Harveer Singh

Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

Wastewater Treatment Plants 1AC

Humans are the main cause of pollution in the ocean, and the world
desperately needs new sources of energy that can replace fossil fuels. My
partner and I have decided wastewater treatment plants are best suited to
solve these problems. Therefore we affirm the resolution: the United States
federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration
and/or development of the Earth's oceans. Now lets dive into the plan.

Contention I, Significance, the harms in the status quo

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

A. The United States is a major source of pollution

Rapaport, Dave. Published March 2010 Sewage Pollution in Pacific Island
Countries and How to Prevent it Executive Summary Center for Clean
Development 1227 W. 10th Avenue
Eugene, Oregon USA <http://www.uvm.edu/~rlachape/dev-pacis.html>
Accessed December 11, 2014
Sewage is the most significant source of marine pollution in the Pacific
region. Nearly every Pacific island nation has identified critical environmental
and public health problems resulting from the disposal of human excrement.
These have included algae blooms and eutrophication in lagoons, dying
reefs, contaminated drinking water wells and outbreaks of gastrointestinal
disease and cholera. The causes of this pollution include overflowing latrines and privies, water seal
toilets, septic systems, sewage treatment plants as well as the complete lack of sanitation facilities in some places.

Globally, sewage is a major component of marine pollution from land-based

activities, which account for roughly three-fourths of all pollutants entering
the world's oceans. Land-based sources of marine pollution are contributing
to an alarming decline in the health of the world's marine ecosystems and their
ability to provide for human needs.

Sewage

along with other forms of pollution from land-based activities is

represent a severe threat to

around the world.

blamed for the decline and collapse of fisheries and tourism, and

public health

in various regions

B. Marine ecosystems are negatively impacted by sewage pollution

dumped into the ocean.
Rapaport, Dave Published March 2010 Sewage Pollution in Pacific Island
Countries and How to Prevent it Executive Summary Center for Clean
Development 1227 W. 10th Avenue
Eugene, Oregon USA <http://www.uvm.edu/~rlachape/dev-pacis.html>
Accessed December 11, 2014
The flow of nutrients carried by sewage and other sources, has severe
impacts on the marine environment, particularly coastal areas. In a marine
ecosystem, microscopic organisms provide food for aquatic plants as they
decompose dead organic matter and consume oxygen in the process. The
plants in turn provide oxygen back into the ecosystem as they grow through

. The introduction of excess levels of nitrogen, phosphorus and

other nutrients from sewage throws off this balance by causing a rise in the
population of oxygen consuming microorganisms, increasing the biological
oxygen demand, or BOD. The increased BOD depletes oxygen faster than it
can be replenished by the aquatic plants, resulting in a severely depleted level of
oxygen, suffocating many animals which need oxygen in order to survive. The
photosynthesis

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

decay of these organisms

in turn

leads to

even

greater demand for oxygen and

feeds a vicious cycle of spiraling BOD and anoxic waters. The population of
phytoplankton surge as the organisms which would normally keep them in check die-off, resulting in vast
algae blooms. This phenomenon, known as eutrophication, renders the area unfit to support the marine life
thus

which would normally be found there.

C.

The world is rapidly running out of fossil fuels.

"The End Of Fossil Fuels." - Our Green Energy. Ecotricity.co.uk. N.p., n.d. Web.
Accessed February 11, 2015. <https://www.ecotricity.co.uk/our-greenenergy/energy-independence/the-end-of-fossil-fuels>.
Clearly fossil fuel reserves are finite - it's only a matter of when they run out. Globally every year
we currently consume the equivalent of over 11 billion tonnes of oil in fossil
fuels. Crude oil reserves are vanishing at the rate of 4 billion tonnes a year. If
we carry on at this rate without any increase for our growing population or
aspirations, our known oil deposits will be gone by 2052. Well still have gas left, and
coal too. But if we increase gas production to fill the energy gap left by oil, then those reserves will only give us an

But the rate at which the world consumes fossil

fuels is not standing still, it is increasing as the world's population increases
and as living standards rise in parts of the world that until recently had
consumed very little energy. Fossil fuels will therefore run out earlier. Its often
additional eight years, taking us to 2060.

claimed that we have enough coal to last hundreds of years. But if we step up production to fill the gap left through
depleting our oil and gas reserves, the coal deposits we know about will only give us enough energy to take us as
far as 2088. And lets not even think of the carbon dioxide emissions from burning all that coal.

