K

Modern wind power is a method for humanity to control nature

leaving it as a standing reserve
Beckman 00 (Tad, Ph.D. HMC professor, Heidegger and Environmental
Ethics, page 1 5,
http://www2.hmc.edu/~tbeckman/personal/HEIDART.HTML)
Heidegger clearly saw the development of "energy resources" as
symbolic of this evolutionary path; while the transformation into modern
technology undoubtedly began early, the first definitive signs of its
new character began with the harnessing of energy resources, as we
would say. (7) As a representative of the old technology, the windmill took energy from the
wind but converted it immediately into other manifestatio ns such as the
grinding of grain; the windmill did not unlock energy from the wind in order to store it for later arbitrary

Modern wind-generators, on the other hand, convert the energy of

wind into electrical power which can be stored in batteries or
otherwise. The significance of storage is that it places the energy at our
distribution.

disposal ; and because of this storage the powers of nature can be

turned back upon itself. The storing of energy is, in this sense, the symbol
of our over-coming of nature as a potent object. "...a tract of land is challenged into
the putting out of coal and ore. The earth now reveals itself as a coal mining district, the soil as a mineral

This and other examples that Heidegger used throughout

illustrate the difference between a technology that diverts
the natural course cooperatively and modern technology that achieves the
unnatural by force. Not only is this achieved by force but it is achieved by placing nature in our
deposit." {[7], p. 14}
this essay

subjective context, setting aside natural processes entirely, and conceiving of all revealing as being
relevant only to human subjective needs. The essence of technology originally was a revealing of life and
nature in which human intervention deflected the natural course while still regarding nature as the teacher

The essence of modern technology is a

revealing of phenomena, often far removed from anything that resembles "life and nature," in
which human intrusion not only diverts nature but fundamentally
and, for that matter, the keeper.

changes it . As a mode of revealing, technology today is a challenging-forth of nature so that the

technologically altered nature of things is always a situation in
which nature and objects wait, standing in reserve for our use. We pump crude

oil from the ground and we ship it to refineries where it is fractionally distilled into volatile substances and
we ship these to gas stations around the world where they reside in huge underground tanks, standing

Technology has intruded upon nature in

a far more active mode that represents a consistent direction of domination .
Everything is viewed as "standing-reserve" and, in that, loses its
natural objective identity. The river, for instance, is not seen as a river; it is seen as a source
ready to power our automobiles or airplanes.

of hydro-electric power, as a water supply, or as an avenue of navigation through which to contact inland
markets. In the era of techne humans were relationally involved with other objects in the coming to
presence; in the era of modern technology, humans challenge-forth the subjectively valued elements of
the universe so that, within this new form of revealing, objects lose their significance to anything but their
subjective status of standing-ready for human design. (8) At this point, we have almost completed the
analysis of modern technology in its essence.

This causes planetary extinctionit divorces our relationship with

the natural world and makes ecocide inevitable
Gottlieb 94 (Roger S. Gottlieb Professor of Humanities at Worcester
Polytechnic Institute, holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Brandeis University,
Ethics and Trauma: Levinas, Feminism, and Deep Ecology, Crosscurrents: A
Journal of Religion and Intellectual Life, 1994, Summer,
http://www.crosscurrents.org/feministecology.htm)

Here I will at least begin in agreement with Levinas. As he rejects an ethics proceeding on the basis of self-

the anthropocentric perspectives of conservation or liberal

environmentalism cannot take us far enough. Our relations with
nonhuman nature are poisoned and not just because we have set up
feedback loops that already lead to mass starvations , skyrocketing
interest, so I believe

environmental disease rates , and devastation of natural resources .

The problem with ecocide is not just that it hurts human beings. Our
uncaring violence also violates the very ground of our being, our natural
body, our home. Such violence is done not simply to the other as if the
rainforest, the river, the atmosphere, the species made extinct are totally
different from ourselves. Rather, we have crucified ourselves -in-relationto-the-other, fracturing a mode of being in which self and other can no more
be conceived as fully in isolation from each other than can a mother and a
nursing child. We are that child, and nonhuman nature is that mother. If this image seems too maudlin, let
us remember that other lactating women can feed an infant, but we have only one earth mother. What
moral stance will be shaped by our personal sense that we are poisoning ourselves, our environment, and
so many kindred spirits of the air, water, and forests? To begin, we may see this tragic situation as setting
the limits to Levinas's perspective. The other which is nonhuman nature is not simply known by a "trace,"
nor is it something of which all knowledge is necessarily instrumental. This other is inside us as well as
outside us. We prove it with every breath we take, every bit of food we eat, every glass of water we drink.
We do not have to find shadowy traces on or in the faces of trees or lakes, topsoil or air: we are made from
them. Levinas denies this sense of connection with nature. Our "natural" side represents for him a threat of
simple consumption or use of the other, a spontaneous response which must be obliterated by the power
of ethics in general (and, for him in particular, Jewish religious law(23) ). A "natural" response lacks
discipline; without the capacity to heed the call of the other, unable to sublate the self's egoism. Worship
of nature would ultimately result in an "everything-is-permitted" mentality, a close relative of Nazism itself.
For Levinas, to think of people as "natural" beings is to assimilate them to a totality, a category or species
which makes no room for the kind of individuality required by ethics.(24) He refers to the "elemental" or
the "there is" as unmanaged, unaltered, "natural" conditions or forces that are essentially alien to the
categories and conditions of moral life.(25) One can only lament that Levinas has read nature -- as to some

It is
precisely our sense of belonging to nature as system , as interaction, as
extent (despite his intentions) he has read selfhood -- through the lens of masculine culture.

interdependence , which can provide the basis for an ethics

appropriate to the trauma of ecocide . As cultural feminism sought to expand our
sense of personal identity to a sense of inter-identification with the human other, so this ecological
ethics would expand our personal and species sense of identity into
an inter-identification with the natural world. Such a realization can
lead us to an ethics appropriate to our time, a dimension of which has come to

be known as "deep ecology."(26) For this ethics, we do not begin from the uniqueness of our human
selfhood, existing against a taken-for-granted background of earth and sky. Nor is our body somehow
irrelevant to ethical relations, with knowledge of it reduced always to tactics of domination. Our knowledge
does not assimilate the other to the same, but reveals and furthers the continuing dance of
interdependence. And our ethical motivation is neither rationalist system nor individualistic self-interest,
but a sense of connection to all of life. The deep ecology sense of self-realization goes beyond the modern
Western sense of "self" as an isolated ego striving for hedonistic gratification. . . . . Self, in this sense, is
experienced as integrated with the whole of nature.(27) Having gained distance and sophistication of
perception [from the development of science and political freedoms] we can turn and recognize who we
have been all along. . . . we are our world knowing itself. We can relinquish our separateness. We can come
home again -- and participate in our world in a richer, more responsible and poignantly beautiful way.(28)

