Kritik

First Im going to start off with an overview. The AFF claims to solve for warming but
in fact, even though they say they solve warming, all they are really doing is just
destroying the environment. Their plan puts up a screen that allows consumers to
consume more without feeling bad about it, under pretenses that the energy and
electricity we use is green. Other companies decide to use this screen as something
to hide behind so that they could harvest much more materials from the environment
under pretenses that they are being green for the consumer to buy. This will obviously
require taking even more resources from the Earth and will drive unsustainable
depletion of hydrocarbon and other resources. This in fact will escalate warming even
more, so while they say they are trying to solve for warming, they are actually
increasing it. What they are doing is also not just escalating warming, but is also
increasing energy shocks which is impacting the economic instability of this world. All
of these things will combine and lead to extinction, so we should not do their plan.

Turns case and shuts down deliberationimplementation focus is reductionist and
displaces agencyour argument is that the framework for analysis is itself a political
choice
Adaman and Madra 2012 *economic professor at Bogazici University in Istanbul, **PhD from UMass-
Amherst, economics professor (Fikret and Yahya, Bogazici University, Understanding Neoliberalism as
Economization: The Case of the Ecology, http://www.econ.boun.edu.tr/content/wp/EC2012_04.pdf,
WEA)

States as agents of economization
Neoliberal reason is therefore not simply about market expansion and the withdrawal of the welfare state,
but more broadly about reconfiguring the state and its functions so that the state governs its subjects through a
filter of economic incentives rather than direct coercion. In other words, supposed subjects of the neoliberal state
are not citizen-subjects with political and social rights, but rather economic subjects who are supposed
to comprehend (hence, calculative) and respond predictably (hence, calculable) to economic incentives (and
disincentives). There are mainly two ways in which states under the sway of neoliberal reason aim to manipulate the conduct of their
subjects. The first is through markets, or market-like incentive-compatible institutional mechanisms that economic
experts design based on the behaviorist assumption that economic agents respond predictably to
economic (but not necessarily pecuniary) incentives, to achieve certain discrete objectives. The second involves a
revision of the way the bureaucracy functions. Here, the neoliberal reason functions as an internal critique of the way bureaucratic dispositifs
organize themselves: The typical modus operandi of this critique is to submit the bureaucracy to efficiency audits and subsequently advocate
the subcontracting of various functions of the state to the private sector either by fullblown privatization or by public-private partnerships.
While in the first case citizen-subjects are treated solely as economic beings, in the second case the state is conceived as an
enterprise, i.e., a production unit, an economic agency whose functions are persistently submitted to various forms of
economic auditing, thereby suppressing all other (social, political, ecological) priorities through a
permanent economic criticism. Subcontracting, public-private partnerships, and privatization are all
different mechanisms through which contemporary governments embrace the discourses and practices of
contemporary multinational corporations. In either case, however, economic policy decisions (whether they involve
macroeconomic or microeconomic matters) are isolated from public debate and deliberation, and treated as matters of
technocratic design and implementation, while regulation, to the extent it is warranted, is mostly conducted by experts outside political
lifethe so-called independent regulatory agencies. In the process, democratic participation in decision-making is either
limited to an already highly-commodified, spectacularized, mediatized electoral politics, or to the calculus of opinion polls
where consumer discontent can be managed through public relations experts. As a result, a highly reductionist notion of
economic efficiency ends up being the only criteria with which to measure the success or failure of such decisions.
Meanwhile, individuals with financial means are free to provide support to those in need through charity organizations or corporations via
their social responsibility channels.
Here, two related caveats should be noted to sharpen the central thrust of the argument proposed in this chapter. First, the separation of
the economic sphere from the social-ecological whole is not an ontological given, but rather a political
project. By treating social subjectivity solely in economic terms and deliberately trying to insulate policy-making from
popular politics and democratic participation, the neoliberal project of economization makes a political choice. Since there
are no economic decisions without a multitude of complex and over-determined social consequences, the attempt to block
(through economization) all political modes of dissent, objection and negotiation available (e.g., voice) to those who
are affected from the said economic decisions is itself a political choice. In short, economization is itself a political
project.
Yet, this drive towards technocratization and economizationwhich constitutes the second caveatdoes not mean that
the dirty and messy distortions of politics are gradually being removed from policy-making. On the contrary, to
the extent that policy making is being insulated from popular and democratic control, it becomes exposed to the
distortions of a politics of rent-seeking and speculationironically, as predicted by the representatives of the Virginia
School. Most public-private partnerships are hammered behind closed doors of a bureaucracy where
states and multinational corporations divide the economic rent among themselves. The growing
concentration of capital at the global scale gives various industries (armament, chemical, health care, petroleum, etc.see,
e.g., Klein, 2008) enormous amount of leverage over the governments (especially the developing ones). It is extremely important,
however, to note that this tendency toward rent-seeking is not a perversion of the neoliberal reason. For much of
neoliberal theory (in particular, for the Austrian and the Chicago schools), private monopolies and other forms of
concentration of capital are preferred to government control and ownership. And furthermore, for some (such as the
Virginia and the Chicago schools), rent-seeking is a natural implication of the opportunism of human beings, even though neoliberal
thinkers disagree whether rent-seeking is essentially economically efficient (as in capture theories of the Chicago school imply) or inefficient
(as in rent-seeking theories of the Virginia school imply) (Madra and Adaman, 2010).
This reconfiguration of the way modern states in advanced capitalist social formations govern the social manifests itself in all
domains of public and social policy-making. From education to health, and employment to insurance, there is an observable
shift from rights-based policymaking forged through public deliberation and participation, to policy-making based
solely on economic viability where policy issues are treated as matters of technocratic calculation. In
this regard, as noted above, the treatment of subjectivity solely in behaviorist terms of economic incentives
functions as the key conceptual choice that makes the technocratization of public policy possible. Neoliberal thinking and
practices certainly have a significant impact on the ecology. The next section will focus on the different means through which various forms of
neoliberal governmentality propose and actualize the economization of the ecology.

