Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 226

DDI 08- K.O.

Solar Satellites: The Space


AFF
Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt 1/226
Solar Satellites- The Space AFF
Solar Satellites 1AC...........................................................................................................5
Contention 1- The Advantages.........................................................................................6
Advantage 2: Cosmic Dominance/ Galactic Peace........................................................12
Advantage 3: Ditching the Rock.....................................................................................18
Contention 2 is Solvency .................................................................................................22
Inherency- Now is key time.............................................................................................24
Military Support..............................................................................................................25
Obstacles Now..................................................................................................................26
Tech Feasible Now...........................................................................................................27
Solar Advances Now........................................................................................................28
Lack of Funding...............................................................................................................29
Space has untapped energy.............................................................................................31
Space Race and Space Col inevitable.............................................................................32
Military Advantage- Uniqueness....................................................................................33
Oil Dependency Kills Readiness.....................................................................................35
Resupply Hurts Readiness..............................................................................................36
Oil Consumption Increasing...........................................................................................37
DOD Lacks Organized Program....................................................................................38
Oil is running out.............................................................................................................39
Links- Solar Solves Readiness.........................................................................................40
Energy Key to Readiness.................................................................................................46
Agile Force key to Readiness..........................................................................................50
Impacts- Oil Dependency: kills Global Leadership......................................................51
Hurts Western Economies...............................................................................................53
Escalates armed conflict, terrorism and econ collapse.................................................54
Dependency impact Laundry List..................................................................................55
Kills International Leverage...........................................................................................56
Forward Deployment Solves Leadership and conflict prevention..............................57
Military = alt energy usage public and private sector .................................................58
Military= Energy Leader................................................................................................59
Middle East Stability.......................................................................................................60
Information Warfare Advantage- Uniqueness..............................................................63
U.S. must increase efforts to expand cyberspace deterrence.......................................66
Specific Internal Link- Space Radar..............................................................................67
Internal Links- Information key to RMA......................................................................69
RMA key to Readiness.....................................................................................................71
Impacts- Space Radar Good: Deterrence......................................................................73
Cyber-warfare cause Accidental Nuke War..................................................................75
RMA key to deter Chinese Asymmetric attack.............................................................79
High-Tech Leadership key to Hegemony......................................................................80
Cyber-attacks are easy- resources exist.........................................................................81
Cyber-attack tracing causes Miscalc..............................................................................82
RMA stops Prolif..............................................................................................................83

1
DDI 08- K.O. Solar Satellites: The Space
AFF
Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt 2/226
Prolif leads to Nuke War.................................................................................................84
Space weapons Good- Econ/Accident/taiwan add on...................................................86
Weaponization already started.......................................................................................88
Weaponization Inevitable................................................................................................89
Weaponizing now- China................................................................................................91
Weaponization Zero-Sum...............................................................................................97
Now is key to Weaponize- we must do it first................................................................98
U.S. key to check Rogue Nations in space......................................................................99
Prolif= Extinction...........................................................................................................100
Space Radar key to diffuse conflict, and defend from asteroids...............................101
Asteroids kill everything................................................................................................102
Weapons key to surveillance.........................................................................................103
Space key to Military.....................................................................................................104
Space Dominance key to Peace.....................................................................................105
Hege High- Must go to space now................................................................................110
Moral imperative to go to space...................................................................................111
U.S. space dominance dissolves military need.............................................................112
Dominance Solves Space Arms Race............................................................................116
Space Weapons BAD- Expeditionary force Add-on...................................................117
Expeditionary Space force prevents orbital weapons.................................................119
Space Weapons not coming...........................................................................................121
Space Weapons Fail.......................................................................................................122
Space Weapons undermine U.S. strength....................................................................123
U.S. has more to gain over negotiations of weapons...................................................124
Chinese attack................................................................................................................125
Conventional Warfare better........................................................................................126
Risks arms race and accidental nuke war...................................................................127
Space Weapons Bad- destroys military........................................................................128
Exacerbates fears of debris chain.................................................................................129
Space weapons case pre-emptive attack......................................................................130
China Does Not Want Space Weapons........................................................................131
Arms Control Solves......................................................................................................132
Space Col- K2 Helium-3................................................................................................133
Helium-3 Solves..............................................................................................................135
Helium 3 Solves US-China Conflict.............................................................................136
Solar Satellites K2 Space Colonization.......................................................................137
Space Colonization Solves Extinction..........................................................................139
Space Colonization Solves Nuke war...........................................................................141
Solar Power Advantage.................................................................................................142
Beaming is effective........................................................................................................143
Gets a lot of Sunlight.....................................................................................................146
Comparatively better than other renewables..............................................................147
SSP Preserves Biodiversity............................................................................................149
Solvency..........................................................................................................................150
Incentives solve...............................................................................................................151
Quantum Dots are effective PV’s.................................................................................152

2
DDI 08- K.O. Solar Satellites: The Space
AFF
Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt 3/226
No Heat Problems..........................................................................................................153
Solar Satellites are environmentally clean...................................................................154
Federal Key.....................................................................................................................156
Small efforts lead to Space Solar Farms......................................................................157
Construction is Feasible................................................................................................159
No Launch Harms..........................................................................................................160
2AC Stuff- Now is key Exts...........................................................................................161
Now is key—Maslow Window......................................................................................162
Timeframe Exts..............................................................................................................165
Energy Solvency.............................................................................................................166
CHINA EXTS.................................................................................................................167
A2 Status Quo Solves.....................................................................................................170
A2 Unreliable..................................................................................................................171
A2 Hurts environment...................................................................................................172
A2 No Solar Panel Tech.................................................................................................174
A2 No Reception Tech...................................................................................................175
A2 No Beam-down Tech................................................................................................176
A2 No Launch Tech.......................................................................................................177
A2 No Tech.....................................................................................................................178
A2 Microwave Beams Bad............................................................................................179
A2 Spending Link..........................................................................................................180
A2 Ground Solar Conditions........................................................................................181
A2 DoD CP......................................................................................................................182
A2 International CP.......................................................................................................183
A2 States CP...................................................................................................................184
Non-Uniques...................................................................................................................185
Spending Non-Uniques..................................................................................................186
A2: SBSP Energy Too Expensive.................................................................................187
A2: ASATs Create Space Debris..................................................................................188
Int’l PERM SOLVENCY:.............................................................................................189
A2 Micro-meteorides—.................................................................................................190
Politics Links- Congress Supports................................................................................191
Congress Supports Space Exploration.........................................................................192
Space Weapons unpopular............................................................................................193
NASA Funding Bipartisan............................................................................................194
NASA Funding Partisan................................................................................................195
NASA Funding unpopular............................................................................................196
Plan Costs PC.................................................................................................................197
Negative Stuff- 1NC FRONTLINE..............................................................................198
COLONIZATION BAD EXTS – Virus Turn.............................................................204
HEG BAD EXTS............................................................................................................206
No Solar Cells.................................................................................................................207
Micrometeoroids Ext.....................................................................................................208
Requires too much Krypton..........................................................................................209
Treaty with Russia prevents Beaming.........................................................................210
Space Causes Cancer.....................................................................................................211

3
DDI 08- K.O. Solar Satellites: The Space
AFF
Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt 4/226
DOD COUNTERPLAN.................................................................................................212
EFFICIENCY COUNTERPLAN.................................................................................213
IRAQ NEG.....................................................................................................................214
NO CHINA RACE.........................................................................................................217
BIZCON LINK...............................................................................................................219
OIL DA LINKS..............................................................................................................220
SPENDING LINKS.......................................................................................................221
NASA WON'T DO PLAN.............................................................................................222
SQUO SOLVES.............................................................................................................223
PRIVATE INVESTMENT NOW.................................................................................224
Space Inevitable.............................................................................................................225

4
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites 1AC

Plan:

The United States Federal Government should substantially increase monetary incentives
for development and deployment of Solar Power Satellites in the United States. We’ll
clarify.

5
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Contention 1- The Advantages

Advantage 1- The Information War

UAV’s are failing- Space Radar is essential to fill the gap in military aircraft surveillance

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, July 16, 2007, (“Solar power satellites and
space radar” The Space Review: essays and commentary about the final frontier,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/910/1 [Bapodra])

Using power from an SPS, such a satellite would be able to liberally use its ion engines to change its orbit.
These engines would never be powerful enough to make the kind of quick responsive maneuvers that some
space operations commanders would like to see in future LEO-based spacecraft, but they would be a step in the
right direction.

The demise of the E-10 program that had been intended to replace the Air Force’s JSTARS and AWACS
surveillance aircraft has left a hole in future US situational awareness capabilities that neither unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs), such as the Predator and Global Hawk, nor existing satellite programs can possibly fill. Space
Radar could do so, but only if the program is restructured to make it at once more ambitious in terms of future
capability and less ambitious in terms of near-term operations.

Effective Space Radar is only possible through solar power satellite electric transmissions

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, July 16, 2007, (“Solar power satellites and
space radar” The Space Review: essays and commentary about the final frontier,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/910/1 [Bapodra])

In order to achieve the power levels needed for an effective GMTI system using current technology, very large
solar arrays would be needed. Even if these were to use the new Boeing solar cells that, according to the
company, are more than 30% efficient, the arrays would still be much bigger than anything on any operational
satellite. Such large arrays would make the SR spacecraft easy targets for enemy antisatellite weapons and
would also produce so much drag while in low Earth orbit (LEO) that their lifespan would be shorter—perhaps
much shorter—than current-generation reconnaissance satellites.
Why, then, does such a system need to rely 100% on its own power? If solar power satellites (SPS) were
available in geosynchronous orbit and could beam electricity to the SR satellites in LEO, this might allow the
radar satellites to have as much power as their power control systems and heat radiators could handle. Power
could be transmitted by a tightly focused laser or microwave beam to one or two receptors, integrated into the
spacecraft’s bus. If the radar antenna were integrated into the skin of the satellite the way it is on a B-2 bomber,
such satellite would be difficult to detect and track.

6
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Radar will be able to see critical areas of the Earth over a short time span, will be able to monitor
adversarial territory as well as terrorist locations

John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar”


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra]

With Space Radar it will be possible to see all critical areas of the Earth over a relatively short time span. In
other words, fairly frequent revisit over areas. If it was tasked to cover an emerging situation anywhere in the
world, it could respond by providing both collected and processed information within minutes to hours
depending on where the location was and where the satellites were in orbit when the issue arose. If the trouble
spot is within a theater of operations where US airborne assets are already deployed, the SR would be able to
hand off Space Radar data and information to the other systems to help them know where to look and where to
identify the issue. Likewise, air ISR assets could also tip and cue the Space Radar.
The result of this interaction would be much more precise and decisive ISR information available on a shorter
timeline. If the area of concern is deep inside an adversary’s territory, which would be out of reach of airborne
assets, then Space Radar could cover that area on every satellite pass, thereby regularly updating our knowledge
of an unfolding situation.
An example of that might be terrorists who are using caves to store weapons. There might be a repetitive pattern
of vehicles coming and going from these caves over time. Those are the types of things that Space Radar would
be good at in the GMTI mode — identifying the movement of vehicles and activity in an area and be able to
update that knowledge on a regular basis. SR could then switch to SAR [synthetic aperture radar] mode and
take a high-quality SAR picture of the area where movement tips us off that something is going on.

7
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space provides critical survalience and navigationwhich that allow for a smaller and more effective
military.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

Absent access to space – the U.S. would be unable to conduct large military operations abroad and make
us more vulnerable to anti-space hostilities.

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

8
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Intelligence and communication is essential for future combat effectiveness. Tech advancement is critical
to precision warfare
Sharjeel Rizwan, Defence Journal Columnist Pakistan September 2000, “Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)”, Defence Notes
http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/sept/military.htm [Bapodra]

Today the advent of new forms of communication and imaging technology, incorporated into systems such as
“smart” weaponry and digitised battlefield networks have led to the rethinking of war making and strategy
conceptualisation over the ages, as technology has developed, new methods of collecting information have
emerged. These new methods have improved the battlefield awareness of our Commanders and Soldiers.
Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance C41SR has
enabled the integration of these new inputs. Technological advancements of weapons and vehicles of air power
are being developed in a manner that will continue to shorten the time cycles for action along with the other
segments of IDA. A significant portion of technological progress being made in the military sphere deals with
reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) systems. The employment of RSTA technologies is
moving warfare further towards greater utilisation of aerial assets for gathering of information, greater range of
striking power through long-range offensive systems, and higher accuracy through availability of better target
information. RSTA with communications give military forces the ability to locate targets with accuracy, carry
out designation and cueing of weapon systems that significantly enhance combat power. The use of RSTA
systems, AWACs, UAVs and their integration into a C4ISR system has enabled the use of sophisticated
weapons like “smart bombs” and precision guided munitions (PGMs) which are extremely accurate and reduce
civilian casualties. C4ISR has also led to the expansion of space and the compression of time on the battlefield.
C4ISR provides situational awareness (SA) for integration and coordination of joint element manoeuvres and
sensor to shooten connectivity for weapons employment. It is the essential capability for binding the nation’s
armed services defence and intelligence agencies and other government and private organisations into a viable,
coherent force. The resultant information superiority fundamentally changes the way operations are conducted.
Joint C4ISR enables ability to mass effects without massing forces; protects against asymmetric threats; and
provides joint force flexibility, interpretability and efficiency.

9
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

We’ll claim two Scenarios to Military Effectiveness

First is Hegemony

Military readiness is key to hegemony – it deters rogue states and counterbalancing

Thomas Donnelly. National Security Outlook. 2003 http://www.aei.org/scholars/scholarID.68/scholar.asp


[Bapodra]

The preservation of today's Pax Americana rests upon both actual military strength and the perception of
strength. The variety of victories scored by U.S. forces since the end of the cold war is testament to both the
futility of directly challenging the United States and the desire of its enemies to keep poking and prodding to
find a weakness in the American global order. Convincing would-be great powers, rogue states, and terrorists to
accept the liberal democratic order--and the challenge to autocratic forms of rule that come with it--requires not
only an overwhelming response when the peace is broken, but a willingness to step in when the danger is
imminent. The message of the Bush Doctrine--"Don't even think about it!"--rests in part on a logic of
preemption that underlies the logic of primacy.

US hegemony is key to prevent multiple scenarios for nuclear war

Zalmay Khalilzad, U.N. Ambassador, RAND Corporation 1995 , Washington Quarterly, Spring, Lexis

Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a
global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding
principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United
States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more
open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a
world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear
proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership
would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid
another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S.
leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power
system.

10
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Second is Prolif

Information is critical to Revolution in Military Affairs


Jeffrey McKitrick et al, US Air War College, 2001, "The Revolution in
Military Affairs,"
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp3.html [Bapodra]

Another revolution under way in warfare is that associated with information systems, their associated capabilities, and their effects on
military organizations and operations. We call this new warfare area information warfare, which we define as the struggle between
two or more opponents for control of the information battlespace.
At the national level, information warfare could be viewed as a new form of strategic warfare, one of the key issues being the
vulnerability of socio-economic systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. At the military
operational level, information warfare may contribute to major changes in the conduct of warfare; therefore, one of the key issues is
the vulnerability of command, control, communications, and intelligence systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's
system while protecting yours.
As we increasingly assimilate information capabilities into our military structure and focus more and more on establishing and
maintaining an "information advantage" as a war-winning strategy, we also change the vulnerabilities of US forces, and, ultimately of
the United States itself. The force structure that will implement information warfare 25 years from now may well be different from
today's military in more ways than just its equipment. Moreover, the character of warfare may change in ways that affect our thinking
regarding intelligence and crisis and wartime decision making

Revolution in Military Affairs prevents nuclear proliferation


Martin Libicki, Senior Analyst, Rand Corporation, Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, March 1, 2001 [Bapodra]

Moore would have the United States back off its attempts to shove its military forces into techno-overdrive (especially in space). The
Defense Department, in contrast, has no such desire; it sees countering WMD as yet another item on its agenda.
Left unexamined, though, was the possibility that the linkage between the RMA and nuclear proliferation does not hold. Indeed, the
RMA has had little discernible effect on the efforts that other nations have made to develop nuclear weapons, which are by far the
most militarily useful of the WMD. In fact, the reverse may well be true: The RMA reduces the rationale for nuclear acquisition on the
part of states that might otherwise plan to use them against U.S. forces.

Proliferation leads to extinction.


Victor Utgoff, Deputy Director of Strategy, Forces, and Resources Division of Institute for Defense Analysis,
Summer 02, “Proliferation, Missile Defence and American Ambitions”, Survival, p.87-90. [Bapodra]

The war between Iran and Iraq during the 1980s led to the use of chemical weapons on both sides and exchanges of missiles
against each other’s cities. And more recently, violence in the Middle East escalated in a few months from rocks and small
arms to heavy weapons on one side, and from police actions to air strikes and armoured attacks on the other. Escalation of
violence is also basic human nature. Once the violence starts, retaliatory exchanges of violent acts can
escalate to levels unimagined by the participants before hand. Intense and blinding anger is a common response to fear
or humiliation or abuse. And such anger can lead us to impose on our opponents whatever levels of violence are readily
accessible. In sum, widespread proliferation is likely to lead to an occasional shoot-out with nuclear
weapons, and that such shoot-outs will have a substantial probability of escalating to the maximum
destruction possible with the weapons at hand. Unless nuclear proliferation is stopped, we are headed toward a
world that will mirror the American Wild West of the late 1800s. With most, if not all, nations wearing
nuclear ‘six-shooters’ on their hips, the world may even be a more polite place than it is today, but every once in a
while we will all gather on a hill to bury the bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

11
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Advantage 2: Cosmic Dominance/ Galactic Peace

First, Not only is a war in space inevitable – but nations are looking to weaponize.

Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9, 2008,
“Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren]

The consequences of war in space are in fact so cataclysmic that arms control advocates like Mr.
Kimball would like simply to prohibit the use of weapons beyond the earth's atmosphere. But it’s
already be too late for that. In the weeks since an American rocket slammed into an out-of-control
satellite over the Pacific Ocean, officials and experts have made it clear that the United States, for
better or worse, is already committed to having the capacity to wage war in space. And that, it seems
likely, will prompt others to keep pace. What makes people want to ban war in space is exactly what
keeps the Pentagon's war planners busy preparing for it: The United States has become so dependent
on space that it has become the country's Achilles' heel. ''Our adversaries understand our dependence
upon space-based capabilities,'' Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, commander of the United States Strategic
Command, wrote in Congressional testimony on Feb. 27, ''and we must be ready to detect, track,
characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure.'' Whatever
Pentagon assurances there have been to the contrary, the destruction of a satellite more than 130 miles
above the Pacific Ocean a week earlier, on Feb. 20, was an extraordinary display of what General
Chilton had in mind -- a capacity that the Pentagon under President Bush has tenaciously sought to
protect and enlarge. Is war in space inevitable? The idea or such a war has been around since Sputnik,
but for most of the cold war it remained safely within the realm of science fiction and the carefully
proscribed American-Soviet arms race. That is changing. A dozen countries now can reach space with
satellites -- and, therefore, with weapons. China strutted its stuff in January 2007 by shooting down
one of its own weather satellites 530 miles above the planet. ''The first era of the space age was one of
experimentation and discovery,'' a Congressional commission reported just before President Bush took
office in 2001. ''We are now on the threshold of a new era of the space age, devoted to mastering
operations in space.''

12
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The U.S. is in a rare position of unprecedented hegemony – The time to go to space is now before nations
catch up to us.

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

13
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Because of how valuable our space assets are – we must develop offensive capabilities to protect from or
deter an attack on them.

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

Solar Power satellite research will be implemented for space radars, lasers and small satellites

Kim Ramos, Major, Air Force, 4/00, "Solar Power Constellations Implications for
the United States Air Force," http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?
verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA394928

As the world population increases and natural resources used to produce energy decrease,
alternative methods to produce sustainable, environmental cost effective energy are required.
One proposed solution to the problem is solar power satellites. Solar power satellites are
satellites, which collect the energy of the sun, convert it onto a beam, and beam that energy to a
receiving antenna. The receiving antenna converts the beam into electricity and feeds the
electricity into a power grid. The receiving antenna may be located on another satellite, or on
Earth. Presented here are several solar power satellite proposals, architectures, incremental
technology demonstrations and predictions as to when they will become commercially viable.
Given the previous information, this paper analyzes the implications for the Air Force in relation
to doctrine and future plans. The research method consisted of a search of scientific journals,
published symposium papers, and research reports. The search focused on the current
research on solar power satellites, and Air Force programs, which have power issues.
Based on the research, the Air Force should plan to capitalize on the advantages of solar
power satellite constellations. Solar power satellites can assist with implementing
various plans (i.e., long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles, space-based radar, lasers,
and small satellites), complying with public law, and reducing the logistics tail associated
with an expeditionary force.

14
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space is the ultimate high-ground – The U.S. has a unique window of opportunity establish dominance.
Once we establish space dominance it eliminates any chance of a space arms race or any other nation to
secure space

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

15
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. control of space creates the stability for lasting global peace and prosperity.

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

16
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The U.S. has a moral imperative to secure space and promote peace and prosperity – before any other
state does gets control of space

Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

17
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Advantage 3: Ditching the Rock

Advances in Space Based Solar Power spurs space travel


National Security Space Office, 10/10/07, “Space‐Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security” (Alex Werner)

SBSP cannot be constructed without safe, frequent (daily/weekly), cheap, and reliable access to space and ubiquitous in‐space
operations. The sheer volume and number of flights into space, and the efficiencies reached by those high volumes is game‐changing.
By lowering the cost to orbit so substantially, and by providing safe
and routine access, entirely new industries and possibilities open up.
SBSP and low‐cost, reliable space access are co‐dependent, and advances in either will catalyze development in the other.

The suns radiation can be harnessed by satellites to ensure a prosperous and sustainable space colony.

SpaceMagazine May 26, 2005, [http://www.spacemagazine.co.uk/ //e.berggren]

Space is filled with radiant energy and beyond earth's atmosphere this energy flow more steadily and more
intensely from the sun than that which penetrates to the surface of the Earth. So an abundant and essential
source of energy that would be used in space for the space colony would be solar radiation by developing
satellite solar power stations. To live in space, humans must be protected from the fierce intensity and
penetrating wavelengths of unattenuated sunlight, but this same energy is one of the primary resources of
space. The colony will have to have enough energy to maintain a fairly uniform temperature even though it
is apace. The sun shines twenty-four hours a day and is not dimmed by an atmosphere. Shaded materials
not exposed to direct sunlight will almost be at absolute zero. While the temperature in closed bodies
exposed to the sun can soar above the boiling point. The colony will need to have both heaters and air
conditioners. On the other hand, this sun's energy can be converted into electricity in the colonies. It will be
converted with ten percent efficiency to electrical power which is sold at a rate of .012 kw/hr, a square
kilometer of space would return more than $14,000,000 each year. Converting solar power to electricity in
space, we would build satellite solar power stations that would intercept the sunlight and convert it into
electricity. The satellite solar power stations would intercept enough sunlight to replace five nuclear
reactors or coal plants. The stations could be as big as nine miles long and four miles wide and it would
only weigh twenty thousand tons. It would be built with hollow triangular girders made of aluminum that is
very fast and easy to build . Solar power satellites are a pollution free way to generate electricity and cost
no more than coal or nuclear energy. There has been twomajor designed stations made so far. One is
designed by Peter Glaser of Author D. Little Inc., which would use very large arrays of photo voltaic cells
to make the conversion directly into energy. The other major design is by Gordon Woodcock of Boeing
Aircraft Corporation, proposed having conventional turbogenerators operating on a Brayton cycle with
helium as the working fluid. All in all radiation from the sun is a great source of energy for the future of
space colonization. The use of the sun will cut down on the use of fossil fuels and any other chemicals that
could be used to create energy in space. With more research and testing, the use of the sun's radiation will
greatly enhance the space colonization and will help in the everyday life of the colony.

Space Colonization prevents extinction

Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N //e.berggren]

18
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By increasing the size of the mirrors
used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections, it would be possible to support habitats beyond
the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the known resources of the asteroids, there is sufficient material to
construct habitats capable of supporting populations thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing
our ecological niche to include the solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be
destroyed by a single natural or made-man catastrophe.

Extinction is inevitable by 2050 without space colonization


Daily Record 2002 [Graham Brough, “WOULD THE LAST PERSON TO LEAVE EARTH PLEASE TURN OUT THE LIGHTS;
EXPERTS WARN WE NEED TO MOVE PLANET AS MODERN LIFE KILLS OURS,” Jul 8, LN//

The Earth will be so gutted, wrecked, over-exploited and the barren seas so fished out that we will have to
find a new planet – or even two - by 2050. Environmentalists at the World Wildlife Fund say we have just
another half century of luxury living left before the Earth becomes a spent husk. By that time, we will
either have to colonise space or risk human extinction as population and consumption expand.

Space colonization enables nuclear survival


Fred Koschara,[computer programmer/ major in planetary studies, 2001, http://www.l5development.com/fkespace/financial-
return.html]

Potentially one of the greatest benefits that may be achieved by the space colonies is nuclear survival, and the ability to
live past any other types of mass genocide that become available. We have constructed ourselves a house of dynamite, and
now live in fear that someone might light a match. If a global nuclear war were to break out, or if a deadly genetic
experiment got released into the atmosphere, the entire human race could be destroyed in a very short period of time. In
addition, many corporate attitudes seem concerned with only maximizing today's bottom line, with no concern for the
future. This outlook leads to dumping amazingly toxic wastes into the atmosphere and oceans, a move which can only bring
harm in the long run. Humanity has to diversify its hold in the universe if it is to survive. Only through space colonization
is that option available, and we had all best hope we're not to late.

19
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Colonization Solves for an Asteroid impact – That would kill every one even the cockroaches.

Corey Powell 2000 “20 ways the World could be Swept Away”[JWU]

1. Asteroid impact Once a disaster scenario gets the cheesy Hollywood treatment, it's hard to take it
seriously. But there is no question that a cosmic interloper will hit Earth, and we won't have to wait
millions of years for it to happen. In 1908 a 200-foot-wide comet fragment slammed into the
atmosphere and exploded over the Tunguska region in Siberia, Russia, with nearly 1,000 times the
energy of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Astronomers estimate similar-sized events occur
every one to three centuries. Benny Peiser, an anthropologist-cum-pessimist at Liverpool John Moores
University in England, claims that impacts have repeatedly disrupted human civilization. As an
example, he says one killed 10,000 people in the Chinese city of Chi'ing-yang in 1490. Many scientists
question his interpretations: Impacts are most likely to occur over the ocean, and small ones that happen
over land are most likely to affect unpopulated areas. But with big asteroids, it doesn't matter much
where they land. Objects more than a half-mile wide- which strike Earth every 250,000 years or so-
would touch off firestorms followed by global cooling from dust kicked up by the impact. Humans
would likely survive, but civilization might not. An asteroid five miles wide would cause major
extinctions, like the one that may have marked the end of the age of dinosaurs. For a real chill, look to
the Kuiper belt, a zone just beyond Neptune that contains roughly 100,000 ice-balls more than 50 miles
in diameter. The Kuiper belt sends a steady rain of small comets earthward. If one of the big ones
headed right for us, that would be it for pretty much all higher forms of life, even cockroaches.

