Energy

Advantage 1 is Energy
Despite increased domestic production the US is still heavily oil dependent
Dlouhy 13 - covers energy policy, politics and other issues for The Houston Chronicle and
other Hearst Newspapers from Washington, D.C. (Jennifer, Report: US oil growth having
limited effect on energy security, Fuel Fix, 10-14-13,
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/10/14/report-americans-hunger-for-oil-makes-usvulnerable/)//KG
WASHINGTON The United States may soon claim the throne as the worlds top crude and gas
producer, but Americas dependence on oil leaves the nation at risk , according to a
global energy security assessment issued Monday. According to the analysis by Roubini
Global Economics and Securing Americas Future Energy, the nations heavy reliance on
petroleum fuels threatens to undo U.S. gains in efficiency and oil and gas production. Heavy
oil dependence still renders the country highly vulnerable to price fluctuations in the shortto-medium term, particularly as economic growth and fuel demand recovers , according
to the report. While physical supplies of oil may be more dependable in the United States
particularly with hydraulic fracturing allowing production of newly recoverable crude and gas resources the
nations overall dependence on oil and inefficient use of it leaves the economy exposed to
high and volatile oil prices. Of 13 countries evaluated in the report, the United States ranks No. 5, behind
Canada and the relatively oil efficient nations of Germany, the United Kingdom and Japan. The United States
effectively climbed in the rankings ahead of Australia, Brazil, China and other countries because of its relatively
high levels of domestic oil production, which helped make up for bottom-tier scores tied to consumption. SAFE CEO
Robbie Diamond said the oil security index underscores that the path to true oil security is not

paved by production alone. Even despite the domestic oil boom, U.S. oil security is only
middle-of-the-road, he said. The disconnect between oil production and security also are
illustrated by Saudia Arabias dead-last position, at No. 13. Like the United States, the oil-rich nation is a big
consumer of crude. Saudia Arabias long status as a leading global oil producer also means the
country is heavily dependent on crude exports for revenue. The reports release kicks off a week of
events tied to the 40th anniversary of the OPEC oil embargo. An interactive online version of the oil security index
allows users to dig into quarterly data and rankings dating back to 2000. Overall, countries were assessed

for their structural dependency on oil, their economic exposure to oil price volatility and their
vulnerability to physical supply disruptions. For instance, analysts evaluated the structural importance of
oil in individual countries by looking at per-person fuel consumption and the volume of oil consumed per unit of
gross domestic product. The economic exposure was assessed by looking at total spending on oil
and net oil imports as a percentage of GDP, among other factors . In analyzing supply security,
Roubini Global Economics looked not only at how vulnerable countries were to physical supply disruptions but also
their capabilities to respond, such as by tapping emergency inventories. Low fuel demand wasnt enough to secure
a high spot. While India has the lowest fuel consumption per person of all the nations assessed in the report, it is
near the bottom of the rankings because of the countrys oil consumption and spending. Nouriel Roubini, chairman
of the group, said the security index is meant to capture a range of diverse factors affecting how nations might be
affected by changes in oil supply and demand. Changes in the supply and cost of oil, and the demand for it, impact
individual nations in different ways due to unique national strengths, weaknesses, advantages, and disadvantages,
Roubini said. Some of the reports findings about the United States dovetail with warnings from lawmakers that the

Oil prices are still set

globally, so even soaring domestic production means that when prices climb, Americans
U.S. can attain energy security but will never be truly energy independent.

get hit with the added cost too.

A report issued last month concluded that the United States rigid
dependence on oil to fuel cars and trucks meant that Americans kept buying the stuff over the past decade, even as
prices rose, at a cost of $1.2 trillion in additional federal debt.

Algae biofuel can solve the worlds energy demands

USU 14 Utah State University (USU researchers: Algae biofuel can help meet energy
demand, Biomass Magazine, 6-5-14, http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/10491/usuresearchers-algae-biofuel-can-help-meet-energy-demand)//KG
Microalgae-based biofuel not only has the potential to quench a sizable chunk of the worlds
energy demands, say Utah State University researchers, its a potential game-changer .
Thats because microalgae produces much higher yields of fuel-producing biomass than other
sources of alternative fuels and it doesnt compete with food crops , says Jeff Moody, who
completed a masters degree in mechanical engineering from USU in May. With USU faculty
mentors Chris McGinty and Jason Quinn, Moody published findings from an unprecedented worldwide
microalgae productivity assessment in the May 26, online Early Edition of the Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences. The teams research was supported by the U.S.
Department of Energy. Despite its promise as a biofuel source, the USU investigators questioned whether
pond scum could be a silver bullet-solution to challenges posed by fossil fuel dependence. Our aim wasnt to
debunk existing literature, but to produce a more exhaustive, accurate and realistic
assessment of the current global yield of microalgae biomass, Moody says . With advisor Quinn,
assistant professor in USUs Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Moody began building
simulations and generating data. As the project progressed, the engineers realized they needed expertise outside
their discipline. They recruited McGinty, associate director of USUs Remote Sensing/Geographic Information
Systems Laboratory in the Department of Wildland Resources, for help in developing the sophisticated spatial
interpolations and resource modeling needed to develop their large-scale model. Visual representations of physical
and biophysical processes are very powerful tools, McGinty says. Adding the geospatial interpolation component
brought the data into focus. Using hourly meteorological data from 4,388 global locations, the
team determined the current global productivity potential of microalgae. Our results were

much more conservative than those found in the current literature , Quinn says. Even so,
the numbers are impressive . Algae, he says, yields about 2,500 gallons of biofuel per acre
soybeans yield approximately 63 gallons; corn about 435
gallons. In addition, soybeans and corn require arable land that detracts from food
per year in promising locations. In contrast,

production, Quinn says. Microalgae can be produced in non-arable areas unsuitable for agriculture. The
the United States could be used to
produce enough algal biofuel to supplement more than 30 percent of those countries fuel
consumption. Thats an impressive percentage from renewable energy , says Moody, who soon
begins a new position as systems engineer for New Mexicos Sandia National Labs. Our findings will help
USU researchers estimate untillable land in Brazil, Canada, China and

to justify the investment in technology development and infrastructure to make

algal biofuel a viable fuel source.
Oil dependency causes war empirics prove it threatens international security
and escalates conflicts
Colgan 13 - Assistant Professor in the School of International Service at American University
in Washington, D.C. (Jeff, "Oil, Conflict, and U.S. National Interests", Policy Brief, Belfer
Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, October 2013,
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/23517/oil_conflict_and_us_national_interests.
html)//KG
Although the threat of "resource wars" over possession of oil reserves is often exaggerated,
the sum total of the political effects generated by the oil industry makes oil a leading
cause of war . Between one-quarter and one-half of interstate wars since 1973 have been
connected to one or more oil-related causal mechanisms. No other commodity has had such
an impact on international security. The influence of oil on conflict is often poorly
understood. In U.S. public debates about the 1991 and 2003 Iraq wars, both sides focused excessively on the
question of whether the United States was fighting for possession of oil reserves; neither sought a broader
understanding of how oil shaped the preconditions for war. Oil fuels international conflict through

eight
distinct mechanisms: (1) resource wars, in which states try to acquire oil reserves by force;