1. 2nc AT: Permutation
We'll explain our alternative such as the mutual exclusivity is clear, we are telling you
not to use any of the Earths resources for personal gain, yet you do it anyways. The
AFF sets up a screen for other companies to take out more resources from other
places. You cannot do the plan and the K, the perm just doesnt work, it doesnt make
any sense. The AFF does not get a perm, they do not deserve it, and their plan does
not deserve it.


2. 2nc AT: Alternative Doesnt Solve
They say the alt cant solve and consumption is inevitable but we say cross-apply
frameworkdiscussions at the academic level are more productivecreates better a
relationship to policy which is more important than trivial simulationif this approach
is better we should win
Bilgin 5 Assistant Prof of International Relations at Bilkent University, REGIONAL SECURITY IN THE
MIDDLE EAST A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE, p54-

The point is that a broader security agenda requires students of security to look at agents other than the state, such as social movements,
nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) and individuals, instead of restricting their analysis to the states agency. This is essential not only because
states are not always able (or willing) to fulfil their side of the bargain in providing for their citizens security, as noted above, but also because
there already are agents other than states be it social movements or intellectuals who are striving to provide for the differing needs of
peoples (themselves and others). This is not meant to deny the salience of the roles states play in the realm of security; on the contrary, they remain
significant actors with crucial roles to play.25 Rather, the argument is that the states dominant position as an actor well endowed to provide
(certain dimensions of) security does not justify privileging its agency. Furthermore, broadening the security agenda without attempting a
reconceptualisation of agency would result in falling back upon the agency of the state in meeting non-military threats. The problem with
resorting to the agency of the state in meeting non-military threats is that states may not be the most suitable actors to cope with them. In
other words, the state being the most qualified actor in coping with some kinds of threats does not necessarily mean it is competent (or willing) enough to
cope with all. This is why students of critical approaches aim to re-conceptualise agency and practice. Critical approaches view non-state actors,
in particular, social movements and intellectuals, as potential agents for change (Cox 1981, 1999; Walker 1990b; Hoffman 1993; Wyn Jones 1995a, 1999). This
echoes feminist approaches that have emphasised the role of womens agency and maintained that women must act in the provision of
their own security if they are to make a change in a world where their security needs and concerns are marginalised (Tickner 1997; also see
Sylvester 1994). This is not necessarily wishful thinking on the part of a few academics; on the contrary, practice indicates that peoples (as
individuals and social groups) have taken certain aspects of their own and others security into their own hands (Marsh 1995: 1305; Turner 1998).
Three successful examples from the Cold War era the Nestl boycott, the anti-apartheid campaign for South Africa and the campaign against nuclear missile
deployments in Europe are often viewed as having inspired the social movements of the post-Cold War era (Lopez et al. 1997: 2301; Marsh 1995). Christine
Sylvester (1994) has also pointed to the examples of the Greenham Common Peace Camp in Britain (198089) and womens producer cooperatives in Harare,
Zimbabwe (198890) to show how women have intervened to enhance their own and others security. These are excellent examples of how a broader
conception of security needs to be coupled with a broader conception of agency. It should be noted here that the call of critical approaches for
looking at the agency of non-state actors should not be viewed as allocating tasks to preconceived agents. Rather, critical approaches aim to empower
nonstate actors (who may or may not be aware of their own potential to make a change) to constitute themselves as agents of security to meet this
broadened agenda. Nor should it be taken to suggest that all non-state actors practices are emancipatory. Then, paying more attention to the
agency of non-state actors will enable students of security to see how, in the absence of interest at the governmental level (as is the case with the Middle
East), non-state actors could imagine, create and nurture community-building projects and could help in getting state-level actors