20
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

One hundred trillion humans are lost every second of delayed colonization

Nick Bostrom, 2004, philosophy professor at Yale & Oxford,”


http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.htm[JWU]

"As I write these words, suns are illuminating and heating empty rooms, unused energy is being
flushed down black holes, and our great common endowment of negentropy is being irreversibly
degraded into entropy on a cosmic scale. These are resources that an advanced civilization could have
used to create value-structures, such as sentient beings living worthwhile lives. The rate of this loss
boggles the mind. One recent paper speculates, using loose theoretical considerations based on the rate
of increase of entropy, that the loss of potential human lives in our own galactic supercluster is at least
~10^46 per century of delayed colonization.[1] This estimate assumes that all the lost entropy could
have been used for productive purposes, although no currently known technological mechanisms are
even remotely capable of doing that. Since the estimate is meant to be a lower bound, this radically
unconservative assumption is undesirable. We can, however, get a lower bound more straightforwardly
by simply counting the number or stars in our galactic supercluster and multiplying this number with
the amount of computing power that the resources of each star could be used to generate using
technologies for whose feasibility a strong case has already been made. We can then divide this total
with the estimated amount of computing power needed to simulate one human life. As a rough
approximation, let us say the Virgo Supercluster contains 10^13 stars. One estimate of the computing
power extractable from a star and with an associated planet-sized computational structure, using
advanced molecular nanotechnology[2], is 10^42 operations per second.[3] A typical estimate of the
human brain's processing power is roughly 10^17 operations per second or less.[4] Not much more
seems to be needed to simulate the relevant parts of the environment in sufficient detail to enable the
simulated minds to have experiences indistinguishable from typical current human experiences.[5]
Given these estimates, it follows that the potential for approximately 10^38 human lives is lost every
century that colonization of our local supercluster is delayed; or equivalently, about 10^31 potential
human lives per second. While this estimate is conservative in that it assumes only computational
mechanisms whose implementation has been at least outlined in the literature, it is useful to have an
even more conservative estimate that does not assume a non-biological instantiation of the potential
persons. Suppose that about 10^10 biological humans could be sustained around an average star. Then
the Virgo Supercluster could contain 10^23 biological humans. This corresponds to a loss of potential
equal to about 10^14 potential human lives per second of delayed colonization. What matters for
present purposes is not the exact numbers but the fact that they are huge. Even with the most
conservative estimate, assuming a biological implementation of all persons, the potential for one
hundred trillion potential human beings is lost for every second of postponement of colonization of our
supercluster.[6]"

21
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Contention 2 is Solvency

Federal government coordination catalyzes SBSP investment and development


Tyler Hamilton, Toronto Star business columnist, author, 10-15-07 ("Space-based solar power back in
play" http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/266738)[JWu]

On the positive side, technology has advanced significantly over the past four years.
"While significant technical challenges remain, space-based solar power is more
technically executable than ever before and current technological vectors promise to
further improve its viability," according to the study. "A government-led proof-of-
concept demonstration could serve to catalyze commercial sector development."
The recommendation is that a co-ordinated national program be created with "high-
level leadership" and financial resources "at least" on level with nuclear fusion
research or construction of an international space station. It's proposing a 10-megawatt
pilot plant that would beam a continuous flow of solar electricity back to Earth.

And, USFG contribution and incentives ensure space power


National Security Space Office, 10/10/07, “Space‐Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic
Security” (Alex Werner)

Several major challenges will need to be overcome to make SBSP a reality, including the creation
of low‐cost space access and a supporting infrastructure system on Earth and in space. Solving
these space access and operations challenges for SBSP will in turn also open space for a host of
other activities that include space tourism, manufacturing, lunar or asteroid resource utilization,
and eventually settlement to extend the human race. Because DoD would not want to own SBSP
satellites, but rather just purchase the delivered energy as it currently does via traditional
terrestrial utilities, a repeated review finding is that the commercial sector will need Government
to accomplish three major tasks to catalyze SBSP development. The first is to retire a major
portion of the early technical risks. This can be accomplished via an incremental research and
development program that culminates with a space‐borne proof‐of‐concept demonstration in the
next decade. A spiral development proposal to field a 10 MW continuous pilot plant en route to
gigawatts‐class systems is included in Appendix B. The second challenge is to facilitate the
policy, regulatory, legal, and organizational instruments that will be necessary to create the
partnerships and relationships (commercial‐commercial, government‐commercial, and
government‐government) needed for this concept to succeed. The final Government contribution
is to become a direct early adopter and to incentivize other early adopters much as is
accomplished on a regular basis with other renewable energy systems coming on‐line today.

22
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Scientific advances mean that we have the technology to go into space; the only
barrier is federal government patronage
NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the
consulting firm Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square
kilometres, required hundreds of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost
as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a former NASA research manager and active
promoter of space solar power.
Economically unfeasible
After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically
unfeasible in the 1970s. Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics,
electronics and robotics will bring the size and cost down to a fraction of the original
schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble the equipment in space.
Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lower-
cost space launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power
as a modern fossil-fuel plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10
times that of the International Space Station. Sending that material into orbit would
require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US currently launches fewer than 15
rockets each year.
In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental
scientific breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar
power will be practical in the next few decades.
"There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse.

If we start now, the timeframe is within the decade

Frank Morring, Senior Space Technology Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense
Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO backs space solar power"
aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml &headline=NSSO
%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu]

"This is not a 50-year solution," said John Mankins, an expert in the field and
president of the Space Power Association. "The kinds of things that are possible today
say a truly transformational demonstration at a large scale is achievable within this
decade."
As an example, Mankins listed the rapid progress in boosting the efficiency of solar cells.
While 20-25 percent efficiency was once considered a long-term goal, efficiencies on the
order of 40 percent already have been achieved. And the modularity and scalability of the
systems needed to build an SSP platform make testing relatively straightforward.

23
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Inherency- Now is key time


Now is key time for space development

CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the research lost
momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the technology, Mankins told
CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it seemed.
"The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles Miller, a director of
the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space. "The environment is perfect for a
new start."
Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural resource
depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy back to Earth,
Miller explained.
And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, encouraging the U.S.
government to spearhead the development of space power systems.

We must go into space now. If not, we may never get the chance again

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Nasa
programs and MEPs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

Currently, the most important issue for humanity’s future – within the next 5 – 10 years — is to resume the
large-scale human expansion into space by achieving self-sufficient colonies (e.g. on the Moon) before
2025. This is serious business because such opportunities are not continuously available. Indeed, unless we
breakout into space by 2025, the last 200 years of macroeconomic and macrohistorical experience teach
that long-term trends in the economy, technology, and society will not be favorable again for human
expansion until about 2071. This is especially sobering because attempting to estimate the geopolitical,
technological, and/or economic state of the world that far into the future is essentially impossible, and
therefore the next Maslow Window (2015 – 2025) is of inestimable importance.

New sources of energy are needed now to keep up with rocketing demand

NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty",
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu]

With the world's population projected to skyrocket to 10 billion people by the year 2050, supplying cheap,
environmentally friendly electricity to meet basic needs will be a daunting challenge.
"We need new sources of electrical power," said John Mankins, Manager of Advanced Concepts Studies at
NASA Headquarters Office of Space Flight, "and we have been studying a variety of space solar power
concepts. Tremendous advances have been made in many relevant technologies in the last fifteen years."

24
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military Support

Plan has military support

NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

A futuristic scheme to collect solar energy on satellites and beam it to Earth has
gained a large supporter in the US military. A report released yesterday by the
National Security Space Office recommends that the US government sponsor
projects to demonstrate solar-power-generating satellites and provide financial incentives
for further private development of the technology.

25
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Obstacles Now

There are many obstacles before we develop solar satellites, but they will be
operational by 2020 if we act now
Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from
space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space
[Bapodra])

But a number of obstacles still remain before solar satellites actually get off the ground, said Jeff Keuter,
president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington-based research organization. "Like any activity
in space, there are enormous engineering challenges," he said. One major barrier is a lack of cheap and
reliable access to space, a necessity for launching hundreds of components to build what will be miles-long
platforms. Developing robotic technology to piece the structures together high above Earth will also be a
challenge. Then there is the issue of finding someone to foot what will be at least a billion-dollar bill. "It
will take a great deal of effort, a great deal of thought and unfortunately a great deal of money," Keutersaid.
"But it is certainly possible." And Miller, of the Space Frontier Foundation, said he thinks it will be
possible in the next 10 years. "We could see the first operational power satellite in about the 2020 time
frame if we act now," he said.

26
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Tech Feasible Now


Advances in technology make space solar power feasible now—a small governmental endorsement to
catalyze investment is the only barrier

Andrzej Zwaniecki, USInfo Staff writer, site maintained by U.S. Department of State's Bureau of
International Information Programs, 8-20-07, ("Space solar energy has future, U.S. researchers say"
www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/20070820153255saikceinawz0.864773.html)[JWu]

In recent decades, the technologies essential to the concept have made “tremendous” progress, he told
USINFO. For example, efficiency of solar power generation and wireless power transmission has more
than quadrupled, allowing for significant reductions in the size, mass and potential costs of the solar
power systems.
Martin Hoffert, former chair of the Department of Applied Sciences at New York University, told
members of the Capitol Hill Club in August that space solar power research and development can
proceed with existing technologies.
But the potential costs remain high, discouraging entrepreneurs and the government from investing in
it. The major expense -- transporting equipment and materials into orbit aboard a space shuttle -- is
$20,000 per kilogram of payload, or the carrying capacity of a space vehicle. Proponents of space solar
power believe the project would become viable economically if the payload cost could be reduced to below
$200 per kilogram, and the total expense of delivery and robotic assembly on orbit could be brought below
$3,500 per kilogram.
That is not likely to happen any time soon and a reusable launch vehicle, needed to reduce costs
drastically, eventually would require government investment, Mankins said. He said, however, that a
small-scale demonstration project of the space solar power concept could help convince skeptics and
provide a strong political justification for such an investment.

Solar space power is feasible now—the only stumbling block is perception of cost

Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

The idea of using satellites to beam solar power down from space is nothing new—the Department of
Energy first studied it in the 1970s, and NASA took another look in the ’90s. The stumbling block has
been less the engineering challenge than the cost.

A Pentagon report released in October could mean the stars are finally aligning for space-based solar
power, or SBSP. According to the report, SBSP is becoming more feasible, and eventually could help
head off crises such as climate change and wars over diminishing energy supplies. “The challenge is
one of perception,” says John Mankins, president of the Space Power Association and the leader of
NASA’s mid-1990s SBSP study. “There are people in senior leadership positions who believe
everything in space has to cost trillions.”

27
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Advances Now

Solar power advances happening now

Monique Hanis, Communications Director for Communications Director forSolar Energy Industries, 08,
“Emerging solar technologies,” http://www.wncgreenbuilding.com/2008/emerging_solar_technologies
We are witnessing an exciting time in the solar-energy sector. Research facilities, universities and
companies are striving to develop new and innovative solar technologies for the commercial and residential
sectors. From building-integrated and thin-film materials, to concentrating-solar and solar-thermal
applications, the options for converting the sun’s rays into energy are expanding like never before.
Meanwhile, improvements in the technology, manufacturing processes and installation are converging to
help drive costs down.
Federal incentives, along with state and local rebate and loan programs, are now lessening the up-front
costs of solar energy. In fact, a number of companies including Google, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Macy’s and
Safeway have plans for significant solar photovoltaic (PV) installations as part of their energy-efficiency
programs.
Advancements in PV technology continue as researchers at the National Renewable Energy Lab,
University of Delaware, Sandia National Lab and others create new combinations of layered-cell structures
that split and refract sunlight for more efficient energy production. Prototype PV cells have reportedly
reached 42 percent efficiency, nearly three times the 15 to 22 percent in today’s PV panels. Other
innovations — like the trackers at Nellis Air Force Base that rotate 15-megawatt PV panels to follow the
sun — improve performance by 30 percent.

28
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Lack of Funding
No solar power research funding now

Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based
solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

A review by the National Research Council (2) found the program to have a credible
plan which required significant funding increases. Rather than strengthening the
program, however, all funding for the space solar power group ceased after
September 2001, and essentially no R&D work on power from space is now being
done in the US.

NASA can’t solve under current funding

National Research Council, 2001, Laying the Foundation for Space Solar Power: An Assessment of
NASA’s Space Solar Power Investment Strategy, http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?
record_id=10202&page=12
With such a broad scope it is not surprising that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and industry participants have defined a myriad of
technologies that could be developed for the future applications. It should also not be surprising that if
NASA’s year-to-year expenditure remains at around $10 million or less, the program will be
inadequate to meet the identified needs. Funding has been in yearly incremental add-ons by the U.S.
Congress and has not been part of the formal NASA operating plan. It is impossible to make efficient
progress in technology development when funding and management support are uncertain. However,
the current SERT managers have defined a potentially valuable program despite these obstacles.

Tech advancements adequate. Incentives needed to continue long-term investments.

Jason Hardison, writer for Austin Media Group, 10/10/07, “Who Shocked J.R.?,”
http://www.larryhagman.com/WHO_SHOCKED_JR.doc
Hagman is urging Congress to extend solar investment credits in the current energy bill. Such credits are
crucial for the industry and Wall Street to continue to make mid- and long-term investments in
manufacturing plants, developing utility-scale solar projects, and adding much-needed jobs to meet
current demand.
“The technology is here. Solar is real and more affordable than it has ever been,” says Hagman. “If we
really want this to take, we have to give alternative energy the same perks that we give to oil and
coal. So go out and buy a Senator!”

29
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Funding insufficient for SBSP now

Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy,
National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+
anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

The NSSO-led study reports that the United States has spent over $20 Billion on fusion energy research in
a steady and sustained manner. In fact, the White House has requested $418 million for fusion research
in FY2008, which is 5 times the total amount this nation has invested in SBSP over the last 40 years.
The Space Frontier Foundation agrees that “SBSP requires a coordinated national program with high-
level leadership and resourcing commensurate with its promise, but at least on the level of fusion
energy research or International Space Station construction and operations.”

NASA under budget cuts and lack of management talent now. New scientist spur needed.

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar
Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1

NASA has good reason to be afraid that the Congress or maybe even the White House will give them a
mandate to work on space solar power at a time when the agency’s budget is even tighter than usual and
when everything that can be safely cut has been cut. This includes almost all technology development
programs that are not directly tied to the Exploration Missions System Directorate’s Project Constellation.
Not only that, the management talent inside the organization is similarly under stress. Adding a new
program might bring down the US civil space program like a house of cards.

30
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space has untapped energy


Space has near infinite untapped energy

Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar
development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

Space is big - there is an awful lot of energy out there, and the crumbs we fight about here on Earth
are laughably tiny in comparison. Zettawatts from the Sun pass just through the region between
Earth and Moon - that's enough energy for each man, woman and child in the US to sustainably
power an entire US economy all to themselves. Even our terrestrial energy choices, fossil or renewable,
fission or wind, almost all derive from the energy profligacy of our Sun and other stars before it.
Gathering power in space and transmitting it to Earth should not be a mystery to us in this 21st
century. Communications satellites already do it routinely. One significant obstacle to power
applications, however, is regulatory: there is no spectrum allocated to power transmission, as there is
for communications.

31
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Race and Space Col inevitable


Space renaissance, race, and colonization are inevitable

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at
Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked
with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic growth"
http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

A variety of long-term indicators – economic, social, technological, and political –


strongly suggest that a new international space race will take shape during the next
5 – 10 years. This unprecedented thrust into space is expected to significantly exceed
the scale and scope of the 1960’s Apollo Moon program and will culminate by 2025 in a
variety of major activities in space such as humans on Mars, tourists on the Moon,
and solar power satellites in LEO.
Long-term patterns in the economy, technology, and exploration over the last 200
years appear to have predictive power for the 21st Century. In particular, a roughly
56-year cycle was identified, where macro-engineering projects (e.g., Panama Canal),
significant human explorations (e.g., Lewis and Clark), and major military conflicts
(e.g., Civil War) tended to cluster together, near economic booms. The bottom-line
forecast is that the decade from 2015 to 2025 will be the analog of the 1960s, bringing a
global focus on achievement in space exploration and a Camelot-like zeitgeist. The
purpose of this Weblog is to evaluate these forecasts based on macroeconomics and
macrohistory, by comparing them to
events and trends from around the world in 10 Wave Guide areas.

32
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military Advantage- Uniqueness


Oil Makes Unsustainable

Declining supply of oil will make the US military unsustainable

Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military Urges
development of alternative fuels” http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812
[Bapodra])

WASHINGTON -- A new study ordered by the Pentagon warns that the rising cost and dwindling supply
of oil -- the lifeblood of fighter jets, warships, and tanks -- will make the US military's ability to respond to
hot spots around the world "unsustainable in the long term." The study, produced by a defense consulting
firm, concludes that all four branches of the military must "fundamentally transform" their assumptions
about energy, including taking immediate steps toward fielding weapons systems and aircraft that run on
alternative and renewable fuels. It is "imperative" that the Department of Defense "apply new energy
technologies that address alternative supply sources and efficient consumption across all aspects of military
operations," according to the report, which was provided to the Globe. Weaning the military from fossil
fuels quickly, however, would be a herculean task -- especially because the bulk of the US arsenal, the
world's most advanced, is dependent on fossil fuels and many of those military systems have been designed
to remain in service for at least several decades.

Energy costs threaten US military sustainability and continue dependence on nations that are threats
to US interests

Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military Urges
development of alternative fuels” http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812
[Bapodra])

“The US military will have to be even more energy intense, locate in more regions of the world, employ
new technologies, and manage a more complex logistics system," according to the report. "Simply put,
more miles will be traveled, both by combat units and the supply units that sustain them, which will result
in increased energy consumption." The costs of relying on oil to power the military are consuming an
increasing share of the military's budget, the report asserts. Energy costs have doubled since the terrorist
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it says, and the cost of conducting operations could become so expensive in the
future that the military will not be able to pay for some of its new weapon systems. Ensuring access to
dwindling oil supplies also carries a big price tag. The United States, relying largely on military patrols,
spends an average of $44 billion per year safeguarding oil supplies in the Persian Gulf. And the United
States is often dependent on some of the same countries that pose the greatest threats to US interests.
Achieving an energy transformation at the Department of Defense "will require the commitment, personal
involvement , and leadership of the secretary of defense and his key subordinates," the report says.

33
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil demand and changing energy geopolitics threaten to fall short of America’s military energy needs

Chip Cummins, Securing America’s Future Energy Newsroom reporter, December 19, 2006, “Choke
Points: As Threats to Oil Supply Grow, A General Says U.S. Isn't Ready” Page A1
http://www.secureenergy.org/site/page.php?node=364&id=7 [Bapodra]

Three years into the sharpest spike in oil prices in a generation, policy makers and military leaders across
the globe are grappling with the implications of fundamental change in energy geopolitics. One such leader
is the new U.S. defense secretary, Robert Gates, who took part last year in a war game simulating
disruptions to the oil trade. It concluded the U.S. had few short-term fixes if supplies were jolted.
Supply lines are longer and oil fields more numerous than a generation ago. New threats have emerged,
from rebels in West Africa to terrorists targeting Saudi Arabia. With supply and demand tightly balanced,
even small disruptions can cause big price swings, endangering economic growth. Nationalistic fossil-fuel
powers such as Russia have shown willingness to brandish energy as a weapon. The war in Iraq has
hammered the oil industry in the world's third-largest holder of conventional oil reserves.
In this new era, one of the central security assumptions of the 20th century -- that a powerful U.S. military
can protect America's energy interests across the globe -- falls short.

Oil consumption in the military is increasing because of WOT and geopolitical oil tensions

Eileen Westervelt and Donald F. Fournier, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
September 2005 “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”,
http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytr
endsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra]

Energy Trends Figure 1 and Table 1 show current demand, supply, and proportionate distribution of energy
for the world, nation, and Army. Table 2 lists world reserves. The Army and the nation’s heavy use of oil
and natural gas is not “in synch” with the nation’s or the earth’s supplies. The relative fuel shares of energy
use vs. energy reserves underscores our need to supplement oil and natural gas as our staple fuels. The
domestic supply and demand imbalance would lessen if coal and/or nuclear energy were made more
environmentally acceptable or if the renewable share of our energy portfolio were to increase. Worldwide
energy consumption is expected to increase by 2.1 percent/yr and domestic energy consumption by 1.4
percent per year. This will exacerbate global energy competition for existing supplies. Army energy
consumption is dominated by facilities consumption. Facilities consumption may decrease in both total
quantity and in intensity basis—but not without an aggressive energy program with careful planning,
diligent monitoring, and prudent investment. The closure of European installations and relocation of troops
onto domestic installations will make this outcome especially challenging. The energy consumption
associated with Army mobility (tactical and nontactical vehicle consumption) is expected to remain
constant, but may potentially increase depending of future phases of the Global War on Terror and on
geopolitical tensions resulting from the world energy situation.

34
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil Dependency Kills Readiness

The Army is completely dependent on fossil fuel, impeding in deployment, maneuverability, and
diverting troops from combat

Felicia French, Army Environmental Policy Institute, April 5, 2005, “How the Army Can Be An
Environmental Paragon Through Energy”, http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/how-army-can-be-energy-
paragon.pdf] [Bapodra]

The Army does not have the luxury of ignoring its dependence on fossil fuel. Along with the rest of the
Nation, it is almost completely dependent on fossil fuel to accomplish its mission. The Department of
Defense (DoD) bill for mobility and installation energy was over $8.2 billion in fiscal year 2004 (27: NP).
DoD is the largest single consumer of the total U.S. energy consumed. The Army uses about 6 percent of
DoD mobility fuels (gas, diesel and jet fuel) to power tactical and utility vehicles, and weapons platforms to
include M1 Abrams tanks and all helicopters (9: 4). However, this does not account for the fuel used by Air
Force planes and Navy ships in transporting Army personnel and equipment in peacetime and especially in
wartime. Fuel logistics for the Army accounts for 70 percent of all tonnage hauled when the Army
mobilizes. The transportation of that same fuel from base to projection platform comprises 8 percent of the
cost (21: 85). The Army also pays $3.2 billion annually to 20,000 active duty and 40,000 reserve
component personnel to transport this fuel (21: 88). The Army could have more “teeth” and less “tail” if we
weren’t so dependent upon this fuel. This logistical behemoth impedes deployment, maneuverability, and
increases our personnel and equipment requirements and diverts troops from combat arms. Additionally, in
2003 it costs $769 million in energy bills for the Army to maintain over 4,100 installations and sites (about
two-thirds of all DoD installations) including Army National Guard, Army Reserve, and overseas facilities.
This totaled 896 million square feet in 158,690 buildings (10: 1).

35
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Resupply Hurts Readiness

Resupply in fuel inhibits warfighting, providing vulnerability to our combat forces

Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute Chief Scientist, 2001, “Battling Fuel Waste in the Military”
http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Security/S01-12_BattlingFuelWaste.pdf

The Army’s formidable half-mile-a-gallon M1A2 tanks are powered by inefficient 1960s-design gas
turbines that yield 1500 horsepower to make 68 tons dash around a battlefield at 30 mph (42 on the road).
They do that pretty well. But 60- to 80-odd percent of the time, that huge turbine is idling at one percent
efficiency to run a 5-kilowatt “hotel load,” mostly air conditioning and electronics. Most civilian vehicles
would use a small auxiliary power unit to serve such tiny, steady loads efficiently. Tanks don’t, because
their fuel was assumed to cost about a buck a gallon. But to keep up with a rapidly advancing armored unit
on the battlefield, cargo helicopters may have to leapfrog big bladders of fuel hundreds of kilometers into
theater, using much of the fuel to do so. The delivery cost can then rise to $400–600 a gallon—yet it was
assumed to be zero. If the designers had known the real delivery cost, they’d have designed the tanks very
differently. Fuel-wasting design doesn’t just cost money; it inhibits warfighting. Each tank is trailed by
lumbering fuel tankers. An armored division may use as much as 20, perhaps even 40, times as many daily
tons of fuel as it does of munitions—around 600,000 gallons a day. Of the unit’s top ten battlefield fuel
guzzlers, only Abrams tanks (#5) and Apache helicopters (#10) are combat vehicles. Several of the rest
carry fuel. This takes a lot of equipment and people. The Army directly uses about $0.2 billion dollars’
worth of fuel a year, but pays about 16 times as much, $3.2 billion a year, just to maintain 20,000 active
and 40,000 reserve personnel to move that fuel. And unarmored fuel carriers are vulnerable. Attacks on rear
logistics assets can make a fuelhungry combat system grind to a halt. Yet the warfighting benefits of fuel
economy— in deployability, agility, range, speed, reliability, and maneuverability—are as invisible as the
fuel delivery cost.

Delivering fuel dramatically increases the cost to operate and sustain military forces

Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force
Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17-
JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf

Delivering fuel where and when it is needed is a significant and increasing burden on the Services. The
logistics costs to deliver fuel include people, training, platforms (for example, oilers, trucks, and tanker
aircraft), and other hardware and infrastructure. Those costs can be tens and sometimes hundreds of times
the cost of the fuel itself, depending on how it is delivered. However, the exact costs are unknown because
acquisition and operational decision processes neither fully quantify those costs nor consider alternatives to
the “logistics systems” that platform acquisition and perhaps operational decisions will dictate.12 It is
likely that actual costs of delivering fuel for operations are dramatically higher than decision makers
realize. Until now, the methods for acquiring military platforms, both combat and support, and accounting
for the costs of fuel to operate and sustain them have been sufficient. However, is the confluence of new
and evolving operational concepts, high fuel costs, and fiscal constraints demanding a transformation in our
view of energy? The available evidence suggests that it is.

36
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil Consumption Increasing


Oil consumption in the military is increasing because of WOT and geopolitical oil tensions

Eileen Westervelt and Donald F. Fournier, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
September 2005 “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”,
http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytr
endsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra]

Energy Trends Figure 1 and Table 1 show current demand, supply, and proportionate distribution of energy
for the world, nation, and Army. Table 2 lists world reserves. The Army and the nation’s heavy use of oil
and natural gas is not “in synch” with the nation’s or the earth’s supplies. The relative fuel shares of energy
use vs. energy reserves underscores our need to supplement oil and natural gas as our staple fuels. The
domestic supply and demand imbalance would lessen if coal and/or nuclear energy were made more
environmentally acceptable or if the renewable share of our energy portfolio were to increase. Worldwide
energy consumption is expected to increase by 2.1 percent/yr and domestic energy consumption by 1.4
percent per year. This will exacerbate global energy competition for existing supplies. Army energy
consumption is dominated by facilities consumption. Facilities consumption may decrease in both total
quantity and in intensity basis—but not without an aggressive energy program with careful planning,
diligent monitoring, and prudent investment. The closure of European installations and relocation of troops
onto domestic installations will make this outcome especially challenging. The energy consumption
associated with Army mobility (tactical and nontactical vehicle consumption) is expected to remain
constant, but may potentially increase depending of future phases of the Global War on Terror and on
geopolitical tensions resulting from the world energy situation.

Oil consumption has led to dependency within the DOD, and rising prices haven’t reduced
consumption

Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy Strategy Teaching
an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the Brookings Institution,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070815.pdf
[Bapodra]

The United States of America has a National Security problem, in which the Department of Defense (DOD)
has a unique interest – energy security. Energy is the life-blood of the US economy and dependence on
imported energy is a looming national crisis. Cheap and abundant energy has been the historical norm for
American consumers and war fighters, and to most Americans energy is taken for granted. Electricity is as
much a part of daily life as breathing air and drinking water. Electricity powers our lights, alarm clocks,
coffee pots, toasters, heating, ventilation and air conditioning, MP3 players, computers, televisions, traffic
lights, subway systems, air traffic control networks, industry, and almost every other facet of daily life in
the 21st century, and it’s been that way for almost 100 years. The US National Academy of Engineering
ranks “Electrification” as the #1 Engineering Achievement of the 20th Century.1 Much of American
society is centered on individual mobility, extensive road networks, and large parking lots. The United
States has more cars than registered drivers, and with a few notable exceptions, fuel has remained
affordable and plentiful. Fuel costs moved from the subconscious to the conscious after recent increases in
the price of oil caused gasoline prices to rise to $3 per gallon, but for the most part, increased fuel prices
have done nothing to reduce consumption. The United States imports 26% of its total energy supply and
56% of the oil it consumes.

37
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

DOD Lacks Organized Program

The DOD lacks coordinated energy programs and is based on energy efficiency

Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy


Strategy Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the
Brookings Institution,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070
815.pdf [Bapodra]

Despite these trends there is no existing formal Department of Defense Energy Strategy
and no single individual or organization responsible for energy issues within the
Department. The DOD Annual Energy Management Report for FY 2006 lists the
Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) as
the DOD Senior Energy Official responsible for meeting the goals of Energy Policy Act
of 2005 (EPAct 2005) and Executive Order (EO) 13123, Greening the Government
through Efficient Energy Management.22 However, this position has been vacant for
several years and does not satisfy the need for a comprehensive Senior Energy Official
for the Department.
This is not to say the DOD is unconcerned with energy issues. The Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Services have recently conducted or sponsored
numerous studies focusing on energy, many of which have been invaluable information
sources for this paper: MITRE Corporation JASON Project, Reducing DOD Fossil Fuel
Dependence (2006); Defense Science Board, More Capable Warfighting Through
Reduced Fuel Burden (2001), and soon to be released Energy Strategy (2006-2007); OSD
Energy Security Integrated Product Team (2006); Air Force Scientific Advisory Board,
Technology Options for Improved Air Vehicle Fuel Efficiency (2006); Navy Research
Advisory Council, Study on Future Fuels (2005); Army Corps of Engineers, Energy
Trends and Their Implications for US Army Installations (2005); and Defense Advanced
Research Projects, Petroleum-Free Military Workshop (2005), to name a few. Common
recommendations include making fuel efficiency a more significant factor in determining
new mobility platforms (e.g. miles per gallon for ground vehicles, nautical miles/pound
(lb.) fuel/lb. payload for aircraft and ships) and creating incentives for energy efficiency
throughout the DOD. However, none of the studies offered anything other than liquid
hydrocarbons as the best fuel for DOD mobility platforms for at least the next 25 years.
Impressive groups of energy experts have produced many of these studies, but they are
all either Service specific or temporary in nature, meaning the group of experts dispersed
after writing the study’s final report. The lack of a full-time energy advocate within the
DOD leaves a void in follow-up actions to study recommendations, or creation of
directive guidance on energy issues within the Department.