Ecological ways of knowing nature are necessarily participatory. [This] knowledge is ecological and plural,
reflecting both the diversity of natural ecosystems and the diversity in cultures that nature-based living
gives rise to. The recovery of the feminine principle is based on inclusiveness. It is a recovery in nature,
woman and man of creative forms of being and perceiving. In nature it implies seeing nature as a live
organism. In woman it implies seeing women as productive and active. Finally, in men the recovery of the
feminine principle implies a relocation of action and activity to create life-enhancing, not life-reducing and
life-threatening societies.(29) In this context, the knowing ego is not set against a world it seeks to control,
but one of which it is a part. To continue the feminist perspective, the mother knows or seeks to know the
child's needs. Does it make sense to think of her answering the call of the child in abstraction from such
knowledge? Is such knowledge necessarily domination? Or is it essential to a project of care, respect and
love, precisely because the knower has an intimate, emotional connection with the known?(30) Our
ecological vision locates us in such close relation with our natural home that knowledge of it is knowledge

this is not, contrary to Levinas's fear, reducing the other to the

same, but a celebration of a larger, more inclusive, and still complex
and articulated self.(31) The noble and terrible burden of Levinas's individuated responsibility
of ourselves. And

for sheer existence gives way to a different dream, a different prayer: Being rock, being gas, being mist,
being Mind, Being the mesons traveling among the galaxies with the speed of light, You have come here,
my beloved one. . . . You have manifested yourself as trees, as grass, as butterflies, as single-celled beings,
and as chrysanthemums; but the eyes with which you looked at me this morning tell me you have never
died.(32) In this prayer, we are, quite simply, all in it together. And, although

this new

ecological Holocaust -- this creation of planet Auschwitz is under

way, it is not yet final. We have time to step back from the brink, to
repair our world. But only if we see that world not as an other across an irreducible
gap of loneliness and unchosen obligation, but as a part of ourselves as we are
part of it, to be redeemed not out of duty, but out of love; neither for
our selves nor for the other, but for us all.
Vote Neg to recognize humanitys solidarity with nature this can
repair our relationship with both nature and our own being
Best and Nocella 6 (Associate professor of philosophy at the University of Texas at El
Paso, Igniting a Revolution: Voices in Defense of the Earth, p. 82-84)
Yet, for both Heidegger and revolutionary environmentalists, there exist
possibilities for transformation despite the destructiveness of Enframing. In
the midst of technological peril indeed, precisely because the peril
strikes at and thus awakens us to the bond between human and
nonhuman life there emerges a sense of solidarity of human with
nonhuman beings. Looking at the well-heeled, bureaucratic discourse of human resource management and
personnel resources, the challenging forth of human beings into standing reserve is fairly evident. Factory-farmed cows, pigs, and
chickens obviously have it far worse than people, but in both cases the purpose is to harness resources for maximum efficiency and
profit. Ultimately human and nonhuman beings are similarly enframed

within one giant gasoline station. It is precisely the experience of this solidarity which must be
constantly rearticulated in arts, poetry, ceremony, music, and especially in socioeconomic and political action in order to provide a
historically and ontologically authentic break with the metaphysics of technical control and capitalist exploitation. Action will

only be truly revolutionary if it revolves around engagement in solidarity with

nature, where liberation is always seen both as human liberation from
the confines of Enframing and simultaneously as liberation of animal
nations and eco-regions from human technics. Anything less will always lapse
back into the false and oppressive hierarchy of man over nature and
man over animals with attendant effects of technological, disciplinary control over humans, nonhumans, and the Earth. Using a
familiar title from the anarchist Crimethinc collective, revolutionary environmentalism is truly an instance of fighting for our lives
where the pronoun refers to all life not just human life. Heidegger describes the possibility of

transformation through a return of Being as a re-figured humanism. It is the possibility of

suspending the will and attaining a lucid sense of the free play of Being within which all of life emerges and is sustained. A human
being, like any entity, is s/he stands forth as present. But his distinctive feature lies in [the fact] that he, as the being who thinks, is
open to Being.Man is essentially this relationship of responding to Being. Such experience is the clearing of a space (symbolically
represented, for example, in the building of an arbor for a ceremony or in the awesome silence created by the space within a cathedral

or a grove of old-growth Redwoods), and the patient readiness for Being to be brought to language. Given the appropriate bearing and
evocation through language, human beings can become aware of dwelling, along

with all other existent beings, within Being the open realm within which entities are released into
presence (Gelassenhait or releasement). What comes to the fore in suspension of willed manipulation is
an embrace of other beings and the enduring process of evolution within which all beings emerge and
reflecting on or experiencing oneself within the dimension of freedom that is the domain through which all
beings pass, human beings can repair the willed manipulation inherent in
calculative thinking and realize a patient equanimity toward Life . It is only in the
develop. By

context of this reawakened sense of the unity of life that revolutionary action gains an authentic basis. It is the engagement with the
Other that shows the ELF actions are truly about defense of plant and animal life, and they demonstrate genuine liberation concerns
that typically are trapped within Enframing. That is to say, ELF (and similar) actions, show themselves as part of a dynamic and
necessary historical evolution and transformation process, not merely a gesture of opposition and negation, because of their profound
solidarity with animals and the Earth. Such guidance solidarity thus serves as a general

basis for a post-Enframing, post-capitalist order, an ecological, not a capitalist

society. What will change is, first, the preeminence of Enframing as that which animates the epoch and, correspondingly, our
relationship to technology. No longer will technical solutions be sought after in
realms of activity where technique is not applicable . No longer will everyday
activities be pervaded by the standardization and frenzied pace of technology. No longer will nature be looked
upon as a homogenous field of resources to be extracted and exploited. No
longer will resource-intensive and polluting technologies be utilized simply
because they serve the blind interests of corporations over the needs of the Earth.
No longer will human beings take from the Earth without thought of
the far-reaching consequences of such actions on all present and
future forms of life. Critics would wrongly denounce this position as atavistic, primitivist, or antiscience/technology. But as the turning toward the re-emergence of Being unfolds, both through revolutionary action rooted in
solidarity with nature and through new, non-exploitative modes of acting in the world, technics will not disappear; instead, the limits
of technology as a mode of revealing will begin to be discerned so that new forms and uses of technology can emerge.

Questions about technology will center on whether a given

technology can be developed and used so that plant and animal life can
appear as it is and not be reduced to standing reserve . The question,
for Heidegger, is not whether technology, in the sense of a set of tools, is done away with,
but whether Enframing is surmounted. It is in this sense of releasement Heidegger writes,
Mortals dwell in that they save the earth.Saving does not only snatch something from a danger. To save really means to set
something free intro its own presencing. I take this as the literal equivalent of the masked ALF activist reclaiming a puppy from a
research lab so that it can become a dog rather than a unit of research, or an ELF activist who stops the destruction of an aquifer or
forest so that it can remain an aquifer or forest rather than become a water or wood resource. It is just this new

ethos which must guide a revolutionary reconstruction of society on

grounds that preserve the openness to Being and the ability of each kind
of being to become what it is in its essence. For those who charge Heidegger with merely
recycling, and not transcending, Western anthropocentrism, it is important to note that there are possibilities
here for an emerging post-humanism a new orientation to nature
beyond egocentric forms of human agency and towards interrelation with other beings and
Being itself. Heideggers philosophy allows for multiple modes of engagement with others and nature as equals, all of them
rooted in a relationship of solidarity, respect, and concern. I call this kind of pluralistic, egalitarian, and ecological outlook ontological
anarchism. It begins with the rejection of illegitimate rule of metaphysical constructs that have served to justify unlimited
technological appropriation of the world. In place of Enframing with its subjectivist metaphysical underpinnings, ontological
anarchism proclaims a multiplicity of forms of experience in which a sense of revealing comes to the fore such as in art, music,
religion, and philosophy. One such experience, a pre-dominant theme of spiritual re-awakening in the ELF communiques, is found in
Native American philosophy and practice.

T- Incentives
A. Interpretation: Its is a possessive pronoun showing
ownership
Glossary of English Grammar Terms, 2005
(http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/possessive-pronoun.html)
Mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs are the possessive pronouns used to
substitute a noun and to show possession or ownership.
EG. This is your disk and that's mine. (Mine substitutes the word disk and
shows that it belongs to me.)

B. Violation the aff provides an incentive for the planit doesnt actually develop the plan
C. Voting issue
1. Limits incentives introduce multiple new mechanisms
its huge
Moran, 86 (Theodore, Investing in Development: New Roles for Private
Capital?, p. 28)
if incentivesare broadly defined to include tariffs and trade
controls along with tax holidays, subsidized loans, cash grants, and other fiscal
measures, they comprise more than forty separate kinds of measures .
Guisinger finds that

Moreover, the author emphasizes, the value of an incentive package is just one of several means that
governments use to lure foreign investors. Other methodsfor example, promotional activities
(advertising, representative offices) and subsidized government servicesalso influence investors location
decisions. The author points out that empirical research so far has been unable to distinguish the relative
importance of fundamental economic factors and of government policies in decisions concerning the
location of foreign investmentlet alone to determine the effectiveness of individual government
instruments.