interested in the formation of a security community. It should, however, be noted that not all non-state actors are community-minded just as not all
governments are sceptical of the virtues of community building. Indeed, looking at the agency of nonstate actors is also useful because it enables
one to see how non-state actors could stall community-building projects. In the Middle East, womens movements and networks have
been cooperating across borders from the beginning of the Intifada onwards. Womens agency, however, is often left unnoticed, because,
as Simona Sharoni (1996) has argued, the eyes of security analysts are often focused on the state as the primary security agent. However, the
Intifada was marked by Palestinian and Israeli-Jewish womens adoption of non-zerosum, non-military practices that questioned and challenged the
boundaries of their political communities as they dared to explore new forms of political communities (Mikhail-Ashrawi 1995; Sharoni 1995). Such activities
included organising a conference entitled Give Peace a Chance Women Speak Out in Brussels in May 1989. The first of its kind, the conference brought
together about 50 Israeli and Palestinian women from the West Bank and Gaza Strip together with PLO representatives to discuss the IsraeliPalestinian
conflict. The follow-up event took place in Jerusalem in December 1989 where representatives of the Palestinian Womens Working Committees and the Israeli
Women and Peace Coalition organised a womens day for peace which, Sharoni noted, culminated in a march of 6,000 women from West to East Jerusalem
under the banner Women Go For Peace (Sharoni 1996: 107). Aside from such events that were designed to alert public opinion of the unacceptability of the
Israel/Palestine impasse as well as finding alternative ways of peacemaking, women also undertook direct action to alleviate the condition of Palestinians
whose predicament had been worsening since the beginning of the Intifada (Mikhail-Ashrawi 1995). In this process, they were aided by their Western
European counterparts who provided financial, institutional as well as moral support. In sum, womens agency helped make the Intifada possible on
the part of the Palestinian women, whilst their Israeli- Jewish counterparts helped enhance its impact by way of questioning the moral
boundaries of the Israeli state. The Intifada is also exemplary of how non-state actors could initiate processes of resistance that might
later be taken up by policy-makers. The Intifada began in 1987 as a spontaneous grassroots reaction to the Israeli occupation and took the
PLO leadership (along with others) by surprise. It was only some weeks into the Intifada that the PLO leadership embraced it and put its
material resources into furthering the cause, which was making occupation as difficult as possible for the Israeli government. Although not much came
out of the Intifada in terms of an agree- ment with Israel on issues of concern for the people living in the occupied territories, the process generated a
momentum that culminated in 1988 with the PLOs denouncement of terrorism. The change in the PLOs policies, in turn, enabled the 1993
Oslo Accords, which was also initiated by non-state actors, in this case intellectuals (Sharoni 1996). The point here is that it has been a combination
of top-down and bottom-up politics that has been at the heart of political change, be it the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe, or Intifada in
Israel/Palestine. Emphasising the roles some non-state actors, notably womens networks, have played as agents of security is not to suggest that all non-
state agents practices are non-zero-sum and/or non-violent. For instance, there are the cases of Islamist movements such as FIS (the Islamic Salvation Front) in
Algeria and Hamas in the Occupied Territories that have resorted, over the years, to violent practices as a part of their strategies that were designed to capture
the state mechanism. However, although they may constitute threats to security in the Middle East in view of their violent practices, what needs to be
remembered is that both FIS and Hamas function as providers for security for some peoples in the Middle East those who are often neglected by their own
states (Esposito 1995: 16283). In other words, some Islamist movements do not only offer a sense of identity, but also propose alternative practices and
provide tangible economic, social and moral support to their members. However, the treatment women receive under the mastery of such Islamist movements
serves to remind us that there clearly are problems involved in an unthinking reliance on non-governmental actors as agents for peace and security or an