38
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil is running out

Market correction doesn’t account for how scarce oil is- the DOD has to take action
before the global oil supply is depleted

Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy


and Force Transformation Joint Force Quarterly”
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17-JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg
%2051-54.pdf

Depending upon which view one chooses to accept, the global oil supply will either last
no more than a few decades or will perhaps last a century. On one side of the debate,
experts argue that because of the limited supply of oil, it will increase in expense as it
depletes in availability or production (referred to as Hubbert’s peak). Market analysts, on
the other hand, argue that the market will force a correction of the oil demand, thereby
stemming the flow of oil and prolonging the inevitable. Both arguments underscore that
oil is an increasingly scarce commodity. Clayton Christensen has argued that “markets
that don’t exist can’t be analyzed.”7 Until a market correction takes hold, or there is a
global shift toward alternative sources of fuel, oil demand will continue and, perhaps
increasingly, will influence the global security environment. DOD has the opportunity to
take action to shape this future to our advantage

39
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Links- Solar Solves Readiness


Solar-based energy can replace long supply oil chains

Newswise, June 20, 2001 [“Future Army Could Run On Alternative Fuels, Photosynthesis,”
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/24748/] [Bapodra]

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. -- Getting fuel to soldiers in the field has been a problem since machines
replaced horses. But according to a new report, by 2025 soldiers could make fuel and electricity where they
are, instead of relying on long supply chains to transport energy to them. "Opportunities in Biotechnology
for Future Army Applications," a report released today (Wednesday, 6/20) by the National Research
Council's Board on Army Science and Technology, says future U.S. Army operations in the field could rely
on alternative fuels and biological methods to produce electricity through photosynthesis. The report was
prepared by a 16-member committee of university and industry scientists. Purdue University's Michael
Ladisch, distinguished professor of agricultural and biological engineering and distinguished professor of
biomedical engineering, chaired the NRC committee. One of the most well-known examples of a military
energy crisis occurred near the end of World War II. As U.S. Gen. George Patton raced through France, he
quickly outran his supply lines and the ability to refuel his trucks and tanks. On Aug. 28, 1944, Patton
declared, "At the present time our chief difficulty is not the Germans, but gasoline. If they would give me
enough gas, I could go all the way to Berlin!" Three days later, despite the efforts of the famed Red Ball
Express, a convoy of trucks hurrying fuel to Patton's army, he and his men were stranded dry. The chance
to sweep through France into Germany soon passed. Robert Love, study director for the National Research
Council, says such situations could be avoided in the future by employing alternative fuels made from
natural and renewable resources. "The real issues for the Army are the ability to simplify logistics
requirements, to remain flexible with battlefield fuels, and to capitalize on alternative fuels, such as
methane, instead of restricting ourselves to fossil fuels," he says. "With fossil fuels, logistics can become
difficult because you have to have this long supply chain."

Solar satellites can beam energy securely to bases eliminating depending on land fuel deliveries

National Security Space Office, part of a long-term government study on the feasibility of solar space
power as a provider of U.S. energy, 10-10-07, “Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic
Security,” http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf

For the DoD specifically, beamed energy from space in quantities greater than 5 MWe has the potential to
be a disruptive game changer on the battlefield. SBSP and its enabling wireless power transmission
technology could facilitate extremely flexible “energy on demand” for combat units and installations across
an entire theater, while significantly reducing dependence on vulnerable over‐land fuel deliveries. SBSP
could also enable entirely new force structures and capabilities such as ultra long‐endurance airborne or
terrestrial surveillance or combat systems to include the individual soldier himself. More routinely, SBSP
could provide the ability to deliver rapid and sustainable humanitarian energy to a disaster area or to a local
population undergoing nation‐building activities. SBSP could also facilitate base “islanding” such that each
installation has the ability to operate independent of vulnerable ground‐based energy delivery
infrastructures. In addition to helping Americamin and allied defense establishments remain relevant over
the entire 21st Century through more secure supply lines, perhaps the greatest military benefit of SBSP is
to lessen the chances of conflict due to energy scarcity by providing access to a strategically secure energy
supply.

40
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Renewable energies can eliminate the military’s dependency on oil


Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea
D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD
Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1,
http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way
%20DoD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra]

In an environment of uncertainty about the price and availability of traditional energy sources, DoD is
facing increasing energy demand and support requirements that it must meet if it is to achieve its broader
strategic goals—notably, establishment of a more mobile and agile force. However, recent technological
advances in energy efficiency and alternative energy technologies offer a unique opportunity for DoD to
make progress toward reconciling its strategic goals with its energy requirements through reduced
consumption of fuel—especially foreign fuel. To capitalize on this opportunity, DoD needs to implement
an energy strategy that encompasses the development of innovative new concepts and capabilities to re-
duce energy dependence while maintaining or increasing overall warfighting effectiveness. Recognizing
that DoD must change how it views, values, and uses energy—a transformation that will challenge some of
the department’s most deeply held assumptions, interests, and processes—the Office of Force
Transformation and Resources, within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, asked LMI
to develop an approach to establishing a DoD energy strategy. LMI identified three areas of disconnect
between DoD’s current energy consumption practices and the capability requirements of its strategic goals:
Strategic. DoD seeks to shape the future security environment in favor of the United States. But, our
dependence on foreign supplies of fuel limits our flexibility in dealing with producer nations who oppose or
hinder our goals for greater prosperity and liberty. DoD’s operational concepts seek greater mobility,
persistence, and agility for our forces. But, the energy logistics requirements of these forces limit our ability
to realize these concepts. Fiscal. DoD seeks to reduce operating costs of the current force to procure new
capabilities for the future. But, with increased energy consumption and increased price pressure due to
growing global demand for energy, energy-associated operating costs are growing.

Solar satellites can power distant tanks and military bases

Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual
transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) ,
Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences,
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra]

Charley Lineweaver:: I think someone at the Pentagon sat down and said why are we involved in Iraq, why
are we spending 7 billion dollars a month on this, wouldn’t it be more useful if we took that money and did
something to secure a better energy supply

Narration: Of course – the technology also has… some military applications… such as powering tanks… in
far away deserts...

Dr Lineweaver: They’re in conflict positions where there aren’t power lines that can supply their troops and
the military are willing to pay top dollar for power that can be distributed to them where they want it when
they want … hey I’m the military I can – I can afford to pay 10 times more a 100 times more than civilian
prices then it becomes worthwhile to have that ability to beam it down to a war zone for example.

41
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SBSP helps solve military energy needs

James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)
[JWu]

The US army could also use such a device to deliver electricity to its troops. Military units in forward
areas pay $1 per kilowatt hour, six times the UK domestic price. They pay a lot more to bring in fuel.
Lives could be saved by cutting long and vulnerable logistics chains - though it would require the
large collectors.

Space solar power key to readiness

Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO
backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml
&headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu]

Collecting solar power in space and beaming it back to Earth is a relatively near-term
possibility that could solve strategic and tactical security problems for the U.S. and its
deployed forces, the Pentagon's National Security Space Office (NSSO) says in a report issued
Oct. 10.
As a clean source of energy that would be independent of foreign supplies in the strife-torn
Middle East and elsewhere, space solar power (SSP) could ease America's longstanding
strategic energy vulnerability, according to the "interim assessment" released at a press conference
and on the Web site spacesolarpower.wordpress.com.
And the U.S. military could meet tactical energy needs for forward-deployed forces with a
demonstration system, eliminating the need for a long logistical tail to deliver fuel for
terrestrial generators while reducing risk for eventual large-scale commercial development of
the technology, the report says.

42
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Converters can make field military and intelligence more effective, unlimited power is critical
for their survival

Randyll R. M. Fernandez, Jr., Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, September 2005, “A
Novel Photovoltaic Power Converter For Military
and Space Applications”, Masters Theisis Thesis Advisor: Sherif Michael Second Reader: Robert Ashton,
NPS, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA439411&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
[Bapodra]

For field military personnel on a mission in remote areas, the ability to have
uninterrupted communications and use of their equipment from unlimited available
power sources are critical for their survival. The PVPC technology can make a more
self-sufficient and mobile soldier. They will be less reliant on supply chains by carrying
lesser combat load due to elimination of unnecessary non-rechargeable batteries to power
their equipment.
Intelligence can make or break the outcome of a mission or war. Incorporating
the PVPC technology to current development in aviation especially to the very promising
SoLong aircraft or other UAV prototype can provide us with unlimited information on
any area of interest. Other military applications can benefit substantially from this new
technology as proven from all the test results. In short, PVPC ‘s ability to provide more
power can have a significant impact in the way our military conducts its missions.

43
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
SBSP provides much needed risk-free energy to forward bases
Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Perhaps the biggest news of the NSSO-led study is that the team uncovered
something new that might forever change the economic equation for space-based
solar power. The report estimates that the Department of Defense (DoD) is paying
about $1 per kilowatt-hour for electricity in forward bases in Iraq, when all indirect
costs are included. This is an order of magnitude higher in price than what
Americans pay for electricity in their homes. These higher electricity prices are not
caused by gouging, but by the realities of war and how electricity is generated for
the warfighter. Currently, we pump oil out of the ground in the Middle East or the
continental United States, and then transport the oil to the Gulf coast where it is
refined into kerosene. We then pump the kerosene onto tankers, which must be
guarded by the U.S. Navy, and transport it to the Gulf region. We then pump the
kerosene off the tankers into individual trucks, which must be heavily guarded by
American ground forces. Then, these convoys, which are primary targets for
asymmetric attacks by improvised explosive devices, must run a dangerous
gauntlet through a war zone. Finally, the kerosene is delivered to the forward bases,
where it is converted into electricity. The NSSO-led study report finds that: Petroleum products
account for approximately 70% of delivered tonnage to U.S. forces in Iraq—total daily consumption is
approximately 1.6 million gallons. o Significant numbers of American men and women are killed and
injured while they are defending these supply chains. The estimated cost of $1 per kilowatt hour does
NOT include the cost in lives oAmerican men and women. In other words, if space-based solar power
existed today it would be saving the lives of American men and women in Iraq. It is this fundamental
finding that creates the possibility that the DoD might become an early adopter, and anchor tenant
customer, for SBSP. The possibility that the Department of Defense might be willing to sign up as
anchor tenant to “pay for SBSP services delivered to the warfighter in forward bases in amounts of 5-50
MW continuous, at a price of $1 or more per kilowatt-hour”, changes the entire economic equation of
SBSP.

Alternative energies allow forward deployment because they eliminate supply line dependency
John Young, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, Office of the Secretary September 27, 2006
,Political Transcript Wire, “Hold A Joint A Hearting On Dod Alternative Energy Programs,”
http://www.accessmylibrary.c om/coms2/summary_0286-18480380_ITM [Bapodra]

The Defense Department also has unique energy requirements which often align with the energy needs of
the nation. For example, in early August, Major General Richard Zilmer, al- Anbar province commander,
submitted an urgent request for renewable energy systems for remote forward deployed forces due to the
vulnerability of supply lines to insurgent attack or ambush by roadside bombs. The Defense Department
has worked steadily towards many of these goals and needs over the past several years. On the facilities
side, by 2005, the department had reduced facilities energy use by over 28 percent from the 1985 baseline
and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 has reset the baseline and increased the reduction target. Indeed, in
2005, military service installations received four of the five presidential awards for leadership in federal
energy management. My colleague, Phil Grone, will be able to talk in much greater detail about these
efforts. DOD continues to develop renewable energy technology and facilities on bases using geothermal
sources, wind, solar, and ocean temperature differential. DOD has a range of research and development
programs underway to improve energy efficiency. Examples include the use of lighter weight materials and
platforms, fuel efficient engine designs, drag reducing coatings, and testing alternative fuels. The service-
funded energy and power technology initiative has focused on lightening the logistics burden of our ground
forces by developing efficient power generation, energy storage, and power control and distribution
technologies. Secretary Rumsfeld directed, in the strategic planning guidance this year, that a task force

44
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
review the department's efforts on power and energy alternatives and efficiency. The task force reviewed
DOD plans to invest $1.8 billion on energy related efforts between fiscal years 2007 to 2011. The military
services, combatant commands, and defense agencies embraced this task force and the result was
tremendous collaboration.

45
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Energy Key to Readiness


The DOD must employ new alt-energy technology to sustain forward deployment

Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea
D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD
Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1,
http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way
%20DoD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra]

Recent experience indicates that the nature of the threat facing the United States is changing. Today, we
cannot be sure in advance of the location of future conflicts, given the threat of dispersed, small-scale
attacks inherent in warfare with rogue nations and insurgent forces. In addition, the U.S. military must be
prepared to defend against single strikes capable of mass casualties. This complex security environment—
an environment in which a wide range of conventional and unconventional attacks can come from
unpredictable regions of the world and the risk of a single attack is high—requires the United States not
only to maintain a force that is forward and engaged on a daily steady-state basis, but also to ensure that it
is ready for quick, surge deployments worldwide to counter, and deter, a broad spectrum of potential
threats. Theme 1. Our forces must expand geographically and be more mobile and expeditionary so that
they can be engaged in more theaters and prepared for expedient deployment anywhere in the world.
Theme 2. We must transition from a reactive to a proactive force posture to deter enemy forces from
organizing for and conducting potentially catastrophic attacks. Theme 3. We must be persistent in our
presence, surveillance, assistance, and attack to defeat determined insurgents and halt the organization of
new enemy forces. To carry out these activities, the U.S. military will have to be even more energy intense,
locate in more regions of the world, employ new technologies, and man- age a more complex logistics
system. Considering the trend in operational fuel consumption and future capability needs, this “new” force
employment construct will likely demand more energy/fuel in the deployed setting. Simply put, more miles
will be traveled, both by combat units and the supply units that sustain them, which will result in increased
energy consumption. Therefore, DoD must apply new energy technologies that address alternative supply
sources and efficient consumption across all aspects of military operations.

46
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The DOD requires intense energy postures for deterrence and global military power projection.
Current utility of oil is unsustainable for our forces

Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea
D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD
Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1,
http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way
%20DoD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra]

The security and military strategies for DoD require an energy-intense posture for conducting both
deterrence and combat operations. The strategies rely on persistent presence globally, mobility to project
power and sustain forces, and dominant maneuver to swiftly defeat adversaries. These current and future
operating concepts tether operational capability to high-technology solutions that require continued growth
in energy sources. Current consumption estimates, although based on incomplete data, validate these
increasing fuel requirements and the implications for future operations. Clearly, the skill of our logistics
forces in providing fuel has grown significantly since World War II. Still, we must be mindful of the
operational implications of logistics requirements. The stalling of General Patton’s Third Army following
its campaign across France in August and September 1944 is a telling example of the fuel “tether.” Despite
the heroic efforts of logistics forces, the wear and tear on supply trucks and the strategic priority
for fuel and logistics support in other areas of operations limited Patton to local
operations for nearly 2 months.20 The Defense Energy Support Center (DESC)
estimates that 20,000 soldiers are employed to deliver fuel to operations (and
spending $1 million per day to transport petroleum, which does not include fuel costs
for contractor-provided combat support). The delivery of fuel poses such an
operational and tactical risk that in July 2006, Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, the highest-
ranking Marine Corps officer in Iraq’s Anbar Province, characterized the development
of solar and wind power capabilities as a “joint urgent operational need.” General
Zilmer cited reductions in often dangerous fuel transportation activities as the main
motivation for this request: “By reducing the need for [petroleum-based fuels] at our
outlying bases, we can decrease the frequency of logistics convoys on the road,
thereby reducing the danger to our Marines, soldiers, and sailors.”21 Operational
capability is always the most important aspect of force development. However, it
may not be possible to execute operational concepts and capabilities to achieve our
security strategy if the energy implications are not considered. Current planning
presents a situation in which the aggregate operational capability of the force may be
unsustainable in the long term.

Enduring energy policies are necessary for further military effectiveness

Eileen Westervelt, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 2005 “September Energy
Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/
specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytrendsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra]

The energy situation is highly uncertain–for the Army, the Nation, and the world. Now is the time to
consider both short and long-term issues to develop enduring energy policies and solutions for our military
installations to discern an effective and viable path for the Army’s energy future. To sustain its mission and
ensure the capability to project and support the forces, the Army must insulate itself from the economic and
logistical energy-related problems coming in the near- to mid-future. This requires a transition to modern,
secure, and efficient energy systems and to building safe, environmentally friendly technologies. This is
both a supplyside and demand-side challenge requiring integrated solutions and thoughtful planning and
execution. Primary issues affecting energy options are: availability, affordability, sustainability, and

47
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
security. Any review of these issues must take a global perspective since resources are unevenly distributed
around the world. Further, the impacts of energy consumption have global reach from both an
environmental and political perspective.

48
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military deployment for deterrence and combat operations foster a tremendous energy demand

Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force
Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17-
JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf

The speed with which military forces have deployed and engaged has depended on the speed and
adaptability of the logistics tail, which has adapted and evolved to provide the ever-increasing demand for
fuel that our newest platforms demand. Because of our tremendous logistics capability, the Armed Forces
can be successfully deployed and employed anywhere in the world for both deterrence and combat
operations. However, that capability comes at a high price: a tremendous energy demand. The energy
consumption rates of our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance, is four times what it was in World
War II and twice that of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.8 The logistics tail now consists
largely of the fuel required to execute and sustain operations.

49
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Agile Force key to Readiness

The DOD requires a lighter, more agile, and dispersed force to increase logistical sustainment

Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force
Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17-
JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) can learn from the Royal Navy’s pre–World War I energy
transformation. Like the Royal Navy a century ago, DOD is faced with the problem of limited resources
due in large part to our energy infrastructure. Fuel represents more than half of the DOD logistics tonnage
and over 70 percent of the tonnage required to put the U.S. Army into position for battle.3 The Navy uses
millions of gallons of fuel every day to operate around the globe, and the Air Force, the largest daily DOD
consumer of fuel, uses even more.4 The DOD energy burden is so significant that it may prevent the
execution of new and still evolving operational concepts, which require the rapid and constant transport of
resources without regard for the energy costs.5 These energy burdens will increase as new operational
concepts demand a lighter, more agile and dispersed force, with the attendant increase in logistical
sustainment. As increasing portions of the budget are set aside for fuel purchases to account for the
volatility in fuel prices, increased capability will need to be built into new platforms to mitigate likely
impacts on force shape and composition. It is crucial, therefore, that DOD develops an energy strategy that
reduces the energy burdens of our operational concepts.

50
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Impacts- Oil Dependency: kills Global Leadership

Oil Dependency creates challenges against U.S. foreign policy and national security in every part of
the globe. The DOD must take corrective measures against vulnerabilities in the global energy
infrastructure

Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy Strategy Teaching
an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the Brookings Institution,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070815.pdf
[Bapodra]

The lack of sustained attention to energy issues is undercutting US foreign policy and US national security.
Major energy suppliers – from Russia to Iran to Venezuela – have been increasingly able and willing to use
their energy resources to pursue their strategic and political objectives. Major energy consumers – notably
the United States, but other countries as well – are finding that their growing dependence on imported
energy increases their strategic vulnerability and constrains security objectives.19 Foreign Policy issues are
daily concerns for the White House and the Department of State, but the DOD is typically the department called upon
when Foreign Policy goes awry. In his article, Energy Security: The New Threats in Latin America and Africa,
David L. Goldwyn, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues current US
energy dependency challenges US power in five ways. First, many nations dependent on consuming
imported oil are reluctant to join coalitions led by the United States to combat weapons proliferation,
terrorism or aggression. Examples are the French, Russian and Chinese resistance to sanctions on Iran; Chinese
resistance to sanctions against Sudan; and US tolerance of Middle East repression that would otherwise be sanctioned
were it to occur in any other non-oil-producing part of the world.20 Secondly, high oil revenues in the hands of oil
exporting nations allow governments to act with impunity against their own people, their neighbors, and the
United States. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Latin America’s loudest anti-American cheerleader, has
used oil revenue to build support for his economic vision by providing subsidized oil to neighboring
countries and gain leverage over them by purchasing bonds to finance their debt. Russian President
Vladimir Putin has renationalized the energy sector, restricted foreign access to Russia’s pipeline system,
and demanded open access to Europe. Iran has reduced its international debt and increased foreign reserves
to prepare of possible sanctions. “Even Saudi Arabia’s economic reform movement, born in the days of $10
oil in 1998, evaporated when oil reached $30 per barrel in 2000. Enrichment of America’s competitors
or adversaries harms US security interests in every part of the globe”.21 The third problem is that the
global oil market is far from being a free market system. Governments which do not allow free market
access to develop, exploit and expand supplies control most of the world’s major oil reserves. Most free
market commodities allow the market supply to expand to meet demand. As oil prices rise, many
governments are less receptive to foreign investment, preventing supply from responding to demand and
driving prices even higher. 22 An increased price of imported goods increases the US trade deficit and exports
wealth to foreign lands. In 2005, imported oil accounted for one-third of the country’s $800 billion trade
deficit.23 A fourth problem created by the highly competitive world oil market is the political gamesmanship that
undermines the fluidity and fairness of the market for available supplies. “New competitors like China and India
are trying to negotiate long term contracts (at market prices) to ensure they have supplies in the event of a crisis
or supply disruption…From an economic point of view it may not matter if China lends Angola $3 billion at low
interest to gain part of an exploration project as long as the oil is produced. But China gains an enormous
geopolitical advantage by this act.”24 A fifth problem oil dependency creates for America and directly impacts
the DOD is vulnerability to price volatility that result from supply and demand shocks.25 From the fall of 2005
until gasoline prices started to decline in fall 2006, the “price of gasoline” had replaced “the weather” as every
American’s favorite subject of conversation with a stranger. The price of standard crude oil on NYMEX was
under $25 per barrel in September 2003, but by August 11, 2005, increased to over $60 per barrel, and topped
out at a record price of $78.40 per barrel on July 13, 2006.26 Experts attributed the spike in prices to a variety of
factors, including war in Iraq, North Korea's missile launches, the crisis between Israel and Lebanon, Iranian

51
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
(Lengyel Continues…)

nuclear brinkmanship, and Hurricane Katrina. None of these factors, except for war in Iraq, could be controlled
by the US government. The global energy infrastructure built over the last century is quite fragile and was not
designed with any vision of terrorist attacks or computer hackers. The DOD must accept the fact that
vulnerabilities exist and that bad actors will eventually exploit these vulnerabilities if corrective measures are not
taken.

52
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Hurts Western Economies


Western economies are severely disrupted by attacks on oil supplies

Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University,
http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra]

I will describe our energy dilemma as a six-pronged threat to national security. First, oil
supplies are vulnerable to natural disasters, wars, and terrorist attacks that can disrupt the
lifeblood of the international economy. Within the last year, the international flow of oil
has been disrupted by hurricanes, unrest in Nigeria, and continued sabotage in Iraq. In
late February of this year, terrorists penetrated the outer defenses of Saudi Arabia's
largest oil processing facility with car bombs before being repulsed. Al-Qaeda and other
terrorist organizations have openly declared their intent to attack oil facilities to inflict
pain on Western economies.

53
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Escalates armed conflict, terrorism and econ collapse

Oil competition causes escalation in armed conflict, terrorism, and economic


collapse

Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University,
http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra]

Second, as large industrializing nations such as China and India seek new energy
supplies, oil and natural gas will become more expensive. In the long run we will face the
prospect that the world's supply of oil may not be abundant and accessible enough to
support continued economic growth in both the industrialized West and in large rapidly
growing economies. As we approach the point where the world's oil-hungry economies
are competing for insufficient supplies of energy, oil will become an even stronger
magnet for conflict.
Third, adversarial regimes from Venezuela, to Iran, to Russia are using energy supplies as
leverage against their neighbors. We are used to thinking in terms of conventional
warfare between nations, but energy is becoming a weapon of choice for those who
possess it. Nations experiencing a cutoff of energy supplies, or even the threat of a cutoff,
may become desperate, increasing the chances of armed conflict, terrorism, and economic
collapse.

54
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Dependency impact Laundry List

Oil dependency causes climate change and cancels U.S. benefits of foreign assistance
to the developing world- causing instability, conflict, disease, and terrorism

Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University,
http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra]

Fifth, the threat of climate change has been made worse by inefficient and unclean use of
non-renewable energy. In the long run this could bring drought, famine, disease, and
mass migration, all of which could lead to conflict and instability.

Sixth, much of the developing world is being hit hard by rising energy costs, which often
cancel the benefits of our foreign assistance. Without a diversification of energy supplies
that emphasizes environmentally friendly energy sources that are abundant in most
developing countries, the national incomes of energy poor nations will remain depressed,
with negative consequences for stability, development, disease eradication, and terrorism.

55
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Kills International Leverage

Oil dependence has put the U.S. superpower in a vulnerable position killing
international leverage

Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University,
http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra]

Our current dependence on imported oil has put the United States in a position that no
great power should tolerate. Our economic health is subject to forces far beyond our
control, including the decisions of hostile countries. We maintain a massive military
presence overseas, partly to preserve our oil lifeline. One conservative estimate puts U.S.
oil-dedicated military expenditures in the Middle East at $50 billion per year. But there is
no guarantee that even our unrivaled military forces can prevent an energy disaster. We
have lost leverage on the international stage and are daily exacerbating the problem by
participating in an enormous wealth transfer to authoritarian nations that happen to
possess the commodity that our economy can least do without.

56
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Forward Deployment Solves Leadership and conflict


prevention
Forward deployment and deterrence are critical to leadership
and conflict prevention in the Korean peninsula, Taiwan Strait,
and Kashmir

Alagappa, 2003 – Director East-West Center Washington (Asian Security Order, Page
19-20) [stole from somewhere]

Though its alliance network, forward deployment , and the extended deter rence
provided by its nuclear capability, the United States plays an important role in the
management of the three serious security conflicts and in stabilizing relations among
major powers. Washington deters war on the Korean peninsula and across the Taiwan
Strait, and American leadership has been crucial in defusing tensions in these conflicts
as well as the Indo-Pakistani conflict over Kashmir. Because of the mistrust among
Japan, China, Russia, and the two Koreas, it is often argued that only the United States
can play a stabilizing role in Northeast Asia-by binding Tokyo and preventing the
development of a militarily powerful Japan, and by checking the growing power and
influence of China that is feared by several Asian countries.

57
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military = alt energy usage public and private sector


The military can catalyze leadership for alternative energy development in public
and private sector

Felicia French, Army Environmental Policy Institute, April 5, 2005, “How the Army
Can Be An Environmental Paragon Through Energy”,
http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/how-army-can-be-energy-paragon.pdf] [Bapodra]

This paper will examine the use and conservation of energy for both army mobility and
facility operations. The military has been on the forefront of many social, medical and
technological changes; therefore we can use our credibility and resources to be the
vanguard of change to renewable energy into mainstream society. As a voracious
consumer of energy, it will be financially and politically feasible for the army to decrease
dependence on fossil fuel. To do so would facilitate use of alternative energy by the
public and private sector. Additionally, it is more conducive to a positive public image of
being environmentally and fiscally responsible consequentially allowing greater access to
local training sites-further decreasing our requirement for mobility fuel. The presentation
offers recommendations for alternative and renewable energy to be used by the army and
the numerous positive consequences of this transformation to include: diminishing US
dependence on Middle Eastern oil, decreased dependence on one source of energy, halt
the catastrophic effects of global warming, and ameliorate the deleterious health effects
of fossil fuel combustion. The Army can use our credibility and resources to lead the
change to renewable energy in American society. The Army has been at the forefront of
many social (racial integration, equal pay and promotion), medical (prosthetics, medical
evacuation, and anti-shock trousers) and technological changes (the internet and
robotics). The Army has an opportunity to change its current energy strategy to a strategy
that applies alternate sources of energy because its voracious consumption of fossil fuels
significantly contributes to a long logistics tail. This leadership could also influence the
use of alternative renewable public and private energy. This paper will discuss the
financial feasibility, public perceptions and environmental considerations.