Contention II, Inherency, the barrier in the status quo

A. The United States will not enact plans against ocean
pollution.
Fred Rucker, The Politics of Ocean Pollution: The Third Law of the Sea
Conference and International Structures for Environmental Protection, 1 B.C.
Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 283 (1977), lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu
<http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol1/iss1/12> Accessed December 11,
2014
While some form of action is required to control marine pollution, most
nations or regional organizations will not respond to this need by instituting
effective pollution control programs. The United States has traditionally looked
upon the ocean's resources as a "free good." The oceans are a resource
which may be employed for discharge of wastes by individual states without
any cost to those states. Thus, the economic costs of water pollution damage to the ocean environment are
"externalized. In other words, the economic activities of the political unit generate effects which are external to it,

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

the international community suffers the harm created by the polluter at no

cost to the polluter. Such external costs are not taken into account when
most nations decide whether and how much to pollute. It is only to the international
community as a whole that pollution control is advantageous for it is that community which suffers damage. Even in
the international community, pollution control only becomes economically advantageous when the levels of
pollution become so destructive that their costs to that community outweigh the costs of abatement. Because of
this external nature of pollution costs and the diseconomies of abatement for the polluter, most nations will not
institute strict controls. John Hargrave explains this process which he labels as the" commons effect". "Acquisitive,
self-interested and one fears myopic nations control the land masses bordered by the oceans. Anyone of these
nations may well understand . . . that the continued introduction of waste may eventually wreak havoc on the
ocean eco-system. And yet, if that nation pays the price of stopping its own practices, the ocean may nevertheless
continue to be subject to the same threat from its use as a sink from other nations. . . .". Thus, a nation gains little
from the costs expended to control pollution so that an economic disincentive to control pollution exists. In addition
to this external nature of pollution costs, states recognize that if they employ funds to control pollution, other
nations will gain an economic advantage since the costs of pollution control must be rejected in the costs of goods
produced.

B. Federal funding for the oceans is dwindling while costs

are increasing.
McClain, 2014 Craig, Assistant Director of Science for the National
Evolutionary Synthesis Center and editor @ Deep Sea News, We Need an
Ocean NASA Now Pt. 1, 10/16/14, <http://deepseanews.com/2014/10/weneed-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-1/> Accessed December 11, 2014

Our nation faces a pivotal moment in our involvement of the oceans.

The most remote regions of the deep oceans should be more accessible now than ever due to engineering and
technological advances.

What limits our advances of the oceans is not imagination or

technology but funding. We as a society started to make a choice: to
deprioritize ocean exploration and science. In general, science in the U.S. is
poorly funded; while the total number of dollars spent here is large, we only rank 6th in world in
the proportion of gross domestic product invested into research. The outlook for ocean science is even bleaker. In
many cases, funding of marine science, energy, and exploration, especially
for the deep sea, are at historical lows. In others, funding remains stagnant,
despite rising costs of equipment and personnel. The Joint Ocean
Commission Initiative, a committee comprised of leading ocean scientists,
policy makers, and former U.S. secretaries and congressmen, gave the grade
of D- to funding of ocean science in the U.S. Recently the Obama Administration proposed to
cut the National Undersea Research Program (NURP) within NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, a move supported by the Senate. In NOAAs own words, NOAA determined that NURP was a lowerpriority function within its portfolio of research activities. Yet, NURP is one of the main suppliers of funding and
equipment for ocean exploration, including both submersibles at the Hawaiian Underwater Research Laboratory and
the underwater habitat Aquarius. This cut has come despite an overall request for a 3.1% increase in funding for
NOAA. Cutting NURP saves a meager $4,000,000 or 1/10 of NOAAs budget and 1,675 times less than we spend on
the Afghan war in just one month. One of the main reasons NOAA argues for cutting funding of NURP is that other
avenues of Federal funding for such activities might be pursued. However, other avenues are fading as well.
Some funding for ocean exploration is still available through NOAAs Ocean Exploration Program. However, the
Office of Ocean Exploration, the division that contains NURP, took the second biggest cut of all programs (-16.5%)

Likewise, U.S. Naval funding for basic research has also

diminished. The other main source of funding for deep-sea science in the
and is down 33% since 2009.