uncritical adoption of their agendas. Middle Eastern history is replete with examples of non-state actors resorting to violence and/or adopting zero-sum
practices in the attempt to capture state power. In fact, it is often such violent practices of nonstate actors (that is, terrorism or assassination of political
leaders) that are mentioned in security analyses. Nevertheless, the fact that not all non-state actors are fit to take up the role of serving as agents of
emancipatory change should not lead one to downplay the significant work some have done in the past, and could do in the future. After all, not all states
serve as providers of security; yet Security Studies continues to rely on their agency. Then, in order to be able to fulfil the role allocated to them by
critical approaches, non-state actors should be encouraged to move away from traditional forms of resistance that are based on
exclusionist identities, that solely aim to capture state power or that adopt zero-sum thinking and practices. Arguably, this is a task for
intellectuals to fulfil. This is not to suggest that intellectuals should direct or instruct non-state actors. As Wyn Jones (1999: 162) has noted, the relationship
between intellectuals and social movements is based on reciprocity. The 1980s peace movements, for instance, are good examples of intellectuals
getting involved with social movements in bringing about change in this case, the end of the Cold War (Galtung 1995; Kaldor 1997). The
relationship between intellectuals and peace movements in Europe was a mutually interactive one in that the intellectuals encouraged and
led whilst drawing strength from these movements. Emphasising the mutually interactive relationship between intellectuals and social
movements should not be taken to suggest that to make a change, intellectuals should get directly involved in political action. They could
also intervene to provide a critique of the existing situation, what future outcomes may result if necessary action is not taken at present,
and by pointing to potential for change immanent in world politics. Students of security could help create the political space that would
enable the emergence of a Gorbachev, by presenting such critique. It should, however, be emphasised that such thinking should be anchored in the
potential immanent in world politics. In other words, intellectuals should be informed by the practices of social movements themselves (as was the
case in Europe in the 1980s). The hope is that non-state actors such as social movements and intellectuals (who may or may not be aware of their
potential to make a change) may constitute themselves as agents when presented with an alternative reading of their situation. Lastly, intellectuals
could make a change even if they limit their practices to thinking, writing and self-reflection. During the Cold War very few security analysts were
conscious and open about the impact their thinking and writing could make. Richard Wyn Jones cites the example of Edward N. Luttwak as one such exception
who admitted that strategy is not a neutral pursuit and its only purpose is to strengthen ones own side in the contention of nations (cited in Wyn Jones 1999:
150). Still, such explicit acknowledgement of the political dimension of strategic thinking was rare during the Cold War. On the contrary, students of
International Relations in general and Security Studies in particular have been characterised by limited or no self-reflection as to the
potential impact their research could make on the subject of research (Wyn Jones 1999: 14850). To go back to the argument made above about
the role of the intellectual as an agent of security and the mutually constitutive relationship between theory and practice, students of critical approaches
to security could function as agents of security by way of reflecting upon the practical implications of their own thinking and writing. Self-
reflection becomes crucial when the relationship between theory and practice is conceptualised as one of mutual constitution. State-centric approaches to
security do not simply reflect a reality out there but help reinforce statism. Although it may be true that the consequences of these scholarly
activities are sometimes unintended, there nevertheless should be a sense of selfreflection on the part of scholars upon the potential consequences of their
research and teaching. The point here is that critical approaches that show an awareness of the socially constructed character of reality need
not stop short of reflecting upon the constitutive relationship between theory and practice when they themselves are theorising about
security. Otherwise, they run the risk of constituting threats to the future (Kublkov 1998: 193201).

