding Colorado and Washington

How much money are Colorado and Washington making?

CP is popular 88% approval, bipartisan

Amazon Tax Mechanism

Aquarius Reef Base is owned by the federal government but run by

have been about 50 undersea research bases like

The budget for the

federal budget crunch and cost overruns in NOAAs satellite

has asked for more than $2 billion to fund its weather

China Tradeof link

Pasternack 12 writer and the Founding Editor of Motherboard (Alex, Aug.

Fed Funding not key

Private funding solves the af

Technology, DiveBuddy.com, 6/23/12,

Federal funding not key outside investment solves

In Key Largo , an independent group, the Aquarius Foundation has

Critical for FIU to find funding outside the government

President Mark B. Rosenberg admitted he was skeptical. He wanted to

will seek multiple funding

NOAA owns Aquarius , but it will be up to FIU to come up with the

it will be crucial for FIU to land outside funding

PhD candidate at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, wanted to use the

was looking to do a documentary at

Status Quo solves/not inherent

Adkins 14 Contributor to FIU Magazine (Joann, Saving Aquarius, FIU Magazine,