2. Negative ground they kill core negative strategies like

privates counterplans and legal barrier solvency deficits
3. FX T the aff incentivizes private development. They dont
mandate it happens. They could spike links based on time and
politics is core negative ground
4. Extra T the aff is a permitting change, not a mandate for
action. Impossible to garner competition and even if we get a
link there is an aff side structural bias in the literature you
have to reject them
Prefer competing interpretations-reasonability is a slippery
slope and causes judge intervention

CP
Text: The 29 states, Washington D.C. and other territories
should collaborate to provide a long-term investment tax
credit for oceanic offshore wind energy and mandate
oceanic offshore wind is included as a substantial
component of all state Renewable Portfolio Standards
It solves
Levitan 13 - writes about energy, the environment, and health. His articles
have been published by Scientific American, Discover, IEEE Spectrum, Grist,
and others. In previous articles for Yale Environment 360, he has written
about vehicle-to-grid technology for electric cars and cities' efforts to recycle
food scraps and organic waste (Dave, Will Offshore Wind Finally Take Off on
U.S. East Coast?,
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/will_offshore_wind_finally_take_off_on_us_east_c
oast/2693/)//BB
The U.S. has no national renewable energy target, but 29 states and
Washington, D.C., have adopted their own. Northeastern states like
Massachusetts and Rhode Island have been aggressively pursuing
renewables, and there is now legislation in New Jersey and Maryland
specifically targeting offshore wind development. Kevin Jones, deputy director

of the Institute for Energy and the Environment at the Vermont Law School, says he is optimistic about the
development of offshore wind, especially in the Northeast, in part because there are so few other options
for renewables in the region and the opposition to onshore wind continues to grow. If natural gas prices

the offshore industry is going to need public policy

support rather than federal subsidy , but it can happen if the
remain low I think

Northeastern states work together to achieve economies of scale,

says Jones. That collaboration could include states collectively
mandating that utility companies purchase a set amount of electricity
from offshore wind farms.

DA
No support for Ocean reform
Migliaccio 14 JD @ Vermont Law School (Emily, NOTE: THE NATIONAL
OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE POLLUTION AND STREAMLINE OUR
OCEAN BUREAUCRACY?, 15 Vt. J. Envtl. L. 629)
The Obama Administration issued Executive Order 13,547, intending for
Congress to "show support for effective implementation of the NOP, including the
establishment of an ocean investment fund"--the hope being that Congress would
codify the Order in subsequent legislation. 130 At present, Congress is wrestling with
some bills relating to the NOP; however, not all proposals support the policy. For
example, the House has adopted an amendment to the Water Resources and

Development Act ("WRDA") 131 that would bar the Obama Administration from
implementing marine spatial planning under the WRDA, specifically "preventing the Army
Corps of Engineers and other entities that receive money from the bill from implementing such planning as
part of the National Ocean Policy." 132 Then again, also before Congress is a bill that seeks to establish a
National Endowment for the Oceans, which would fund programs and activities to "restore, protect, maintain,
or understand living marine resources and their habitats and ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources. . . ."
133 For this bill to pass, House and Senate members must agree to prioritize ocean conservation and
research, and allocate funds to [647] the initiative. Although the NOP [National Ocean Policy] is

is hard to find hope for successful ocean

reform in the current congressional atmosphere.
appearing on the Congressional docket, it

TPA will pass soon but every vote counts and will be
needed for passage
Needham 4-30, (Vicki, Reporter for the Hill). "Ryan
'reasonably Optimistic' on Trade Bill." TheHill. TheHill, 30
Apr. 2015. Web. 05 May 2015.
<http://thehill.com/policy/finance/240618-ryanreasonably-optimistic-on-trade-bill>.
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) expressed

optimism on Thursday that the House will pass a

bill that would expedite trade agreements through Congress amid speculation that GOP
opposition to it is growing. I feel reasonably optimistic, Ryan told reporters at a breakfast hosted by The
Christian Science Monitor in Washington. The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee wouldn't provide any estimates as to
how many Republicans might defect while pushing back against the notion that Republican dissent on the bill had climbed as high as 75
lawmakers. "I don't think it captures where we are, I dont think its an accurate reflection of where we are, he said in response to a figure
in a Politico article. He

said that, once Republicans see that trade promotion

authority, or fast-track, constricts the Obama administration from
making decisions without congressional input, those arguments
against the bill pretty much fade away. He said most of the concern is rooted in an outdated,
13-year-old version of fast-track combined with a reflexive reaction to giving the president any more perceived power. When
they understand it, they support it, he said of his party's
lawmakers. With the Senate expected to go first on its bill, the
House is likely to pass fast-track sometime next month, although Ryan argued
it will require Democratic help. Its going to require both parties to work together
to get it done, he said. He called on President Obama to deliver votes and
argued, I dont think Democrats want to see him fail on such a major
issue. Ryan called the updated version of fast-track a belt and suspenders approach to giving Congress the power it needs to steer
trade negotiations while ensuring accountability on the objectives by the Obama administration and giving U.S. trading partners the
assurances they need to put their best offers on the table. Estimates of Democratic support among House lawmakers are hovering around
15 to 20 lawmakers. Democrats are simultaneously ramping up their lobbying efforts of their own members. A majority of the New Democrat
Coalition is heading to the White House later Thursday for a meeting with the president to craft a strategy to attract more Democratic votes.
On other issues, Ryan said he is still working on a fix for the Highway Trust Fund with Ways and Means Committee ranking member Sandy
Levin (D-Mich.), Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the panels ranking member.
He said the leaders are looking for about $10 billion to extend the fund, which expires at the end of the month, for the remainder of the year,
mostly to deal with road construction. He said estimates are still being run on how to pay for that extension. The Wisconsin Republican also
said his eventual goal is to flatten individual tax rates into the mid-20 percent range. Ryan stuck to his previous statements in saying that he
wants to complete at least a phase one on tax reform sometime this summer and leave the fall open for any extender bills.

Ocean policy has empirically been polarized

Eilperin, The Washington Post, 12 [Juliet, October 28, 2012, The
Washington Post, National ocean policy sparks partisan fight,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/national-ocean-

policy-sparks-partisan-fight/2012/10/28/af73e464-17a7-11e2-a55c39408fbe6a4b_story.html, accessed 7/7/14, GNL]

Partisan battles are engulfing the nations ocean policy, showing
that polarization over environmental issues doesnt stop at the
waters edge. For years, ocean policy was the preserve of wonks. But President Obama
created the first national ocean policy, with a tiny White House staff,
and with that set off some fierce election-year fights. Conservative
Republicans warn that the administration is determined to expand
its regulatory reach and curb the extraction of valuable energy
resources, while many Democrats, and their environmentalist allies,
argue that the policy will keep the ocean healthy and reduce
conflicts over its use. The wrangling threatens to overshadow a fundamental issue the
countrys patchwork approach to managing offshore waters. Twenty-seven federal
agencies, representing interests as diverse as farmers and shippers,
have some role in governing the oceans. Obamas July 2010 executive order set up a
National Ocean Council, based at the White House, that is designed to reconcile the competing interests of
different agencies and ocean users. The policy is already having an impact. The council, for example, is
trying to broker a compromise among six federal agencies over the fate of defunct offshore oil rigs in the
Gulf of Mexico. Recreational fishermen want the rigs, which attract fish, to stay, but some operators of
commercial fishing trawlers consider them a hazard and want them removed. Still, activists invoking the
ocean policy to press for federal limits on traditional maritime interests are having little success. The
Center for Biological Diversity cited the policy as a reason to slow the speed of vessels traveling through
national marine sanctuaries off the California coast. Federal officials denied the petition. During a House
Natural Resources Committee hearing on ocean policy last year, the panels top Democrat, Rep. Edward J.
Markey (Mass.), said that opposing ocean planning is like opposing air traffic control: You can do it, but it
will cause a mess or lead to dire consequences. Rep. Steve Southerland II (R-Fla.), who is in a tight
reelection race, retorted that the policy was like air traffic control helping coordinate an air invasion on
our freedoms. An environmental group called Ocean Champions is spending hundreds of thousands of

The sharp rhetoric puzzles academics such as Boston

University biologist Les Kaufman. He contributed to a recent study
that showed that using ocean zoning to help design wind farms in
Massachusetts Bay could prevent more than $1 million in losses to
local fishery and whale-watching operators while allowing wind
producers to reap $10 billion in added profits by placing the turbines
in the best locations. Massachusetts adopted its own ocean policy, which was introduced by
dollars to unseat him.