All their spillover claims link harder to themits more pragmatic to reflect on social
dynamics than pretend we can reform politics from the campus, even if theres no
exact blueprintthis is also a DA to the perm
Pepper 10 Prof Geography Oxford, Utopianism and Environmentalism, Environmental Politics, 14:1, 3-
22, SAGE

Conclusion
Academic and activist opinion nonetheless frequently argues that Utopian endeavour is necessary for radical environmentalism and for related movements such as
feminism, anarchism and socialism. Utopianism is important within these movements to inspire hope and provide
'transgressive' spaces, conceptual and real, in which to experiment within alternative paradigms. To be truly
transgressive, rather than lapsing into reactionary fantasy, ecotopias need to emphasise heuristic
spaces and processes rather than laying down blueprints, and must be rooted in existing social and economic relations rather than being
merely a form of abstraction unrelated to the processes and situations operating in today's 'real' world.
This paper suggests that by these criteria, the transgressiveness of ecotopianism is ambiguous and limited. Deep ecological and bioregional
literature, for instance, can seem regressively removed from today's world. Anti-modernism is evident, for instance, in the form
of future primitivism and the predilection for small-scale 're-embedded' societies echoing "traditional cultures'. Blueprinting is also suggested by
the strong metanarratives driven by (ecological) science. There is a remarkable consensus amongst
ideologically diverse ecotopian perspectives about what should be in ecotopia, leaving relatively little as
provisional and reflexive. Additionally, idealism in the negative sense is often rife in ecotopianism.
However, idealism pervades reformist as well as radical environmentalism, and the principles behind ecological
modernisation - the much-favoured mainstream policy discourse about the environment are founded on
premises that can be described as 'Utopian* in the pejorative sense used by Marxists. That is, they do not
adequately and accurately take into account the socioeconomic dynamics of the capitalist system they
are meant to reform. Thus they fail to recognise that social-democratic and 'third way' attempts to
realise an environmentally sound, humane, inclusive and egalitarian capitalism are ultimately headed
for failure.
Notwithstanding these limitations of ecotopianism, given that the environmental problems featured in dystopian fiction for over a century seem increasingly to be materialising, it may be that
we will soon be clutching at ecotopias as beacons affirming Bloch's 'principle of hope* (1986).
And what of those who, despite these deepening environmental problems, still maintain that 'ecotopia' is Utopian fantasy in the worst sense,
while considering their reformist visions to be pragmatic and attainable? These "hard-nosed realists*, as Terry Eagleton (2000, p.33)
ironically calls them, "who behave as though chocolate chip cookies and the IMF will be with us in another
3000 years time", should realise that although the future may or may not be pleasant:
to deny that it will be quite different in the manner of post-histoire philosophising, is to offend against
the very realism on which such theorists usually pride themselves. To claim that human affairs might
feasibly be much improved is an eminently realistic proposition.
1. 2nc AT: No Impact
They say that there is no impact but we say that interconnected consumptive crises
are acceleratingextinction
Nhanenge 7 *Jytte Masters @ U South Africa, ECOFEMINSM: TOWARDS INTEGRATING THE CONCERNS
OF WOMEN, POOR PEOPLE AND NATURE INTO DEVELOPMENT]

There is today an increasing critique of economic development, whether it takes place in the North or in the South. Although the world
on average generates more and more wealth, the riches do not appear to "trickle down" to the poor and improve their
material well-being. Instead, poverty and economic inequality is growing. Despite the existence of development aid for more
than half a century, the Third World seems not to be "catching up" with the First World. Instead, militarism,
dictatorship and human repression is multiplied. Since the mid 1970, the critique of global economic activities
has intensified due to the escalating deterioration of the natural environment. Modernization,
industrialisation and its economic activities have been directly linked to increased scarcity of natural resources and
generation of pollution, which increases global temperatures and degrades soils, lands, water, forests and
air. The latter threat is of great significance, because without a healthy environment human beings and animals will
not be able to survive. Most people believed that modernization of the world would improve material well-being for all. However,
faced with its negative side effects and the real threat of extinction, one must conclude that somewhere
along the way "progress" went astray. Instead of material plenty, economic development generated a violent,
unhealthy and unequal world. It is a world where a small minority live in material luxury, while millions of
people live in misery. These poor people are marginalized by the global economic system. They are forced to
survive from degraded environments; they live without personal or social security; they live in abject poverty, with hunger, malnutrition and
sickness; and they have no possibility to speak up for themselves and demand a fair share of the world's resources. The majority of these
people are women, children, traditional peoples, tribal peoples, people of colour and materially poor people (called women and Others).
They are, together with nature, dominated by the global system of economic development imposed by the
North. It is this scenario, which is the subject of the dissertation. The overall aim is consequently to discuss the unjustified domination of
women, Others and nature and to show how the domination of women and Others is interconnected with the
domination of nature. A good place to start a discussion about domination of women, Others and nature is to disclose how they
disproportionately must carry the negative effects from global economic development. The below discussion is therefore meant to give an idea
of the "flip-side" of modernisation. It gives a gloomy picture of what "progress" and its focus on economic growth has meant for women, poor
people and the natural environment. The various complex and inter-connected, negative impacts have been ordered into four crises. The
categorization is inspired by Paul Ekins and his 1992 book "A new world order; grassroots movements for global change". In it, Ekins argues that
humanity is faced with four interlocked crises of unprecedented magnitude. These crises have the
potential to destroy whole ecosystems and to extinct the human race. The first crisis is the spread of
nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, together with the high level of military spending. The second crisis is
the increasing number of people afflicted with hunger and poverty. The third crisis is the environmental degradation.
Pollution, destruction of ecosystems and extinction of species are increasing at such a rate that the
biosphere is under threat. The fourth crisis is repression and denial of fundamental human rights by
governments, which prevents people from developing their potential. It is highly likely that one may add more crises to these four, or
categorize them differently, however, Ekins's division is suitable for the present purpose. (Ekins 1992: 1).