58
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military= Energy Leader

The military is the technology leader, how it decides to meet future energy will
shape the entire nation

Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance
strains military Urges development of alternative fuels”
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812 [Bapodra])

The Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation and Resources, which is responsible for
addressing future security challenges, commissioned LMI, a government - consulting
firm, to produce the report. Called "Transforming the Way DoD Looks at Energy," the
study is intended as a potential blueprint for a new military energy strategy and includes a
detailed survey of potential alternatives to oil -- including synthetic fuels, renewable
biofuels, ethanol, and biodiesel fuel as well as solar and wind power, among many others.
The military is considered a technology leader and how it decides to meet future energy
needs could influence broader national efforts to reduce dependence on foreign oil. The
report adds a powerful voice to the growing chorus warning that, as oil supplies dwindle
during the next half-century, US reliance on fossil fuels poses a serious risk to national
security. "The Pentagon's efforts in this area would have a huge impact on the rest of the
country," Copulos said. The Department of Defense is the largest single energy consumer
in the country. The Air Force spends about $5 billion a year on fuel, mostly to support
flight operations. The Navy and Army are close behind. Of all the cargo the military
transports, more than half consists of fuel. About 80 percent of all material transported on
the battlefield is fuel. The military's energy consumption has steadily grown as its arsenal
has become more mechanized and as US forces have had to travel farther distances.

59
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Middle East Stability

A. The US is key to Middle East peace, despite hostility to the US

Robert Kagan, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 2006


The Washington Post January 15, Lexis

Even in the Middle East, where hostility to the United States is highest, American influence
remains remarkably high. Most still regard the United States as the indispensable player in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Bush administration's push for democracy, though erratic and
inconsistent, has unmistakably affected the course of events in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and
Lebanon -- never mind Iraq. Contrary to predictions at the time of the Iraq war, Arab hostility has
not made it impossible for both leaders and their political opponents to cooperate with the United
States.

B. Mid-East instability is on the brink of spiraling into all-out regional conflict

Marvin J. Cetron, president of Forecasting International Ltd, and Owen Davies, former
senior editor at Omni magazine and a freelance writer specializing in science, technology,
and the future, 9-1, 2007, The Futurist, “Worst-case scenario: the Middle East: current
trends indicate that a Middle Eastern war might last for decades. Here is an overview of
the most critical potential impacts.”

There is more to come. After all, this is the most volatile region in the world. Sunnis and
Shi'ites have carried on an intermittent religious and ethnic power struggle there for some
1,400 years. Worse, after World War I the victors deliberately broke the Middle East into
artificial states that could never be stable, and thus could not easily be united under the
banner of Pan Arabism. As Sesh Velamoor of the Foundation For the Future points out, if
the West is unhappy with conditions in the Middle East, it has itself largely to blame. But
the important point is that mere instability soon could break down into general chaos.
Here is one possible course of events: Hezbollah's current protests in Lebanon and the
government's reactive crackdown may result in a larger war. Saudi Arabia could
intervene here, too, as it has been actively supporting the government of Prime Minister
Fouad Siniora. At the same time, Hezbollah and Hamas, in the Occupied Territories, will
be encouraged to expand their struggle against Israel. In Egypt, the banned but still
powerful Muslim Brotherhood would be encouraged to resume the battle for a
fundamentalist Islamic state, endangering Western access to the Suez Canal. Extremists
from distant reaches of the Muslim world will flood into the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, a
land of Sunni Arabs, and Iran, the home of Persian Shi'ites, already on opposite sides in
Iraq, might expand their conflict to do battle across the Persian Gulf, with fallout in
Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
One way or another, it all spins out of control. Everyone in the Middle East fights
everyone else for decades.

60
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

C. The Middle East is heated and potentially explosive- massive conflict can occur at
any time

The Age 9/24/2007 “Tempers must remain cool as the Middle East heats up”,
http://www.theage.com.au/news/editorial/tempers-must-remain-cool-as-the-middle-east-heats-
up/2007/09/23/1190486129857.html

THE torturous road to peace in the Middle East becomes more excruciating every day and the
cumulative effect of events in the region over the past week offer little hope for any reduction in
what appear to be increasingly flammable tensions. If anything, the talk now is of war. The match
that lights the flame may well be last Thursday's assassination of Lebanese MP Antoine Ghanem,
a violent murder that pitched his divided nation further into turmoil. His death was the latest in a
string of attacks against prominent critics of Lebanon's neighbour and former powerbroker Syria,
the most notable being the 2005 killing of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri. Mr Ghanem's
death introduces an unwelcome element of instability ahead of tomorrow's crucial presidential
elections, especially if an anti-Syrian candidate is elected. More importantly, any instability could
fan the flames of civil war in a country that has been a pivotal test-run for democracy in the
region since September 11, 2001.
The killing has been widely condemned by the international community and the finger pointed,
once again, at Syria, and by implication its ally, Iran. Syria has, somewhat ingenuously, denied
any involvement, as it has with the other high-profile assassinations of anti-Syrian leaders in
Lebanon. Calls have been made for UN Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon to launch an international probe into the bombing, and this should be carried out with
haste.
Talk of war further intensified after the deputy commander of Iran's air force, General
Mohammad Alavi, announced that Iran had already prepared a plan to attack Israel if it bombed
his country. This war of words was further escalated when a senior commander of Iran's
Revolutionary Guard chose to outline the capability of his country's ballistic missiles, which he
threatened to use on American targets in the Middle East. These threats coincide with growing
international pressure on Iran to abandon what is regarded by the West, and particularly by the
US, as its clandestine nuclear arms program. The French also added fuel to the fire when Foreign
Minister Bernard Kouchner warned the world to "prepare for the worst and the worst is war". The
head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, quickly entered the
fray and warned against the use of force against Iran, a move UN officials described as an "out of
control" drift to war. This pointed admonition coincides with a string of reports emanating from
Washington that the Bush Administration is running out of patience with diplomacy and is
intensifying its plans for air strikes against Iran.
The events in Lebanon and the debate over Iran run parallel with Israel's declaration of the Gaza
Strip as "hostile territory" and Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu's confirmation that
two weeks ago Israel carried out an air attack deep inside Syria, Iran's only Arab ally, on a site
that it believed was being equipped for nuclear development by North Korea. Another suggestion
is that the target was Iranian weapons destined for Lebanon's Hezbollah. There has also been
speculation that the raid served as a "dry run"

61
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
(The Age Continues…)

for a possible Israeli or US attack on Iran. Meanwhile, US efforts to ensure the success of a Middle East
peace conference, planned for November, remain mired in political haggling over what is to be brought to
the negotiating table.

In the Middle East, every event, every tension, is connected to another, more so since the Iraq war, and it is
this very mutuality that can make one act, such as the murder of a Lebanese MP, have dangerous
consequences for the region as a whole. The Middle East is now overheated and potentially explosive, and
Australia must impress upon its allies that, in a part of the world where every action can easily be met with
a disproportionate reaction, there is more mileage in diplomacy than in any military solution.

C. Massive Middle Eastern Instability Causes nuclear war

Steinbach, 02 (John Steinbach, Hiroshima/Nagasaki Peace Committee, March 2002,


http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.03/0331steinbachisraeli.htm )

Meanwhile, the existence of an arsenal of mass destruction in such an unstable region in


turn has serious implications for future arms control and disarmament negotiations, and
even the threat of nuclear war. Seymour Hersh warns, "Should war break out in the
Middle East again,... or should any Arab nation fire missiles against Israel, as the Iraqis
did, a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong
probability."(41) and Ezar Weissman, Israel's current President said "The nuclear issue is
gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional."(42) Russia and before
it the Soviet Union has long been a major (if not the major) target of Israeli nukes. It is
widely reported that the principal purpose of Jonathan Pollard's spying for Israel was to
furnish satellite images of Soviet targets and other super sensitive data relating to U.S.
nuclear targeting strategy. (43) (Since launching its own satellite in 1988, Israel no longer
needs U.S. spy secrets.) Israeli nukes aimed at the Russian heartland seriously
complicate disarmament and arms control negotiations and, at the very least, the
unilateral possession of nuclear weapons by Israel is enormously destabilizing, and
dramatically lowers the threshold for their actual use, if not for all out nuclear war. In the
words of Mark Gaffney, "... if the familar pattern(Israel refining its weapons of mass
destruction with U.S. complicity) is not reversed soon - for whatever reason - the
deepening Middle East conflict could trigger a world conflagration."

62
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Information Warfare Advantage- Uniqueness

The United States is vulnerable to a cyber attack because of its increased


dependence on data transactions

Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics,
"Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002,
http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra]

In the United States, we are blessed with wonderful geography from a national security
perspective; we have friendly countries to the north and south and large oceans to the east
and west. In the past, few enemies have ever had the means to threaten our homeland
seriously. So, for most of our history, we have not had to worry about being attacked at
home. There was a 40-year period during the Cold War when Soviet bombers and
intercontinental ballistic missiles were poised to attack our cities, but with the demise of
the Soviet Union, the successes of strategic arms reduction talks, and the warming of
relations with Russia, we once again felt safe. Recent terrorist attacks, however, have
reminded us of our physical vulnerability. At the same time, we also are making the
transition to the new borderless geography in cyberspace. As we grow more dependent on
the Internet, its inherent vulnerabilities have put all of us—government, military,
industry, and citizens—at risk. The Internet was originally designed to be open, based on
the premise that users were known and trustworthy. Security was not designed in from
the beginning, so as the Internet has evolved into the current global network of networks,
we have found it difficult to provide security for our data and transactions. The rapid pace
of technical innovation introduces unanticipated vulnerabilities with every advance, and
commercial software suppliers are often more eager to get their new products out in the
market than they are anxious to assure their invulnerability. 2 Our security planning,
often based on the older models of mainframes or well-defined networks within a single
organization, have proved inadequate for this new environment with its ever-increasing
threat.

63
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The United States does not have defense capabilities against a cyber-attack

James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence


and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency
Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the
Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 .
Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra]

In addition, the U.S. defense posture, which is designed around power projection and not
homeland defense, leaves the country's information and communications networks
vulnerable. Currently no mechanism exists for effective defense of the computer
networks of businesses, the power grids of American cities, or even the information
networks of the federal government. Indeed, cyber-defense is left to the FBI, a law-
enforcement agency meant to pursue criminals, not defend the nation. Thus far, the FBI's
efforts to coordinate cyber-defense have been hampered by a lack of technological skills
and resources. The bureau has supposedly been coordinating the sharing of information
across public and private sectors but has in fact focused on its traditional role of law
enforcement.
The Clinton administration's response to these challenges was fragmented and
disorganized. Leadership in cyber-warfare was supposed to come from the National
Security Council (NSC), but not enough materialized. Relations between the FBI and the
NSC were tense, and those between the NSC and the Pentagon even worse, with officials
refusing even to speak with one another. And cooperation among the military services
remains weak, despite efforts to put all computer warfare under a single entity, the U.S.
Space Command. Every service has developed its own information-warfare capability at
huge cost and with significant duplication of effort. Similarly, the CIA, the Defense
Intelligence Agency, and the NSA have each undertaken independent information-
warfare efforts, with little cooperation between them.

64
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

As the United States grows as an unchallenged power, it becomes increasingly


vulnerable to cyber-attack. Increased info tech is necessary

James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence


and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency
Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the
Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 .
Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra]

JUST AS World War I introduced new weaponry and modern combat to the twentieth
century, the information age is now revolutionizing warfare for the twenty-first. Around
the world, information technology increasingly pervades weapons systems, defense
infrastructures, and national economies. As a result, cyberspace has become a new
international battlefield. Whereas military victories used to be won through physical
confrontations of weapons and soldiers, the information warfare being waged today
involves computer sabotage by hackers acting on behalf of private interests or
governments. The recent escalation of tension between Israel and the Palestinians, for
example, has had a prominent virtual dimension. From October 2000 to January 2001,
attacks by both sides took down more than 250 Web sites, and the aggressions spread
well beyond the boundaries of the Middle East to the computer networks of foreign
companies and groups seen as partisan to the conflict.
A decade after the end of the Cold War, the U.S. military stands as an uncontested
superpower in both conventional and nuclear force. Ironically, its overwhelming military
superiority and its leading edge in information technology have also made the United
States the country most vulnerable to cyber-attack. Other nations know that they have
fallen behind in military muscle, so they have begun to look to other methods for
bolstering their war-fighting and defense capacities -- namely, "asymmetrical warfare,"
which the Pentagon characterizes as "countering an adversary's strengths by focusing on
its weaknesses."
Furthermore, the U.S. military is radically changing. The "revolution in military affairs"
seeks to apply new technology, particularly digital information technology, to operational
and strategic concepts. With plans ranging from computer-based weapons research
programs to software that encrypts classified military data, from computer-guided
"smart" bombs to a space-based missile defense, America's military forces are coming to
depend more and more on computers and information networks. These two factors -- the
dominance of U.S. conventional forces and the military's already extensive and growing
use of information technology – make cyber-attack an increasingly attractive and
effective weapon to use against the United States. But U.S. defense plans and
policymakers' concept of national security have not caught up to the new threats of
computer warfare. Indeed, recent warnings indicate that the United States remains highly
vulnerable. To address this challenge, Washington urgently needs to modernize its
thinking and transcend its strategies of deterrence and national security, which remain
fixed in the Cold War, pre-Internet world.

65
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. must increase efforts to expand cyberspace deterrence


The United States must make clear that it will recognize an asymmetric cyber-
attack as an act of war and respond against it

James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence


and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency
Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the
Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 .
Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra]

In order for defense planners to coordinate a strategy for cyberspace, the definitions of
national security and the appropriate methods of managing it need to be redefined.
"National security" has always meant protecting the nation's borders from foreign attack,
and the perceived national interest has often led to the projection of U.S. military power
overseas to protect the homeland. But as the Chinese clearly understand, future war is no
longer going to focus on borders and territorial disputes. In addition, previously it was
defeat on the battlefield that decided the outcome of a conflict, and any wartime attacks
on a country's private sector primarily targeted its industrial complex. In cyberspace,
however, the asymmetric advantage goes to whoever understands that a successful
computer attack against privately owned information networks is just as effective a
weapon as military force. This is an uncomfortable concept for both military and political
leaders to grasp, because it requires, first, acknowledging that the barriers between the
public and private sectors have eroded and, second, embracing innovative strategies that
take the private sector's new technological skills and vulnerability into account.
Furthermore, effective defense means deterring attacks before they occur. The threat of
retaliation is a good preventive strategy. Every nation already understands the
consequences of using weapons of mass destruction against the United States.
Washington must similarly put the world on notice that it will consider a cyber-attack
against any U.S. entity an act of war that will generate an appropriate response. It must
also make clear that the United States does not distinguish between methods of attack;
whether struck by a bomb or a computer virus, it cares only about the effect.

66
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Specific Internal Link- Space Radar

Space Radar will greatly enhance our military intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance capabilities protecting our armed forces

Terry Everett, eight-term member of the US House of Representatives Fall 2007,


“Arguing for a Comprehensive Space Protection Strategy” Strategic Studies Quarterly
Fall

Space Radar, with its sophisticated synthetic aperture radar and moving target indicator
sensors, will provide all-weather, day-night, 24-7 coverage of static and moving targets,
greatly enhancing our intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities and
protection of our armed forces. As William B. Scott and Linda H. Strine point out in a
recent Aviation Week and Space Technology article, “Visionaries believe Space Radar
will not only revolutionize the way military forces locate, track and target an enemy, but
have as profound an impact on commerce and citizens’ daily lives as GPS does” if
applications such as ship tracking for business and homeland security and all-weather,
around-the-clock imaging for marketing are realized.14

Space Radar will have global utility for the military

John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar”


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra]

Space Radar is designed to give ground commanders of all services an eye-in-the-sky


view of what is on the ground around them or over a mountain top. The system will be
able to produce high-quality synthetic aperture radar imagery, as well as surface moving
target indications. This radar in space will provide denied area, all weather, day and night
surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities required by the national intelligence and
joint warfighter communities. Specifically, a modern multifunctional radar will host a
range of capabilities including synthetic aperture radar imagery, high resolution terrain
information, advanced geospatial intelligence, and surface moving target indication. The
SR program seeks to provide these important capabilities to the nation.
Designed to be tightly integrated with present and planned intelligence systems, the
resultant Space Radar will provide transformational capabilities to both the National
Intelligence Community and Warfighting agencies alike through agile, responsive
intelligence collections using near-real time tasking and data dissemination. The SR
system will allow a 'deep look' into denied areas of interest in all weather, day or night,
without risk to personnel or equipment. SR's on-demand intelligence capability will have
global utility across the spectrum of conflict.

67
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Radar will be able to see critical areas of the Earth over a short time span,
will be able to monitor adversarial territory as well as terrorist locations

John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar”


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra]

With Space Radar it will be possible to see all critical areas of the Earth over a relatively
short time span. In other words, fairly frequent revisit over areas. If it was tasked to cover
an emerging situation anywhere in the world, it could respond by providing both
collected and processed information within minutes to hours depending on where the
location was and where the satellites were in orbit when the issue arose. If the trouble
spot is within a theater of operations where US airborne assets are already deployed, the
SR would be able to hand off Space Radar data and information to the other systems to
help them know where to look and where to identify the issue. Likewise, air ISR assets
could also tip and cue the Space Radar.
The result of this interaction would be much more precise and decisive ISR information
available on a shorter timeline. If the area of concern is deep inside an adversary’s
territory, which would be out of reach of airborne assets, then Space Radar could cover
that area on every satellite pass, thereby regularly updating our knowledge of an
unfolding situation.
An example of that might be terrorists who are using caves to store weapons. There might
be a repetitive pattern of vehicles coming and going from these caves over time. Those
are the types of things that Space Radar would be good at in the GMTI mode —
identifying the movement of vehicles and activity in an area and be able to update that
knowledge on a regular basis. SR could then switch to SAR [synthetic aperture radar]
mode and take a high-quality SAR picture of the area where movement tips us off that
something is going on.

Space radar will help war fighter awareness and intelligence gathering

John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Based Radar (SBR)”


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sbr.htm [Bapodra]

For the war fighter, it could support predictive battlespace awareness and could be
equally predictive for the intelligence analyst. By finding the anomalous event, analysts
get out ahead of activities. The refresh rate is such that analysts are not looking at history,
they are looking at current events. Looking at current events, as opposed to the history,
provides the ability to start drawing trend lines and anticipate how the subject of inquiry
is going to act and respond increases dramatically. And, having watched him over a long
period of time, the ability then to be predictive from an analytical point of view also goes
up enormously. So, both the intelligence analyst and the military operator are going to
find their environments completely changed by this system.

68
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Internal Links- Information key to RMA


Assimilating information capabilities are key to maintaining an info-advantage
against cyber-attacks

Jeffrey McKitrick et al, US Air War College, 2001, "The Revolution in


Military Affairs,"
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp3.html [Bapodra]

Another revolution under way in warfare is that associated with information systems,
their associated capabilities, and their effects on military organizations and operations.
We call this new warfare area information warfare, which we define as the struggle
between two or more opponents for control of the information battlespace.
At the national level, information warfare could be viewed as a new form of strategic
warfare, one of the key issues being the vulnerability of socio-economic systems, and the
question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. At the military
operational level, information warfare may contribute to major changes in the conduct of
warfare; therefore, one of the key issues is the vulnerability of command, control,
communications, and intelligence systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's
system while protecting yours.
As we increasingly assimilate information capabilities into our military structure and
focus more and more on establishing and maintaining an "information advantage" as a
war-winning strategy, we also change the vulnerabilities of US forces, and, ultimately of
the United States itself. The force structure that will implement information warfare 25
years from now may well be different from today's military in more ways than just its
equipment. Moreover, the character of warfare may change in ways that affect our
thinking regarding intelligence and crisis and wartime decision making.

69
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Intelligence and communication is essential for future combat effectiveness. Tech


advancement is critical to precision warfare
Sharjeel Rizwan, Defence Journal Columnist Pakistan September 2000, “Revolution in Military Affairs
(RMA)”, Defence Notes http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/sept/military.htm [Bapodra]

Today the advent of new forms of communication and imaging technology, incorporated
into systems such as “smart” weaponry and digitised battlefield networks have led to the
rethinking of war making and strategy conceptualisation over the ages, as technology has
developed, new methods of collecting information have emerged. These new methods
have improved the battlefield awareness of our Commanders and Soldiers. Command,
Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
C41SR has enabled the integration of these new inputs. Technological advancements of
weapons and vehicles of air power are being developed in a manner that will continue to
shorten the time cycles for action along with the other segments of IDA. A significant
portion of technological progress being made in the military sphere deals with
reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) systems. The employment of
RSTA technologies is moving warfare further towards greater utilisation of aerial assets
for gathering of information, greater range of striking power through long-range
offensive systems, and higher accuracy through availability of better target information.
RSTA with communications give military forces the ability to locate targets with
accuracy, carry out designation and cueing of weapon systems that significantly enhance
combat power. The use of RSTA systems, AWACs, UAVs and their integration into a
C4ISR system has enabled the use of sophisticated weapons like “smart bombs” and
precision guided munitions (PGMs) which are extremely accurate and reduce civilian
casualties. C4ISR has also led to the expansion of space and the compression of time on
the battlefield.
C4ISR provides situational awareness (SA) for integration and coordination of joint
element manoeuvres and sensor to shooten connectivity for weapons employment. It is
the essential capability for binding the nation’s armed services defence and intelligence
agencies and other government and private organisations into a viable, coherent force.
The resultant information superiority fundamentally changes the way operations are
conducted. Joint C4ISR enables ability to mass effects without massing forces; protects
against asymmetric threats; and provides joint force flexibility, interpretability and
efficiency.

70
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA key to Readiness

Transformation helps readiness

Jason Sherman, March 30,2006, lnside the Pentagon, Report:


Transformation reduces vulnembility to
'disruptive ' threats, Vo I. 22 No. 13, Lexis,

MP is the Army's premier communications modernization program that


provides the last mile of connectivity for the sustaining base. The
13MP installs fiber optic and wireless information transport systems
along with the hardware and software required to ensure the
installation has the most efficient, interoperable, commercially
standard technology available. Beginning this fiscal year, the program
will focus directly on those installations housing and supporting
moduIar units, including their training and support activities. These
improvements will support combat force readiness by meeting the
information requirements of deploying, deployed, and returning
warfighting forces. MP funds provide for the establishment of several
Area Processing Centers (APC). These centers will host services for the
entire array of combat support functions, including transportation,
logistics, maintenance, munitions, engineering, acquisition, finance,
medical, and military personnel readiness, In addition to providing
enhanced reachback capability to deployed forces, the consolidation of
IT investments and operating resources typically located on every
Army installation will reduce operating costs and enhance the Army's
ability to secure its networks. This will be accomplished by moving
vulnerabilities typically located at every installation to APCs that are
equipped with expanded IA and computer network defense
capabilities. The robust secure architecture that is typically built into
over 190 installations will now be consolidated into under ten APCs,
reducing the number of entry points into Army networks. The APCs
should be consolidated in Defense Information Systems Agency's
(DISA) data mega centers.

71
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military Transformation makes war fighting more effective.


Davis, 2003 (Joshua, November. Columnist and award winning
documentary producer. "If we run out
of batteries, this war is screwed". Wired Magazine Issue 1 1.06.
<http:I/www. wired.corn/wired/archive/l1.06/battlefield.html>)

He grabs my notebook and a blue ballpoint pen and draws an obtuse


angle. "When we attacked in the last Gulf war, we basically- - had our
vehicles lined in a wedge," he says. "We had five divisions moving
across the desert like that. As they went through, they'd sweep an area
clear - if there's a problem, the other unit can see and hear it, and,
more important, the unit is close by and can arrive quickly to help. In
that model, once you move through, the rear zones are secure. There's
not much left back there." NOW Mims draws a bunch of small circles
spread out on the page. This is Rumsfeld's theory of swarm tactics
because 2 technology allows soldiers to keep track of each other, even
when they're out of one another's sight, they , can now move in any
formation, "We may not always know exactly where the enemy is,"
Mims explains, "but we know where we are. When the enemy engages
us in this spread-out fashion, we send air cover to protect the unit until
the support forces arrive." Swarm theory holds that you move fast and
don't won7 about securing the rear. The benefits to this are many.
First, you need fewer troops and less equipment. War becomes
cheaper. Second, it's harder for the enemy to attack a widely dispersed
formation. Third, units can cover much more ground - they aren't
forced to maintain the wedge by slowing down to accommodate
lagging vehicles. Fourth, swarming allows you to go straight for the
heart of the enemy's command structure, undermining its support from
the inside out rather than battling on the periphery.

72
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Impacts- Space Radar Good: Deterrence


Space Radar enhances global deterrence due to threat of surveillance

Los Angeles Air Force Base, No Date Given “Fact Sheets: Space Radar: Space Radar”
http://www.losangeles.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5308 [Bapodra]

The Space Radar constellation is envisioned to consist of nine satellites, providing


worldwide coverage with a frequent revisit rate. This robust constellation will be
integrated into the nation's collection capabilities to significantly enhance our level of
persistent surveillance against our adversaries.
Space Radar will provide five types of tailorable products:
· Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Imagery: grayscale imagery
· Surface Moving Target Indication (SMTI): movement detection and characterization
· Open Ocean Surveillance (OOS): wide area coverage to detect ships at sea
· High Resolution Terrain Information (HRTI): 3-D topographic maps of an area
· Geospatial Intelligence Products (GEOINT): advanced products
Individually, these products will be able to satisfy many users' intelligence requirements.
When combined, fused products yield even deeper understanding of targets. Yet Space
Radar's truly transformational capability derives from the powerful combination of
products and persistence, provided by a responsive, timely, and assured system. The
products described above will be available during day or night, and during inclement
weather conditions. The users will be able to rapidly update tasking, determine when the
collection will occur, and plan operations with the confidence that Space Radar will be
there to support them. Central to this capability is the introduction of Electronically
Steered Array (ESA) technology onto the satellites, which allows the radar to shift its
focus on different targets almost instantaneously, and the creation of a robust,
interdependent ground system being developed in partnership with multiple national
agencies.
Space radar will profoundly change the nature of global persistent ISR, and its effects
will be widespread. It will significantly advance intelligence analysts' abilities to solve
hard intelligence problems, enable situational understanding throughout the full spectrum
of conflict, and enhance global deterrence through the mere threat of observation. Space
Radar is a joint effort of great benefit to the National Intelligence, Military, and Civil user
communities.

73
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Future Space Radar is critical to deterrence and surveillance of pro-terror states

Dr. Stephen M. Younger, Director of Defense Threat Reduction Agency, December 2-3,
2003 “The 34th IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security Strategy and Policy
Security Planning and Military Transformation after Iraqi Freedom”
http://ifpafletcherconference.com/oldtranscripts/2003/ellis.htm [Bapodra]

As Combatant Commanders rely on more sophisticated and integrated intelligence,


surveillance, and reconnaissance support in the future, we must supply unprecedented
situational awareness to give our fighting forces battlefield dominance. As
USSTRATCOM assumes ISR duties, we will consider ISR as a weapons system that not
only informs and enables operations, but also has a deterrent value all its own. When a
potential adversary knows you're watching, and knows we have the capability to respond
to any threat, it can be a great incentive to change behavior, if their actions are to be tried
in the court of world opinion, or in a more kinetic environment. This is not only true of
rogue states, but also of terrorist groups. Future systems such as space-based radar have
the potential to provide persistent ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance]
like we have never seen before. It is up to us to create mechanisms to share, analyze, and
assimilate the product, and slide down the continuum from data to information to
knowledge to wisdom. When we cannot target terrorists themselves, we can certainly
work to deter their actions through the states and organizations supporting them.
Returning to our nuclear arsenal, as Dr. Younger noted, we are on plan to reduce our
operational stockpile as directed by the President and the Nuclear Posture Review, a
seminal effort that perhaps should have been entitled the Strategic Posture Review, given
its broad focus. As we are now two years into the NPR, a strategic capabilities
assessment has been initiated by OSD to assess progress and provide midcourse
guidance. In order to continue providing an effective deterrent, Congress recently
provided funding to study elements of our nation's stockpile. These studies will help us
determine the size and character of the future stockpile required to continue protecting
our nation, our forces, and our allies in the years ahead. A weapon is only a deterrent if it
retains credibility. That's why we're also examining the deterrent value of nuclear and
conventional niche weapons, such as the robust nuclear earth penetrator and Big BLU.
Deterrence only has credibility to the extent we back it up with capability and
determination. Today's United States Strategic Command continues to be uniquely
positioned to support deterrence through its cohesive package of both new and legacy
missions. I thank you for your patience, and for your attendance at this most
worthwhile gathering, and look forward to your questions. Thank you.