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

U.S. is the National Science Foundation which primarily supports biological research through the
Biological Oceanography Program. Funding for science within this program has
diminished leading it to, fund larger but fewer grants. This trend most likely
reflects the ever increasing costs of personnel, equipment, and consumables
which only larger projects can support. Indeed, compared to rising fuel costs, a necessity for
oceanographic vessels, NSF funds do not stretch as far as even a decade ago. Shrinking funds and high fuel costs
have also taken their toll on The University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) which operates the
U.S. public research fleet. Over the last decade, only 80% of available ship days were supported through funding.
Over the last two years the gap has increasingly widened, and over the last ten years operations costs increased
steadily at 5% annually. With an estimated shortfall of $12 million, the only solution is to reduce the U.S. research
fleet size. Currently this is expected to be a total of 6 vessels that are near retirement, but there is no plan of
replacing these lost ships. The situation in the U.S. contrasts greatly with other countries. The budget for the
Japanese Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) continues to increase, although much less so
in recent years. The 2007 operating budget for the smaller JAMSTEC was $527 million, over $100 million dollars
more than the 2013 proposed NOAA budget. Likewise, China is increasing funding to ocean science over the next
five years and has recently succeeded in building a new deep-sea research and exploration submersible, the
Jiaolong. The only deep submersible still operating in the US is the DSV Alvin, originally built in 1968.

Now lets discuss the actual plan to be implemented.

Plan Text:
Plank 1, Mandates: The United States federal government will increase its
development of the oceans by building wastewater treatment (WWTP) plants
along the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico coasts where most sewage,
industrial waste, and other pollution occurs.
Plank 2, Funding: The United States will redirect 625 million dollars
($22.67 million/ plant) from fossil fuel subsidies beginning at the start of FY
2015 ( 1.2% cut of the current amount of 52 billion) towards this plan which
will cover all costs such as: capital costs, project development costs, running
costs, and training costs.
Plank 3, Enforcement: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
Department of Energy (DOE)
Plank 4, Legislative Intent: The affirmative reserves the right for
clarification and requests that all off-case positions be run in the first
negative constructive for reasons of fair debate.

Contention III, Solvency

A. Wastewater water plants clean water that enters the
oceans through natural biological processes.
Columbia Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Published 2014,

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

/www.gocolumbiamo.com City of Columbia Public Works, Department Water

Environment Federation. Accessed December 11, 2014
<https://www.gocolumbiamo.com/PublicWorks/Sewer/wwtppg_4.php>
Wastewater treatment plants remove solids, from everything from rags
and plastics to sand and smaller particles found in wastewater; reduce
organic matter and pollutants--naturally occurring helpful bacteria and other
microorganisms consume organic matter in wastewater and are then
separated from the water; and, restore oxygen--the treatment process
ensures that the water put back into our rivers or oceans have enough oxygen
to support life. The wastewater comes from: Homes--human and household
wastes from toilets, sinks, baths, dishwashers, garbage grinders, clothes washers and drains, industry,
schools, and businesses--chemical and other wastes from factories , food-service
operations, school activities, hospitals, shopping centers , etc. Storm Water Infiltration and Inflow from Runoff and
Groundwater--water that enters the sanitary sewer system during a storm, as well
as groundwater that enters through cracks in sewers. The City of Columbia has one set
of sewers for wastewater from homes and businesses (sanitary sewers) and a separate system for storm water
runoff. On the average, each person in the U.S. contributes 50-100 gallons of wastewater every day. If you include
industrial and commercial water uses, the per person usage of water is as high as 150 gallons per day. How does
our wastewater treatment plant work? The 16 million gallons per day (average) entering the facility is conveyed by
over 635 miles of interceptor sewers, varying in size from 8 inches to 72 inches in diameter. The Sanitary Sewer

The
Wastewater Treatment
is a biological process in which

Maintenance Section is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all public sewer mains and manholes.
type of

wastewater treatment used in the

Columbia Regional

Plant is called the complete-mix activated sludge process. This

naturally occurring living microorganisms (bacteria, protozoa, tiny plants and animals) are
maintained at a very high population level. They quickly consume the dissolved and
suspended material carried over from the primary treatment of the incoming
wastewater as a source of food. This process promotes the formation of
biological masses that clump together by adhesion and settle to the bottom
forming "sludge."
By cleaning water waste water treatment plants solve for the negative
health effects linked to pollutants.

B. Wastewater treatment plants solve for damaged marine

ecosystems including dead zones (eutrophication).

Fennell, Christina Published November 13, 2013 Dead Zones: In the Problem
Lies the Solution Innovations in Research and Development. Doc file.
Accessed December 11, 2014
Considerable effort from government, private institutions, and environmental activists has been taken to
encourage remediation projects designed to mitigate the growing dead zones in the ocean. It has been shown that

Remediation
through nutrient and agricultural runoff reduction has been implemented for
over 50 years with minimal success due to enforcement issues. Alternatively,
large scale engineering projects operating within the marine environment are
alleviation of hypoxia will require the removal of excess phosphorus in the affected waters.