Mitt Romney, the Republican governor at the time, and later embraced by his Democratic successor, Deval
L. Patrick. The whole concept of national ocean policy is to maximize the benefit and minimize the
damage. Whats not to love? Kaufman said, adding that federal officials make decisions about offshore

Nearly a decade ago,

two bipartisan commissions called upon the government to
coordinate its decisions regarding federal waters, which extend from
the roughly three-mile mark where state waters end to 200 miles
from shore. When Romney moved to establish ocean zoning in 2005 in Massachusetts, he warned
energy production, fisheries and shipping without proper coordination.

that without it there could be a Wild West shootout, where projects were permitted on a first come, first
served basis. In Washington, however, legislation to create an ocean zoning process failed. The policy set
by Obama in 2010 calls for five regions of the country the Mid-Atlantic, New England, the Caribbean, the
West Coast and the Pacific to set up regional bodies to offer input. White House Council for
Environmental Quality spokeswoman Taryn Tuss said the policy does not give the federal government new
authority or change congressional mandates. It simply streamlines implementation of the more than 100
laws and regulations that already affect our oceans. House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc
Hastings (R-Wash.) said he is not opposed to a national ocean policy in theory. But he said he is concerned
that the administrations broad definition of what affects the ocean including runoff from land could
open the door to regulating all inland activities, because all water going downhill goes into the ocean. ...
That potential could be there. The House voted in May to block the federal government from spending

Two
influential groups anglers and energy firms have joined
Republicans in questioning the administrations approach. In March, ESPN
money on implementing the policy, though the amendment has not passed the Senate.

Outdoors published a piece arguing that the policy could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing some of the

The article, which

convinced many recreational fishermen that their fishing rights were
in jeopardy, should have been labeled an opinion piece, the editor
said later. Fishermen saw this as just another area where fishing
was going to be racheted down, said Michael Leonard, director of
ocean resource policy for the American Sportfishing Association,
whose 700 members include the nations major boat manufacturers,
as well as fish and tackle retailers. Leonard added that the White House has solicited
nations oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

some input from anglers since launching the policy and that they will judge the policy once its final

The National Ocean Policy Coalition

a group based in Houston that includes oil and gas firms as well as
mining, farming and chemical interests has galvanized industry
opposition to the policy. Its vice president works as an energy lobbyist at the law firm Arent
implementation plan is released, after the election.

Fox; its president and executive director work for the firm HBW Resources, which lobbies for energy and
shipping interests. Brent Greenfield, the groups executive director, said that the public has not had
enough input into the development of the policy and that his group worries about the potential economic
impacts of the policy on commercial or recreational activity. Sarah Cooksey, who is Delawares coastalprograms administrator and is slated to co-chair the Mid-Atlantics regional planning body, said the policy
will streamline application of laws already on the books. No government wants another layer of
bureaucracy, she said. In Southerlands reelection race, Ocean Champions has labeled the congressman
Ocean Enemy #1 and sponsored TV ads against him. Jim Clements, a commercial fisherman in the
Florida Panhandle district, has mounted billboards against Southerland on the grounds his stance hurts

Ocean Champions
President David Wilmot said that while most ocean policy fights are
regional, this is the first issue Ive seen thats become partisan. I
do not think it will be the last.
local businesses. Southerland declined to comment for this article.

PC is key to TPA and trade dealsthat solves structural impediments

that otherwise tank the economy (get a more recent card bruh) (This
card is so good. Look at the initials at the end of it) (get a more
recent card. And someone take me to the RR) (This card is awesome,
and Joseph will take you to the RR if you admit how great this card
is)
Wall Street Journal 12-28 (Charles Boustany and Robert B. Zoellick,
Mr. Boustany (R., La.) is a senior member of the House Ways and Means
Committee, where he serves on the Subcommittee on Trade. Mr. Zoellick
served as U.S. trade representative, deputy secretary of state, and president
of the World Bank., 12-28-2014, "A Trade Opportunity for Obama and the New
Congress", WSJ, http://www.wsj.com/articles/charles-boustany-and-robert-bzoellick-a-trade-opportunity-for-obama-and-the-new-congress-1419811308,
Accessed: 12-29-2014) JO
Prof. Richard Neustadt explained to President John F. Kennedy that the presidency relied on the
power to persuade. Its time for Mr. Obama to persuade on trade.
He must make use of the convening power of the executive to
bolster his advocacy. His administration must work closely with
Congress to listen, explain, address problems and cut deals . So why
Americans are feeling squeezed. On the eve of the election, Pew
Research reported that 79% of Americans considered the economy to be poor or at best fair. A boost in U.S.
trade can increase wages and lower living expenses for families
does trade matter? First,

offering higher earnings and cutting taxes on trade. Manufacturing workers who produce exports earn, on average, about

18% more, according to the Commerce Department. Their pay raise can be traced to the higher productivity of
competitive exporting businesses. Since World War II, U.S. trade policy has focused on lowering barriers to manufacturing
and agricultural products. But U.S. trade negotiators also use free-trade agreements (FTAs) to pry open service sectors

such business services as software, finance,

architecture and engineering employed 25% of American workers,
more than twice as many as worked in manufacturing. Business service
and expand e-commerce. In recent years,

employees earned over 20% more than the average manufacturing job, and the U.S. consistently runs a trade surplus in
business services. Over the past five years, the World Bank reports, about 75% of the worlds growth has been in
emerging markets, which generally have higher barriers to trade. As Americas highly productive farmers and ranchers
have seen, growing world markets are the drivers of higher sales. With the boom in U.S. energy innovation and
production, fuel exports could spur more investment and jobs in that sector, too. American families, and businesses,
benefit from higher incomes and lower-priced imports. The World Trade Organization reports that the North American Free
Trade Agreement and the Uruguay Round, the last big global trade agreement, have increased the purchasing power of an
average American family of four by $1,300 to $2,000 every year. The Peterson Institute for International Economics
estimates that the new trade deals in the works could offer that family another $3,000 or more a year. Second,

the

U.S. and world economies desperately need a shift from

extraordinary governmental spending and zero-interest-rate
monetary policies to growth led by the private sector. Sustained
growth can only be generated by private investment, innovation and
purchases. American companies need greater confidence in freeenterprise policies before investing their big cash reserves. Trade
policy offers an international partnership to overcome structural
impediments to growth .

The negotiations for the TPP, for example, aim to create an open trade and

investment network among the U.S., six current FTA partners, and five new ones. The biggest additional market is Japan, a
pivotal Pacific ally. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wants to use the TPP to press his own economy toward more
competition, without which his goal of reviving Japan will falter. Vietnam and Malaysia would also take part; they believe
they can use the rules and disciplines of the TPP to boost growth, improve industries and services, expand global linkages,
and avoid the so-called middle income trap, where countries lack of productivity growth slows the rise to higher
incomes.