74
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-warfare cause Accidental Nuke War


Cyber-attacks trigger accidental nuclear escalation

Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University


Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary
Journal [Bapodra]

The nuclear shadow over the information age remains significant. The essence of
information warfare is in subtlety and deception: the manipulation of uncertainty. The
essence of nuclear deterrence lies in the credible and certain threat of retaliation backed
by an information environment accepted and trusted by both sides in a partly competitive,
partly conflictual relationship. Nuclear assets may themselves become the targets of
cyberwarriors. Triumphalism about the RMA in high technology conventional weapons
overlooks asymmetrical strategies that might appeal to U.S. opponents. Among these
might be the reciprocal use of information warfare to deny U.S. access in time of need to
a timely nuclear response or to a credible nuclear threat. But even more problematic is the
potential collision course between intentional information warfare and unintended side
effects when cyberwar is waged against a nuclear armed state, especially one with a non-
Western culture. Neither the status of nuclear forces in the new world order, nor all of the
military implications of the information revolution, are apparent now. There are reasons
to suppose that the strategies and technologies of information warfare will develop along
one track, whereas efforts to control nuclear weapons spread and to establish the safety
and security of existing nuclear arsenals will involve a different community of specialists
and attentive publics. Nevertheless, there are sufficient grounds to be concerned that a too
successful menu of information strategies may contribute to a failure of nuclear
deterrence in the form of accidental/inadvertent war or escalation. Unplanned interactions
between infowarriors and deterrers could have unfortunate byproducts.

75
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Information warfare combines nuclear weapons and information to cause accidental


nuclear war.

Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University


Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and
Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra]

The end of Cold War has led some to assume that nuclear weapons and nuclear
deterrence are passe. Along with this, is a related assumption that a revolution in high
technology, conventional weaponry will accelerate the rate of nuclear political and
military obsolescence. On the other hand, all concede that the "revolution in military
affairs" is driven mostly by new technologies in information, communications, and
electronics. [1] New information and communication technologies may enable new forms
of war making, including information warfare, that are dysfunctional for deterrence
stability with, or without, nuclear weapons. It is possible that the remnants of pax atomica
will combine with attacks using the new strategies of information to produce an outcome
no one favors: accidental or inadvertent nuclear war or escalation.
In order to proceed, we need a working definition of information warfare. A large
literature offers candidate views on the concept of information warfare. [2] For present
purposes, information warfare can be defined as activities by one state or nonstate actor
against another that attempt to disrupt, deceive, or destroy one or more of the following
attributes of military or military related information: (1) the physical aspects of
information transfer or communication, such as landlines, radio receivers, satellites,
commanders, and command posts, not to exclude the flow of electrons back and forth
between senders and receivers; (2) the communications contents, consisting of asserted
facts, ideas, proposals, and other messages; (3) the network of channels by which sender
and receiver are connected and organizational behaviors influenced; (4) the security
protocols that authenticate a message sender and/or enable senders and receivers to pass
information back and forth without giving it away to the enemy; and, (5) persons in the
security decision-making process, including their role perceptions and their images of the
adversary that might be influenced by infowar. [3]

76
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

An information attack during nuclear tensions cause nuclear wars

Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University


Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and
Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra]

Each of the requirements for the avoidance of accidental/inadvertent nuclear war


(balancing positive and negative control, making and acting upon valid warning and
attack assessment, and maintaining authoritative and responsive delegation of authority
and/or devolution of command) is potentially at risk from information warfare.
First, the balance between positive and negative control becomes a more complicated
juggling act as alert levels are raised. Some components of the force, say ICBMs, are
permanently at high levels of readiness for prompt launch. Others, such as the bomber
force, require a great deal of care and feeding under stressful conditions before they are
launch ready. Nuclear armed sea-based cruise and ballistic missiles can be readied to fire
in a short time provided that the submarine is on station, but some submarines may need
to proceed from port to station and others may be moved in connection with targeting
requirements or possible threats to their survivability. Elements of the command system
also require synchronized movement across disparate services and civilian departments.
If NATO alerts are involved in addition to U.S. forces--as they would have been during
any Cold War confrontation with the Soviets--the management of alert phasing and
timing becomes even more complicated.
Info weapons introduced into this alerting process have the potential to disestablish the
desirable balance between positive and negative control as forces are gradually
empowered to go to war. From an enemy perspective, this might be considered a good
thing: confuse the American alerting process and make the wartime command system
only partly ready for battle. That is conventional, not nuclear, logic. In a nuclear crisis,
the two sides have a shared interest in avoiding nuclear war as well as a competitive
desire to prevent one another's gains. Accordingly, each will want the other to maintain
assured control over the balance between unlocking the cocked pistol for retaliation and
preserving control over the military movements and actions that might trigger inadvertent
war. And those military movements and actions are dangerous precisely because their
inherent danger might not be so obvious. As Thomas Schelling has noted, war can begin
not as a deliberate decision by policy makers, but as the result of a process over which
neither side has full control. The possible loss of control to be feared here is not military
usurpation of civil authority or military disregard of authorized commands. Instead, it is a
lack of correct foresight that results in a sequence of events foreseen by neither side,
creating a new and more adverse climate of expectations about future behavior. [29]

77
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Implementing information warfare at times of nuclear crisis causes accidental nuke


conflict escalation

Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University


Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and
Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra]

If the two sides in a nuclear crisis get into a sequence of events not correctly foreseen by
either and seek to interpret those events correctly, information warfare will be harmful,
not helpful, to correct interpretation. An example is perceptions management by one side
designed to suggest to the media, public, and legislature of the other side that the first
side's intentions are only honorable. [30] The second side, according to this carefully
orchestrated set of perceptions fed from one side to another, is really the "aggressor" or
the "uncooperative" partner. And the media and political elites of the second side might
believe the image created by enemy perceptions management, calling upon leaders to
stand down forces and accept the demands of the opponent. Or, leaders of the second side
might be outraged at the cyberpropaganda of the first side, escalate their demands, and
become more intransigent. As Robert Jervis explains:
A state tends to see the behavior of others as more planned, coordinated, and centralized
than it is. Actions that are accidental or the product of different parts of the bureaucracy
following their own policies are likely to be perceived as part of a coherent, and often
devious, plan. In a nuclear crisis, the propensity to see all of the other side's behavior as
part of a plan would be especially likely to yield incorrect and dangerous conclusions.

78
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA key to deter Chinese Asymmetric attack


US info development is key to prevent Chinese preemptive asymmetric attack

James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence


and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency
Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the
Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 . Foreign Affairs,
Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra]

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT now believes that more than 30 nations have developed aggressive computer-
warfare programs. The list includes Russia and China, volatile governments such as Iran and Iraq, and U.S.
allies such as Israel and France. Ambitious newcomers, including India and Brazil, are also seeking to
become powers in the world of virtual combat.
Americans celebrated the Persian Gulf War as a major victory for U.S. military forces and as a vindication
of the nation's defense structure. But outside the United States, the conflict taught an additional lesson: a
direct military confrontation with the United States would inevitably result in defeat. So while the United
States has continued to develop its conventional forces (the Pentagon's defense budget is now larger than
those of the 12 next largest nations combined), other countries have looked elsewhere for an asymmetric
advantage. "The rest of the world realizes that you don't take the United States on in a military frontal
sense, but you can probably bring it down or cause severe damage in a more oblique way," asserts Art
Money, assistant secretary of defense for command, control, and intelligence. "And that's where the
vulnerability in the United States resides."
One country that American intelligence has been closely monitoring is China, which is actively exploring
the possibilities raised by this new American vulnerability. Because Beijing sees the United States as its
principal antagonist in the twenty-first century, Chinese military leaders and policymakers have made an
intensive effort to apply the lessons learned from the Persian Gulf War's show of American military might.
The heated Chinese debate about how to seize a military advantage over the United States produced a
partial answer in Unrestricted Warfare, written by two People's Liberation Army (PLA) colonels, Qiao
Liang and Wang Xiangsui. The book clearly sets out why China considers the Gulf War to have been the
last hurrah for the old-style warrior.
The authors believe that China will never be able to match American technological superiority. Moreover,
having watched Moscow spend itself into oblivion trying to win the Cold War arms race, Beijing will seek
to avoid the same mistake. Instead, the authors write, a digital attack will give China a significant
asymmetric advantage and even bring about the defeat of the United States. China has therefore been
making large investments in new technology for the PLA and has established a special information-warfare
group to coordinate national offense and defense. China-watchers in the Pentagon refer to these efforts as
the creation of "the Great Firewall of China."
Part of the reason for such aggressive action is that China suspects that it is already under cyber-attack from
the United States. Every piece of computer hardware or software imported from the United States or its
allies is subject to detailed inspection when it arrives at the border. China's own technicians then take
control of the goods and either resist or closely monitor Western experts' efforts to install the equipment
themselves.

79
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

High-Tech Leadership key to Hegemony

High tech leadership is key to the economy and hegemony

William Hawkins, Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the


U.S. Business and Industry Council, October 10, 2003,
http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=901 [Bapodra]

PCAST's draft warns that U.S. technological preeminence is not assured because as
manufacturing is moving overseas, research and development is following, risking a shift
in future innovation which could leave America behind the technology curve. Global
R&D centers are emerging around manufacturing in India and Asia (especially in China)
where labor costs for R&D design capabilities are one-third to one-tenth what they are in
the United States. Companies are deciding to locate near strong R&D centers and
“clusters of innovation.” Confidence in the quality of foreign design capabilities is slowly
growing, as is the management of global design systems.
Foreign government subsidies of all types are wide and varied and include tax rebates,
tax holidays, stock options (with no capital gains taxes), science-based industrial parks,
direct subsidies and worker training programs. “We are not just competing against
foreign companies but foreign countries,” concludes the PCAST paper.
PCAST considers R&D and manufacturing as the two basic anchors of the modern
economy. R&D is coupled with manufacturing in an “innovation ecosystem” that drives
successful innovation, new products, and improved productivity. With manufacturing
leaving the country, the United States runs the risk of losing the strength of its innovation
infrastructure of design, research and development and the creation of new products and
whole industries. One aspect of the de-industrialization problem that is often overlooked
is that it is manufacturing that generates the revenue that supports R&D and innovation.
Loss of American high-tech leadership in both production and technology would have
serious implications for the nation's economic vitality, living standards, and national
security.

80
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-attacks are easy- resources exist

Cyber-attacks are easier because cyberspace levels the playing field from high-value
to low-risk

Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics,
"Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002,
http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra]

Cyberspace tends to level the playing field between the entities in that space and offers
attackers many high-value, low-risk targets. The threats can come from a hacker, an
insider, a criminal, a terrorist, a hostile nationstate, or even some combination of these.
The motivations can be equally diverse—mischief, theft, data collection, disruption of
operations, falsification of data. The threats, obviously, can be aimed equally well against
military or civilian targets. The weapons, with innocuous-sounding names like worms,
viruses, and even Trojan horses, are themselves readily available on the Internet. Most
important, the Internet itself is a very attractive target. Unlike physical break-ins, Internet
attacks are easy. An attacker who gets access to a Web site can roam around freely and
from a safe distance. Although in the past, a great deal of technical sophistication was
required to penetrate a computer network, attacks are now possible even by much less
well-informed adversaries; successful intruders share their programs— often with
“hacking for dummies” type scripts—enabling anyone to duplicate their efforts.

81
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-attack tracing causes Miscalc


Cyber-attacks are difficult to trace- causes miscalculated responses

Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics,
"Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002,
http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra]

Attackers can and do obfuscate who and where they are, making Internet intrusions and
attacks difficult to trace. Additionally, because the Internet allows packets to flow easily
across political, administrative, and geographic boundaries, cooperation from many
different entities, many without a vested interest, may be required to trace an attack.
Consequently, attackers often operate (or appear to operate) from other countries, and
thus international cooperation is required to trace and investigate attacks. Internet attacks
are low-risk: since the attackers do not need to be physically present, the risk of
identification is greatly reduced. Much of the activity is often masked by legitimate or
unrelated activity, and because multiple jurisdictions may be involved, prosecution can
be difficult and sometimes impossible.

82
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA stops Prolif


Revolution in Military Affairs prevents nuclear proliferation

Martin Libicki, Senior Analyst, Rand Corporation, Bulletin of the


Atomic Scientists, March 1, 2001

Moore would have the United States back off its attempts to shove its military forces into
techno-overdrive (especially in space). The Defense Department, in contrast, has no such
desire; it sees countering WMD as yet another item on its agenda.
Left unexamined, though, was the possibility that the linkage between the RMA and
nuclear proliferation does not hold. Indeed, the RMA has had little discernible effect on
the efforts that other nations have made to develop nuclear weapons, which are by far the
most militarily useful of the WMD. In fact, the reverse may well be true: The RMA
reduces the rationale for nuclear acquisition on the part of states that might otherwise
plan to use them against U.S. forces.
LET'S TAKE EACH CLAIM IN TURN. A QUESTION SUCH AS, "Would the RMA
eventually spur countervailing WMD programs?" is tough to answer. The RMA is a 50-
year process that began sometime in the late 1970s (in efforts to counter the numerical
superiority of Soviet tanks in the European theater), and it is only halfway complete.
Fortunately, although the start of the RMA may be imprecise, the date at which it was
first perceived can plausibly be fixed to the day--January 17, 1991--when U.S. bombers
started coming back from Baghdad unscathed.
Until then, there was considerable doubt that the U.S. military machine would work as
advertised. Influential analysts argued that Defense was putting too much stock in high
technology, which could neither be maintained nor used very well and thus offered no
great advantage over cheaper, lower-tech equipment (which, being indisputably cheaper,
could be purchased in larger quantities).
Suddenly, their case was lost. A force equipped with high technology had worked much
better than anticipated (having six months of downtime in the desert to work out the bugs
did not hurt). The revolution was discovered.

83
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Prolif leads to Nuke War

Nuclear proliferation destroys international stability and causes escalatory nuclear


wars

George Quester Professor of Government & Politics at the University of Maryland 1994
The Washington Quarterly Vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 103-114, Spring Lexis

If Americans ask themselves the elementary question of why they should be opposed to
the proliferation of nuclear weapons, an obvious first answer might now be that such a
spread of weapons of mass destruction could lead to U.S. cities being destroyed and/or
U.S. military units or other U.S. assets abroad suffering nuclear attacks. Further,
Americans also care about nuclear proliferation because foreign cities may get destroyed
in future outbreaks of war. Following such proliferation, nuclear attacks on U.S. targets
could take place more "rationally" in the wake of normal military and political conflicts.
Crises sometimes lead to "a war nobody wanted," or to escalations that neither side can
control. The risks that such deterrence failures would involve nuclear use are increased as
more countries get nuclear weapons. Such nuclear attacks on U.S. targets could also take
place less "rationally" -- if someone like Idi Amin or Mu'ammar Qadhafi were to take
charge of a country that possesses nuclear weapons. The kinds of political forces that
bombed the World Trade Center in New York, or attacked the entrance to Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters in Virginia, might then use nuclear weapons.
Continues…. Americans, and most other people, will want to avoid a situation in which
any state can defy the will of the rest of the world, just by being able to threaten the
destruction of any of the world's cities. Whatever hopes are now entertained for a
disciplined world order and a reliable system of collective security thus depend on the
halting of nuclear proliferation. Finally, the United States will not find it easy to sit on the
sidelines in a regional war involving nuclear-armed states. In desperate circumstances
such states will try to threaten the interests of bystanders, in order to force an
international intervention. And other states within and outside such a region will apply
great pressures for U.S. and/or UN involvement.

84
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NUCLEAR WAR LEADS TO EXTINCTION


Victor Utgoff, Depute director of strategy, forces, and resources division of institute for defense analysis,
‘02, “Proliferation, Missile defense and American ambitions” Survival, P. 87-90

85
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space weapons Good- Econ/Accident/taiwan add on


A. Now is the key time to access space – failure to do so would result in global
economic collapse, accidental nuclear war, and confrontation over Taiwan.
Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9,
2008, “Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren]

IT doesn't take much imagination to realize how badly war in space could unfold. An enemy --
say, China in a confrontation over Taiwan, or Iran staring down America over the Iranian
nuclear program -- could knock out the American satellite system in a barrage of antisatellite
weapons, instantly paralyzing American troops, planes and ships around the world. Space itself
could be polluted for decades to come, rendered unusable. The global economic system would
probably collapse, along with air travel and communications. Your cellphone wouldn't work.
Nor would your A.T.M. and that dashboard navigational gizmo you got for Christmas. And
preventing an accidental nuclear exchange could become much more difficult. ''The fallout,
if you will, could be tremendous,'' said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control
Association in Washington.

B. Economic collapse would escalate to full scale conflict and rapid extinction.
Thomas Bearden [(Lt. Col in US Army), 6-24-00, “The Unnecessary Energy Crisis”, Free Republic, p.
online]

History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic
collapse, the stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to
the point where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25
nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea
launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a
spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China-whose long-range nuclear missiles
(some) can reach the United States-attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the
mutual treaties involved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict,
escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies have shown for decades that, under such
extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potential adversaries
are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy
of the MAD concept is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without
effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all is to launch immediate full-bore
pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and massively as possible.
As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs. Today, a great percent of
the WMD arsenals that will be unleashed, are already on site within the United States itself. The
resulting great Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the
biosphere, at least for many decades.

86
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

C. An accidental launch would lead to retaliatory strikes and extinction within half
an hour
The American Prospect, 2/26/01

The bitter disputes over national missile defense (NMD) have obscured a related but
dramatically more urgent issue of national security: the 4,800 nuclear warheads --
weapons with a combined destructive power nearly 100,000 times greater than the
atomic bomb that leveled Hiroshima -- currently on "hair-trigger" alert. Hair-trigger
alert means this: The missiles carrying those warheads are armed and fueled at all times. Two
thousand or so of these warheads are on the intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)
targeted by Russia at the United States; 1,800 are on the ICBMs targeted by the
United States at Russia; and approximately 1,000 are on the submarine-based
missiles targeted by the two nations at each other. These missiles would launch on
receipt of three computer-delivered messages. Launch crews -- on duty every second of every
day -- are under orders to send the messages on receipt of a single computer-delivered
command. In no more than two minutes, if all went according to plan, Russia or the
United States could launch missiles at predetermined targets: Washington or New
York; Moscow or St. Petersburg. The early-warning systems on which the launch
crews rely would detect the other side's missiles within tens of seconds, causing
the intended -- or accidental -- enemy to mount retaliatory strikes. "Within a half-
hour, there could be a nuclear war that would extinguish all of us," explains Bruce
Blair. "It would be, basically, a nuclear war by checklist, by rote."

D. War Over Taiwan Goes Nuclear


Chicago Tribune ’96 [“China Prepares New Show of Strength,” Uli Schmetzer, Feb. 6//uwyo-
crowe]

the Peoples Liberation


While a peaceful solution remains a priority, both the politburo and
Army have pledged to use force if necessary to regain the island on which the
Nationalists settled after losing the civil war to Mao Tse-tung in 1949. A PLA analysis--leaked
to Western media--suggests that in the event of war with Taiwan, the U.S. would not
intervene because U.S. commercial interests in China would be damaged and any intervention
could lead to a new Sino-Russian alliance. The document, circulated among officers, concludes
that even if the U.S. intervened, Washington could only retard--but not reverse--the
defeat of Taiwan, and a Sino-U.S. conflict might lead to a global nuclear
holocaust.

87
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization already started


Not only is a war in space inevitable – The race to weaponize space has already
started.
Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9,
2008, “Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren]

The consequences of war in space are in fact so cataclysmic that arms control advocates like Mr.
Kimball would like simply to prohibit the use of weapons beyond the earth's atmosphere. But
it’s already be too late for that. In the weeks since an American rocket slammed into an out-of-
control satellite over the Pacific Ocean, officials and experts have made it clear that the United
States, for better or worse, is already committed to having the capacity to wage war in space.
And that, it seems likely, will prompt others to keep pace. What makes people want to ban war
in space is exactly what keeps the Pentagon's war planners busy preparing for it: The United
States has become so dependent on space that it has become the country's Achilles' heel. ''Our
adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities,'' Gen. Kevin P. Chilton,
commander of the United States Strategic Command, wrote in Congressional testimony on Feb.
27, ''and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any
threat to our space infrastructure.'' Whatever Pentagon assurances there have been to the
contrary, the destruction of a satellite more than 130 miles above the Pacific Ocean a week
earlier, on Feb. 20, was an extraordinary display of what General Chilton had in mind -- a
capacity that the Pentagon under President Bush has tenaciously sought to protect and enlarge. Is
war in space inevitable? The idea or such a war has been around since Sputnik, but for most of
the cold war it remained safely within the realm of science fiction and the carefully proscribed
American-Soviet arms race. That is changing. A dozen countries now can reach space with
satellites -- and, therefore, with weapons. China strutted its stuff in January 2007 by shooting
down one of its own weather satellites 530 miles above the planet. ''The first era of the space age
was one of experimentation and discovery,'' a Congressional commission reported just before
President Bush took office in 2001. ''We are now on the threshold of a new era of the space age,
devoted to mastering operations in space.''

88
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization Inevitable

Space Weaponization inevitable, two reasons


1) Countries see space as key to successful military operations and are willing to
fight for it
2) China already has the tech
Areospace Daily, staff Monthly defense report, 3-12-07, [“Space can't be preserved as a weapons-free
'sanctuary’”, L/N//E.Berggren]

WEAPONIZATION INEVITABLE:Curtailing the "weaponization" of space and preserving it


as a peaceful sanctuary will prove impossible given the ever-growing importance of space to
military operations, according to Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) "Future adversaries will be able to track
and target American forces using satellites, and I find it inconceivable that in a war with such an
adversary America would refrain from attacking those space assets at the expense of our
warfighters," says Kyl, who chairs the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism, technology
and homeland security. "Somehow preserving space as a sanctuary may sound appealing in
theory, but it would be indefensible in practice," he says. Concerns over the vulnerability of
America's space assets have been heightened by China's January test of a prototype anti-satellite
weapon against one of their own defunct satellites.

89
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
SPACE RACE INEVITABLE AROUND 2013

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

This is a hallmark of Maslow Windows: loosening of federal and other purse strings to pursue a
lofty goal of international significance. In 1969 U.S. News & World Report reported that although
initial cost estimates for the Moon project had been up to $ 40 B, “Congress raised hardly any
questions (and)…Initial funds were appropriated swiftly to send Project Apollo on its way.”
As we approach the 1960s-style economic boom of the next Maslow Window (fully ramped-up
by 2015) these patterns will repeat. In short: 1) a major Sputnik-like shock will occur near 2013
(1957 + 56) involving probably China and their international partners; see Wave Guide 5, 2)
the American public will raise urgent questions about the viability of American math and science
education and demand reforms, and 3) the new “Space President”, a John F. Kennedy-like figure,
will respond by committing the U.S. to spectacular, unprecedented activities in space with
essentially unanimous support from Congress; see Wave Guide 3.

International space race and colonization are inevitable

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

The intersection of projected trajectories for the world’s current and future space powers suggests
there will be a major international event just prior to the opening of the next Maslow Window
(near 2015). The Nominal Model timelines (see Forecasts page) suggest this will occur near 2013
(Sputnik year 1957 + 56) and will have an impact on the U.S. and world comparable to
Sputnik’s launch in 1957.
One likely model is that an international consortium of space powers (ICSP) – possibly led by
China – will announce their comprehensive plan for the large-scale colonization and utilization of
space, probably including the Moon and possibly Mars. In addition to lunar settlements and
orbiting solar power stations, their agenda might include plans for LEO and lunar hotels. Moon
hotels are hardly a new idea; the Shimizu Corporation (Tokyo) had impressive designs over 20 years
ago when we had meetings with them in connection with a NASA rfp at General Dynamics space
headquarters in San Diego. Interestingly, despite their sophisticated concepts, Shimizu did not
feature their space projects on their website before and I am unable to find any mention of them
now.
Based on the current interest levels and cooperation capabilities of many countries, this ICSP
scenario seems very reasonable. For example, both Japan and the U.S. have announced plans to
send people back to the Moon within 12 years, and China (possibly in cooperation with Russia)
wants to establish a lunar base shortly thereafter. India also has lunar ambitions. And Russia,
through its American broker Space Adventures, already offers private citizens their own personal
trip around the Moon (for a hefty fee). Russia also claims to be ahead in a “race to Mars” that they
expect to win by 2025.

90
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponizing now- China

Weaponization now – China is committed to a covert weapon strategy, recent attack


on satellites prove.
Craig Covault, [analysis for avation week and space technology think tanks, 3-5-07, L/N//E.Berggren]

There are least 30 Chinese anti-satellite concepts and tactics that could be a factor in any future
U.S.-Chinese military space face-off. This is in spite of Chinese assertions that it is only working
on civilian space projects now that its Jan. 11 anti-satellite (Asat) test was a success, says the
U.S.-China Economic Security Review Commission (see p. 24). This political stance does not
necessarily pass for reality, however, the report indicates. "The likelihood of Chinese hypocrisy,
deception or merely lack of uniform policy implementation must be considered," the
commission said. But it also found probable that "an aggressive Chinese analysis of U.S. space
vulnerabilities and even covert systems development by the Chinese may be considered
consistent with a Chinese view that the weaponization of space by the U.S. is inevitable and
requiring a counterstrategy". Among the 30 Chinese Asat strategies uncovered by the
commission, many are based on covert operations aimed at shielding China from blame for a
loss of U.S. space capability, if a conflict looms between the two countries.

Space race now - China’s recent ASAT success prove there is no chance of space
remaing neutral.
BBC news, January 19, 2007,[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6276543.stm // E.Berggren]
It is thought that the Chinese used a ground-based medium-range ballistic missile to destroy a
weather satellite that had been launched in 1999. Correspondents say this is the first known
satellite intercept test for more than 20 years. China's foreign ministry refused to confirm or
deny the report. While the technology is not new, it does underline the growing capabilities of
China's armed forces, according to the BBC's Dan Griffiths in Beijing. Space arms race? Late on
Thursday, US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe confirmed an article in
the magazine American Aviation Week and Space Technology, which reported that the test had
taken place. The report said that a Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite was
destroyed by an anti-satellite system launched from or near China's Xichang Space Centre on 11
January. The test is thought to have occurred at more than 537 miles (865km) above the Earth.
Foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said: "I can't say anything about the reports. I really
don't know."

China is already creating new space weaponary for its military space systems
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

China appears to be sharpening its war fighting space skills, from creating anti-satellite
weaponry, building new classes of heavy-lift and small boosters, as well as improving an array
of military space systems. That judgment comes courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense
(DoD) which earlier this week released its annual report to Congress: The Military Power of the
People's Republic of China. The report focuses on the current and probable future course of that
country's growing military-technological prowess, including the use of space to assure military

91
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
advantage.

China has already developed the capabilities for laser-weapons and ASATs
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

Flagged in the report is China's work in electronic warfare. In particular, the country is procuring
state-of-the-art technology to improve its intercept, direction finding, and jamming capabilities.
A possible target for the jammers: receivers utilized in the Global Positioning System (GPS)
satellite constellation. The report also underscores China's "robust" research and development
program for laser weapons. In 1999, the Chinese displayed a portable laser weapon, advertised
for blinding human vision and electro-optical sensors. In addition, a radio-frequency weapons
program is likely in place. "Beijing may have acquired high-energy laser equipment that could
be used in the development of ground-based anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons," the DoD report
says.

China will use EMP’s as a first strike against us – they see space as a must for
military victory in the future
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

This year's report cites a comment from Captain Shen Zhongchang from the Chinese Navy
Research Institute. He envisions, according to the DoD, a weaker military defeating a superior
one by attacking its space-based communications and surveillance systems. "The mastery of
outer space will be a requisite for military victory, with outer space becoming the new
commanding heights for combat," Shen is quoted as saying. He also is quoted in the report as
observing that "lightning attacks and powerful first strikes will be more widely used in the
future." In future wars, Shen highlights radar, radio stations, communications facilities, and
command ships as priority targets vulnerable to smart weapons, electronic attack, and
electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons.