(2) petro-aggression, whereby oil insulates aggressive leaders such as Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini from domestic opposition, and therefore makes them more willing to engage
in risky foreign policy adventurism; (3) the externalization of civil wars in oil-producing states
("petrostates"); (4) financing for insurgenciesfor instance, Iran funneling oil money to Hezbollah;
(5) conflicts triggered by the prospect of oil-market domination, such as the United States'
war with Iraq over Kuwait in 1991; (6) clashes over control of oil transit routes, such as
shipping lanes and pipelines; (7) oil-related grievances, whereby the presence of foreign
workers in petrostates helps extremist groups such as al-Qaida recruit locals; and (8) oilrelated obstacles to multilateral cooperation, such as when an importer's attempt to curry
favor with a petrostate prevents multilateral cooperation on security issues . These
mechanisms can contribute to conflict individually or in combination. The linkages
between oil and international conflict are growing increasingly important in light of three
transitions under way in global energy markets. The first is the shift in patterns of global oil
production away from traditional suppliers in the Middle East and toward (1) suppliers of
unconventional oil reserves in North America and (2) new suppliers of conventional oil, especially in Africa. As
many as sixteen developing countries will become oil exporters in the near future, creating a
swath of new international security concerns. Second, the low oil prices of the 1990s have
given way to higher and more volatile prices, increasing the magnitude of the consequences
one can expect from oil-conflict linkages. Third, the relative decline of U.S. hegemony may reduce the
provision of public goods such as security of shipping lanes and pipelines. Although these transitions alter some of
the ways in which the oil industry contributes to international conflict, none eliminates linkages between the two or
allows the United States to disengage from global markets. THE ROLE OF FRACKING Understanding the eight
mechanisms linking oil to international security can help policymakers think beyond the much-discussed goal of
energy security, defined as reliable access to affordable fuel supplies. Achieving such an understanding is important
in light of recent changes in the United States. As hydraulic fracturing"fracking"of shale oil and gas

accelerates, energy imports are projected to decline, and North America could even achieve
energy independence, in the sense of low or zero net overall energy imports, in the next decade. Yet the
United States will continue to import large volumes of oil, and the world price of
oil will continue to affect it . Moreover, so long as the rest of the world remains
dependent on global oil markets, the fracking revolution will do little to reduce
many oil-related threats to international security . The emergence of aggressive,
revolutionary leaders in petrostates would likely continue to pose threats to regional
security. Petrostates will continue to be weakly institutionalized and thus subject to civil
wars, creating the kind of security problems that demand responses by the international
community, as occurred in Libya in 2011. Petro-financed insurgent groups such as Hezbollah will persist, as will
threats to the shipping lanes and oil transit routes that supply important U.S. allies, such as Japan. In sum, energy
autarky is not the answer. Self-sufficiency will bring economic benefits to the United States, but few gains for
national security. So long as the oil market remains globally integrated, national oil imports matter far less than
total consumption. Rather than viewing energy self-sufficiency as a panacea, the United States should

contribute to international security by making long-term investments in research and

development to reduce oil consumption and provide alternative fuel sources in the
transportation sector. In addition to the economic and environmental benefits of reducing oil
consumption, substantial evidence exists that military and security benefits will accrue from
such investments.
Algae biofuel foster US independence from oil
Saleh 11 Georgetown University (Sameh, Algae Biodiesel: A Shift to Green Oil?, TTHblog,
11-17-11, http://triplehelixblog.com/2011/11/algae-biodiesel-a-shift-to-green-oil/)//KG
Energy is one of the few commodities that can single-handedly cause economies
to crumble, instigate resource wars, and cripple the fragile balance of the
worlds ecosystem all at once . The symbiotic relationship between consumers and current energy
resources can only be sustained as a function of mutual benefit. When the consumer depletes the available

resources without regards for sustainability, diminution of resources gradually intensifies to what is now known as
the energy crisis. For years, sustainability experts and energy engineers have been warning the

general public of the energy crisis, but only recently have heads started to turn. Now, the
topic of energy is at the forefront of the national agenda and a global point of contention and
reform. For simplicity, it is helpful to put the crisis in a more tangible checklist of causes and indicators. Fossil
fuels lead to alarming economic, social, and environmental problems. Whether one supports
the science behind global warming or not, the implications of limited fossil fuel resources for
our environment are undeniable. In 2007 The Science Daily pointed out that the last 11 years were 11 of
the 13 hottest years in recorded history worldwide1. NASA noted earlier this year that the first half of
2010 has been the warmest in the 131 years that NASA has been taking such statistics 2. Food
production has markedly declined in the southern hemisphere, the polar ice caps are melting, the sea levels are
rising, high-intensity storms frequencies have increased, and the coral reefs are being bleached. But beyond the

controversy of global warming, lies the visible problem of pollution and physical erosion of
the environment. For example, the burning of coal, which produces environmentally toxic
acid rain, and the transportation of oil risks spills threaten human health and the
environment. Failing to take collective action against the widespread use of fossil

fuels has hurts Americas soft power to influence global changes . Such lack of
development of soft power can be traced to the economic and geopolitical basis of the
energy crisis. As of 2010, the United States still depend on foreign countries for about 40% of its fossil fuels3.
This oil dependence has made the U. S. vulnerable to supply cut-offs at any time similar to
the oil embargo of 1973. Reliance on foreign oil also widens the growing U.S. trade deficit ,
which accounts for the low financial value of exports versus imports that threatens the U.S.
economic infrastructure. These two deterrents in a world of competition are resulting in a dramatic shift of
wealth from Western countries to the developing world. Perhaps, Robert Ebel of the Center for Strategic and
International Studies stated most accurately: Oil fuels military power, national treasuries, and

international politics. It has been transformed into a determinant of well-being, of national

security, and of international power for those who possess this vital resource, and the
converse for those who do not 4. To put the extent of the issue in perspective, the United States consumes
nearly a million dollars of energy for every minute of the 525,600 minutes in a common year, $200,000 of which is
spent on foreign oil imports5. Exploring the possible engineering solutions for an alternative to fossil fuels is an
exhaustive subject that requires thorough analysis and research. Eventually, each alternative energy source
is labeled by its debilitating downfall: inefficiency, cost, environmental danger, et cetera. But,

algae biodiesel, formed from the oil of the algal plant material is a very
promising technology on the brink of eluding these pitfalls . The science behind the
process is fairly straightforward: the algae is grown through dark photosynthesis and oil is extracted from
the algae through a press, which will then be converted into a usable biofuel through a chemical process known as
transesterification. However, the reality of proliferating and fine-tuning such a process is understandably more
complex. At face value, the benefits of using algae are astounding and definitely worth the

trouble. Not only does algae biodiesel not further the alarming exponential increase in global
pollution, it actually reduces it by absorbing and cutting CO2 emissions and nitrogen from
waste water6. It efficiently produces ten times more fuel per gallon than any other biofuel and has been
estimated by an assortment of different engineering companies to output at least 4,000 gallons per acre of land
grown7. The efficiency can be valued even more when one appraises the fact that algae can

be grown in any location or climate, unlike other forms of renewable energy like solar, wind,
and geothermal, which depend on specific regional resources. Clearly, both the U.S.
economy as well as individual citizens can benefit from the development of algae
biofuel . So why is the U.S., the second-leading consumer of energy in the world, not a
leading manufacturer of algae biofuel? Due to its competitiveness as an alternative to oil,
federal algae research funding was stopped for an extended period of time . Mr. Curwin, writer for
CNBC notes, The industryneeds to get Washington on its side. Currently, algael biofuels arent eligible for tax
breaks and subsidies going to other biofuels 8. Therefore, businesses perceive that investing in algae

biodiesel is risky because there are no incentives to supplement research and development .
Without incentives, algae biodiesel has not been proven on a mass production scale and
suffers from high production costs. However, as recently as February of this year, there have been

impressive strides to overcome the obstacles that face the implementation of algae biodiesel. The Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency has already extracted oil from algal ponds at a cost of $2 per gallon and is now
on track to begin large-scale refining of the fuel for a cost of less than $3 a gallon9. Currently, the top eight firms in
the U.S. that are working with algae have attracted over $350 million in capital over the past three years, and all of
them have aggressive commercialization dates for their technologies within the next three years8. The strides in
finalizing algae biofuel so far have been promising, but relatively gradual . Thus,

maximization of algae fuels potential depends on incentives from the federal

government

and ultimately on support from its constituents.