Nuclear war

Harris, member of the NICs Long Range Analysis Unit, and Burrows, counselor in
the NIC, 09
[Mathew J. Burrows is a counselor in the National Intelligence Council (NIC),
the principal drafter of Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World, Jennifer
Harris is a member of the NICs Long Range Analysis Unit, Revisiting the
Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis, The Washington Quarterly,
April, http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf,
accessed: 7/13/13]
Increased Potential for Global Conflict Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is likely to be
the result of a number of intersecting and interlocking forces. With so many possible permutations of outcomes, each with ample opportunity
for unintended consequences, there is a growing sense of insecurity. Even so, history may be more instructive than ever. While we continue to

the Great Depression is not likely to be repeated, the lessons to be drawn

from that period include the harmful effects on fledgling
democracies and multiethnic societies (think Central Europe in
1920s and 1930s) and on the sustainability of multilateral
institutions (think League of Nations in the same period). There is no reason to
think that this would not be true in the twenty-first as much as in the twentieth century. For that reason, the ways in which the
potential for greater conflict could grow would seem to be even more apt in a
constantly volatile economic environment as they would be if change would be steadier. In
believe that

surveying those risks, the report stressed the likelihood that terrorism and nonproliferation will remain priorities even as resource issues move

Terrorisms appeal will decline if economic growth

continues in the Middle East and youth unemployment is reduced . For
up on the international agenda.

diffusion of technologies and

scientific knowledge will place some of the worlds most dangerous
capabilities within their reach. Terrorist groups in 2025 will likely be a combination of descendants of long
those terrorist groups that remain active in 2025, however, the

established groups inheriting organizational structures, command and control processes, and training procedures necessary to conduct

newly emergent collections of the angry and

disenfranchised that become self-radicalized, particularly in the
absence of economic outlets that would become narrower in an
economic downturn. The most dangerous casualty of any
economically-induced drawdown of U.S. military presence would
almost certainly be the Middle East. Although Irans acquisition of nuclear weapons is not inevitable,
worries about a nuclear-armed Iran could lead states in the region to
develop new security arrangements with external powers, acquire
additional weapons, and consider pursuing their own nuclear
sophisticated attack and

ambitions . It is not clear that the type of stable deterrent

relationship that existed between the great powers for most of the Cold War would emerge naturally in the Middle
East with a nuclear Iran. Episodes of low intensity conflict and terrorism taking
place under a nuclear umbrella could lead to an unintended
escalation

and broader conflict if clear red lines between those states involved are not well established. The close proximity of

potential nuclear rivals combined with underdeveloped surveillance capabilities and mobile dual-capable Iranian missile systems also will

. The lack of
strategic depth in neighboring states like Israel, short warning and
produce inherent difficulties in achieving reliable indications and warning of an impending nuclear attack

missile flight times, and uncertainty of Iranian intentions may place

more focus on preemption rather than defense, potentially leading
to escalating crises. Types of conflict that the world continues to
experience, such as over resources, could reemerge, particularly if
protectionism grows and there is a resort to neo-mercantilist
practices. Perceptions of renewed energy scarcity will drive
countries to take actions to assure their future access to energy
supplies. In the worst case, this could result in interstate conflicts if
government leaders deem assured access to energy resources, for
example, to be essential for maintaining domestic stability and the
survival of their regime. Even actions short of war, however, will
have important geopolitical implications. Maritime security concerns
are providing a rationale for naval buildups and modernization
efforts, such as Chinas and Indias development of blue water naval capabilities. If the fiscal stimulus
focus for these countries indeed turns inward, one of the most obvious funding targets may be military. Buildup of regional
naval capabilities could lead to increased tensions, rivalries, and
counterbalancing moves, but it also will create opportunities for multinational cooperation in protecting critical sea
lanes. With water also becoming scarcer in Asia and the Middle East,
cooperation to manage changing water resources is likely to be
increasingly difficult both within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world. What
Kind of World will 2025 Be? Perhaps more than lessons, history loves patterns. Despite widespread changes in the world today, there is little to

the trend
toward greater diffusion of authority and power that has been
ongoing for a couple of decades is likely to accelerate because of the
emergence of new global players, the worsening institutional deficit,
potential growth in regional blocs, and enhanced strength of non-state actors and networks. The
suggest that the future will not resemble the past in several respects. The report asserts that, under most scenarios,

multiplicity of actors on the international scene could either strengthen the international system, by filling gaps left by aging post-World War II
institutions, or could further fragment it and incapacitate international cooperation. The diversity in both type and kind of actor raises the
likelihood of fragmentation occurring over the next two decades, particularly given the wide array of transnational challenges facing the

international community. Because of their growing geopolitical and economic clout, the rising powers will enjoy a high degree of freedom to
customize their political and economic policies rather than fully adopting Western norms. They are also likely to cherish their policy freedom to
maneuver, allowing others to carry the primary burden for dealing with terrorism, climate change, proliferation, energy security, and other
system maintenance issues. Existing multilateral institutions, designed for a different geopolitical order, appear too rigid and cumbersome to
undertake new missions, accommodate changing memberships, and augment their resources. Nongovernmental organizations and
philanthropic foundations, concentrating on specific issues, increasingly will populate the landscape but are unlikely to affect change in the
absence of concerted efforts by multilateral institutions or governments. Efforts at greater inclusiveness, to reflect the emergence of the
newer powers, may make it harder for international organizations to tackle transnational challenges. Respect for the dissenting views of

An
ongoing financial crisis and prolonged recession would tilt the scales
even further in the direction of a fragmented and dysfunctional
international system with a heightened risk of conflict. The report
concluded that the rising BRIC powers (Brazil, Russia, India, and
China) seem averse to challenging the international system, as
Germany and Japan did in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,
but this of course could change if their widespread hopes for greater
prosperity become frustrated and the current benefits they derive
from a globalizing world turn negative.
member nations will continue to shape the agenda of organizations and limit the kinds of solutions that can be attempted.

Warming
No impact
IBD, 14 (5/13/2014, Investors Business Daily, Obama Climate Report: Apocalypse Not, Factiva,
JMP)

Not since Jimmy Carter falsely spooked Americans about

overpopulation, the world running out of food, water and
energy, and worsening pollution, has a president been so filled
with doom and gloom as this one. Last week's White House
report on climate change was a primal scream to alarm
Americans into action to save the earth from a literal meltdown.
Maybe we should call President Obama the Fearmonger in Chief. While
Climate:

scientists can argue until the cows come home about what will happen in the future with the
planet's climate, we do have scientific records on what's already happened. Obama moans that the
devastation from climate change is already here as more severe weather events threaten to imperil

according to the government's own records which

presumably the White House can get severe weather events are no more
our very survival. But,

likely now than they were 50 or 100 years ago and the losses of
lives and property are much less devastating. Here is what government
data reports and top scientists tell us about extreme climate conditions: Hurricanes: The
century-long trend in Hurricanes is slightly down, not up. According
to the National Hurricane Center, in 2013, "There were no major hurricanes in the North Atlantic
Basin for the first time since 1994. And the number of hurricanes this year was the lowest since
1982." According to Dr. Ryan Maue at Weather Bell Analytics, "We are currently in the longest
period since the Civil War Era without a major hurricane strike in the U.S. (i.e., category 3, 4 or 5)"

The N ational O ceanic and A tmospheric A dministration

says there has been no change in severe tornado activity . "There has
Tornadoes: Don't worry, Kansas.

been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years." Extreme heat
and cold temperatures: NOAA's U.S. Climate Extremes Index of unusually hot or cold temperatures
finds that over the last 10 years, five years have been below the historical mean and five above the
mean. Severe drought/extreme moisture: While higher than average portions of the country were
subjected to extreme drought/moisture in the last few years, the 1930's, 40's and 50's were more
extreme in this regard. In fact, over the last 10 years, four years have been below the average and
six above the average. Cyclones: Maue reports: "the global frequency of tropical cyclones has