92
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China already has the tech to blind satellites and are pursuing offensive options for
military purposes.
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

Improving space-based reconnaissance and surveillance technologies is high on China's agenda.


"These systems, when fully deployed, will provide a robust and versatile space reconnaissance
capability with regional coverage," the just released DoD report explains. "Publicly, China
opposes the militarization of space and seeks to prevent or slow the development of U.S. anti-
satellite (ASAT) systems and space-based missile defenses," the DoD reports states. "Privately,
however, China's leaders probably view ASAT systems -- and offensive counterspace systems,
in general -- as well as space-based missile defenses as inevitabilities." Meanwhile, the report
adds, China is said to be acquiring a variety of foreign technologies that could be used to
develop its own satellite-killing capability. On this score, China already may possess the ability
to damage optical sensors on some spacecraft - at least those vulnerable to laser damage.
Ground-based, satellite-blinding laser weaponry is likely being pursued. "Given China's current
level of interest in laser technology, Beijing probably could develop a weapon that could destroy
satellites in the future," the report notes. China is also thought on a path toward a direct-ascent
ASAT system. This hardware could be fielded in the 2005-2010 timeframe, the DoD asserts.
Space interceptors can destroy targets in space. Moreover, the report highlights a Hong Kong
newspaper account in January 2001 that claimed China had developed and tested an ASAT
system using a "parasitic microsatellite." Although the DoD review says this claim cannot be
confirmed, it points out that home-grown microsatellite and nanosatellite technologies are being
proliferated by a number of nations.

China is developing small satellites with rapid launch capabilities for military
purposes and hopes to have a space station there for sustainable military prescence.
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

In the booster department, China is proceeding with building a new modular family of heavy-lift
launchers. Additionally, a new small, solid-propellant space lifter is being developed. A family
of these smaller boosters would provide China the ability to hurl small satellites into orbit. This
class of booster would give China a rapid launch capability, "and has broad military, civil, and
commercial applications," the DoD report observes. As for China's human spaceflight program,
the DoD acknowledges the fact that the country's first manned space mission may occur this
year. "China also has long-term plans to launch its own space station, and possibly a reusable
space plane as well. While one of the strongest immediate motivations for this program appears
to be political prestige, China's manned space efforts almost certainly will contribute to
improved military space systems in the 2010-2020 timeframe," the report concludes.

93
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization now – China already has and impressive array of space weapons
and is moving towards placing nuclear weapons in space.
The Washington Times, January 11, 2008, [“China has gained and tested array of space weapons”,
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2007/mar/29/20070329-114710-9929r/ //E.Berggren]

China is developing an "impressive" array of space weapons, including missiles and jammers,
and is moving toward placing nuclear weapons in space to attack U.S. satellites, the
commander of U.S. strategic forces told the Senate yesterday. The Chinese military has
"undertaken what we would call a very disciplined and comprehensive continuum of capability
against ... our space capabilities," Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright yesterday told the Senate
Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee. Their capabilities go "all the way from
temporary and reversible effects -- [Global Positioning System] jamming, things like that,
[communications] jamming, all the way through direct ascent ASAT," he said, referring to anti-
satellite weapons. "Eventually, they'll probably be looking at co-orbital" weapons -- missiles that
orbit near a satellite and then explode. "Then, the one that you really worry about is introducing
weapons of mass destruction into space on a missile," he said.

China is continuing to deploy and develop space weapons to deny the US access.
Asia Times, June 6, 2008, “china take on the US in space”, [http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:DO4IE-
uoJE8J:www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JF06Ad01.html+space+weapon+inevitable&hl=en&ct=clnk
&cd=25&gl=us //E.Berggren]

"Even as it tries to rally multinational coalitions and public opinion to oppose 'the weaponization
of space', Beijing quietly continues to develop its own space-based weapons and tactics to
destroy American military assets," Heritage Foundation vice president for foreign policy and
defense studies, Larry M Wortzel, railed in a commentary. "China's strategy here is to blunt
American military superiority by limiting and ultimately neutralizing its existing space-based
defense assets, and to forestall deployment of new technology that many experts believe would
provide the best protection from ballistic missile attack." Last month, Chinese President Hu
Jintao sided with Russia in its long-running campaign to block the deployment of a US missile
defense system covering much of East Asia that would partly operate from bases in Eastern
Europe. Some analysts believe Beijing is worried the deployment of American space-based
interceptors would block missiles the PLA has been upgrading to target what it calls the
renegade island of Taiwan and US Pacific bases. Certainly, the Chinese military apparatus hasn't
been sitting on its haunches while its diplomats have been getting all worked up over the
Americans. Security analysts say it has poured cash into an electronic warfare capability
designed to jam satellite transmissions, developed laser-based weapons and improved its heavy-
lift rockets.

94
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
China's space programs are all in its national interests
China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a
White Paper", viewed on Spacered;
http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the
state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of
outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind. As a developing
country, China's fundamental tasks are developing its economy and continuously pushing
forward its modernization drive.
The aims and principles of China's space activities are determined by their important status and
function in protecting China's national interests and implementing the state's development
strategy. The aims of China's space activities are: to explore outer space, and learn more about
the cosmos and the Earth; to utilize outer space for peaceful purposes, promote mankind's
civilization and social progress, and benefit the whole of mankind; and to meet the growing
demands of economic construction, national security, science and technology development and
social progress, protect China's national interests and build up the comprehensive national
strength.

China's space plans include monitoring and communication satellites, and space preeminence

China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a
White Paper", viewed on Spacered;
http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

The 21st century will witness vigorous development of space activities across the world.
China is drafting a space development strategy and plans oriented to the 21st century
according to the actual demands and long-term target of national development to spur the
growth of the space industry.
Development Targets
The short-term development targets (for the next decade) are:
- To build up an earth observation system for long-term stable operation. The meteorological
satellites, resource satellites, oceanic satellites and disaster monitoring satellites can develop
into an earth observation system for long-term stable operation to conduct stereoscopic
observation and dynamic monitoring of the land, atmosphere, and oceanic environments of
the country, the peripheral regions and even the whole globe.
- To set up an independently operated satellite broadcasting and telecommunications system.
Positive support will be given to the development of commercial broadcasting and
telecommunications satellites such as geo-stationary telecom satellites and TV live
broadcasting satellites with long operating life, high reliability and large capacity, so as to
form China's satellite telecom industry.
- To establish an independent satellite navigation and positioning system. This will be
achieved by setting up a navigation and positioning satellite group step by step and
developing a relevant application system, which will eventually bring into being China's
satellite navigation and positioning industry;
The long-term development targets (for the next 20 years or more) are as follows:
To achieve industrialization and marketization of space technology and space applications.
The exploration and utilization of space resources shall meet a wide range of demands of
economic construction, state security, science and technology development and social
progress, and contribute to the strengthening of the comprehensive national strength;
- To establish a multi-function and multi-orbit space infrastructure composed of various

95
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
satellite systems and set up a satellite ground application system that harmonizes
spacecraft and ground equipment to form an integrated ground-space network system in
full, constant and long-term operation in accordance with the overall planning of the state;
- To establish China's own manned spaceflight system and carry out manned spaceflight
scientific research and technological experiments on a certain scale; and
- To obtain a more important place in the world in the field of space science with more
achievements and carry out explorations and studies of outer space.
- To upgrade the overall level and capacity of China's launch vehicles. This will be achieved
by improving the performance and reliability of the "Long-March" group, developing the
next generation of launch vehicles with non-toxic, non-polluting, high-performance and low-
cost qualities, forming a new group of launch vehicles and strengthening the capability of
providing international commercial launching services;
- To realize manned spaceflight and establish an initially complete R and D testing system
for manned space projects;
- To establish a coordinated and complete national satellite remote-sensing application
system by building various related ground application systems through overall planning,
setting up a remote-sensing data receiving, processing and distributing system covering
the whole country for data sharing, and forming a fairly complete application system in
major application fields of satellite remote-sensing; and
- To develop space science and explore outer space by developing a scientific research and
technological experiment satellite group of the next generation, strengthening studies of
space micro-gravity, space material science, space life science, space environment and
space astronomy, and carrying out pre-study for outer space exploration centering on the
exploration of the moon.

Chinese will go into space by 2015—the only issue is whether it will be cooperative or confrontational

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
(Contributions from Anny Wong, PhD, political scientist. "10 reasons why china is good for space"
http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/2008/06/22/10-reasons-why-china-is-good-for-space/)[JWu]

3. Energy-hungry China may decide to lead solar power satellite development. Facing $
trillions of energy infrastructure costs in the next 20 years, China may decide to develop this
inexhaustible energy source that would reduce both environmental pollution and strategic tensions.
2. China and U.S. (and others) may form a Grand Space Alliance for the 2015 Maslow
Window. If indeed we’re “less than 5 years from a new generation of Chinese leaders with
whom a far stronger relationship may be built,” — see Thomas Barnett — new options are
possible. With joint interests in global security, new energy sources, and the exploration of
space, China and the U.S. may decide that a “Football Game” model is more productive than
the previous Cold War space experience was. In an American professional football game there are
rules, big money, great excitement, intense competition, and winners and losers, but at the end of
the game both teams survive, learn, and remain friends; they also look forward to the next
game on the schedule.
1. A less attractive option is that China (and partners) may stimulate the rapid development of
space by challenging the U.S. in a Cold War-style confrontation, complete with a Sputnik-like
event. Reason #2 (above) is basically a model of greatly expanded International Geophysical Year-
style friendly cooperation. However, in 1957 it led to the surprise launch of Sputnik which
shocked America and triggered the 1960s race to space between two very unfriendly countries.
As we draw closer to the 2015 Maslow Window it will become clearer which model of
international space development — “Football Game” or “Cold War”– will occur.

96
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization Zero-Sum

Space is vital to the future of both countries making it a zero-sum situation and
weaponization inevitable.
Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.html+china+space+weapons&h
l=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren]

In reviewing the DoD report, some Western China watchers don't see anything startling or new
in the assessment of Chinese space interests. But the report does wave a cautionary flag,
according to one expert. "Still lots of speculation of what the Chinese might be developing," said
Joan Johnson-Freese, chair of the Naval War Colleges National Security Decision Making
Department in Newport, Rhode Island. "Regarding space specifically, both countries see space
as so vital to their futures," Johnson-Freese told SPACE.com. "Actions by one are seen as nearly
zero-sum to the other," she said. Johnson-Freese said that the Chinese have read the 2001 Report
of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and
Organization as suggesting the inevitability that space will become a battleground.
Therefore, the U.S. would be remiss not to prepare. "They also note that in the first U.S. Space
War Game in 2001, American forces were pitted against an opponent threatening a small
neighbor. Subsequently, the Chinese view that they would be remiss not to prepare for the
inevitability of U.S. development of space weapons." There are lots of "inevitabilities" in both
U.S. and China camps, Johnson-Freese said, that were not considered inevitabilities five years
ago. "Lots of action-reaction on both sides," she added.

97
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Now is key to Weaponize- we must do it first

The US no longer has a choice about weaponization if we don’t act now it will just
put us at risk from countries that have/ are determined to further develop them.
Michael Bruno, [president of aerospace daily’s defense report, 1-30-07, “U.S. must develop offensive
space abilities”, L/N//E.Berggren]

The United States cannot trust that China will restrain itself against exploiting space for weapons
and other military uses, and it must bolster its defensive and offensive capabilities high above
the Earth, a longtime Senate proponent of missile and space systems said Jan. 29. Conservative
Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, a leading Republican party policymaker in that chamber, also asserted
that further arms control agreements regarding space could be "dangerous" in limiting the
United States while adversaries continue their developments. "Military capabilities in space
are likely to prove vital to our security in the future, and I do not believe we should consider
forfeiting our right to build them," Kyl said in a speech at the Heritage Foundation in
Washington. "The bottom line is this: We must not jeopardize our warfighters in the name of
preserving an indefensible distinction between space and nonspace weapons," he continued. "If
targeting an adversary's satellites allows our military to achieve victory more quickly or at lower
cost in blood, such attacks must be considered. The Chinese seem to understand this point much
better than we do." Kyl delivered his prepared speech because he said not enough concern and
attention has been - or likely will be - given to U.S. must develop offensive space abilities
China's Jan. 11 test of a ballistic anti-satellite (ASAT) capability. With Iraq preoccupying U.S.
officials and Democrats in control of Congress, Kyl believes a strong voice against accepting or
negotiating China's ASAT developments will be lost. Kyl criticized President Bush for not
personally speaking out against the Jan. 11 test, as well as administration officials at the State
Department for being too soft-spoken in response. The inevitable result could be an emboldened
Beijing and limited U.S. options in a fight over Taiwan, among various potential flashpoints -
although he said the two countries ought to exist in cooperation. But Chinese ASAT efforts fly
in the face of their peaceful declarations, and any space arms control deal would be unverifiable
since so many defensive capabilities have inherent, offensive applications as well.

98
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. key to check Rogue Nations in space

Rogue nations and non state actors have the capabilities to employ space weapons –
only a strong US presence in space can solve.
Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12-99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren ]

Rogue nations are motivated for various reasons to catch up with and challenge the defense
technology of the presently advanced countries. No country can keep all the rogue elements
from doing what they want to do, and which in many cases is as much their sovereign right as it
was a western country's to develop launch capability and ICBM's. The fact that the nuclear bomb
is more than 50 years old and orbital missiles are more than 40 years old should be kept in mind,
as regards what's likely to happen in these countries with modern computers and other current
technologies. It's a lot easier now. The only way to stay ahead is on capabilities out of the reach
of rogue nations. A key sector is space based capabilities. Our current space capabilities are
limited by our ability to launch only small payloads of limited capability.

Effective satellites are key to preventing rogue nations from producing nuclear or
biological weapons.
Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12-99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren]

For defense purposes, a satellite constellation is needed to provide constant coverage of the
surface of the Earth, e.g., so that an enemy can't launch a missile when there is no defence
satellite above, or move their nuclear or biological weapons where there's no high resolution
reconnaissance satellite above. Presently, our reconnaissance satellites are spread out and cannot
provide continuous coverage, so this is easy. In fact, our space assets are pretty sparse and
limited, and will remain so until we beef up our space infrastructure and assets. For large scale
space development, where's the beef.

99
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Prolif= Extinction

Proliferation Risks Extinction


Stuart Taylor Jr., journalist, LEGAL TIMES, September 16, 2002, LN.

The truth is, no matter what we do about Iraq, if we don't stop proliferation another five or ten
potentially unstable nations may go nuclear before long, making it ever more likely that one or
more bombs will be set off on our soil by terrorists or terrorist governments. Even an airtight
missile defense will be useless against a nuke hidden in a truck, a shipping container, or a boat.
Unless we get serious about stopping proliferation, we are headed for "a world
filled with nuclear-weapons states where every crisis threatens to go nuclear,"
where "the survival of civilization truly is in question from day to day," and where
"it would be impossible to keep these weapons out of the hands of terrorists, religious cults, and
criminal organizations," So writes Ambassador Thomas Graham Jr., a moderate Republican who
served as a career arms-controller under six presidents and led the successful Clinton
administration effort to extend the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

100
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Radar key to diffuse conflict, and defend from asteroids

Space based radar is key to early warning detection so we can diffuse conflicts
before they happen and from an inevitable asteroid
Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12-99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren ]

The Russians used space based radar during the Cold War, and this application is just starting to
emerge in US military. When the radar is directly overhead, it can see around objects that
ground-based radar cannot. Firther, the radar cross section is dramatically higher for most
objects seen from above, especially for aircraft and ground vehicles. Radar satellites to date have
provided non-real-time data which is first collected and then sent down, and have been few and
far between. What we need is a constellation of radar satellites to give constant coverage of the
Earth. In space, radar can be used to discriminate between warheads and decoys, e.g., when the
bus recoils from dropping off a high inertia device vs. a decoy. This helps make defense
massively dominant over offense coming up from Earth. Other applications such as air traffic
control and domestic police services can give commercial paybacks. The same assets can be
used to defend the satellite platforms from aggressors, and defend Earth from natural
asteroids by early detection. Defense of commercial satellites from orbital debris will also be a
peacetime spinoff and practice ground, first finding the objects.

101
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Asteroids kill everything


Asteroid Impact Kills Everything, Even The Cockroaches
Corey S. Powell 2000 [“20 Ways the World Could End Swept away” Discover v21 n10 online @
http://www.ldolphin.org/twentyways.html oct 2000]
1. Asteroid impact Once a disaster scenario gets the cheesy Hollywood treatment, it's hard to
take it seriously. But there is no question that a cosmic interloper will hit Earth, and
we won't have to wait millions of years for it to happen. In 1908 a 200-foot-wide
comet fragment slammed into the atmosphere and exploded over the Tunguska region in Siberia,
Russia, with nearly 1,000 times the energy of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Astronomers estimate similar-sized events occur every one to three centuries. Benny Peiser, an
anthropologist-cum-pessimist at Liverpool John Moores University in England, claims that
impacts have repeatedly disrupted human civilization. As an example, he says one
killed 10,000 people in the Chinese city of Chi'ing-yang in 1490. Many scientists
question his interpretations: Impacts are most likely to occur over the ocean, and small ones that
happen over land are most likely to affect unpopulated areas. But with big asteroids, it
doesn't matter much where they land. Objects more than a half-mile wide- which
strike Earth every 250,000 years or so- would touch off firestorms followed by
global cooling from dust kicked up by the impact. Humans would likely survive,
but civilization might not. An asteroid five miles wide would cause major
extinctions, like the one that may have marked the end of the age of dinosaurs.
For a real chill, look to the Kuiper belt, a zone just beyond Neptune that contains roughly
100,000 ice-balls more than 50 miles in diameter. The Kuiper belt sends a steady rain of
small comets earthward. If one of the big ones headed right for us, that would be
it for pretty much all higher forms of life, even cockroaches.

102
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weapons key to surveillance


Space provides critical survalience and navigation which that allow for a smaller
and more effective military.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

103
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space key to Military


Absent access to space – the U.S. would be unable to conduct large military
operations abroad and make us more vulnerable anti-space hostilities.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

104
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Dominance key to Peace


Because of how valuable our space assets are – we must develop offensive
capabilities to protect from or deter an attack on them.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

105
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space is the ultimate high-ground – The U.S. has a unique window of opportunity
establish dominance. Once we establish space dominance it eliminates any chance of
a space arms race or any other nation to secure space
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

106
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. control of space creates the stability for lasting global peace and prosperity.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

107
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Keeping space as a sactuary argument would only allow other nations to covertly
develop these weapons – leaving us vulnerable for a surprise nuclear attack.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

108
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

If Space weaponization is inevitable – we might as well be ready to defend ourselves


Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

The U.S. must be the frontrunner in space or else other countries will put weapons into orbit

John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New
Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and
decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra]

The lesson for space is that some country inevitably will move to seize control of it, no matter how much
money the United States sinks into feel-good projects like the International Space Station. Americans have
been caught napping before, as when the Soviet Union shocked the world with Sputnik in 1957. In truth,
the United States could have beaten the Soviets to space but for a deliberate slow-down strategy that was
meant to foster sunny relations with the world's other superpower.

The United States is the world's frontrunner in space, with about 110 military satellites in operation,
compared with about 40 for Russia and 20 for the rest of the world. Yet a leadership role in space is not the
same as dominance, and the United States today lacks the ability to defend its assets against rudimentary
ASAT technology or to deny other countries their own weapons in space. No country appears to be
particularly close to putting weapons in orbit, though the Chinese are expected to launch their first
astronaut in the next year or two and they're working hard to upgrade their military space capabilities. "It
would be a mistake to underestimate the rapidity with which other states are beginning to use space-based
systems to enhance their security," says the just-released annual report of the Stockholm International
Peace Research Institute. At a U.N. disarmament conference two years ago, Chinese officials called for a
treaty to keep weapons out of space -- a possible sign that what they really want is some time to play catch-
up.

109
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Hege High- Must go to space now


The U.S. is in a rare position of unprecedented hegemony – The time to go to space
is now before nations catch up to us.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

110
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Moral imperative to go to space

The U.S. has a moral imperative to secure space and promote peace and prosperity
– before any other state does gets control of space
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

111
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. space dominance dissolves military need

A world in which the U.S. has control of space states would no longer need
traditional military forces.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

112
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space is critical to the military

John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New
Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and
decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra]

The Pentagon began to exploit the vast emptiness of space soon after. Military satellites have been in orbit
for more than 40 years. In this sense, the militarization of space is old hat. Today, in fact, the armed
services rely on space so much that they simply couldn't function as they currently do without access to it.
Satellites facilitate communications, monitor enemy activity, and detect missile launches. Their
surveillance capabilities are astounding: The KH-11 supposedly can spot objects six inches in size from
hundreds of miles up. These functions were critical to the success of American campaigns against Iraq and
Serbia in the 1990s, and they are essential to operations in Afghanistan.

Even seemingly mundane uses of space have military value. The Global Positioning System is well known
to civilian navigators, but it was designed for military navigational purposes, such as helping cruise
missiles locate their targets and special-ops units find their rally points. On June 6, 1944, General
Eisenhower surely would have appreciated a weather forecast of the type we now routinely get from
satellites via local TV and radio broadcasts. On September 11, 2001, it was the space-enabled transmission
of cell-phone signals and instant news that helped Todd Beamer and the other passengers of United Flight
93 prevent an already catastrophic day from turning even worse.

Space serves as an advantage for future conflicts

John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New
Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and
decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra]

The wrangling over weapons and budgets stems from a fundamental confusion over what space is and how
we should use it. From the standpoint of physics, space begins about 60 miles above sea level, which is
roughly the minimum height a satellite must attain to achieve orbit. In this sense, space is just another
medium, much like land, water, and air, with its own special rules of operation. For military purposes,
however, space is more: It's the ultimate high ground, a flank from above whose importance, for those able
to gain access to it, may represent the critical difference in future conflicts.
For arms-control fanatics, however, space is a kind of sanctuary, and putting weapons in it poses an
unconscionable threat. U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan has called for ensuring "that outer space remains
weapons-free." Theresa Hitchens of the Center for Defense Information warns of threats to "global
stability" and "the potential for starting a damaging and destabilizing space race." With space, there's
always the sense that weapons violate some pristine nature. This is clearly one of the sentiments behind the
Kucinich bill. Yet it is exactly wrong -- there should be weapons way up there because then there will be
fewer of them right down here.

113
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military offensive capabilities are critical for space superiority

John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New
Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and
decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra]

The Rumsfeld commission also emphasized defense: how to protect American satellites from foreign
enemies. It had almost nothing to say about offense: how to use space for projecting American power
around the globe. The commission was a creature of consensus, so this does not necessarily represent
Rumsfeld's own thinking. And defense certainly is important. Military satellites are tempting targets
because they're so crucial to the United States in so many ways. They are protected by their remoteness, but
not much else. Their frail bodies and predictable flight paths are a skeet shoot compared with hitting speedy
ICBMs, an ability that the United States is just starting to master. They're also vulnerable to jamming and
hacking. Hardening their exteriors, providing them with some maneuverability, and having launch-on-
demand replacements available are all key ingredients to national security. Yet defense doesn't win wars. In
the future, the mere act of protecting these assets won't be enough to preserve American military superiority
in space.

114
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. hegemonic control of space will dissolve conflicts and ensure national security

John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New
Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and
decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra]

With the right mix of intellectual firepower and political muscle, the United States could achieve what
Dolman calls "hegemonic control" of space. The goal would be to make the heavens safe for capitalism and
science while also protecting the national security of the United States. "Only those spacecraft that provide
advance notice of their mission and flight plan would be permitted in space," writes Dolman. Anything else
would be shot down.

That may sound like 21st-century imperialism, which, in essence, it would be. But is that so bad? Imagine
that the United States currently maintained a battery of space-based lasers. India and Pakistan could inch
toward nuclear war over Kashmir, only to be told that any attempt by either side to launch a missile would
result in a boost-phase blast from outer space. Without taking sides, the United States would immediately
defuse a tense situation and keep the skies above Bombay and Karachi free of mushroom clouds.
Moreover, Israel would receive protection from Iran and Iraq, Taiwan from China, and Japan and South
Korea from the mad dictator north of the DMZ. The United States would be covered as well, able not
merely to deter aggression, but also to defend against it.

National security always has been an expensive proposition, and there is no getting around the enormous
costs posed by a robust system of space-based weaponry. It would take a supreme act of national will to
make it a reality. We've done it before: Winning the Cold War required laying out trillions of dollars, much
of it on machines, missiles, and warheads that never saw live combat. Seizing control of space also would
cost trillions, but it would lead to a world made immeasurably safer for America and what it values.

115
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Dominance Solves Space Arms Race

Don’t bother with your weaponization bad arguments – Once we secure space,
countries wont be able to weaponize or attack
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”,
http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

116
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons BAD- Expeditionary force Add-on


Advantage shell:

A. Development of SBSP requires reusable launch vehicles that are key to rapid launch missions like
ESF

Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE
IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,”
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf
If a nation wishes to conduct surprise surveillance or reconnaissance on an adversary, that nation’s space
assets must either be able to maneuver or be launched rapidly in response to a tasking. Maneuvering
costs fuel, which is often in short supply on non-refueling, long-mission spacecraft placed in orbit by non-
reusable launch vehicles. It is simply not economical from a launch cost perspective to increase the
fraction of satellite weight represented by fuel. Unfortunately, rapidity and responsiveness are not
characteristics of current US space launch systems.

B. Solar power satellites key to expeditionary force

Kim Ramos, Major, Air Force, 4/00, “Solar Power Constellations Implications for the United States Air
Force,” http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA394928
As the world population increases and natural resources used to produce energy decrease, alternative
methods to produce sustainable, environmental cost effective energy are required. One proposed solution to
the problem is solar power satellites. Solar power satellites are satellites, which collect the energy of the
sun, convert it onto a beam, and beam that energy to a receiving antenna. The receiving antenna converts
the beam into electricity and feeds the electricity into a power grid. The receiving antenna may be located
on another satellite, or on Earth. Presented here are several solar power satellite proposals, architectures,
incremental technology demonstrations and predictions as to when they will become commercially viable.
Given the previous information, this paper analyzes the implications for the Air Force in relation to
doctrine and future plans. The research method consisted of a search of scientific journals, published
symposium papers, and research reports. The search focused on the current research on solar power
satellites, and Air Force programs, which have power issues. Based on the research, the Air Force
should plan to capitalize on the advantages of solar power satellite constellations. Solar power
satellites can assist with implementing various plans (i.e., long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles,
space-based radar, lasers, and small satellites), complying with public law, and reducing the logistics tail
associated with an expeditionary force.

117
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

C. ESF model leads to treaty banning orbital space weapons

Brian C. Ruhm, Major, U.S. Air Force, 4/03, “Finding the Middle Ground: The U.S. Air
Force, Space Weaponization, and Arms Control,”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/1459681/US-Air-Force-031394, pg. 40-41
Gray’s critique is accurate insofar as agreements that focus on limiting systems and
hardware and their associated
capabilities. Focusing on prohibited activities and behavior – most notably the actual
deployment of space weapons into orbit – rather than on prohibited systems allows
signatories to largely get around this problem. Agreements that prohibit the placement
of weapons in space and limit the testing of these systems against space-based
targets could be readily verified, especially if they also created a robust and mandatory
launch notification regime, and if the signatories to this agreements develop better
systems for tracking and characterizing space born objects. The central component of
such an agreement would be the prohibition on the placement of weapons in orbit.
Signatories would need to arrive at a common definition for the term “weapon in space,”
but it would include any orbiting system capable of attacking or disabling other
space-based systems, or any orbiting system capable of launching or releasing
weapons towards earth. With respect to laser or directed energy devices that might
provide legitimate communications or information services, the agreement would
need to account for permissible power or wavelength thresholds.