They say consumption is inevitable but we say that it


Solvency

Investors wont invest in offshore wind
Edwards 11 --- Owner and director of Sunflower Blue Ltd consulting group, former R&D Manager
experienced with ROVs, AUVs, Dive systems, general underwater engineering, pipelines with over two
decades of experience (Ian, Overcoming Challenges for the Offshore Wind Industry and Learning from
the Oil and Gas Industry, http://greenoffshore.dk/wp-content/uploads/Offshore-wind-report-
Overcoming-Challenges-for-the-Offshore-Wind-Industry1.pdf)//RAW
Recent consultants reports indicate that offshore wind has one of the highest costs of any energy
generating technology which is currently available on a commercial scale, this still seems to be true even
when the estimated costs of carbon capture and storage are included in the cost of fossil fuel powered
thermally generated electricity. The high cost of energy generated by offshore wind farms is probably
the biggest single challenge facing offshore wind and it is imperative that the industry reduces these
costs as rapidly as possible. There is no magic bullet which will reduce the cost of offshore wind
energy, it can only be achieved by optimizing every stage of development, manufacture, installation and
operation. However, because wind energy does not require the purchase of a fuel, the anticipated
increase in the cost of fossil fuels, caused by market forces and carbon taxes, is likely to make offshore
wind power more competitive in the future. The high cost of energy generated by wind farms means
that a subsidy of approximately 100 per MW hr is required to make the electricity generated by
offshore wind farms commercially viable. Subsidies are awarded by national governments and this
brings an element of political uncertainty into the economics of offshore wind. Banks and financial
institutions view this as a commercial risk i.e. subsidies may be reduced or removed by government, and
this may affect the ability of wind farm owners to raise the capital required to build offshore wind farms.
The ability to raise the capital to build offshore wind farms is also hindered by the legacy of poor
reliability for some early offshore wind farms, which makes offshore wind look too risky to investors,
and the constraints resulting from the recent global financial crisis. Although the offshore wind industry
cannot control the financial markets, it can and must improve the reliability of offshore wind farms and
reduce the cost of energy, making it less reliant on subsidies. This is likely to be difficult to achieve
because of the inherent conservatism of the financial community who like to see many years of
successful track record, the incremental approach to the development of offshore wind farm technology
which is still rooted in an onshore paradigm, and the absence of long term testing of new designs in the
marine environment.

There is a shortage of available factories, rare earth minerals, magnets, copper cables
and space - these are all barriers for construction
Edwards 11 --- Owner and director of Sunflower Blue Ltd consulting group, former R&D Manager
experienced with ROVs, AUVs, Dive systems, general underwater engineering, pipelines with over two
decades of experience (Ian, Overcoming Challenges for the Offshore Wind Industry and Learning from
the Oil and Gas Industry, http://greenoffshore.dk/wp-content/uploads/Offshore-wind-report-
Overcoming-Challenges-for-the-Offshore-Wind-Industry1.pdf)//RAW
The offshore wind industry faces a series of challenges from the global supply chain, in particular the
er, for cables, transformers, generators Rare earth minerals, for high permeability
powered semiconductors, for control, power conditioning and AC/DC conversion High modulus carbon
fibre, for wind turbine blades The offshore wind industry will have to compete with other industrial
sectors for these materials, this may have the effect of increasing the capital cost of wind farms. There
are also opportunities associated with these shortages to develop alternative technical solutions, e.g.
the shortage of copper may lead to the development of aluminum conductors for submarine cables and
super conductors for transformers and generators. There are very few suitable harbours with long
deepwater quays, lay down areas for marshaling components, and areas for assembling wind turbines (a
minimum of 6 hectares is required) and additional space for factories to produce wind farm
components, (because most wind turbine components are too big to be easily transported by road).
Because large harbour developments take a long time to plan and construct and generally require
national or regional government financial assistance, there is an urgent requirement to start planning,
funding and building these facilities if the EU 2020 targets for offshore wind are to be met. There is a
concern about the supply of suitable vessels capable of installing offshore wind farms. The market has
responded by building new wind turbine installation vessels, so there is less concern about the capacity
to install foundations and turbine assemblies. However, there is still a shortage of vessels capable of
installing cables, both within array cables and export cables. The offshore oil and gas industry operates
vessels capable of installing these cables but the global offshore oil and gas market is buoyant, so these
vessels may not be available to install wind farm cables. Further, there is the potential for competition
from the oil and gas industry for existing and new vessels, because the planned peak for installing
offshore wind farms (2015 to 2020) is likely to coincide with a peak in oil and gas decommissioning
activity and the installation of what will probably be the tail end of the construction of gas production
platforms in the Southern North Sea. There is insufficient capacity to manufacture the quantity of
submarine cables required for the planned offshore wind farms. One industry source suggested that if
all the existing submarine cable manufacturing capacity was added together and then multiplied by ten,
there still wouldnt be enough capacity. Whilst this may be an exaggeration, it does point to a significant
shortfall in manufacturing capacity. Cable manufacturers have recognized the market opportunity and
have or are building new quayside factories; however, several cable manufacturers have reported
current backlogs of two years or more, which indicates that current supply is only just keeping up with
demand. There is a similar shortfall in the capacity to build offshore wind turbines, and an urgent need
to build new factories adjacent to suitable harbour facilities. One turbine manufacturer reports the
ability to manufacture approximately 200, 5MW or larger turbines per year from its factory. To achieve
the EU 2020 targets, it is likely that between three and five turbines will have to be installed per day, or
between approximately 1,000 and 1,800 per year. These quantities are for the offshore market and
exclude the demand for onshore turbines, so there is currently a significant shortfall in the capacity to
build offshor turbines.
Offshore wind is basically impossible because of limited foundation and turbine
capacity technology Extend Giordano 10, present foundation technology limits the
offshore wind energy industrys ability so much that it would be impossible to do the
AFFs plan. If thats not enough, the capacity of energy storage of turbines would be
extremely small, so much that it would be useless to build these turbines as we
wouldnt be able to harness the little electricity the turbines would be making in the
first place.