Oil price shocks destroy the economy

Pope 13 - former executive director of the Sierra Club, now senior adviser to Securing
America's Energy Future (Carl, Oil dependence: Fracking is no remedy; alternative fuels
are, San Jose Mercury News, 11-1-13,
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_24427996/oil-dependence-fracking-is-no-remedyalternative-fuels)//KG
Forty years ago, the Saudi Oil Ministry informed the Secretary of Defense that it would no longer supply fuel to the
U.S. 6th Fleet. The OPEC oil embargo had begun. For the next five years, the U.S. made serious efforts to escape
monopoly dependence on oil. Then, with the decline in oil prices, we fell asleep. Even when prices began to
rise to the stratosphere in 2004, America kept on snoozing . Whenever voices from the

military, who bear the heaviest burden, urge us to end oil's stranglehold on our
transportation system, the oil cartel and industry concoct a new theory to put us to back to
sleep. This time, the sedative is the promise that huge, exciting, Saudi-sized oil
production in the U.S. will achieve "energy independence ." Increased U.S. oil
production, combined with more efficient autos pouring into the marketplace powered by the Obama fuelefficiency regulations and a revived U.S. auto industry, are indeed lowering the volume of oil that the
U.S. imports. But world oil prices have risen so much that the dollars and jobs we

export to pay for imported oil are greater than ever . We'll add another $4 trillion to our
national debt from importing oil over the next 20 years. As long as the United States uses almost 20
million barrels of oil each day, increasing our domestic production by fracking a million or
two barrels a day -- which are the projections -- still leaves us importing more oil than we did
when the first embargo hit, at a much higher price. And new U.S. oil costs more than $90 a barrel to
find and produce, so it only comes to market if oil continues to be unaffordable. Every American
recession over the past several decades has been preceded by , or was concurrent with,
an oil price spike . The U.S. economy is tied to the highly unpredictable, cartel-influenced
global oil market, which manipulates supply and prices. As long as oil is the lifeblood of the
U.S. economy, wherever a specific barrel comes from, our military will be forced to bear the burden
of guarding against a supply disruption anywhere in the globe. Oil dependence, at times,
requires us to accommodate hostile governments or alter our pursuit of key national security
objectives. We don't tolerate such monopolies elsewhere. We source electricity from hydro, gas, coal, nuclear and
now wind, geothermal and solar. If wheat gets too pricey, we buy rice or corn; chicken can replace beef. It's folly
that nothing is set up to replace oil in our cars, planes or trucks when there are lots of perfectly good energy
sources that could cost less than $100 per barrel. Whenever oil prices spike, we crowd our underinvested transit
systems; let's build them out. Natural gas could power trucks for a fraction of the cost per mile of diesel; electric
cars free drivers from the volatile oil market. We just need to make these alternatives the norm. It's not that oil

is imported that is crippling us, or even that it is expensive. It is the fact that it has a
monopoly -- one our environment, our security and our economy can no longer afford.
After 35 years, it's time for the U.S. to wake up .

Economic decline causes war studies prove

Royal 10
(Jedediah, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense,
2010, Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises, in
Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and
Brauer, p. 213-215)
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external
conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic
decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. Research in this vein has been considered
at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow. First, on the systemic level. Pollins
(20081 advances Modclski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the

global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often
bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as
economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin. 19SJ) that leads
to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Fcaron. 1995).
Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive
environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner.
1999). Separately. Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles
impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and
connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. Second, on a dyadic
level. Copeland's (1996. 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a
significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that
interdependent states arc likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future
trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline , particularly for difficult to
replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be

inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for
decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent
states.4 Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed
conflict at a national level. Mom berg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal
conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write. The
linkage, between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually
reinforcing. Economic conflict lends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the
favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which
international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other (Hlomhen? & Hess. 2(102. p. X9>
Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism
(Blombcrg. Hess. & Wee ra pan a, 2004). which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to
external tensions. Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government.
"Diversionary theory" suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic
decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military
conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DcRoucn (1995), and Blombcrg. Hess,

and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force arc at least indirecti)
correlated. Gelpi (1997). Miller (1999). and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that Ihe tendency towards
diversionary tactics arc greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders
are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has
provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak
Presidential popularity, are statistically linked lo an increase in the use of force. In summary, rcccni economic

scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of

economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external
conflict al systemic, dyadic and national levels.' This implied connection between integration, crises and armed
conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.

Algae biofuels sustain a green navy and air forces its

possible by 2016
Grant 13 - consults businesses on environmental issues (Tom, Jet Engine Biofuel
Passes Test With Flying Colors, Biofriendly Corporation, 6-11-13,

http://biofriendly.com/blog/emissions/jet-engine-biofuel-passes-test-with-flyingcolors/)//KG
On April 25th, 2013, NASA researchers found that a commercial jet could safely fly with
jet fuel that also contained plant oil. In fact, it was reported that a biofuel mix created from
camelina plant oil did not affect a DC-8 aircrafts engine performance as high as 39,000
feet. Additionally, it was reported that the biofuel mix produced 30% fewer emissions
than traditional aviation fuel under certain circumstances, which is excellent news
for the environment. The Test Flights The test flights (that took place near Edwards Air Force Base in
California) were conducted between February and April when weather conditions were optimal in order to create

To actually study the effects on the environment, a specially outfitted HU25C Guardian airplane was used to analyze the contrails . In order to do so, the aircraft have to
be as close as 300 feet to the DC-8 while in flight. While the emission reductions were shown to
be 30%, it is believed that the reduction would be even greater if jets could run
entirely on biofuel. However, in order to move away from the 50-50 blend, a jet would have to be altered.
contrails.

What Is Camelina Oil? Camelina is an oilseed crop native to northeastern Europe. It can be cultivated in the United
States and is considered to be well-suited for the Northern Plains states because it can handle low temperatures
and requires little water. While the research looks promising for using camelina oil to blend with traditional aviation
fuel, its cost is a major factor in deciding whether or not it is really feasible as an alternative fuel source. With a
price tag of about $18 per gallon, it is far more expensive than the $4 a gallon for traditional aviation fuel. Future

With the promising results from initial tests, more tests are planned for 2014.
NASA also wants to do additional flight tests on other biofuels, such as algae.
NASA is interested in using algae to create aviation biofuels in particular
Testing

because of the fact that it does not need fresh water to grow .

Unfortunately,

With
the uncertainty of oil prices, renewable biofuels will decrease the dependency on
foreign oils. At the same time, biofuels will reduce carbon emissions and have a better
impact on the environment. Not only do researchers hope to fuel jets, but the
researchers are limited because of continuous development of commercial applications and technologies.

Navy is hoping to have green aircraft and ships as early as 2016 . It should also
be noted that while there were small differences in emissions during flight, other research has shown that

biofuels can have an even greater environment impact while jets are grounded.
Since idling airplanes at busy airports greatly affect the air quality, using biofuels
can reduce the damage done to the environment . However, more information about the research
will likely be made available to the public, aviation industry, and Environmental Data Resources, in the weeks

Biofuels are the way of the future. With advancements in

technology, people will soon be able to travel more while harming the environment
less.
following the experiments.

This military power is key to hegemony

Conway, Roughead, and Allen, 07- *General of U.S. Marine Corps and Commandant of the

Marine Corps, **Admiral of U.S. Navy and Chief of Naval Operations, ***Admiral of U.S. Coast Guard and Commandant of the Coast
Guard (*James Conway, **Gary Roughead, ***Thad Allen, "A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower", Department of the
Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States Coast Guard, http://www.navy.mil/maritime/MaritimeStrategy.pdf)

This strategy reaffirms the use of seapower to influence actions and activities at sea and ashore. The expeditionary
character and versatility of maritime forces provide the U.S. the asymmetric advantage of enlarging or contracting
its military footprint in areas where access is denied or limited. Permanent or prolonged basing of our military forces

The sea is a vast maneuver

space, where the presence of maritime forces can be adjusted as conditions dictate
to enable flexible approaches to escalation, de-escalation and deterrence of
conflicts. The speed, flexibility, agility and scalability of maritime forces provide
6755 joint or combined force commanders a range of options for responding to
crises. Additionally, integrated maritime operations , either within formal alliance structures
overseas often has unintended economic, social or political repercussions.