118
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Expeditionary Space force prevents orbital weapons


ESF models differ from orbital weapons

Brian C. Ruhm, Major, U.S. Air Force, 4/03, “Finding the Middle Ground: The U.S. Air Force, Space
Weaponization, and Arms Control,” http://www.scribd.com/doc/1459681/US-Air-Force-031394, pg. 39
It may seem that there is little difference between orbiting space-based weapons and an expeditionary or
sortie-based alternative. This overlooks two important distinguishing factors. The first is that an
expeditionary approach, when implemented as part of a larger regime to regulate space weapons,
counteracts the vulnerability and proximity issues that undermine stability. Expeditionary forces
would reduce the fear of a surprise attack and diminish the likelihood of a preemptive attack in space. But
what cost would the US be willing to pay for stability? Clearly it would be unwise to cede the initiative in
space by withdrawing forces while allowing adversaries’ weapons to remain there, especially given the US
military’s increasing dependence on space support systems. This is where the second important difference
between ESF and orbiting weapons comes into play. An expeditionary capability, deployed only in
times of war or imminent conflict and otherwise withheld from space, provides a clear and verifiable
demarcation point for international agreements that would prevent states from placing weapons in
space in times of peace.

Development of SBSP leads to development of low cost reusable launch system

Eric R. Hedman, chief technology officer of Logic Design Corporation, 2/4/08, “If we build it, will they
come?,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1050/1
When the US committed to landing a man on the Moon by the end of the sixties, it led to great
improvements in education and built the foundation for our current level of technological
development. It’s time for our political leadership to grab hold of a vision to lead us into the future. There
is hope that technology can help lift us out of what seems like an endless stream of problems. Developing
space-based solar power and a lower cost reusable launch system could spawn a whole series of
technological innovations and entirely new industries. The SPBS report points out that eventually it may
be more cost effective to build solar power satellites from lunar materials requiring an infrastructure
throughout cislunar space. It may be prudent to wait for the results of a project to test the feasibility of solar
power satellites before committing to developing a fully reusable launch system. But when one is
eventually built, I believe it will open up other markets, including tourism as well as others we have yet to
imagine. I believe that if we build it, they will come. I also believe that space-based solar power is worth
looking into to see if it could be one answer—of possibly several—to our energy and trade deficit
problems.

119
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Reusable launch vehicles key to future space operations and government incentives are key to success

Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE
IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,”
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf
Both the administrator of NASA and leading members of the launch industry encouraged the
development of government incentives, ranging from tax credits to guaranteed loans, to promote the
development of new, low cost, reusable launch vehicles. Speaking at a hearing of the U.S. Senate's
Science, Technology, and Space subcommittee Wednesday, September 23 [1998], NASA administrator
Dan Goldin said current high launch costs is inhibiting not only the commercial development of space,
but future uses by NASA. "The potential for the future seems almost limitless," Goldin said, but noting
that NASA spends more than $4 billion a year on launch costs, "without affordable and reliable access to
space, this potential will remain unrealized." Goldin said a NASA analysis of the launch industry indicated
that if private industry developed a large reusable launch vehicle on its own, it could lower the price
per pound to orbit to around $2,500. Government incentives, though, could lower that per pound cost
to as little as $1,000. "The contrast is stark, and could make all the difference in opening up

120
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons not coming


U.S. not pushing for space weapons. Complications and other priorities ensure.

Nina Tannenwald, Director International Relations Program, Brown University, Summer 04, “Law Versus
Power on the High Frontie: The Case for a Rule-Based Regie for Outer Space,”
http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/tannenwald.pdf, pg. 5
Although SPACECOM and its supporters aggressively assert their views, advocates of weapons in space
may be in the minority, even in the Pentagon. As many observers recognize, the interests of the United
States in space are much broader than SPACECOM presents. U.S. testing and deployment of orbital
weapons could make using space for other military and commercial purposes more difficult. Many in
the military, especially those involved in crucial military support activities, are quietly aware of this, as are
officials at NASA and the international space station, and their supporters in Congress. Congressional
support for antisatellite (ASAT) programs does not appear to be deep or widespread. Serious questions
remain as to whether the threats to U.S. assets in space are really as great as SPACECOM argues,
and whether, even if the threats were real, expensive and difficult space-based weapons would really be
the most effective way to deal with them. In many cases, those wishing to hurt the United States will
likely find it much easier, and more effective, to attack terrestrial targets.

121
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons Fail


Space weapons vulnerable due to inability to maneuver in space

Bob Preston, and Calvin Shipbaugh et al., “Space Weapons, Earth Wars,” Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation, pg. 104
Because achieving a particular orbit requires such enormous effort, significantly changing established
orbits is not generally practical. As a result, it is hard to concentrate the efforts of a constellation of
satellites in space and time. As defenses, space weapons are static in the same way that terrestrial
fortifications are. Space-based defenses are inherently subject to saturation by a terrestrial opponent
that is able to concentrate an attack against them in space and time. This limitation may be an
advantage if a limited defense against a limited threat is needed that is observably incapable of
destabilizing a deterrence relationship with another, larger threat.

122
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons undermine U.S. strength


Space weapons would undermine U.S. conventional strength

Michael Katz-Hyman, research associate for the Space Security Project of the Henry L.
Stimson Center, and Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center,
directed defense policy and programme reviews at the US Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency, April 03, “Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing
Space,” pg. 89
Given the extraordinary and growing differential in power that the United States enjoys in ground warfare,
sea power, and air power, it is hard to propound compelling arguments for seeking to supplement these
advantages by weaponizing space. The current U.S. lead in the military utilization of space has never
been greater and is unchallenged. If the United States pushes to extend its pronounced military dominance
into space, others will view this through the prism of the Bush administration's national security strategy,
which places emphasis on preventive war and preemption. Foreign leaders will not passively accept U.S.
initiatives to implement a doctrine of space dominance. They will have ample, inexpensive means to
take blocking action, as it is considerably easier to negate U.S. dominance in space than on the
ground, at sea, and in the air. The introduction of space weaponry and ASAT testing are therefore
likely introduce grave complications for the terrestrial military advantages that the United States has
worked so hard, and at such expense, to secure.

123
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. has more to gain over negotiations of weapons

U.S. has more to gain over negotiations not deploying space weapons than deploying weapons

Kenneth S. Blazejewski, a JD/MPA joint degree student at NYU School of Law and the Woodrow Wilson
School, Spring 2008, “Space Weaponization and US-China Relations,” Strategic Studies Quarterly, Vol. 2,
No. 1, pg. 45-6
A second reason for US commitment not to place weapons in space is the negotiating leverage such a
concession would provide. Of course, such leverage cannot be taken for granted. Rather, agreement not to
weaponize outer space could be loosely conditional on making progress in other areas of US security.
There are at least three areas where the United States could expect to gain concessions from China in
return for a commitment not to weaponize space. First, China's participation at the CD strongly
suggests that it might be willing to begin negotiations on an FMCT, a top security priority of successive
US governments, if the United States agrees to negotiate on space weapons. Since China's commitment to
the FMCT can facilitate the FMCT commitments of India and Pakistan, its participation is critical. Second,
the United States can demand greater support from China on the Proliferation Security Initiative.
The PSI, which seeks to prevent illicit sea and air transport of fissile material, has been identified by the
Bush administration as a key program in reducing the possibility of acquisition of nuclear weapons by a
terrorist organization. To date, China's muted opposition to the PSI stands as one of the greatest
impediments to a fuller development of the initiative. Chinese cooperation could be vital to this program's
success. Third, the United States should demand greater transparency in Chinese military planning,
especially with regard to ASAT and space-focused programs. Such transparency, long sought by US
defense officials, would reduce the likelihood of potential conflicts over speculative intelligence and give
the United States greater insight into how military decisions are made (and whether China indeed suffers
from a stovepiped bureaucracy). I argue that progress in each of these three areas would represent a
greater security gain than proceeding with the weaponization of space. If the United States is able to
negotiate a quid pro quo in one or all of these areas in return for a commitment not to weaponize outer
space, the agreement would represent a clear US net security gain.

124
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Chinese attack
China would retaliate to US space weapons deployment but favors an arms control over a weapons
approach

Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing,and Pavel Podvig, 08,
“Russian and Chinese Responses to U.S. Military Plans in Space,” Cambridge, MA: American Academy of
Arts and Sciences, pg. 65
In summary, the development and deployment of U.S. missile defense systems, including weapons in
space, would definitely encourage a number of responses from China including technological
development, military counter- measures, and political realignment. The type of response would
depend on the specific infrastructure of U.S. missile defense and space weaponization programs. At the
moment and in the near future, China's major response would be to take an arms control approach,
such as firmly advocating at the CD a legal instrument to prevent space weaponization. Facing very
limited missile defense deployment, e.g., the initial GMD currently under deployment, China might focus
on building more road-mobile ICBMs and developing a variety of penetration aids. If a stronger
missile defense system with more interceptors is deployed, China would need to produce more fissile
material to fuel more warheads, thus influencing its FMCT participation. If China is confronted with the
deployment of a layered (or space-based) missile defense system, it could consider additional measures
such as using ASAT weapons.

125
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Conventional Warfare better


Conventional warfare faster, easier and cheaper than space weapons

Frank G. Koltz, 1/99, “Space, Commerce, and National Security,” Washington, D.C.: Council on Foreign
Relations, pg. 19
Conventional military forces can also be employed to deny an adversary access to space goods and
services. A satellite is only one segment of the total system that is required to deliver space products and
services. Equally important are ground-based antennas, control centers, relay stations, and
distribution nodes. All of these segments can be targeted by familiar military tactics (e.g., bombing or
missile attack), as well as emerging techniques popularly referred to as information or cyber-warfare. In
addition, the headquarters and other facilities in which space products and services are actually used by an
adversary can also be attacked. In short, highly specialized weapons will not always be necessary to
deny an adversary the use of space. In many cases, it may be faster, easier, and cheaper to accomplish
the same objective using forces that perform other functions closer to the Earth's surface.

126
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Risks arms race and accidental nuke war


Space weapons risk arms races, accidental nuclear war, and are vulnerable to attack

Lori Scheetz, Fall 06, “Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue,” Georgetown
International Environment Law Review, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82, pg. 62
Many in the arms control community, on the other hand, believe that space weapons will destabilize the
global community and promote a costly arms race. Emphasizing the destabilizing consequences of
space weapons, Thomas Graham Jr. asserts that, because American missile interceptors in space could
quickly wipe out Russian early warning satellites, the mere existence of these weapons will escalate
tension between the two countries and place Russia on constant alert. One false signal from an early
warning satellite could lead to a Russian nuclear strike. Moreover, weaponization of space might not
significantly reduce American vulnerability to attack because most weapons systems will depend on
ground facilities and radio links, which can be attacked through electronic hacking and jamming.
The actual weaponry based in space is also susceptible to attack.

127
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons Bad- destroys military


Space weapons damage military power by increasing the vulnerability of its military center of
gravity
Bruce M. Deblois, Summer 03, “The Advent of Space Weapons,” Astropolitics, Vol. 1 No. 1
In this view, a space-weaponizing country creates both the powder keg of global instability (where it
has weakened its own international posture) as well as the spark of regional instability (where it has
made itself a target of pre- emption and escalation). Coupled with this very unstable environment, it can
also be argued that the same country that weaponizes space may actually damage its own military power.
Much of the impetus behind space weaponization stems from perceived military utility, to include national
missile defense applications for boost-phase intercept, time-critical targeting, and defense mechanisms for
critical space systems. Ironically, the posturing of more military assets in space could actually weaken
the military posture of those that seek further military advantage in that domain. Space assets are
already a center of gravity (CoG), or at least a critical concentration of military force enhancement assets.
To deploy more systems in space in an attempt to protect this CoG only complicates the problem. In spite
of the added defenses, the preponderance of threats will remain: denial and deception, electronic
warfare (e.g. uplink and downlink jamming), ground facilities disruption, micro-satellites (e.g. space
mines), direct ascent interceptors or even a nuclear detonation in space.

128
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Exacerbates fears of debris chain


Space weapons would exacerbate the fears of a debris chain

Michael Katz-Hyman, research associate for the Space Security Project of the Henry L.
Stimson Center, and Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center,
directed defense policy and programme reviews at the US Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency, April 03, “Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing
Space,” pg. 122-3
The weaponization of space, particularly with respect to the flight-testing of antisatellite weapons, would
greatly compound existing concerns over safe passage. In the event of a resumption of ASAT tests, the
Pentagon would attempt to mitigate space debris, as it does with respect to missile defense tests, but
the effectiveness of such efforts is questionable. Moreover, other states that test ASATs may not be as
conscientious about debris creation. The actual use of ASATs would compound these dangers
exponentially. Space warfare would not only constitute a threat to targeted satellites, it would also
create debris fields that would threaten satellites operating in low earth orbit, including NTM, space
transportation systems such as the U.S. space shuttle, and the International Space Station. The
damage resulting from warfare that includes ASAT use could be more long lasting in space than on
Earth.

129
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space weapons case pre-emptive attack


Space weapons increase likelihood of war. Creates incentives for pre-emptive attack.
Nina Tannenwald, Director International Relations Program, Brown University,
Summer 04, “Law Versus Power on the High Frontie: The Case for a Rule-Based Regie
for Outer Space,” http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/tannenwald.pdf, pg. 34-5
In terms of their geostrategic impact, space-based weapons do not simply enhance
existing threats but introduce a new and greater danger because of the threat they
pose to strategic stability. The vulnerability of space-based weapons will likely
create incentives for preemptive attack to protect them during a crisis, greatly
increasing the likelihood of war. Further, although supporters of space weapons claim
that, consistent with the United States' defensive orientation to the world, such weapons
would be for defensive purposes, the reality is that, given their characteristics, many of
them are inherently offensive weapons. It is widely recognized that space-based
ballistic missile defense systems could carry out surprise attacks against terrestrial
targets or satellites.

130
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China Does Not Want Space Weapons


China has consistently advocated banning space weapons

Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing,
12/05, “Action/Reaction: U.S. Space Weaponization and China,” Arms Control Today,
Vol. 35, No. 10,
In China's view, the most effective way to secure space assets would be to agree on a
ban on space weaponization. As its working paper to the CD emphasizes, "Only a
treaty-based prohibition of the deployment of weapons in outer space and the
prevention of the threat or use of force against outer space objects can eliminate the
emerging threat of an arms race in outer space and ensure the security for outer
space assets of all countries which is an essential condition for the maintenance of
world peace." China's stance on banning weapons in outer space has been consistent
since 1985 when it first introduced a working paper to the CD on its position on space
weapons. China's most recent working paper on the issue, introduced in June 2002,
emphasizes three basic obligations: Not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects
carrying any kinds of weapons, not to install such weapons on celestial bodies, or not
to station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.
Not to resort to the threat or use of force against outer space objects. Not to assist or
encourage other states, groups of states, and international organizations to participate in
activities prohibited by this treaty.

China does not want space weapons. Too much space debris limits space
accessibility.

Keith R. Payne, Autumn 01, "Action-Reaction Metaphysics and Negligence,”


Washington Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 4
China also fears the increasing population of space debris. Such debris, resulting
from 50 years of space activity, already poses a considerable hazard to spacecraft.
Under U.S. space weaponization plans, this crowding problem could worsen as a large
number of space weapons could be deployed in LEO. The launching and testing of
weapons would also increase space debris. Moreover, deploying space-based weapons
in the increasingly crowded realm of LEO would leave less room for civilian systems.
Those problems would also occur during periods of peace. If a number of satellites
were to be destroyed during the course of a war, some scientists warn, they would
create so much debris that it would prevent future satellites from being stationed in
space and generally limit space access. Indeed, pointing to the debris problem, Chinese
scientists and officials have said that space weaponization should be considered an
environmental threat as well as a security problem.

131
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Arms Control Solves


An arms control would prevent space weapons from destabilizing current US
hegemony and putting civilian and commercial satellites at risk.

Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing,and
Pavel Podvig, 08, “Russian and Chinese Responses to U.S. Military Plans in Space,”
Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, pg. 74
A focused space weapons ban would reduce the proliferation of ASATs. It would
reduce the risk of a "Space Pearl Harbor" for other military and civilian satellites.
As many experts in the United States point out, the heavy dependence of the United
States on its space assets means that it "has more to lose than to gain by opening the
way to the testing and deployment of ASATs and space weapons." For example, the
United States is now more dependent on satellites to perform important military
functions than is any other state. By placing weapons in space, the United States
might stimulate others to balance symmetrically and asymmetrically against U.S.
space assets. It would be very difficult for the United States to maintain
unchallenged hegemony in space weaponization, and many have argued that the
United States' current military advantage in space assets would be lost or degraded
by weaponization. Space weaponization would also threaten U.S. civilian and
commercial assets. The economy and society of the United States are highly
dependent on the applications of commercial satellites. Placing weapons in space
would make these satellites much more vulnerable.

132
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Col- K2 Helium-3


Solar powered satellites can provide us with a sustainable energy source and also
lunar mining for clean fuel.
James Plaxco, [Vice president for the NSS and over 30 years of experience in space exploration and
studies, 12-9-05, http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:qnoDsuoXp0QJ:www.astrodigital.org/ambassador/+solar+powered+satellites,
+helium+3&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=13&gl=us // e.berggren]

Powering Earth: Space and the Future of Energy: As Earth's energy consumption increases,
scientists work to find new energy sources to power our planet. This presentation investigates
the feasibility of space-based solutions to Earth's energy shortage including satellites that collect
solar power and mines on the Moon. The program will examine and evaluate three scientists'
blueprints for harnessing space resources to meet our growing demand for clean fuel. Solar
Power from Space for Earth: A presentation detailing the idea of using a system of space-based
Solar Power Satellites to meet the large increases in energy demand resulting from increasing
world population and per capita energy consumption. Also discussed is the feasibility of mining
the Moon for the necessary construction materials. A variety of architecture scenarios are
explored. The presentation focuses on the ideas of Dr. Peter Glaser (the SPS concept), Dr.
Gerard O'Neil (space manufacturing), and Dr. David Criswell (Lunar Solar Power)

Solar powered satellites can be used to mine and collect Helium-3 trapped in the
moon’s surface.
Gregg E. Maryniak, [Director and vice president of X prize and aerospace engineer, No month 2007,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:0_0iAPO_wvcJ:www.googlelunarxprize.org/lunar/education/why-the-
moon+solar+powered+satellites+collecting+helium+3&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=12&gl=us //e.Berggren]

In addition to using lunar materials to build solar power satellites we can collect energy on the
moon’s surface and transmit it to the Earth. Eventually we may also collect Helium 3 trapped in
moon soil which is an ideal low-radiation fusion fuel. The moon’s close proximity to the Earth
makes it a great place for humans to learn to live and work in space while still having frequent
rescue and return opportunities. The Moon provides an ideal place to backup the accumulated
knowledge of mankind. By expanding the solution set to include resources outside the Earth’s
biosphere we can solve seemingly intractable problems of energy and the environment and
enable the remediation of the Earth.

133
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Space Crafts are key to the support and return of Helium-3.
George T. Whiteside, [Executive director of the Nation Space Society, May 7, 2008, “Reauthorizing the
Vision for Space Exploration”, http://www.nss.org/Whitesides_Statement_Reauthorizing_VSE.pdf
//e.berggren]

Another potential space-based alternative energy source is atomic fusion using helium-3, an
element rare
on Earth, yet abundant on the lunar surface and in the atmospheres of the gas giants. This
connects well with the Vision for Space Exploration, and offers a concrete material which
NASA could prospect for. America’s new launch vehicles and manned spacecrafts are suitable
to support a return to the moon and development of mining and refining technologies, and
should therefore continue as planned. Our first outpost on the moon can be supported by
engineering projects to create infrastructure supporting solar power satellite production as well
as extraction and use of helium-3.

134
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Helium-3 Solves
Helium-3 is he only energy source that can support the growing population for
thousands of years.
Julia Wakefield, lunar specialist for Space.com, 6-30-00,
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html // e.Berggren]

Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source:


extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product.
Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it
is found on Earth.But there is plenty of it on the moon. Society is straining to
keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as
the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moonjust may be the
answer. "Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and
settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute
(FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison. Scientists estimate there are
about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for
thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25
tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto
Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.

135
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Helium 3 Solves US-China Conflict

The moon has enough Helium 3 to solve the world’s energy crisis – preventing
conflict
Keith Kohl, lunar specialist for the energy and capital practical envestment analysisin the new energy
economy, Feb 20, 2007, [“The Nuclear Side of the Moon”, http://64.233.167.104/search?
q=cache:7LgwVccbQSUJ:www.energyandcapital.com/articles/nuclear-energy-
fusion/366+helium+3+and+energy+solution&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us //e.Berggren]

Baltimore, MD - By 2050, the world will have an estimated population of 12 billion people. The
demand for energy will be enormous. But one solution to the world's long-term energy demands
may be 239,000 miles away. The world is desperately looking for an heir to oil. Among the
contenders is the nuclear option. And the nuclear boom has already started. Uranium prices have
increased dramatically. Prices may even reach $100/pound before 2007 is over. Also, current
uranium production cannot meet demand. So Australia, holding 40% of the world's reserves, is
beginning to open up new property for development. By 2050, the world will need about 900
nuclear plants to satisfy its energy requirements. Japan plans to build five by 2010, China
expects 30 before 2020, and India already has 9 under construction. Even Canada is refurbishing
over two dozen of its facilities. The 103 nuclear plants in the U.S. supply nearly 20% of our
electricity. But the solution I was referring to is a different kind of nuclear power - nuclear
fusion. Future Fusion: Essentially, fusion involves multiple nuclei joining together to form a
heavier nucleus. Depending on the masses of the nuclei involved, energy is either released or
absorbed. Fusing two nuclei heavier than iron or nickel will absorb energy. When they are
lighter than iron or nickel, energy is released. One of the promising materials that may prove
fusion to be a viable source of energy is helium-3. Since helium has an extremely low mass per
nucleon, it is favored for the fusion process. And helium-3 presents a non-radioactive
opportunity to contain the lone high-energy proton released using electric and magnetic fields.
This results directly in the generation of electricity. Presently, scientists extract helium-3 by
dismantling nuclear weapons - which still doesn't yield enough to make fusion a viable solution.
Only $3 Billion Per Ton. You read that correctly - one ton of helium-3 would cost in excess of
$3 billion. Imagine fueling the entire annual U.S. energy demand with roughly 25 tons of
helium-3, or even the world's demand with 100 tons. Yet that amount seems impossible to
produce given its rarity on earth. But spending $75 billion on energy is trivial compared to
current U.S. expenditures. Remember that the U.S. government spent over $300 billion on
oil imports in 2006 alone! In 2001, the Energy Information Agency reported that 107 million
U.S. households spent nearly $159 billion on energy. Though we cannot produce even a fraction
of the helium-3 reserves, the moon could hold enormous reserves. Lacking the magnetic field
the Earth has allows the moon to absorb a significant amount of helium-3. In fact, scientists have
estimated that the moon has more than a million tons of helium-3. That would be enough to
power the world's energy needs for tens of thousands of years.

136
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites K2 Space Colonization


The solar energy harnessed can be used to start and sustain critical long term
colonies in space.
Bryan Yager, [Assistant NASA/Ames Research Center Library Offical, July 10, 2002, “Space
Settlements: A Design Study”,
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/s.s.doc.html
//e.berggren]

Abundant solar energy and large amounts of matter from the Moon are keys to successfully
establishing a community in space. Not only does the sunshine foster agriculture of unusual
productivity, but also it provides energy for industries needed by the colony. Using solar energy
to generate electricity and to power solar furnaces the colonists refine aluminum, titanium, and
silicon from lunar ores shipped inexpensively into space. With these materials they are able to
manufacture satellite solar power stations and new colonies. The power stations are placed in
orbit around the Earth to which they deliver copious and valuable electrical energy. The
economic value of these power stations will go far to justify the existence of the colony and the
construction of more colonies.

The suns radiation can be harnessed by satellites to ensure a prosperous and


sustainable space colony.
SpaceMagazine May 26, 2005, [http://www.spacemagazine.co.uk/ //e.berggren]
Space is filled with radiant energy and beyond earth's atmosphere this energy flow more steadily
and more intensely from the sun than that which penetrates to the surface of the Earth. So an
abundant and essential source of energy that would be used in space for the space colony would
be solar radiation by developing satellite solar power stations. To live in space, humans must be
protected from the fierce intensity and penetrating wavelengths of unattenuated sunlight, but this
same energy is one of the primary resources of space. The colony will have to have enough
energy to maintain a fairly uniform temperature even though it is apace. The sun shines twenty-
four hours a day and is not dimmed by an atmosphere. Shaded materials not exposed to direct
sunlight will almost be at absolute zero. While the temperature in closed bodies exposed to the
sun can soar above the boiling point. The colony will need to have both heaters and air
conditioners. On the other hand, this sun's energy can be converted into electricity in the
colonies. It will be converted with ten percent efficiency to electrical power which is sold at a
rate of .012 kw/hr, a square kilometer of space would return more than $14,000,000 each year.
Converting solar power to electricity in space, we would build satellite solar power stations that
would intercept the sunlight and convert it into electricity. The satellite solar power stations
would intercept enough sunlight to replace five nuclear reactors or coal plants. The stations
could be as big as nine miles long and four miles wide and it would only weigh twenty thousand
tons. It would be built with hollow triangular girders made of aluminum that is very fast and
easy to build . Solar power satellites are a pollution free way to generate electricity and cost no
more than coal or nuclear energy. There has been twomajor designed stations made so far. One
is designed by Peter Glaser of Author D. Little Inc., which would use very large arrays of photo
voltaic cells to make the conversion directly into energy. The other major design is by Gordon
Woodcock of Boeing Aircraft Corporation, proposed having conventional turbogenerators
operating on a Brayton cycle with helium as the working fluid. All in all radiation from the sun
is a great source of energy for the future of space colonization. The use of the sun will cut down
on the use of fossil fuels and any other chemicals that could be used to create energy in space.
With more research and testing, the use of the sun's radiation will greatly enhance the space

137
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
colonization and will help in the everyday life of the colony.

Solar energy key to the success of space colonies.


Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N
//e.berggren]

In addition to the workers and their families, space colonies would contain many of the
professions found in any small terrestrial town. Space settlements would also address human
needs beyond the physical and economic. By its very nature, each habitat would have a high
degree of self-sufficiency and independence. Independence in space colonies need not, however,
mean isolation. Communications between Earth and space colonies, or from one colony to
another, would be a relatively simple matter with thousands of communities within a few light-
seconds of each other. Although transport from Earth's surface to a colony or colony group is
likely to remain relatively expensive, the cost of travel from one free-space habitat to another
can be very small. Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By
increasing the size of the mirrors used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections,
it would be possible to support habitats beyond the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the
known resources of the asteroids, there is sufficient material to construct habitats capable of
supporting populations thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing our ecological
niche to include the solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be
destroyed by a single natural or made-man catastrophe.

138
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Colonization Solves Extinction


Space Colonization prevents extinction
Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N
//e.berggren]

Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By increasing the size of
the mirrors used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections, it would be possible
to support habitats beyond the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the known resources of the
asteroids, there is sufficient material to construct habitats capable of supporting populations
thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing our ecological niche to include the
solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be destroyed by a single
natural or made-man catastrophe.

Expansion into space is critical to averting extinction.


James Oberg, space writer and a former space flight engineer based in Houston, 1999, Space Power
Theory, http://www.jamesoberg.com/books/spt/new-CHAPTERSw_figs.pdf //e.berggren

We have the great gift of yet another period when our nation is not threatened; and our world is free from
opposing coalitions with great global capabilities. We can use this period to take our nation and our fellow
men into the greatest adventure that our species has ever embarked upon. The United States can lead,
protect, and help the rest of [hu]mankind to move into space. It is particularly fitting that a country
comprised of people from all over the globe assumes that role. This is a manifest destiny worthy of
dreamers and poets, warriors and conquerors. In his last book, Pale Blue Dot, Carl Sagan presents an
emotional argument that our species must venture into the vast realm of space to establish a spacefaring
civilization. While acknowledging the very high costs that are involved in manned spaceflight, Sagan
states that our very survival as a species depends on colonizing outer space. Astronomers have
already identified dozens of asteroids that might someday smash into Earth. Undoubtedly, many more
remain undetected. In Sagan’s opinion, the only way to avert inevitable catastrophe is for mankind to
establish a permanent human presence in space. He compares humans to the planets that roam the night
sky, as he says that humans will too wander through space. We will wander space because we possess a
compulsion to explore, and space provides a truly infinite prospect of new directions to explore. Sagan’s
vision is part science and part emotion. He hoped that the exploration of space would unify humankind. We
propose that mankind follow the United States and our allies into this new sea, set with jeweled stars. If we
lead, we can be both strong and caring. If we step back, it may be to the detriment of more than our
country.