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., past chairman of the

American Meteorological Society Committee on Weather
Forecasting and Analysis, reports, "floods have not increased in the U.S. in
reached a historical low." Floods:

frequency or intensity since at least 1950. Flood losses as a percentage of U.S. GDP have dropped

Even NOAA admits a "lack of

significant warming at the Earth's surface in the past decade"
and a pause "in global warming observed since 2000." Specifically,
by about 75% since 1940." Warming:

NOAA last year stated, "since the turn of the century, however, the change in Earth's global mean

"There is no evidence
that disasters are getting worse because of climate change. ...
It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters
associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have
increased on climate time scales either in the U.S. or globally."
surface temperature has been close to zero." Pielke sums up:

One big change between today and 100 years ago is that humans are much more capable of
dealing with hurricanes and earthquakes and other acts of God. Homes and buildings are better
built to withstand severe storms and alert systems are much more accurate to warn people of the
coming storms. As a result, globally, weather-related losses have actually decreased by about 25%
as a proportion of GDP since 1990. The liberal hubris is that government can do anything to change
the earth's climate or prevent the next big hurricane, earthquake or monsoon. These are the people
in Washington who can't run a website, can't deliver the mail and can't balance a budget. But they

The President's doomsday claims

last week served mostly to undermine the alarmists' case for
radical action on climate change. Truth always seems to be the
first casualty in this debate. This is the tactic of tyrants. Americans
are going to prevent droughts and forest fires.

are wise to be wary about giving up our basic freedoms and lowering our standard of living to
combat an exaggerated crisis.

Wind increases emissions and is unreliable

Lea, 12 --- director and economic adviser at the Arbuthnot Banking Group
(January 2012, Ruth, Electricity Costs: The folly of wind power,
http://www.civitas.org.uk/economy/electricitycosts2012.pdf,)

Wind-power is not effective in cutting CO 2 emissions At first glance it could be assumed

that wind-power could play a major part in cutting CO 2 emissions. Once the turbines are
manufactured (an energy-intensive business in itself) and installed then emissions
associated with the electricity could be expected to be zero - as indeed for nuclear
power. But, as pointed out in chapter 2, wind-power is unreliable and intermittent
and requires conventional back-up plant to provide electricity when the wind is
either blowing at very low speeds (or not at all) or with uncontrolled variability
(intermittency). Clearly the CO 2 emissions associated with using back-up
capacity must be regarded as an intrinsic aspect of deploying wind turbines.
This is all the more relevant given the relatively high CO2 emissions from
conventional plants when they are used in a back-up capacity. As energy
consultant David White has written:5 ... (fossil -fuelled) capacity is placed under
particular strains when working in this supporting role because it is being used to
balance a reasonably predictable but fluctuating demand with a variable and largely
unpredictable output from wind turbines. Consequently, operating fossil capacity
in this mode generates more CO2 per kWh generated than if operating
normally. ... it seems reasonable to ask why wind-power is the beneficiary of such
extensive support if it not only fails to achieve the CO2 reductions required, but also
causes cost increases in back-up, maintenance and transmission, while at the same time
discouraging investment in clean, firm generation. 6 In a comprehensive quantitative
analysis of CO2 emissions and wind-power, Dutch physicist C. le Pair has

recently shown that deploying wind turbines on normal windy days in

the Netherlands actually increased fuel (gas) consumption, rather than
saving it, when compared to electricity generation with modern highefficiency gas turbines. 7,8 Ironically and paradoxically the use of wind
farms therefore actually increased CO2 emissions, compared with using
efficient gas-fired combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) at full power. Conclusions Britain
has committed itself to draconian cuts in CO2 emissions. On the basis of the costings

discussed in chapter 2, nuclear power and gas-fired CCGT were the preferred
technologies for generating reliable and affordable electricity. On the basis of the
evidence presented above, these two technologies are also the preferred technologies
for reducing CO2 emissions. Wind-power fails the test on both counts. It is expensive and
yet it is not effective in cutting CO2 emissions. If it were not for the renewables targets
set by the Renewables Directive, wind-power would not even be entertained as a costeffective way of generating electricity or cutting emissions. The renewables targets
should be renegotiated with the EU.

Squo solves VOLCANOS

---their evidence overestimates because it ignores external cooling factors

Santer 14 PhD in Climatology, climate researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and
former researcher at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit
(Benjamin, Volcanic contribution to decadal changes in tropospheric temperature, Nature Geoscience,
doi:10.1038/ngeo2098)//BB

Despite continued growth in atmospheric levels of greenhouse

gases, global mean surface and tropospheric temperatures have
shown slower warming since 1998 than previously1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Possible explanations
for the slow-down include internal climate variability3, 4, 6, 7, external cooling
influences 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and observational errors12, 13. Several recent modelling
studies have examined the contribution of early twenty-first-century volcanic
eruptions1, 2, 4, 8 to the muted surface warming. Here we present a detailed analysis of
the impact of recent volcanic forcing on tropospheric temperature, based on observations as well as

We identify statistically significant correlations

between observations of stratospheric aerosol optical depth and satellite-based
estimates of both tropospheric temperature and short-wave fluxes at the top of the
atmosphere. We show that climate model simulations without the effects of early
twenty-first-century volcanic eruptions overestimate the tropospheric
climate model simulations.

warming

observed since 1998. In two simulations with more realistic volcanic influences following the

1991 Pinatubo eruption, differences between simulated and observed tropospheric temperature trends
over the period 1998 to 2012 are up to 15% smaller, with large uncertainties in the magnitude of the
effect. To reduce these uncertainties, better observations of eruption-specific properties of volcanic
aerosols are needed, as well as improved representation of these eruption-specific properties in climate
model simulations.

They cant solvelimited capacity

Giordano 10 JD, served four years of active duty in the United States Navy as a Surface Warfare
Officer where he gained unique training, experiences, and insights for working with people and solving
complex problems
(Michael, ALLEN CHAIR ISSUE 2010: ENVISIONING ENERGY: ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMICS, AND THE ENERGY
FUTURE: COMMENT: OFFSHORE WINDFALL: WHAT APPROVAL OF THE UNITED STATES' FIRST OFFSHORE
WIND PROJECT MEANS FOR THE OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY INDUSTRY, 44 U. Rich. L. Rev. 1149)//BB

One of the things keeping the offshore wind energy industry from
growing is a lack of sufficient technology. Expanded growth of the offshore wind industry
will depend on research, development, and innovation. 46 Areas of technological need
include improved reliability, greater environmental compatibility,
and cost reduction. 47 Technological advances must address these
areas of need with regard not just to the design of turbines but also
to the installation process and maintenance.
At present, offshore wind turbines are basically larger versions of onshore wind turbines that have been
adapted to the marine environment. 48 The current foundation system for offshore wind [1156] turbines
consists of large steel tubes called monopiles, which are typically embedded twenty-five to thirty meters
below the mud line. 49 Monopile designs are considered appropriate for waters up to thirty meters deep.