(such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) or more informal arrangements (such as the Global Maritime

send powerful messages to would-be aggressors that we will act

with others to ensure collective security and prosperity. United States seapower will
be globally postured to secure our homeland and citizens from direct attack and to
advance our interests around the world. As our security and prosperity are
inextricably linked with those of others, U.S. maritime forces will be deployed to
protect and sustain the peaceful global system comprised of interdependent
networks of trade, finance, information, law, people and governance. We will employ the
Partnership initiative),

global reach, persistent presence, and operational flexibility inherent in U.S. seapower to accomplish six key tasks,

Where tensions are high or where we wish to demonstrate to our

friends and allies our commitment to security and stability, U.S. maritime forces will
be characterized by regionally concentrated, forward-deployed task forces with the
combat power to limit regional conflict, deter major power war , and should
deterrence fail, win our Nations wars as part of a joint or combined campaign. In
addition, persistent, mission-tailored maritime forces will be globally distributed in order to
contribute to homeland defense-in-depth, foster and sustain cooperative
relationships with an expanding set of international partners, and prevent or
mitigate disruptions and crises. Credible combat power will be continuously
postured in the Western Pacific and the Arabian Gulf/Indian Ocean to protect our
vital interests, assure our friends and allies of our continuing commitment to
regional security, and deter and dissuade potential adversaries and peer
competitors. This combat power can be selectively and rapidly repositioned to meet contingencies that may
arise elsewhere. These forces will be sized and postured to fulfill the following strategic imperatives: Limit
regional conflict with forward deployed, decisive maritime power. Today regional conflict
has ramifications far beyond the area of conflict. Humanitarian crises, violence spreading across
borders, pandemics, and the interruption of vital resources are all possible when
regional crises erupt. While this strategy advocates a wide dispersal of networked
maritime forces, we cannot be everywhere, and we cannot act to mitigate all
regional conflict. Where conflict threatens the global system and our national
interests, maritime forces will be ready to respond alongside other elements of
national and multi-national power, to give political leaders a range of options for
deterrence, escalation and de-escalation. Maritime forces that are persistently
present and combat-ready provide the Nations primary forcible entry option in an era of declining access,
even as they provide the means for this Nation to respond quickly to other crises.
Whether over the horizon or powerfully arrayed in plain sight, maritime forces can
deter the ambitions of regional aggressors, assure friends and allies, gain and
maintain access, and protect our citizens while working to sustain the global order.
or strategic imperatives.

Critical to this notion is the maintenance of a powerful fleetships, aircraft, Marine forces, and shore-based fleet
activitiescapable of selectively controlling the seas, projecting power ashore, and protecting friendly forces and

No other disruption is as potentially

disastrous to global stability as war among major powers. Maintenance and
extension of this Nations comparative seapower advantage is a key component of
deterring major power war. While war with another great power strikes many as
improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous effects demands that it be actively
deterred using all elements of national power. The expeditionary character of
maritime forcesour lethality, global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome
barriers to access, and operational agilityprovide the joint commander with a
range of deterrent options. We will pursue an approach to deterrence that includes a
credible and scalable ability to retaliate against aggressors conventionally,
unconventionally, and with nuclear forces.
civilian populations from attack.Deter major power war.

US primacy prevents global conflict diminishing power

creates a vacuum that causes transition wars in multiple
places
Brooks et al 13 [Stephen G. Brooks is Associate Professor of Government at

Dartmouth College.G. John Ikenberry is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics

and International Affairs at Princeton University in the Department of Politics and
the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He is also a Global
Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University.William C. Wohlforth is the Daniel
Webster Professor in the Department of Government at Dartmouth College. Don't
Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment, Winter 2013, Vol. 37, No.
3, Pages 7-51,http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/ISEC_a_00107]
A core premise of deep engagement is that it prevents the emergence of a far
more dangerous global security environment. For one thing, as noted above, the United States overseas
presence gives it the leverage to restrain partners from taking provocative action.
Perhaps more important, its core alliance commitments also deter states with aspirations to regional hegemony from contemplating expansion and make
its partners more secure, reducing their incentive to adopt solutions to their security problems that threaten others and thus stoke security dilemmas. The
contention that engaged U.S. power dampens the baleful effects of anarchy is consistent with influential variants of realist theory. Indeed, arguably the
scariest portrayal of the war-prone world that would emerge absent the American Pacifier is provided in the works of John Mearsheimer,
who forecasts dangerous multipolar regions replete with security competition, arms races, nuclear proliferation and associated
preventive wartemptations, regional rivalries, and even runs at regional hegemony and full-scale great power war. 72 How do retrenchment advocates, the
bulk of whom are realists, discount this benefit? Their arguments are complicated, but two capture most of the variation: (1) U.S. security guarantees are
not necessary to prevent dangerous rivalries and conflict in Eurasia; or (2) prevention of rivalry and conflict in Eurasia is not a U.S. interest. Each response
is connected to a different theory or set of theories, which makes sense given that the whole debate hinges on a complex future counterfactual (what
would happen to Eurasias security setting if the United States truly disengaged?). Although a certain answer is impossible, each of these
responses is nonetheless a weaker argument for retrenchment than advocates acknowledge. The first response flows from defensive realism as well as
other international relations theories that discount the conflict-generating potential of anarchy under contemporary conditions. 73 Defensive realists
maintain that the high expected costs of territorial conquest, defense dominance, and an array of policies and practices that can be used credibly
to signal benign intent, mean that Eurasias major states could manage regional multipolarity peacefully without theAmerican pacifier. Retrenchment
would be a bet on this scholarship, particularly in regions where the kinds of stabilizers that nonrealist theories point tosuch as democratic governance
or dense institutional linkagesare either absent or weakly present. There are three other major bodies of scholarship, however, that might give
decisionmakers pause before making this bet. First is regional expertise. Needless to say, there is no consensus on the net security effects of U.S.
withdrawal. Regarding each region, there are optimists and pessimists. Few experts expect a return of intense great power competition in a post-American
Europe, but many doubt European governments will pay the political costs of increased EU defense cooperation and the budgetary costs of increasing

Europe that is incapable of securing itself from various

threats that could be destabilizing within the region and beyond (e.g., a regional conflict akin to the
military outlays. 74 The result might be a

1990s Balkan wars), lacks capacity for global security missions in which U.S. leaders might want European participation, and is vulnerable to the influence

What about the other parts of Eurasia where the United States has a
substantial military presence? Regarding the Middle East, the balance begins toswing
toward pessimists concerned that states currently backed by Washington
notably Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia might take actions upon U.S. retrenchment that
would intensify security dilemmas. And concerning East Asia, pessimismregarding the
regions prospects without the American pacifier is pronounced. Arguably the principal concern
expressed by area experts is that Japan and South Korea are likely to obtain a nuclear
of outside rising powers.

capacity and increase their military commitments, which could stoke a destabilizing reaction from
China . It is notable that during the Cold War, both South Korea and Taiwan moved to obtain a nuclear weapons capacity and were only
constrained from doing so by astill-engaged United States. 75 The second body of scholarship casting doubt on the bet on defensive realisms sanguine
portrayal is all of the research that undermines its conception of state preferences. Defensive realisms optimism about what would happen if the
United States retrenched is very much dependent on itsparticularand highly restrictiveassumption about state preferences; once we relax
this assumption, then much of its basis for optimism vanishes. Specifically, the prediction of post-American tranquility throughout Eurasia rests on the
assumption that security is the only relevant state preference, with security defined narrowly in terms of protection from violent external attacks on the
homeland. Under that assumption, the security problem is largely solved as soon as offense and defense are clearly distinguishable, and offense is

research across the social and other sciences,

undermines that core assumption: states have preferences not only for security but
also for prestige, status, and other aims, and theyengage in trade-offs among the various objectives. 76 In
addition, they define security not just in terms of territorial protection but in view of many and varied milieu
goals. It follows that even states that are relatively secure may nevertheless engage
in highly competitive behavior. Empirical studies show that this is indeed sometimes the case. 77 In
extremely expensive relative to defense. Burgeoning
however,

sum, a bet on a benign postretrenchment Eurasia is a bet that leaders of major countries will never allow these nonsecurity preferences to influence their