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

considered one of the most attractive options because they are often far less
expensive, and offer much more rapid results than nutrient reduction plans.
Although current remediation projects are considered novel, they provide a solution that do not create another

researchers have proposed that

remediation of dead zones will not be successful without the removal of
excess phosphorus and nitrogen within the hypoxic zones. It has been tested
that treatment of the oceans dead zones could be modeled after a modern
waste water treatment plant, using filtration and biological processing to
disperse pollutants, in this case the targeted pollutant being the excess
nutrients. This method is very successful in small scale models within
contained units, but has yet to be implemented as solution due to size of the
project and the resources needed. Any other method of remediation would require a minimal
environmental problem as a consequence. Some

consequential effect due to the nature of the problem..

By solving for the excess nutrients and other pollutants, waste water
treatment plants are solving for damaged marine ecosystems that have
been negatively affected by pollutants.

C. Anaerobic digestion of wastewater sludge produces

energy from the pollution taken into the plant. {note:
Digesters are part of the plant not a separate plant}
Wong, Shutsu, Published July 2011Tapping the Energy Potential of Municipal
Wastewater Treatment: Anaerobic Digestion and Combined Heat and Power
in Massachusetts Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection/
http://www.mass.gov/ Accessed December 11, 2014 <
http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/water/priorities/chp-11.pdf>
Through a process called anaerobic digestion (AD), organic solids can
be broken down to produce biogas, a methane rich byproduct that is usable
for energy generation. When applied at municipal wastewater treatment
facilities, an existing waste stream can be converted into renewable energy
through a combined heat and power system (CHP). If additional organic waste streams are
diverted to these facilities to supplement municipal wastewater solids, even
greater efficiencies and energy potential can be attained for energy
generation onsite and resale to the grid. Such a program leads to
environmental benefits from methane capture, renewable energy generation,
and organic waste volume reduction. Furthermore, facilities can reduce their

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

operational costs associated with energy consumption and waste disposal

while generating revenue from processing additional waste streams . This paper
establishes the merits and benefits of these technologies, the existing conditions at state wastewater treatment
plants (WWTPs) and the potential for a renewable energy strategy that focuses on WWTPs as resource recovery

Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) present an untapped source of

renewable energy. Within the millions of gallons of wastewater that pass
through these plants in any given day are hundreds of tons of bio
solids. When anaerobically digested, those bio solids generate biogas which
can be anywhere from 60 to 70 percent methane. (Natural gas that is
typically purchased from the grid for use onsite is methane.) If captured, that biogas
can fuel an onsite combined heat and power generation system, thus, creating a renewable energy source . In
fact, contained within the wastewater is ten times more energy than there is
necessary to treat that water. As of June 2011, only six of 133 municipal WWTPs in Massachusetts
centers.

utilize anaerobic digestion, and of those six, only three are using or in the process of installing a CHP system to
generate renewable energy onsite. In addition to the environmental benefit of renewable energy, onsite
generation also has economic incentives. Where energy can be captured from existing byproducts such as sludge,
less energy must be purchased from the grid and less sludge must be transported for processing offsite (either for
land application, to a landfill or to another company for further processing). Onsite energy generation also
promotes energy independence and helps to insulate municipal plants from electricity and gas price
fluctuations. At present, the cost of wastewater and water utilities are generally 3060 percent of a citys energy
bill, making it economically advantageous for municipalities to adopt these technologies to minimize the impact of
these utilities on their limited budgets. Treating millions of gallons of wastewater containing bio solids, these
Massachusetts WWTPs are processing a potential fuel every day, and more often than not, that fuel simply passes
through the plant and goes to landfill. This study aims to encourage the installation of systems that can harness
that energy for productive use instead of allowing it to go to waste. The typical wastewater treatment process
begins with the piping of water from the sewer system to the treatment plant. There, settling and thickening
processes remove mud, grit and water, creating a dewatered sludge. That remaining sludge and water mixture is
then treated to remove chemicals (some facilities may use advanced treatment processes) and is subsequently
prepared for transportation to an offsite landfill, incinerator, or composter. Alternatively, that sludge can also be
stabilized and prepared for soil amendment and land application. If added, the process of AD would follow the
settling and thickening steps and could serve as a sludge stabilization method. With AD, sludge is instead piped
into digesters where, in the absence of oxygen and with constant mixing and heating, naturally occurring
microorganisms break down waste solids, producing methane, carbon dioxide and several other trace gases in the
process. Due to its high methane concentration of 60 to 70 percent,3 that gas, often called biogas, can be captured
and flared or productively used for energy generation. To harness the energy contained in biogas, the gas can be
cleaned, compressed and burned in a boiler, generating heat for maintaining digester temperatures and onsite
heating. In conjunction with a CHP system, the gas can also be used to produce electricity.

For these reasons we urge the judge to affirm.