50 Offshore wind farms use large turbines "ranging from the Vestas V-80 2 MW turbine to GE Wind's 3.6
MW turbine to Repower's 126 m diameter, 5 MW turbine." 51

Present foundation technology limits the offshore wind energy

industry's ability to harness the full potential of offshore wind
energy. The strongest and most consistent winds blow above waters
deeper than thirty meters. 52 A marginal "10% increase in wind speed creates a 33%
increase in available energy." 53 Thus, meaningful growth of offshore wind
energy is dependent upon the research and development of new
technologies that enable developers to place turbines in deep water .
Some anticipate the creation of "stiffer, multi-pile configurations with broader bases suitable for water

many expect that foundations will

transition even further, toward floating turbine structures that would be
depths up to 60 m or greater." 54 From there,

fastened and secured to the ocean floor by wires. 55 Such a transition would have to make use of existing
technologies from the oil and natural gas industries, which already use floating platforms. 56 Unlike oil and
gas projects on the OCS, wind projects require fast, modular installations that can be replicated easily due

Researchers believe that "the

biggest challenge [1157] for deepwater wind turbines will be to
merge the mature but expensive technologies borne of the oil and gas
industry with the experience of low-cost economic drivers fueling the shallow water offshore
wind energy industry." 58
to the anticipated frequency of maintenance. 57

Wind doesnt solve global warming

Burnett 4 - Ph.D. is a Senior Fellow for the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA)
(Sterling, Wind power: Not green, but red, http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/wind-power-not-greenbut-red/article_dd3a5dc3-058a-5f5b-9bac-84c34897151e.html?mode=jqm)//BB

Wind powers environmental benefits are usually overstated, while

its significant environmental harms are often ignored. Promised air
pollution improvements have failed to materialize. Wind farms
generate power only when the wind is blowing within a certain range
of speed. When there is too little wind, wind towers dont generate power; but when the wind is too
strong, they must be shut down for fear of being blown down. Even when they function properly, wind
farms average output is less than 30 percent of their theoretical
capacity compared to 85 to 95 percent for combined-cycle gas fired
plants. Because of intermittency problems, wind farms need
conventional power plants to supplement the power they do supply .
Bringing a conventional power plant on line to supply power is not as simple as turning on a switch;
therefore most redundant fossil fuel power stations must run, even if at reduced levels, continuously.
Accordingly, very little fossil-fired electricity will be displaced and few emissions will be avoided because
fossil-fueled units (operating at less than their peak capacity and efficiency or operating in spinning
reserve mode which means they are emitting more pollution per energy produced than if operating at
peak efficiency, imagine a car idling near train tracks in case the power goes out) must be kept
immediately available to supply electricity when the output from wind turbines drop because wind speed
slows or falls below minimums required to power the turbines. Kilowatt-hours produced by wind turbines
cannot be assumed displace the emissions associated with an equal number of kWh from fossil-fueled

Combined with the pollutants emitted and CO2 released

in the manufacture and maintenance of wind towers and their
associated infrastructure, substituting wind power for fossil fuels
does not improve air quality very much.
generating units.

The economy is empirically resilient to shocksits survived much

worse
Morningstar 13 1/19/13(Morningstar provides data on more than
385,000 investment offerings, including stocks, mutual funds, and similar
vehicles, along with real-time global market data on more than 8 million equities,

indexes, futures, options, commodities, and precious metals, in addition to foreign exchange
and Treasury markets. Morningstar also offers investment management services through its
registered investment advisor subsidiaries and has more than $186 billion in assets under
advisement and management as of June 30, 2012. The company has operations in 27
countries. U.S. Economy Not So Fragile After All,
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=581616)
No, the U.S. Economy Has Not Been Fragile After All. Although most economists got at

least some things right about the U.S. economy over the past two
years, the one nearly universal error was the expectation that the
economy was fragile. The U.S. economy has proven to be anything
but fragile. I believe this to be the single biggest error that
economists have made over the last two years. During that time, the
U.S. has survived the fallout from a major debt crisis in Europe, a
divisive election, temporarily going over the fiscal cliff, gasoline
prices that have been on a yo-yo, a tsunami in Japan, and Hurricane
Sandy, which shut down New York and even the stock exchanges for
a couple of days. These are not signs of a fragile economy.

Not key to global econ

Decoupling solves the impact
Keane 4/13/14 (Tom Keane, Globe Columnist, citing IMF data, World
economy no longer hangs on the US,
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/04/12/world-economy-longerhangs/GRC0rfo0QP2YT5q4qpFw8L/story.html, Keerthi, Acc 4/21/14)
The US economy is big, but relatively speaking, not as big as it once was.
Thirty years ago, America accounted for one-quarter of world
output. Today its down to one-fifth. Thats a meaningful change. Back then we were rich, and everyone
else was much less so. Now those countries especially China have gotten better off.
(In fact, China, with a 15 percent share of global output, is now the second biggest economy in the world.) Some might see this as a sign of

its a tale of success, a story

of nations and people coming out of poverty, being able to live better, longer, and more productive lives. And
much of that can be credited to US efforts to encourage free trade
and local economic development through institutions such as the
World Bank, the IMF, and the World Trade Organization. Still, that success has
failure, of other nations getting the best of America, of the United States in decline. In truth,

downsides. As other nations get richer and the world gets more interconnected, the United States no longer goes it alone. Indeed, thats

host of
Ukraine , global

already happening and sometimes in a negative way. The IMFs otherwise sunny outlook, for instance, worries about a

issues that could upend growth, including Russias incursion into

climate change , North Korea n war-mongering, and political troubles in Turkey and the
Middle East . For the United States, once seemingly in control of its own and the worlds destiny, thats a novel proposition.
The future is no longer solely in our hands.

No impact (Miller)
Econ decline does not breed war 93 data points prove

Miller, 2k (Morris, economist, adjunct professor in the University of Ottawas Faculty of

Administration, consultant on international development issues, former Executive Director and Senior
Economist at the World Bank, Winter, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, Vol. 25, Iss. 4, Poverty as a cause
of wars? p. Proquest)

The question may be reformulated. Do wars spring from a popular reaction to a sudden
economic crisis that exacerbates poverty and growing disparities in wealth and incomes?
Perhaps one could argue, as some scholars do, that it is some dramatic event or sequence of
such events leading to the exacerbation of poverty that, in turn, leads to this deplorable
denouement. This exogenous factor might act as a catalyst for a violent reaction on the part of
the people or on the part of the political leadership who would then possibly be tempted to
seek a diversion by finding or, if need be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the process
leading to war. According to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, there would not appear to be any merit in this
hypothesis. After studying ninety-three episodes of economic crisis in
twenty-two countries in Latin America and Asia in the years since the
Second World War they concluded that:19 Much of the conventional
wisdom about the political impact of economic crises may be wrong ...
The severity of economic crisis - as measured in terms of inflation and negative
growth - bore no relationship to the collapse of regimes ... (or, in democratic
states, rarely) to an outbreak of violence.

No Impact (Drezner)
No econ impactMost recent evidence flows neg
Daniel Drezner 14, IR prof at Tufts, The System Worked: Global Economic
Governance during the Great Recession, World Politics, Volume 66. Number 1,
January 2014, pp. 123-164
The final significant outcome addresses a dog that hasn't barked: the effect
of the Great Recession on cross-border conflict and violence. During the
initial stages of the crisis, multiple analysts asserted that the
financial crisis would lead states to increase their use of force as a
tool for staying in power.42 They voiced genuine concern that the global
economic downturn would lead to an increase in conflictwhether through
greater internal repression, diversionary wars, arms races, or a
ratcheting up of great power conflict. Violence in the Middle East, border
disputes in the South China Sea, and even the disruptions of the Occupy
movement fueled impressions of a surge in global public disorder. The
aggregate data suggest otherwise , however. The Institute for
Economics and Peace has concluded that "the average level of
peacefulness in 2012 is approximately the same as it was in 2007."43
Interstate violence in particular has declined since the start of the
financial crisis, as have military expenditures in most sampled
countries. Other studies confirm that the Great Recession has not
triggered any increase in violent conflict, as Lotta Themner and Peter
Wallensteen conclude: "[T]he pattern is one of relative stability when we
consider the trend for the past five years."44 The secular decline in
violence that started with the end of the Cold War has not been
reversed. Rogers Brubaker observes that "the crisis has not to date
generated the surge in protectionist nationalism or ethnic exclusion
that might have been expected."43