U.S. retrenchment would

result in a significant deterioration in the security environment in at least some of the
worlds key regions. We have already mentioned the third, even more alarming body of scholarship. Offensive realism predicts
strategic choices. To the degree that these bodies of scholarly knowledge have predictive leverage,

the withdrawal of the American pacifier will

yield either a competitive regional multipolarity complete with associated insecurity,
arms racing, crisis instability, nuclear proliferation , and the like, or bids for regional hegemony, which
may be beyond the capacity of local great powers to contain (and which in any case would generate intensely
competitive behavior, possibly including regional great power war ).
that

Warming
Advantage 2 is Warming
Warming is real, anthropogenic, and caused by fossil fuels
Waltham 6/25, Dr. David Waltham is a teacher and researcher in Earth Sciences and
Geophysics at the University of London. He has a PhD in Signal Processing, the application of
nonstationary statistical methods to the processing of seismic reflection data, at Kings
College London. (Three reasons why climate change is real, and humans are causing it
Paleoclimatology can answer the question of anthropogenic climate change by using fossils
to show links between global temperatures and CO2 levels,
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/25/three-reasons-climate-change-realand-humans-cause-it, 6/25/2014) Kerwin
Dire warnings of imminent human-induced climate disaster are constantly in the news but
predictions of the end of the world have been made throughout history and have never yet come
true. Even in the brief period of recorded history, natural climate change has always been with us
whether it is the volcanically induced crop failures that helped precipitate the French revolution or the medieval
warm period that allowed Vikings to colonise Greenland. So how can we trust that the computer models
scientists use to make predictions are reliable? There is sometimes reluctance to take experts' words for
anything and so we would like to be shown the evidence. Unfortunately, that is difficult when the details are buried
under hundreds of thousands of lines of computer code which implement mathematical algorithms of mindnumbing complexity. There is, however, one branch of science that can reliably give an answer that is easy to
understand and hard not to believe. Evidence written in stone Paleoclimatology the study of

Earth's past climates has used fossils to show links between global temperatures and
carbon-dioxide levels. This record is written in stone. There are fossil plant-leaves from 55m years
ago that have a microscopic structure which can be accurately reproduced in modern plants
only when grown in a carbon-dioxide-rich atmosphere. Is it a coincidence that, at the time, it was
so warm that crocodiles were living within the Arctic circle? And this is not an isolated case. A
sedimentary record covering half a billion years shows us exactly what we would expect to see if climate modellers
have done their sums right. Fossil and chemical traces in rocks indicate that warm periods in

Earth's history are associated with higher concentrations of carbon dioxide and quantitative
studies show that this correlation is, if anything, even stronger than predicted. Simple calculations
Those 55m year-old leaves suggest that carbon dioxide concentrations were about four times the present-day levels
and back-of-the-envelope calculations indicate that global mean temperatures were around 7C higher. For
comparison, the largely computer-based predictions published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
imply that quadrupling carbon-dioxide concentrations should increase temperatures by between 3C and 9C. The
simple paleoclimate example may not nail the case for a worryingly strong link between carbon dioxide and
temperature, but it is good supporting data. What is most important, however, is that this evidence is hard to

refute. Counter arguments are unconvincing There is little doubt that the recent rapid
increase in carbon dioxide is linked to human activities such as burning of fossil fuels and
deforestation. But does the paleoclimate evidence really tell us that increased carbon dioxide must mean
increased temperatures? One objection might be that ancient climate change is really evidence
for varying solar brightness. Fluctuating carbon dioxide levels are then a response to climate
variation rather than the cause. However, solar physics tells us that the sun was fainter 55m
years ago rather than brighter, as would be needed for higher temperature . Another concern
is that some important processes, such as ice-sheet disintegration, only affect climate very
slowly. Our warming ice sheets may take centuries to disappear completely but, when they
do, the replacement of reflective-ice by heat-absorbing rock will warm our planet yet further .
The existence of potential complications like these makes comparisons between paleoclimate change and modern
climate change difficult but it is also one of the reasons why multiple approaches are needed. If different
researchers using different methods nevertheless come up with more or less the same answer, perhaps they are
onto something. Climate change deniers also confuse the argument by suggesting there is

nothing we can do anyway. China and other rapidly developing countries will dominate
carbon dioxide output in the 21st century. But that is irrelevant if we are simply asking: "Will

increased carbon dioxide levels change our climate?" The ConversationThe fact that political and
technical problems are massively more complex than anything in climatology is not a reason to stick our heads in
the sand. Widespread agreement that man-made global warming is highly likely would be progress.

Warming is on a temporary slowdown but its still inevitable and catastrophic in

the status quo sharp mitigation is key to solve
The Economist 4/8/2014, (Who pressed the pause button?, [
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21598610-slowdown-risingtemperatures-over-past-15-years-goes-being ] , //hss-RJ)
BETWEEN 1998 and 2013, the Earths surface temperature rose at a rate of 0.04C a
decade, far slower than the 0.18C increase in the 1990s. Meanwhile, emissions of carbon
dioxide (which would be expected to push temperatures up) rose uninterruptedly. This pause
in warming has raised doubts in the public mind about climate change . A few sceptics say
flatly that global warming has stopped. Others argue that scientists understanding of the
climate is so flawed that their judgments about it cannot be accepted with any confidence.
A convincing explanation of the pause therefore matters both to a proper understanding of
the climate and to the credibility of climate scienceand papers published over the past
few weeks do their best to provide one. Indeed, they do almost too good a job. If all were
correct, the pause would now be explained twice over. This is the opposite of what
happened at first. As evidence piled up that temperatures were not rising much, some
scientists dismissed it as a blip. The temperature, they pointed out, had fallen for much
longer periods twice in the past century or so, in 1880-1910 and again in 1945-75 (see
chart), even though the general trend was up. Variability is part of the climate system and a
15-year hiatus, they suggested, was not worth getting excited about. An alternative way of
looking at the pauses significance was to say that there had been a slowdown but not a big
one. Most records, including one of the best known (kept by Britains Meteorological Office),
do not include measurements from the Arctic, which has been warming faster than
anywhere else in the world. Using satellite data to fill in the missing Arctic numbers, Kevin
Cowtan of the University of York, in Britain, and Robert Way of the University of Ottawa, in
Canada, put the overall rate of global warming at 0.12C a decade between 1998 and 2012
not far from the 1990s rate. A study by NASA puts the Arctic effect over the same period
somewhat lower, at 0.07C a decade, but that is still not negligible. It is also worth
remembering that average warming is not the only measure of climate change. According to
a study just published by Sonia Seneviratne of the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate
Science, in Zurich, the number of hot days, the number of extremely hot days and the
length of warm periods all increased during the pause (1998-2012). A more stable
average temperature hides wider extremes . Still, attempts to explain away that
stable average have not been convincing, partly because of the conflict between flat
temperatures and rising CO2 emissions, and partly because observed temperatures are
now falling outside the range climate models predict. The models embody the state of
climate knowledge. If they are wrong, the knowledge is probably faulty, too. Hence
attempts to explain the pause. Chilling news In September 2013 the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change did so in terms of fluctuating solar output, atmospheric pollution
and volcanoes. All three, it thought, were unusually influential. The suns power output
fluctuates slightly over a cycle that lasts about 11 years. The current cycle seems to have
gone on longer than normal and may have started from a lower base, so for the past decade
less heat has been reaching Earth than usual. Pollution throws aerosols (particles such as
soot, and suspended droplets of things like sulphuric acid) into the air, where they reflect
sunlight back into space. The more there are, the greater their cooling effect and pollution