Link turns
Noise disrupts sea turtle navigation
Wilhelmsson 10 Professor of Zoology @ Stockholm
(Dan, Greening Blue Energy: Identifying and managing the biodiversity risks and opportunities of
offshore renewable energy, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 102pp)//BB
Several bird species avoid wind farm areas during migration. Studies have shown numbers of eiders and
geese flying through offshore wind farm areas to decrease 4-5 times after construction. However, the
energetic losses during migration due to bar- rier effects and through avoidance of single wind farms
seem trivial. Energetic costs have only been proposed to be measurable for species commuting daily
within a region, for instance between foraging grounds and roosting or nest sites. In these cases wind
farms could cause fragmentation of coherent ecological units for the birds. Impacts of sound
disturbance from wind farms on long-distance com- munication and navigation among mammals, such
as whales during migration, is largely unknown. Sea turtles are threatened worldwide and may be
disturbed by the low frequency sound from turbines. They show strong fidelity to migration routes,
which may make them more susceptible to disturbance.
Sea turtles are key to oceanic biodiversity
Wilson 9 analyst @ Oceana
(EG, WHY HEALTHY OCEANS NEED SEATURTLES,
http://oceana.org/sites/default/files/reports/Why_Healthy_Oceans_Need_Sea_Turtles.pdf)
Although we cannot now fully understand the roles sea turtles played centuries ago, it is important
that we discover as much as possible. Better understanding of these roleswill allowus to
determinewhat structure and functionswere lost in the ocean ecosystems, the environmental effects of
remaining populations, and management and conservationmeasures required for sea turtles to reach
historic levelsand the improvements in ecosystem health that could result from restored sea turtle
populations. 6 What we do know is that sea turtleseven at diminished population levelsplay an
important role in ocean ecosystems by maintaining healthy seagrass beds and coral reefs, providing key
habitat for other marine life, helping to balance marine food webs and facilitating nutrient cycling from
water to land.
Leads to oil spills
Wilhelmsson 10 Professor of Zoology @ Stockholm
(Dan, Greening Blue Energy: Identifying and managing the biodiversity risks and opportunities of
offshore renewable energy, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 102pp)//BB
The increase in number of industrial facilities in coastal and offshore waters as a result of offshore
renewable energy development may amplify navigational hazards for ships, particularly where wind
farms claim areas of deeper water greater than 20 m in depth. This increases the risks of oil spills and
other types of marine pollution. A wind turbine for example could rip the side of a vessel and cause an
oil spill. It is also possible that the wind turbine rotor and generator, weighing up to 400 tonnes, could
fall on a ship (this can be prevented by technical design of the turbine; see e.g. the Alpha Ventus site.
Envi- ronmental risk evaluations taking the impacts of different types of foundations on ship hulls into
consideration have ranked collisions with jacket and tripod constructions as the most severe, while a
collision with a monopile may cause less damage to the environment. The collision risk for each indi-
vidual case is obviously a product of a number of factors, such as ship traffic, distance to navigational
routes, wind, current and weather conditions.
Oil leakages collapse marine biodiversity
Oceana 12
(Effects of Oil on Marine Life, http://oceana.org/en/our-work/stop-ocean-pollution/oil-
pollution/learn-act/effects-of-oil-on-marine-life)
Once oil makes its way into the environment, it poses a range of threats to marine life. Animals coated
by even small amounts of oil may be unable to swim or fly properly, maintain their body temperature,
feed or even reproduce. Oil can also cover beaches and other vital habitats, making it difficult for
animals to find uncontaminated food and nesting and resting places. Some animals are more vulnerable
to oil than others. For example, young may be less able to deal with either coatings or exposure to toxic
substances than adults due to their size, underdeveloped immune systems and behaviors. Marine
mammals, seabirds (especially penguins) and sea turtles are all particularly vulnerable to oil on surface
waters as they spend considerable amounts of time on the surface feeding, breathing and resting.
Turtles and marine mammals are vulnerable to floating oil at all life stages as they do not appear to
avoid oil slicks and they must inhale large amounts of air prior to diving. Turtles also feed in convergence
zones, areas where air flows and currents meet, which tend to collect floating oil. Fish embryos are also
particularly vulnerable to oil exposure, even at extremely low concentrations of less that one part per
billion. Consequently, even traces of oil pollution at levels often considered safe for wildlife can cause
severe damage to fish. Animals that become coated in or ingest oil often die quickly. Large numbers of
animals were killed immediately after the Exxon Valdez spill, including as many as 300 harbor seals, 900
bald eagles, 2,800 sea otters and 250,000 seabirds. Exposure to oil can also result in non-lethal impacts,
including liver and eye damage and skin irritations. While these effects may not cause immediate death,
they can reduce survival rates by compromising an animals ability to find food and shelter, reproduce
and avoid predators.