So

lvency
Offshore wind fails:
Limited foundation technology
Giordano 10 JD, served four years of active duty in the United States Navy as a
Surface Warfare Officer where he gained unique training, experiences, and insights for
working with people and solving complex problems
(Michael, ALLEN CHAIR ISSUE 2010: ENVISIONING ENERGY: ENVIRONMENT,
ECONOMICS, AND THE ENERGY FUTURE: COMMENT: OFFSHORE WINDFALL:
WHAT APPROVAL OF THE UNITED STATES' FIRST OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT
MEANS FOR THE OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY INDUSTRY, 44 U. Rich. L. Rev.
1149)//BB
One of the things keeping the offshore wind energy industry from growing is a
lack of sufficient technology. Expanded growth of the offshore wind industry will
depend on research, development, and innovation. 46 Areas of technological need
include improved reliability, greater environmental compatibility, and cost
reduction. 47 Technological advances must address these areas of need with
regard not just to the design of turbines but also to the installation process and
maintenance.
At present, offshore wind turbines are basically larger versions of onshore wind turbines
that have been adapted to the marine environment. 48 The current foundation system
for offshore wind [1156] turbines consists of large steel tubes called monopiles, which
are typically embedded twenty-five to thirty meters below the mud line. 49 Monopile
designs are considered appropriate for waters up to thirty meters deep. 50 Offshore wind
farms use large turbines "ranging from the Vestas V-80 2 MW turbine to GE Wind's 3.6
MW turbine to Repower's 126 m diameter, 5 MW turbine." 51
Present foundation technology limits the offshore wind energy industry's ability
to harness the full potential of offshore wind energy. The strongest and most
consistent winds blow above waters deeper than thirty meters. 52 A marginal "10%
increase in wind speed creates a 33% increase in available energy." 53 Thus,
meaningful growth of offshore wind energy is dependent upon the research and
development of new technologies that enable developers to place turbines in deep
water. Some anticipate the creation of "stiffer, multi-pile configurations with broader
bases suitable for water depths up to 60 m or greater." 54 From there, many expect
that foundations will transition even further, toward floating turbine structures that
would be fastened and secured to the ocean floor by wires. 55 Such a transition would
have to make use of existing technologies from the oil and natural gas industries, which
already use floating platforms. 56 Unlike oil and gas projects on the OCS, wind projects
require fast, modular installations that can be replicated easily due to the anticipated
frequency of maintenance. 57 Researchers believe that "the biggest challenge
[1157] for deepwater wind turbines will be to merge the mature but expensive
technologies borne of the oil and gas industry with the experience of low-cost
economic drivers fueling the shallow water offshore wind energy industry." 58
Limited turbine capacity
Giordano 10 JD, served four years of active duty in the United States Navy as a
Surface Warfare Officer where he gained unique training, experiences, and insights for
working with people and solving complex problems

(Michael, ALLEN CHAIR ISSUE 2010: ENVISIONING ENERGY: ENVIRONMENT,

ECONOMICS, AND THE ENERGY FUTURE: COMMENT: OFFSHORE WINDFALL:
WHAT APPROVAL OF THE UNITED STATES' FIRST OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT
MEANS FOR THE OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY INDUSTRY, 44 U. Rich. L. Rev.
1149)//BB
Present constraints on turbine capacity also limit the amount of wind energy
that can be harnessed for electricity. The power and productivity of wind turbines
increases as turbine tower height and the area swept by the turbine blades
increase. 59 For example, an increase in rotor diameter from ten meters to fifty meters
"yields a 55-fold increase in yearly electricity output" because of the increase of the
tower height and the size of the swept area. 60 Added costs due to the construction and
operation of offshore wind farms can be absorbed more easily if the wind farm is able to
generate more electricity. Most believe that offshore wind projects will need 5 MW or
larger turbines to capture wind power and reach the economies of scale needed to
make long-distance offshore sites financially viable. 61
No installation vessels
Giordano 10 JD, served four years of active duty in the United States Navy as a
Surface Warfare Officer where he gained unique training, experiences, and insights for
working with people and solving complex problems
(Michael, ALLEN CHAIR ISSUE 2010: ENVISIONING ENERGY: ENVIRONMENT,
ECONOMICS, AND THE ENERGY FUTURE: COMMENT: OFFSHORE WINDFALL:
WHAT APPROVAL OF THE UNITED STATES' FIRST OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT
MEANS FOR THE OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY INDUSTRY, 44 U. Rich. L. Rev.
1149)//BB
The installation process also brings technological challenges to the offshore wind
energy industry. In order to install offshore wind turbines, developers will need to
hire a fleet of vessels including "barges with compensated cranes, leg stabilized feeder
fleets, oil and gas dynamic positioning vessels, and floating heavy lift cranes." 62 "This
imposes a limitation on American offshore wind development, since all vessels
used for construction and operations and maintenance (O&M) have been
European," 63 and United States law mandates that only United States-based
vessels may work in United States waters, with little exception. 64 Thus, growth of
domestic offshore wind energy also depends on the construction of new,
customized vessels in the United States. Technology must also find ways to address
uncertainties associated with connecting to the electrical grid and finding ways to [1158]
assemble turbines at nearby land locations just prior to installation in the seabed.
Stakeholder opposition
McDonnell, 13 (Tim, 2/28/2013, Why the US still doesn't have a single offshore wind
turbine; Here's a look at the top four reasons why offshore wind remains elusive in the
US, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/28/windpower-renewableenergy,
JMP)
2. Blowback from "stakeholders": Whale and bird lovers. Defenders of tribal lands.
Fishermen. The Koch brothers. Since it was proposed in 2001, Cape Wind, a wind
farm whose backers say could provide 75 percent of Cape Cod's energy needs,
has been run through a bewildering gauntlet of opponents and fought off more
than a dozen lawsuits on everything from boat traffic interference to desecration
of sacred sites to harming avian and marine life. Just down the seaboard another major project,
Deepwater Wind, had to negotiate concerns that its turbines would throw a roadblock in the migratory pathways of
endangered right whales. Alliance for Nantucket Sound, Cape Wind's main opposition group, claims the project "threatens

the marine environment and would harm the productive, traditional fisheries of Nantucket Sound." Last summer's "Cape
Spin" is an excellent "tragicomic" rundown of the controversy: Of course, there's another powerful factor at play here:
NIMBYism. No one could put it better than fossil fuel magnate Bill Koch, owner of a $20 million Cape Cod beachfront
estate and donor of $1.5 million to ANS: "I don't want this in my backyard. Why would you want to sail in a forest of
windmills?" Why indeed. But Catherine Bowes, a senior analyst with the National Wildlife Federation, says while there are
legitimate concerns for wildlife, Cape Wind and Deepwater have both bent over backwards to accommodate them. "I

think there's an attempt at hijacking" the wildlife message by the NIMBYers , she says.
"Wildlife issues are often used as a reason to oppose a project even by those who
have never cared about animals before." Many of the nation's leading environmental organizations
including the NWF, Greenpeace, and the Sierra Clubhave come out in favor of the project. It's easy to see why, Bowes
says: "We know that the biggest threat to wildlife is global warming."

Offshore wind is not competitive --- will kill investment

Taylor, 12 (8/10/2012, Phil, E&E reporter, OFFSHORE WIND: With advance of tax
credit and OCS leases, optimism builds in nascent U.S. industry,
http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2012/08/10/1)
Still, skeptics of Interior's offshore wind energy program, known as "smart from the
start," include the Institute for Energy Research, a think tank led by a former oil industry lobbyist, which
last month criticized the cost of new projects. "It is 'dead in the water' because offshore wind energy
is 3.4 times more expensive than onshore wind energy," the group said in a July 26 blog post,
"making it not a prudent investment compared to other renewable alternatives for
electricity generation."