from Chinese coal-fired power plants, in particular, has been rising. Volcanoes do the same
thing, so increased volcanic activity tends to reduce temperatures. Gavin Schmidt and two
colleagues at NASAs Goddard Institute quantify the effects of these trends in Nature
Geoscience . They argue that climate models underplay the delayed and subdued solar
cycle. They think the models do not fully account for the effects of pollution
(specifically, nitrate pollution and indirect effects like interactions between aerosols and
clouds). And they claim that the impact of volcanic activity since 2000 has been greater than
previously thought. Adjusting for all this, they find that the difference between actual
temperature readings and computer-generated ones largely disappears. The implication is
that the solar cycle and aerosols explain much of the pause. Blowing hot and cold There is,
however, another type of explanation. Much of the incoming heat is absorbed by
oceans , especially the largest, the Pacific. Several new studies link the pause with changes
in the Pacific and in the trade winds that influence the circulation of water within it. Trade
winds blow east-west at tropical latitudes. In so doing they push warm surface water towards
Asia and draw cooler, deep water to the surface in the central and eastern Pacific, which
chills the atmosphere . Water movement at the surface also speeds up a giant churn in the
ocean. This pulls some warm water downwards, sequestering heat at greater depth. In a
study published in Nature in 2013, Yu Kosaka and Shang-Ping Xie of the Scripps Institution
of Oceanography, in San Diego, argued that much of the difference between climate
models and actual temperatures could be accounted for by cooling in the eastern Pacific.
Every few years, as Dr Kosaka and Dr Xie observe, the trade winds slacken and the warm
water in the western Pacific sloshes back to replace the cool surface layer of the central and
eastern parts of the ocean. This weather pattern is called El Nio and it warms the whole
atmosphere. There was an exceptionally strong Nio in 1997-98, an unusually hot year. The
opposite pattern, with cooler temperatures and stronger trade winds, is called La Nia. The
1997-98 Nio was followed by a series of Nias, explaining part of the pause . Switches
between El Nio and La Nia are frequent. But there is also a long-term cycle called the
Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), which switches from a warm (or positive) phase to a cool
(negative) one every 20 or 30 years. The positive phase encourages more frequent, powerful
Nios. According to Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo of Americas National Centre for
Atmospheric Research, the PDO was positive in 1976-98a period of rising temperatures
and negative in 1943-76 and since 2000, producing a series of cooling Nias. But that is not
the end of it. Laid on top of these cyclical patterns is what looks like a one-off increase in
the strength of trade winds during the past 20 years. According to a study in Nature Climate
Change, by Matthew England of the University of New South Wales and others, record trade
winds have produced a sort of super-Nia. On average, sea levels have risen by about 3mm
a year in the past 30 years. But those in the eastern Pacific have barely budged, whereas
those near the Philippines have risen by 20cm since the late 1990s. A wall of warm water,
in other words, is being held in place by powerful winds, with cool water rising behind it.
According to Dr England, the effect of the trade winds explains most of the temperature
pause. If so, the pause has gone from being not explained to explained twice overonce by
aerosols and the solar cycle, and again by ocean winds and currents. These two accounts
are not contradictor y. The processes at work are understood, but their relative contributions
are not. Nor is the answer to what is, from the human point of view, the biggest question of
all, namely what these explanations imply about how long the pause might continue. On

the face of it, if some heat is being sucked into the deep ocean, the process could simply
carry on: the ocean has a huge capacity to absorb heat as long as the pump sending it to
the bottom remains in working order. But that is not all there is to it. Gravity wants the
western-Pacific water wall to slosh back; it is held in place only by exceptionally strong trade
winds. If those winds slacken, temperatures will start to rise again. The solar
cycle is already turning. And aerosol cooling is likely to be reined in by Chinas
anti-pollution laws. Most of the circumstances that have put the planets
temperature rise on pause look temporary . Like the Terminator, global
warming will be back.
Transition to algae mitigates warming reduces fossil fuel consumption and feeds
on carbon dioxide
Owens 14 degree in chemical engineering with an environmental focus from University of
Southern California (Melissa, The Power of Pond Scum: Algae Biofuels, Illumin, 7-11-14,
http://illumin.usc.edu/printer/24/the-power-of-pond-scum-algae-biofuels/)//KG
Why Goo is Great - Algae as an Attractive Alternative Obviously, algae fuel competes with many other
renewable biofuel energy sources such as ethanol fuel and biomass. So what distinguishes
algae fuel as a superior option? Like other biofuel options, a reliance on algae fuel will reduce the
United States' dependence on foreign oil. An inconsistent supply of oil could lead to wild price
fluctuations, soaring especially in the summer months. Alternative fuels, such as algae, produced
domestically are more secure and subject to fewer transportation costs, allowing the price to
be more stable. Algae have a few other unique features that can give it an advantage over other biofuels. Most
notable are the algas size and its ability to proliferate . Marine algae are the most efficient organisms on
earth for absorbing light energy, yielding 5 to 10 times more bioenergy molecules per area per time than any other
plant source [5]. Generally, up to half of an algas body weight is oil, meaning algae have very
high yields. Theoretically, algae would produce 10,000 gallons of oil per acre per year, while

soy, canola, and palm oils produce 50, 150, and 650 gallons per acre per year, respectively
[1]. Also, algaes reproductive capabilities are unparalleled; algae can double in weight several times per day,
according to the US Department of Energy [6]. Because of algaes remarkable proliferation ability,

oil
from algae could be harvested every day, unlike plant sources (such as soybeans or corn)
whose harvesting is delayed by seasonal cycles. The production of algae fuel also has
beneficial environmental effects. Algae feed on carbon dioxide, the hazardous
greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming . With our carbon footprint
becoming more pronounced, and the need to reduce carbon emissions becoming more
immediate, any process that reduces, rather than creates, carbon emissions is highly
beneficial. Because the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not large enough to elicit exponential
growth from algae, engineers have proposed the idea of collecting carbon emissions from
sources such as coal power plants and directly feeding them into an algae fuel-producing
facility. This economical and environmentally-friendly form of recycling would
both reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere and create the ideal
conditions for algae growth. The requirements for the growth of algae are also environmentally
advantageous. A large portion of the tens of thousands of species of algae can thrive in both fresh water and
brackish water, thus reducing the limitations on proliferation sites. Further, unlike other crops algae do not require
large fields that demand fresh water irrigation; they could simply be farmed on flooded land (UPI). In addition to
this, the cultivation of algae for fuel will not infringe on the worlds food supply because algae are not a human food
source like corn or soybeans. Even byproducts from algae fuel production can be applied; after extracting the oil
from algae, a nutrient-rich, paste-like substance remains that could be marketed as fertilizer [2].
Warming causes extinction
IPCC 14, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (Summary for Policymakers,
http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf, 2014) Kerwin

A: OBSERVED IMPACTS, VULNERABILITY, AND ADAPTATION IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING WORLD A-1. Observed
Impacts, Vulnerability, and Exposure In recent decades, changes in climate have caused impacts on

natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans . Evidence of climatechange impacts is strongest and most comprehensive for natural systems. Some impacts on

human systems have also been attributed5 to climate change, with a major or minor contribution of climate change
distinguishable from other influences. See Figure SPM.2. Attribution of observed impacts in the WGII AR5 generally
links responses of natural and human systems to observed climate change, regardless of its cause.6 In many
regions, changing precipitation or melting snow and ice are altering hydrological systems,
affecting water resources in terms of quantity and quality (medium confidence). Glaciers
continue to shrink almost worldwide due to climate change (high confidence), affecting runoff
and water resources downstream (medium confidence). Climate change is causing permafrost
warming and thawing in highlatitude regions and in high-elevation regions (high confidence).7