2AC Advantage Extensions

A. Energy from anaerobic digestion could potentially
power the entire United States with excess energy to
spare.

Craig, Johnson, Published January 25, 2013. Anaerobic Digestion: the future

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

of the United States, Environmental Protective Agency.gov. Accessed

October 25, 2014.
<http://www.epa.gov/agstar/anaerobicdigestion/lookingtothefuture/eda>
Estimates of the electricity that could potentially be generated by anaerobic digestion and of the average
energy have been calculated for the contiguous United States. The estimates are based on published waste

If just 50 percent of the waste generated each year in the

U.S. that was turned to the ocean was anaerobically digested, enough
electricity would be generated to power the entire United States and still
have enough power to fulfill Cubas energy needs. Anaerobic digestion plants
are the way the future is going and fossil fuels wont be around for much
longer. Technology under development today will be capable of producing electricity economically from many
pollution resource data.

polluted coastal regions of the country. The amount of energy theoretically available for use has been estimated at
as much as twice the current U.S. energy consumption. AD plants could be in high demand in the future, and it
would be beneficial to implement them now.

B. The byproducts of the digestion process can be used as

fertilizer.
Kirk, Dana, Published April 2, 2012. Michigan State University and M. Charles
Gould, Bioenergy Educator, Michigan State University Extension. Uses of
Solids and By-Products of Anaerobic Digestion Accessed October 26, 2014
<http://www.extension.org/pages/30310/uses-of-solids-and-by-products-ofanaerobic-digestion#.VEwvofnF_uw>
Undigested biomass (referred to as digestate solids, fiber or biofiber)
contained in the effluent (digestate) of anaerobic digesters provides
opportunities for value-added byproducts. Organic fertilizer, livestock
bedding, compost, fuel pellets, and construction material (medium density fiberboard
and fiber/plastic composite materials) are a few examples of value-added byproducts that
could be created from digestate solids. Solids can be extracted from the digestate using solidliquid separation technologies such as slope screens, rotary drum thickeners and screw-press separators. Common
solid-liquid equipment can produce digestate solids with a moisture content of 18 to 30%. The volume and the
moisture content of the separated solids will vary depending on the technology used. Digestate solids are high in
fiber, consisting mainly of fibrous undigested organic material (lignin and cellulose), microbial biomass, animal hair,
and nutrients. During the anaerobic digestion process, nutrients contained in the feedstock are mineralized.
Mineralized nutrients are easily used by a crop. Digestate solids contain higher concentrations of plant-available
nitrogen and phosphorus compared to as-excreted manure, according to research. The high carbon content of
digestate solids adds organic matter to the soil and improves the water holding capacity of the soil. Actual nutrient
content of digestate solids will vary depending on feedstocks, digester type, management, and solid-liquid
separation technology. Digestate solids as a fertilizer source can be used as separated (wet), blended with other
materials and composted or dried and pelletized.

C. The digester plants could payoff initial investment in

Harveer Singh
Niteesh Kuchakulla
7th period Forensics
Mr. Regier
Codename: Aransil

eight years and generate profit.

Wong, Shutsu, Published July 2011Tapping the Energy Potential of Municipal
Wastewater Treatment: Anaerobic Digestion and Combined Heat and Power
in Massachusetts Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection/
http://www.mass.gov/ Accessed December 11, 2014 <
http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/water/priorities/chp-11.pdf>
Next is a case study in Pittsfield, MA, made possible through a Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (now the
Clean Energy Center) grant for its initial feasibility study (approximately $40,000) and $16 million in stimulus grants

$1.67 million went towards the AD

and CHP system. This funding enabled an upgrade of its existing digesters
and the installation of a new CHP system, three 65kW micro turbines. With the installation of
through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF), where

the new CHP system, the facility is anticipating that 29 percent of its total energy needs can be generated on
site. Through its feasibility study and funding, Pittsfield worked with SEA consultants to also explore the potential of

Most
notable about this project, the projections for this project demonstrate the
potential for positive cash flow for the facility even in the first year. Pittsfield invested $1.67
million in SRF funding for the project.With an estimated energy savings of $206,000 each
year, simple payback would occur in 8 years. Looking on a cash flow basis,
assuming a ten year loan and incorporating their anticipated renewable
energy credits, Pittsfield has over $66,000 in cash flow within the first
year. (See calculations below.) These cash flows do not even incorporate other costs
savings such as reduced sludge disposal costs. That said, AD and CHP has the potential to
incorporating fats oils and grease (FOG) into its system to maximize biogas and energy production.

help municipalities with their bottom lines and can make even more sense if other organic waste streams are
considered to help boost energy generation!