Warming
They squo doesnt solve but we say that Squo solves warming via volcanoes, natural
gas, and wind power, extend Santer 14, Matthews 14, and Scheer 14, warming has
slowed down and recent evidence shows that volcanic eruptions have a pretty big part
in slowing it down. Also, much less people in the US have stopped using fossil fuels
with carbon emissions and have started using natural gases for electricity. In fact
carbon emissions from electricity generating power plants has dropped to an all-time
in the US. And if that isnt enough recent evidence shows that land wind power is
enough to keep the US running. In fact, it is estimated that wind power on land will
estimate up to 30% of where the US gets its electricity from. Prefer all of these cards
because they have all been written in 2014, this year, and many new scientific
discoveries could be made in that short amount of time making our evidence more
reliable than theirs.

They say wind power will solve emissions but we say that Wind power wont solve
emissions extend NRC 7, the development of wind power electricity generation using
our current technology is so outdated that it will not result in a significant reduction in
total emission of other pollutants. Prefer our evidence because they are probably one
of the most qualified authors in this whole debate. They are the National Research
Council. It is their jobs, they have literally dedicated their lives to researching stuff like
this. Also, they arent some couple of journalists, they are the National Research
Council. That makes our evidence more trustworthy than theirs.


Hegemony
Wind not key to manufacturing jobs, extend Platzer 11, wind turbine manufacturing
jobs is responsible for only a very small share of domestic jobs, well under 1% in fact.
So their plan cannot solve for manufacturing jobs. Also prefer our evidence because it
was written in 2011, which is pretty recent.

Their plan siphons off jobs from other more productive parts of the economy, extend
Green 9, the only way governments can create other jobs is by first obliterating other
jobs, and siphoning of jobs from other parts of the economy. As a result, limited
resources would be diverted to inefficient uses, causing economic underperformance.
Prefer our evidence because he is a scholar at the AIE, thus making it his job to
research things like this. Hes basically dedicated his whole life to finding out about
things like this, making our authors more qualified than any of theirs.

Decline will be peaceful and solves all their offense only a risk of chain ganging,
extend MacDonald and Parent 11, the US is completely able to reduce its foreign
policy commitments without inviting in Chinese expansionism. A policy of gradual
retrenchment will not undermine the credibility of US alliance commitments or
unleash destabilizing regional security dilemmas. Prefer our evidence because both of
our authors are professors for political science, meaning theyve dedicated their lives
to researching and writing things about hegemony and other political aspects, making
our authors extremely qualified.

Also, Wind components will be imported and wind job growth is a net negative
OKeefe, 12 --- CEO, George C. Marshall Institute (12/31/2012, William, Wind Tax Credit Advocacy:
Blowing Smok, http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2012/12/should-congress-support-wind-t.php)

A number of the comments supporting extension of the wind production tax credit are based on half
truths, illusions, and special interest politics.
One argument is that eliminating it will cost 37,000 jobs or more. There are two flaws in this argument.
First, it assumes that there is no difference between jobs created by inefficient subsidies and more
efficient allocation of resources. There is literature demonstrating that green subsidies misallocate
resources that cost more jobs than they create. A study conducted by Spains Universidad Rey Juan
Carlos concluded we find that for every renewable energy job that the state manages to finance,
Spains experiencereveals with high confidencethat the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs
on average . Second, most of the jobs created by wind energy are in the manufacture of turbine
blades and steel for wind towers, most of which are imported.