Many terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species have shifted their geographic ranges,
seasonal activities, migration patterns, abundances, and species interactions in response to
ongoing climate change (high confidence). See Figure SPM.2B. While only a few recent species
extinctions have been attributed as yet to climate change (high confidence), natural global
climate change at rates slower than current anthropogenic climate change caused
significant ecosystem shifts and species extinctions during the past millions of years (high
confidence).8 Based on many studies covering a wide range of regions and crops, negative impacts of
climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts (high confidence). The
smaller number of studies showing positive impacts relate mainly to high-latitude regions,
though it is not yet clear whether the balance of impacts has been negative or positive in these regions
(high confidence). Climate change has negatively affected wheat and maize yields for many
regions and in the global aggregate (medium confidence). Effects on rice and soybean yield have
been smaller in major production regions and globally, with a median change of zero across all
available data, which are fewer for soy compared to the other crops. Observed impacts relate mainly to
production aspects of food security rather than access or other components of food security. See Figure SPM.2C.
Since AR4, several periods of rapid food and cereal price increases following climate extremes
in key producing regions indicate a sensitivity of current markets to climate extremes among
other factors (medium confidence).11 At present the worldwide burden of human ill-health from climate change is
relatively small compared with effects of other stressors and is not well quantified. However , there has been
increased heat-related mortality and decreased cold-related mortality in some regions as a result of
warming (medium confidence). Local changes in temperature and rainfall have altered the
distribution of some waterborne illnesses and disease vectors (medium confidence).12 Differences
in vulnerability and exposure arise from non-climatic factors and from multidimensional inequalities often produced
by uneven development processes (very high confidence). These differences shape differential risks from climate
change. See Figure SPM.1. People who are socially, economically, culturally, politically,
institutionally, or otherwise marginalized are especially vulnerable to climate change and also
to some adaptation and mitigation responses (medium evidence, high agreement). This heightened vulnerability is
rarely due to a single cause. Rather, it is the product of intersecting social processes that result in
inequalities in socioeconomic status and income, as well as in exposure. Such social processes

include, for example, discrimination on the basis of gender, class, ethnicity, age, and
(dis)ability.13 Impacts from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat waves, droughts, floods,
cyclones, and wildfires, reveal significant vulnerability and exposure of some ecosystems and many
human systems to current climate variability (very high confidence). Impacts of such climaterelated extremes include alteration of ecosystems, disruption of food production and water
supply, damage to infrastructure and settlements, morbidity and mortality, and
consequences for mental health and human well-being. For countries at all levels of
development, these impacts are consistent with a significant lack of preparedness for
current climate variability in some sectors.14 Climate-related hazards exacerbate other
stressors, often with negative outcomes for livelihoods, especially for people living in
poverty (high confidence). Climate-related hazards affect poor peoples lives directly through
impacts on livelihoods, reductions in crop yields, or destruction of homes and indirectly
through, for example, increased food prices and food insecurity. Observed positive effects for
poor and marginalized people, which are limited and often indirect, include examples such as
diversification of social networks and of agricultural practices. 15 Violent conflict increases
vulnerability to climate change (medium evidence, high agreement). Large-scale violent conflict

harms assets that facilitate adaptation, including infrastructure, institutions, natural

resources, social capital, and livelihood opportunities. 16

Solvency
The United States federal government should substantially increase its Offshore
Membrane Enclosures for Growing Algae.
Algae biofuels are competitive with fossil fuels
Darzins et al 10 - principal group manager, leads the research of the Applied Sciences
Group in the National Bioenergy Center (NBC), a multidisciplinary research team responsible
for developing and integrating chemical and biological technologies for the conversion of
biomass to transportation fuels (Al, Current Status and Potential for Algal Biofuels
Production, IEA Bioenergy, 8-6-10,
http://www.globalbioenergy.org/uploads/media/1008_IEA_Bioenergy__Current_status_and_potential_for_algal_biofuels_production.pdf)//KG
More than 50 years of research have demonstrated the potential of various microalgal
species to produce several chemical intermediates and hydrocarbons that can be converted
into biofuels. Figure 1-3 is a schematic overview of microalgal chemical intermediates and the fuels that can be
produced from these important components. The three major macromolecular components that can
be extracted from microalgal biomass are lipids, carbohydrates, and proteins. These
chemical components can be converted into a variety of fuel options such as alcohols,
diesel, methane, and hydrogen. Of the three major microalgal fractions, lipids, by far, have the
highest energy content. Some species, like Botryococcus, are capable of secreting hydrocarbon molecules
like, those found in petroleum oil. Other microalgal species can accumulate significant amounts of triacylglycerides
(TAGs). These lipids, which resemble the triacylglycerides from oilseed crops, can be converted into
biodiesel and a synthetic green diesel. Microalgal-derived carbohydrates can also be

converted into a variety of fuels such as ethanol or butanol by standard fermentation

processes. Alternatively, the algal biomass residue remaining after oil extraction can be
converted into methane gas using an anaerobic digestion process or into several different
fuel intermediates through various thermochemical processes. While it is beyond the scope of this
report to consider all the potential conversion processes to produce fuel from microalgal feedstocks, historically the
emphasis has been on the high-energy lipids and oils. Many microalgal species have the ability to accumulate large
amounts of triglycerides, especially under stressinduced growth conditions (Milner, 1976). The vast majority of
lipids in most growing cells are typically found in the membrane that surrounds the cell. However, some strains
produce significant amounts of storage lipids and can, when grown, for example, under nutrient limiting conditions,
accumulate storage lipids up to 60 percent of their total weight. The notion of generating biofuels from these
microalgal storage lipids was the main focus of the DOE Aquatic Species Program (1978 - 1996; Sheehan et al.,
1998).

With the real potential for rising petroleum prices in the future and ever

increasing concerns over energy independence, security, and global warming,

the notion of using microalgal feedstocks for biofuels production has steadily
gained momentum over the last few years . Lipids derived from microalgae have been
the predominant focus of this interest because these oils contain fatty acid and triglyceride
compounds, which, like their terrestrial seed oil counterparts, can be converted into alcohol
esters (biodiesel) using conventional transesterification technology (Fukuda et al., 2001). Alternatively, the oils
can be used to produce a renewable or green diesel product by a process known as catalytic
hydroprocessing (Kalnes et al., 2007). The use of vegetable oil and waste fats for biofuel production cannot
realistically begin to satisfy the increasing worldwide demand for transportation fuels nor are they likely in the near
term to displace a significant portion of the U.S. petroleum fuel usage (Tyson et al., 2004).

Algalderived oils

have the potential to displace petroleum-based fuels because their

productivities (i.e., oil yield/hectare) can be 10 to100 times higher than that of terrestrial oilseed
crops (see Table 1-1). These comparisons often do not include the land required to support the actual pond.
do, however,

Activities such as water supply, water treatment, waste disposal and other activities can significantly increase the
area required for cultivation and reduce the effective production rates.

Investments in the Offshore Membrane Enclosures for Growing Algae or OMEGA

overcome status quo challenges to algae cultivation
Rimal 14 - UNESCO Fellow at AGH University of Science and Technology in the Department
of Environmental Biotechnology and Ecology, graduate of Biotechnology from Purbanchal
University in Nepal, focus on bio-energy and cost effective production of second generation
biofuels from biomass plants (Bigyan, GREEN SCUM TO GREEN ENERGY PROSPECTS AND
CHALLENGES, Student Energy, 3-12-14, http://studentenergy.org/blog/green-scum-to-greenenergy-prospects-and-challenges/)//KG
When one thinks of algae, it is either the green scum on the surface of stagnant ponds and moist surfaces or some
sea-weeds. However, when it comes to energy, we talk about those algal species which are single celled and

It is widely accepted that plants generate the atmospheric

oxygen which we need to breath, but almost 75% of atmospheric oxygen is produced by
photosynthetic algae and cyanobacteria. Algae mastered the technique of converting the sunlight into energy
sources long before plants. Algae were the first photosynthetic organisms on the Earth. There are
microscopic, namely Micro algae.

number of alternatives to fossil fuel energies, but why people are talking about these micro organisms is an issue to
ponder. There are some micro algae species like Botryococcus braunii which produce up to 60% oil off their dry

algae are not only important for fuel, but are important to the food and chemical
industries as well. These organisms are a promising alternative to liquid fuels because of
their optimum production of energy from limited use of land (arable) and water resources. Micro
weight. Micro

algae have the highest conversion efficiency (9% of solar energy to algal biomass) compared to 2-3% for common
C4 plants. Habitat diversity (i.e. ability to grow in different substrates: salty, sugary etc.) and the fact that they do
not accumulate recalcitrant compounds like lignocelluloses, make these advantageous over plant biomass also.
Genetic engineering techniques like random insertional mutagenesis [1] and targeted gene disruption [2] are
already established to enhance the bioenergy production from micro algae. The metabolic pathways of production
of energy sources in micro algae are already depicted. The figures below highlight the major processes that occur in
micro algae. With all these possibilities and achievements it seems microalgae are the best alternative source for
energy production. If so, why are not we fuelling our vehicles with algal oil or gas? Micro algae growth is as

Growth of micro algae primarily depends on sunlight intensity and

availability, nutrient source, carbondioxide level, temperature and the system of cultivation .
challenging as it is promising.

Though the idea looks perfect, when it comes to optimising all these parameters the problem becomes colossal.

Because of huge capital costs, not a single

micro

algae commercial-scale

production system for energy production exists . Selection of location with proper sunlight
exposure is very important. Sometimes higher exposure to sun can reduce the growth of algae the photo
inhibition effect. Locations with insolation not less than 3000hr/yr are supposed to be good. The water supply is
another challenge. Low cost and regular supply of appropriate water is very important for algae
cultivation. An advantage is waste water or sea water can also be used, but the risk of increasing inhibiting factors
is always high and pre-treatment increases the cost of cultivation. Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium are the
major nutrients required for micro algae cultivation. A dried mass of micro algae contains approximately 7% of
Nitrogen and 1% of Phosphorus. The nitrogen supplement also leads to additional cost. To produce 1 kilo of micro
algae biomass, 1.83 kg of CO2 is required. Installation of a CO2 generation unit is a poor choice in terms of the cost
and the environmental affect. Therefore, the location must be near a continuous source of CO2. Fossil fuel use
cannot be by-passed completely, even though we want to produce electricity fuels from algae. During the time of
cultivation, temperature regulation plays an important role in producing optimum yields . The use
of natural gas during drying processes also demands expense of it. Chances of soil and water pollution because of

Despite all these challenges, investments are

increasing more rapidly in algal research and cultivation both at the governmental and
industrial level. This signifies the possibility of using these organisms as a more prominent energy source.
Eutrophication of residual nutrients are also high.

However, an integrated approach of cultivation and use of resources must be

applied. Technologies like OMEGA (Offshore Membrane Enclosure for growing algae) bioreactors

[3]

invented by NASA would be the best way for economically viable production . These
reactors are based on a systems approach methodology where production of clean energy
includes treatment of waste water, uptakes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, requires no
arable lands or fresh water as well as recycles important nutrients . Similarly, research on
minimizing the cost as well as the detrimental effects of each step in cultivation
of algae and production of biofuels is extensive . Therefore, the prospect of using green
scum for a sustainable future is hopeful!
OMEGA is economically viable
Trent 12 - PhD in biological oceanography at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, leads the
OMEGA program at NASA (Jonathan, OFFSHORE MEMBRANE ENCLOSURES FOR GROWING
ALGAE (OMEGA) A Feasibility Study for Wasterwater to Biofuels,
NASA Ames Research Center, December 2012,
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2013publications/CEC-500-2013-143/CEC-500-2013-143.pdf)//KG
Techno-economic modeling indicates that converting algae to biofuels only will be difficult if
not impossible to support economically. By leveraging the potential of the OMEGA platform
for other services and activities, however, may change the economic picture . For example,
combining algae cultivation for biofuels with wastewater treatment, renewable electricity,
and aquaculture significantly changes the economics (Fig. 8). Collocating OMEGA with a municipal
wastewater treatment plant provides nitrogen and phosphorus from wastewater as well as carbon from combustion
of biogas. In turn, the algae provide biological nutrient removal and contaminant remediation for
the wastewater. The floating docks supported aquaculture of mussel production and also
provided power for the OMEGA system by providing surfaces for solar panels and access to
vertical-axis wind turbines as well as power buoys . The locally generated power supported cultivation,
harvesting, and bio-oil production with surplus electricity exported to the grid. Bio-oil production used traditional
solvent extraction methods, but hydrothermal liquefaction could reduce the uncertainty of cost

estimates. Using this industrial symbiosis system, and assuming a 10 percent return on
investment, the cost of renewable diesel fell from $6.67/L (without symbiosis) to $5.80/L (13 percent
reduction) with wastewater treatment, to $4.20/L (24 percent reduction) with the addition of renewable electricity
sources, and to $1.43/L (41 percent reduction) with revenue from aquaculture.

The economic impact of

the integrated system represents a 78 percent reduction in costs

(Fig. 8).

US federal investment is key its the world leader and has the most experience
Trentacoste et al 3/6 Scripps Institution of Oceanography at he University of CaliforniaSan Diego (Emily M., The place of algae in agriculture: policies for algal biomass
production, 6 Mary 2014, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11120-014-99858/fulltext.html//AL)
Large-scale cultivation of algae, or algaculture, has existed for over half a century. More recently, algaculture for
food and fuel purposes has begun the transition from R&D and pilot-scale operations to commercial-scale systems.
It is crucial during this period that institutional frameworks (i.e., policies) support and promote development, and
commercialization. While the U.S. government has supported the R&D stage of algaculture for

biofuels over the last few decades, it is imperative that policies anticipate and stimulate the
evolution of the industry to the next level. Large-scale cultivation of algae merges the fundamental
aspects of traditional agriculture and aquaculture. Despite this overlap, algaculture has not yet been
afforded an official position within agriculture or the benefits associated with it. Recognition
of algaculture as part of agriculture under the USDA at national, regional, and local levels
will expand agricultural support and assistance programs to algae cultivation, thus
encouraging progression of the industry. The U.S. is currently the world leader in algal
biomass technology and hosts a disproportionate number of companies devoted to the

industry (Fig. 4). Continued federal support and initiatives will provide the spark needed to
drive algaculture into the next stage of commercialization.
No one has committed to OMEGA yet NASA commitment and funding is key to
launch sites across the world they have the key tech
Trent 12 - studied at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC-San Diego, specializing in
extremophiles, lead scientist on the OMEGA project at NASA's Ames Research Center in
California (Jonathan, Even greener alternative: Energy from algae, New Scientist, 8-31-12,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528797.200-even-greener-alternative-energyfrom-algae.html)//KG
OK, if it's so good, where is it? For the past two years, backed by NASA and the California Energy
Commission, and about $11 million, we have crawled over every aspect of OMEGA. In Santa
Cruz, Calif., we built and tested small-scale PBRs in seawater tanks. We studied OMEGA
processing wastewater in San Francisco, and we investigated biofouling and the impact on
marine life at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories in Monterey Bay. I'm now pretty confident we
can deal with the biological, engineering, and environmental issues. So will it fly economically? Of the options
we tested, the OMEGA system combined with renewable energy sourceswind, solar, and
wave technologiesand aquaculture looks most promising. Now with funds running out
and NASA keen to spin off OMEGA, we need the right half-hectare site for a
scaled-up demonstration. While there is enthusiasm and great potential sites in places
ranging from Saudi Arabia to New Zealand, Australia to Norway, Guantanamo Bay to South
Korea, as yet no one has committed to the first ocean deployment. We could be on
the threshold of a crucial transition in human history from hunting and gathering our
energy to growing it sustainably. But that means getting serious about every option, from
alpha to OMEGA.