Extinction is inevitable by 2050 without space colonization


Daily Record 2002 [Graham Brough, “WOULD THE LAST PERSON TO LEAVE EARTH PLEASE
TURN OUT THE LIGHTS; EXPERTS WARN WE NEED TO MOVE PLANET AS MODERN LIFE
KILLS OURS,” Jul 8, LN// e.berggren]

The Earth will be so gutted, wrecked, over-exploited and the barren seas so fished out that we will
have to find a new planet – or even two - by 2050. Environmentalists at the World Wildlife Fund say
we have just another halfcentury of luxury living left before the Earth becomes a spent husk. By that
time, we will either have to colonise space or risk human extinction as population and consumption
expand.

139
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space expansionism is critical to survival from diseases, war, cancer, pollution and hunger

Sylvia Engdahl, American science fiction writer. She has published thirteen books, including seven
science fiction novels, three nonfiction books, two science fiction anthologies, and a children's picture
book. Engdahl is best known for her novel Enchantress from the Stars which was a 1971 Newbery Honor
book, February 2003, “Space and Human Survival: My Views on the Importance of Colonizing Space”
http://www.sylviaengdahl.com/space/survival.htm [Bapodra]

Some of you are probably thinking that space travel isn’t going to be a big help with these problems, as
indeed, the form of it shown in today’s mythology would not. Almost certainly, you’re thinking that it
won’t solve the other problems of Earth, and I fear you may be thinking that the other problems should be
solved first.
One big reason why they should not is the “narrow window” concept. The other is that they could not. I
have explained why I believe the problem of war can’t be solved without expansion. The problem of
hunger is, or ultimately will be, the direct result of our planet’s limited resources; though it could be solved
for the near-term by political reforms, we are not likely to see such reforms while nations are playing a “
zero-sum game” with what resources Earth still has. Widespread poverty, when not politically based, is
caused by insufficient access to high technology and by the fact that there aren’t enough resources to go
around (if you doubt this, compare the amount of poverty here with the amount in the Third World, and the
amount on the Western frontier with the amount in our modern cities). Non-contagious disease, such as
cancer, is at least partially the result of stress; and while expansion won’t eliminate stress, overcrowding
certainly increases it. The problem of atmospheric pollution is the result of trying to contain the industry
necessary to maintain our technology within the biosphere instead of moving it into orbit where it belongs.
In short, all the worldwide problems we want to solve, and feel we should have solved, are related to the
fact that we’ve outgrown the ecological niche we presently occupy. I view them not as pathologies, but as
natural indicators of our evolutionary stage. I would like to believe that they’ll prove spurs to expansion. If
they don’t, we’ll be one of evolution’s failures.

140
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Colonization Solves Nuke war


Space colonization enables nuclear survival
Fred Koschara, [computer programmer/ major in planetary studies, 2001,
http://www.l5development.com/fkespace/financial-return.html // e.berggren]

Potentially one of the greatest benefits that may be achieved by the space colonies is nuclear
survival, and the ability to live past any other types of mass genocide that become available. We
have constructed ourselves a house of dynamite, and now live in fear that someone might light a
match. If a global nuclear war were to break out, or if a deadly genetic experiment got released
into the atmosphere, the entire human race could be destroyed in a very short period of time. In
addition, many corporate attitudes seem concerned with only maximizing today's bottom line,
with no concern for the future. This outlook leads to dumping amazingly toxic wastes into the
atmosphere and oceans, a move which can only bring harm in the long run. Humanity has to
diversify its hold in the universe if it is to survive. Only through space colonization is that option
available, and we had all best hope we're not to late.

141
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Power Advantage


A single year’s solar flux is equal to the amount of energy contained in all the oil reserves today and
could provide power for global military operations, disaster areas and developing nations

Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from
space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space
[Bapodra])

NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the
research lost momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the
technology, Mankins told CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it
seemed. "The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles
Miller, a director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space.
"The environment is perfect for a new start."
Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural
resource depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy
back to Earth, Miller explained. And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National
Security Space Office, encouraging the U.S. government to spearhead the development of space
power systems. "A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous Earth orbit experiences
enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known
recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today," the report said. The study also concluded
that solar energy from satellites could provide power for global U.S. military operations and
deliver energy to disaster areas and developing nations.
"The country that takes the lead on space solar power will be the energy-exporting country for the
entire planet for the next few hundred years," Miller said.

142
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Beaming is effective
Solar space satellites beam gigawatts of energy to ground receivers providing clean renewable energy

Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from
space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space
[Bapodra])

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Jyoti is the Hindi word for light. It's something Pranav Mehta has never had
to live without. And he is lucky. Near where he lives in Gujarat, one of the most prosperous states in India,
thousands of rural villages lack electricity or struggle with an intermittent supply at best.
"We need to empower these villages, and for empowerment, energy is a must," Mehta said. "Rural India is
suffering a lot because of a lack of energy."
By 2030, India's Planning Commission estimates that the country will have to generate at least 700,000
megawatts of additional power to meet the demands of its expanding economy and growing population.
Much of that electricity will come from coal-fired power plants, like the $4 billion so-called ultra mega
complex scheduled to be built south of Tunda Wand, a tiny village near the Gulf of Kutch, an inlet of the
Arabian Sea on India's west coast. Dozens of other such projects are already or soon will be under way.
Yet Mehta has another solution for India's chronic electricity shortage, one that does not involve power
plants on the ground but instead massive sun-gathering satellites in geosynchronous orbits 22,000 miles in
the sky.
The satellites would electromagnetically beam gigawatts of solar energy back to ground-based receivers,
where it would then be converted to electricity and transferred to power grids. And because in high Earth
orbit, satellites are unaffected by the earth's shadow virtually 365 days a year, the floating power plants
could provide round-the-clock clean, renewable electricity.
"This will be kind of a leap frog action instead of just crawling," said Mehta, who is the director of India
operations for Space Island Group, a California-based company working to develop solar satellites. "It is a
win-win situation."
American scientist Peter Glaser introduced the idea of space solar power in 1968.
NASA and the United States Department of Energy studied the concept throughout the 1970s, concluding
that although the technology was feasible, the price of putting it all together and sending it to outer space
was not. "The estimated cost of all of the infrastructure to build them in space was about $1 trillion," said
John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and president of the Space Power Association. "It was an
unimaginable amount of money."

143
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space solar power would meet our energy needs, eliminate oil dependence, and open new markets

Jeff Foust, editor and publisher of The Space Review, August 13, 2007, “A renaissance for space solar
power?” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1 [Bapodra] a card with no warrants)

For nearly four decades, one concept has tantalized space professionals and enthusiasts alike: space solar
power. The ability to collect solar power in space, continuously and in effectively limitless quantities, and
then transmit that energy back to Earth, could radically reshape not only the space industry but also society
in general. That clean (or, in the current vernacular, carbon neutral) energy would, advocates claim, help
meet the growing energy needs of an increasingly developed world without relying on sources that degrade
the environment and/or come from politically unstable regions of the globe. That demand for energy, in
turn, would create tremendous demand for launch and other space services, driving down costs that would,
in turn, open other markets.

144
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Space solar energy will restore the global environment, replace fossil fuel dependency, and sustain
survival

European Space Agency, 2005, “The Impact of Space Activities upon Society,” ESA Publications Divisi,
Editors David Raitt & Bruce Battrick http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br237/br237.pdf [Bapodra]

Already in the early years of the 21st century it is becoming acutely obvious that the impact
of an expanding human species on a finite planet is resulting in situations that are having
major impacts on global issues such as climate change, the environment, energy, politics and
economics. Indeed, the sustainability of human society may soon be in question, unless
immediate and effective measures are taken. Fortunately, space visionaries and pioneers long
ago recognized this eventuality and they and their followers have quietly developed both the
scientific rationale and the technological concepts to open the space frontier. Upon these
works is the development of a concept called ‘The Space Option’ and, because this option
offers humanity the most ‘optimistic’ pathway to sustainability, it is a choice humanity will
most likely make in order to maintain its well-being and its ultimate survival. The Space
Option concept is an evolutionary plan to meet the basic and anticipated needs of humanity
through the utilization of near-Earth resources – especially that of energy from space. The
wide-scale and successful implementation of the Space Option could contribute substantially
to the restoration of the global environment by its reliance on unlimited, clean space solar
energy to replace humanity’s dependence on fossil fuels, which are finite, or nuclear fuels,
which have negative environmental and political aspects.

Space solar power is necessary to become independent from oil and space exploration

European Space Agency, 2005, “The Impact of Space Activities upon Society,” ESA Publications Divisi,
Editors David Raitt & Bruce Battrick http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br237/br237.pdf [Bapodra] t(his card’s
kind of funny)

There are innumerable innovations from space which impact our daily life and which may come into reality
the near future. One of the most important is the anticipated utilisation of space solar power, which will
hopefully be available soon. Once available, it will help us to become independent from oil, which pollutes
nature and is the cause of fighting and wars around the World. Another very important aspect is the
exploration of the Universe by satellites, probes, manned spaceships and telescopes in orbit. These
activities are widening our horizons and helping us to understand the World that we are living in. They may
one day lead to the detection of another Earth-like planet in the infinity of space, and show us that we are
not alone.

145
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Gets a lot of Sunlight


Space solar power is unaffected by cloud cover, atmospheric dust and “night”, receiving eight times
sunlight as Earth’s surface

Raji Patel, Associate Director of the Massachusetts Space Grant Consortium, April 25, 2008, “Power From
Space: Its Time Has Come”, The TECH Online: Volume 128, Issue 21 http://www-
tech.mit.edu/V128/N21/spacesolarpower.html [Bapodra]

Against this backdrop, it is time we gave serious consideration to energy from space. It is an old idea and
most of the information below is widely available from NASA research. It was initiated after the oil
embargo of the mid-1970’s when NASA, working with the DOE, began to study alternative energy sources
to lessen dependence on foreign oil. Proposed space solar power (SSP) systems consisting of photovoltaic
(PV) arrays and mirrors, placed in a geostationary Earth orbit where unaffected by cloud cover,
atmospheric dust, or by the Earth’s day-night cycle, would receive eight times as much sunlight as they
would on Earth’s surface. The energy could be converted and beamed to Earth.
PV technology has improved considerably since this idea was developed adding to the argument that this
source of energy should be revisited. In addition, the economics of the cost of energy have changed.
According to Dr. Neville Marzwell and his colleagues at the Jet Propulsion Lab, an SSP system could
generate energy at a cost including cost of construction of 60 to 80 cents per kilowatt-hour at the outset. He
believes that “in 15 to 25 years we can lower that cost to 7 to 10 cents per kWh.” The average cost of
residential electricity was 9.86 cents per kWh in the U.S. in 2006.

146
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Comparatively better than other renewables


Space Solar offers unending source of energy with little environmental impact, and is better than the
biofuel or carbon credit solutions

Raji Patel, Associate Director of the Massachusetts Space Grant Consortium, April 25, 2008, “Power From
Space: Its Time Has Come”, The TECH Online: Volume 128, Issue 21 http://www-
tech.mit.edu/V128/N21/spacesolarpower.html [Bapodra]

Admittedly, there are formidable challenges in making this work. However, historically, we have a great
record in making technological advances even though our social and political advances have not been so
stellar. We should examine SSP, at the highest levels, nationally and internationally, because space solar
power offers us energy from an unending source with no emissions and very little environmental impact.
Furthermore, our current “solution” of switching to bio fuels is increasing hunger around the world
evidenced by riots for food in the developing countries, and, the international carbon-credit market, created
as part of the Kyoto Protocol, seems to be doing more for padding middlemen such as EcoSecurities whose
founder is quoted as calling the market “akin to sub prime,” than combating global warming.
It is indeed time to revisit a space-based solution for the world’s energy needs, both at the national and
international levels.

Space solar power is necessary- fossil fuels and nuclear energy are terrible

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

The demand for space-based solar power could be extraordinary. By 2050, according to some estimates, 10
billion people will inhabit the globe--more than 85 percent of them in developing countries. The big
question: How can we best supply humanity's growing energy needs with the least adverse impact on the
environment?
Dependence on fossil fuels is not the answer because burning coal, oil, and gas will pour carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere, raising the risk of global climate change. (And of course these resources will not last
forever.) Nuclear fission reactors avoid the greenhouse problem but introduce the so-far intractable
problem of disposing of nuclear waste. Controlled nuclear fusion might someday provide an inexhaustible
supply of clean energy--but after forty years of continuous funding, a practical fusion reactor is still not in
sight.

147
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar space power is intermittent and comparatively better than other energies

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

And the flow of power from terrestrial renewables is intermittent. Clouds blot out the sun; the wind stops
blowing; lack of rainfall nullifies a hydro generator. Because these technologies do not deliver power
continuously, they require some means of storing energy, adding to overall cost and complexity. A network
of solar power satellites in low earth orbit could provide power to any spot on earth on a virtually
continuous basis because at least one satellite will always be in "view" of the receiving station.

Space solar energy is better than other renewables: it doesn’t take up land, kill ecosystems or
increase food shortages

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

That leaves the menu of renewable energy sources. But terrestrial renewables pose environmental problems
because of their relatively large land requirements. Hydropower, the most exploited renewable thus far, has
significantly disrupted ecosystems and human habitats. Solar, biomass, and wind farms would similarly
compete with people, agriculture, and natural ecosystems for land were they the basis of a global energy
system.
Moreover, ground-based renewable energy systems, such as terrestrial photovoltaics and biomass fuels,
generate fewer than 10 watts of electricity per square meter, on a continuous basis. To generate enough
electricity to meet demand could require developing countries either to divert land from agricultural use,
and thus diminish the supply of food, or to destroy natural ecosystems, a move that could hasten the onset
of global warming.
Solar power satellites would require far less land to generate electricity. Each square meter of land devoted
to the task could yield as much as 100 watts of electricity. And the power-receiving rectenna arrays--a fine
metallic mesh--would be visually transparent, so their presence would not interfere with crop growth or
cattle grazing.

148
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SSP Preserves Biodiversity


Solar satellites will preserve biodiversity

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

The benefits are too large to walk away from. A network of solar power satellites such as what we propose
could supply the earth with 10 to 30 trillion watts of electrical power - enough to satisfy the needs of the
human race through the next century. Solar power satellites thus offer a vision in which energy production
moves off the earth's surface, allowing everyone to live on a "greener" planet. Consider the philosophical
implications: no longer need humankind see itself trapped on spaceship earth with limited resources. We
could tap the limitless resources of space, with the planet preserved as a priceless resource of biodiversity.

149
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solvency
The US federal government is essential to providing 3 key incentives to allow for commercial SBSP
tech to occur.

National Security Space Office Interim Assessment, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power As an
Opportunity for Strategic Security,” http://spacesolarpower.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/final-sbsp-
interim-assessment-release-01.pdf, pg. 3
Several major challenges will need to be overcome to make SBSP a reality, including the creation of low‐
cost space access and a supporting infrastructure system on Earth and in space. Solving these space
access and operations challenges for SBSP will in turn also open space for a host of other activities that
include space tourism, manufacturing, lunar or asteroid resource utilization, and eventually settlement
to extend the human race. Because DoD would not want to own SBSP satellites, but rather just
purchase the delivered energy as it currently does via traditional terrestrial utilities, a repeated review
finding is that the commercial sector will need Government to accomplish three major tasks to catalyze
SBSP development. The first is to retire a major portion of the early technical risks. This can be
accomplished via an incremental research and development program that culminates with a space-
borne proof-of-concept demonstration in the next decade. A spiral development proposal to field a 10
MW continuous pilot plant en route to gigawatts-class systems is included in Appendix B. The second
challenge is to facilitate the policy, regulatory, legal, and organizational instruments that will be
necessary to create the partnerships and relationships (commercial‐commercial, government‐
commercial, and government‐government) needed for this concept to succeed. The final Government
contribution is to become a direct early adopter and to incentivize other early adopters much as is
accomplished on a regular basis with other renewable energy systems coming on‐line today.

Incentives would include financing, and loan guarantees

Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “The National Security Space Office Sponsored Study
on Space-Based Solar Power,” http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SBSPreport.html
The Space Frontier Foundation, which has opposed many other federally-funded space programs as being
wasteful and/or ineffective - strongly supports a new national SBSP initiative for the U.S. Government to
finance and to incentivize the private industry investment SBSP. The Foundation is calling on the U.S.
Congress to finance SBSP at least at the level of fusion energy research, and to give American SBSP
companies the same loan guarantees that it currently gives to the nuclear power industry in order to
close the SBSP business case.”

150
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Incentives solve
Government buying down risks of investment sparks industry SBSP tech

Frank Morring, writer for Aviation Week, 10/11/07, “NSSO Backs Space Solar Power,”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml&headline=NSSO%20Backs
%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space
By buying down the risk with a demonstration at the tactical level, the U.S. government could spark a
new industry able to meet not just U.S. energy needs, but those of its allies and the developing world as
well. The technology essentially exists, and needs only to be matured. A risk buy-down by
government could make that happen, according to the NSSO report.

Government risk reduction paves way for business development

Frank Morring, writer for Aviation Week, 10/11/07, “NSSO Backs Space Solar Power,”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml&headline=NSSO%20Backs
%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space
The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the U.S.
government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to "retire a
major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other policies to
encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early demonstrator/adopter/customer" of
SSP to spur its development.
That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a
functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be required to
develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could enable utilization of the
moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space exploration.

151
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Quantum Dots are effective PV’s

Quantum dots would be highly efficient PVs

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

Very High Efficiency Photovoltaics


In addition to the above activities, which may be characterized as development
efforts, there are two longrange
research investigations into higher efficiency solar cells being undertaken. The first
involves utilization of
specific ranges of sunlight focused through a prism onto cells tailored to the
wavelengths and thusly is termed
“Rainbow”. The other takes advantage of an ensemble of quantum dots in a size
range that will capture most of the radiation from the terrestrial and space solar energy
spectrum. Such a collection of different size quantum dots can be regarded as an
array of semiconductors that are individually size tuned for optimal absorption at their
bandgaps throughout the solar energy emission spectrum. If successful,
theoretical efficiencies of 50 - 70% are
possible.

Quantum dot panels are much more efficient and cheaper

Rice University, May 4, 2007 (ScienceNews adaptation of Rice U materials, " Quantum Dot Recipe May
Lead To Cheaper Solar Panels." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070502143631.htm)[JWu]

Rice University scientists today revealed a breakthrough method for producing molecular specks of
semiconductors called quantum dots, a discovery that could clear the way for better, cheaper solar
energy panels
The research, by scientists at Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN),
appears this week in the journal Small. It describes a new chemical method for making four-legged
cadmium selenide quantum dots, which previous research has shown to be particularly effective at
converting sunlight into electrical energy.
"Our work knocks down a big barrier in developing quantum-dot-based photovoltaics as an
alternative to the conventional, more expensive silicon-based solar cells," said paper co-author and
principal investigator Michael Wong, assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering.

152
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Heat Problems
Silicon carbide electronics solve heat problems
NASA Nov 9, 06 ("Solar system exploration," http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/SiC/benefits.html)
[JWu]

Present-day commercial satellites require thermal radiators to dissipate heat generated by the
spacecraft's functional electronics. These electronics, currently based on silicon or gallium
arsenide semiconductors, would fail if they were not properly cooled by the spacecraft's thermal
radiators. Because silicon carbide electronics can operate at much higher temperatures than
silicon or gallium arsenide, the size and weight of such radiators on a spacecraft could be greatly
reduced or even elimated. This would enable substantial weight savings on a satellite, or at least
allow greater functionality (i.e., more transponders in a communications satellite) by utilizing the
space and weight formerly occupied by the termal management system. Furthermore, SiC electronic
devices have also been shown to be less susceptible to radiation damage than corresopondingly
rated silicon devices. Therefore, SiC electronics could also reduce the size and weight of shielding
normally used to protect spacecraft electronic components from space radiation. Given the
exorbitant per pound costs of launching payloads into earth orbit, the weight savings gained by
using SiC electronics could have large economic and competitive implications in the satellite
industry.
Advanced Launch Vehicle Sensor & Control Electronics

Silicon carbide electronics and sensors that could function mounted in hot engine and aerosurface
areas of advanced launch vehicles would enable weight savings, increased engine performance, and
increased reliability.
Complex electronics and sensors are expected to enhance the capabilities and efficiency of
advanced space launch vehicles. Many of these electronics and sensors monitor and control vital
engine components and aerosurfaces that operate at high temperatures. Since today's silicon-based
electronics technology cannot function at high temperatures, these electronics must presently
reside in environmentally controlled areas. This necessitates the use of long wire runs between the
sheltered electronics and the hot-area sensors and controls or the fuel-cooling of the electronics and
sensors located in high-temperature areas. Both of these low-temperature-electronics approaches
suffer from serious drawbacks, as the wire runs add a substantial amount of weight, fuel cooling has
harmed aircraft fuel efficiency, and both have negatively impacted aircraft reliabiltiy.

A family of high temperature silicon carbide electronics and sensors that could function in hot
areas of the launch vehicle would alleviate the above-mentioned technical obstacles to enable
performance gains. Uncooled operation of 300 - 600 C SiC electronics and sensors mounted would
save weight and increase reliability by replacing hydraulic controls with "smart"
electromechanical controls. SiC-based distributed control electronics would eliminate wiring and
connectors needed in conventional sheltered-electronic control systems.

153
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites are environmentally clean


SBSP is environmentally clean

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

There are 6 billion human beings inhabiting this world. Six billion humans who
place demands on this Earth. Humans who want the Western standard-of-living and who
justifiably want all the conveniences of modern life. A fundamental challenge in this
century is how to provide for the world's growing energy needs. While meeting this
challenge, it is vital that we also protect the Earth's fragile biosphere. Space-Based Solar
Power, or SBSP, may be part of a combined solution for both energy and the
environment. SBSP has the potential to produce renewable energy in very large amounts,
in an economic and environmentally-friendly manner.

The development of SBSP will be environmentally friendly

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

In the Space Frontier Foundation's credo, we have committed ourselves to protect


"the Earth's fragile biosphere" and to bring about a better life for the human race by
"utilizing the unlimited energy and material resources of space." With these goals in
mind, the Foundation is committed to an SBSP Campaign to reach out to the
environmental community and to ensure that “green principals” are used throughout any
development of SBSP in this nation.
The Space Frontier Foundation agrees with the NSSO-led report finding that
“although SBSP holds great promise to deliver clean and renewable energy to
all nations
of the world, the potential environmental impacts of the various systems and
mitigation
options to minimize those impacts require greater study.”
Therefore, the Space Frontier Foundation intends to hold the U.S. Government to
the specific recommendation in the report that “the U.S. Government ... must study the
potential environmental impacts of the various approaches early enough to
help make
effective choices between the various technical alternatives. These studies
should be led
by agencies with the required scientific expertise, credibility, and
independence, and
need to include all relevant stakeholders. Environmental studies should be
piggybacked
to demonstrations of the technologies to minimize the environmental impact in
the
eventual large-scale use of SBSP; therefore, maximizing the environmental
benefit of
SBSP.”

154
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

155
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Federal Key
Federal action extension to space solar power is key

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Extend Federal Incentives for Other Carbon-Neutral Energy Technologies to


SBSP: The U.S. Government is providing major incentives to many other energy
technologies, in support of energy independence and clean renewable energy
objectives. The Space Frontier Foundation believes it is completely reasonable
to ask
for consistency in policy, and quite reasonable since the potential pay-off of
SBSP is
so large.
The SBSP Study Group recommends that consistent with the U.S.
Government
incentives provided to other carbon-neutral energy technologies, it is critical for
the U.S. Government to provide similar incentives to encourage private U.S.
industry to co-invest in the development of SBSP systems. Specifically, the
following incentives should be provided to U.S. industry as soon as possible to
encourage private investment in the development and construction of SBSP
systems:
• Carbon/Pollution Credits and Offsets: The Space Frontier Foundation believes
that it should be rather straight-forward for the U.S. Congress to clarify, to the
extent necessary, that existing law and policy on carbon/pollution credits and
offsets also apply to SBSP.
o Legislation at both the federal and state level that specifies — and clarifies
existing law as specifying — that SBSP is eligible for all pollution credits,
carbon credits, and carbon off-sets that are available to other clean and
renewable energy sources such as wind, hydro, ground solar, and nuclear
• Extend Loan Guarantees to SBSP Developers & Operators: The nuclear
power industry has been given loan guarantees by the U.S. federal government.
The Space Frontier Foundation urges the Administration and the U.S. Congress to
extend the same incentives to the SBSP industry.
o A federal loan guarantee program of up to 80% should be created for U.S.
companies engaged in the business of developing, owning and operating
SBSP systems. This program should either be an extension of, or modeled
after, the existing loan guarantee program provided to the nuclear power
industry.

156
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Small efforts lead to Space Solar Farms

Small-scale prototype solar satellite development makes solar farms inevitable

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

What is certain is that the present push for deregulation has led to a scramble on the part of
telecommunications, computer, cable TV, and utilities industries to enter each others' markets. Some
electric power companies want to enter the telecommunications business as a way of capitalizing on the
huge investment in wire and cable that reaches virtually every building in the country. It makes equal sense
to propose that communications companies enter the power business. In practice, consortiums of power and
communications companies might develop the proposed technology together.

No single piece of this technology poses a fundamental stumbling block. The physics of photovoltaic cells
and microwave generation are well understood. To move to the next stage, though, will require a
demonstration that all the pieces of this system can work together: the solar panels, the phased-array
microwave antennas, the receiving stations that separate the data signals from the power beams, and the
computers that tell the satellites where on the ground to aim the beams. NASA could accelerate this
development tremendously by placing into orbit a prototype of a solar power satellite.

A small solar satellite pilot program within the decade will shape the future for a more advanced
solar station

Richard Macey, reporter at Sydney Morning Herald, October 17, 2007, “Pentagon offers a ray of hope in
energy debate”, The Sydney Morning Herald of Australia,
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/pentagon-offers-a-ray-of-hope-in-energy-
debate/2007/10/16/1192300768027.html [Bapodra]

THE debate over whether nuclear, solar, wind or clean coal is the energy of the future now has a new
player. A report commissioned by an arm of the US Department of Defence has instead proposed lofting
power generation into space.
Giant arrays of orbiting solar panels would collect sunlight, which would be beamed via low-power
microwaves to massive receivers on the ground, or even directly to customers.
Published by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, the report says the US should demonstrate the
technology by building a pilot "space-based solar power" station, big enough to continuously beam up to 10
megawatts of power to the ground, in the next decade.
A more advanced station, "several kilometres across" and weighing more than 3000 tonnes, could deliver
up to 10 gigawatts of electricity. While the report says the project would be a technological challenge, it
"requires no fundamental scientific breakthroughs or new physics".

157
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space solar panels will lead to solar farms and possibly solar stations for space missions

Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual
transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) ,
Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences,
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra]

Narration: In fact, there’s even talk of eventually moving the entire production of the space solar farms –
‘off planet’…
Dr Lineweaver: Well its easier to build things in space than it is to … build them here and then launch
them.
For example if we had a moon base then instead of having to launch things through this much energy we
would have to launch things through about 1/20th of that so you go to the moon you have a moon base and
you get people to dig up things make some metal or make some silicon – there’s lots of silicon on the
moon, in fact most of the moon is silicon and you then build the arrays there and then or only use that much
energy to get it into geo stationary orbit, even though its very far away the amount of energy you need is
very, very little
If we can start to construct solar panels in outer space if all the pollution associated with such construction
would be in outer space it wouldn’t be on earth and so wouldn’t contribute to our problems here.
Narration: Orbiting power stations may even allow us to ‘boldly go where no one has gone before’
Dr Lineweaver: We can imagine a future not too distant in which space based solar power is used as a
gasoline station for rockets and missions that we want to send to Mars send to the moon and Jupiter and
even beyond possibly into another stellar system.

Developing space solar panels open the path for exploration, planetary defense, and space
commercialism and tourism

Judith Burns, Science producer, BBC News, 12/7/07, “The final frontier for solar energy”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7131617.stm [Bapodra]

"It's a matter of developing the technology to make the solar panels cheaper, to send them into the sky and
have the energy conversion to microwaves or optical lasers which then beam the energy down to Earth.
"All of that is demonstrated to be technically feasible. Again it's a matter of economics".
For Lt Col Damphousse, despite the technical and economic challenges, the advantages are clear.
"It opens up all the other things that we are trying to do in space; our exploration strategy, our planetary
defence, commercialism in space, space tourism.
"If we're able to do this as an international effort this helps to relieve some of those pressures on resource
shortages, overpopulation. This is something that's in the interest of the entire planet.
"Once we open up the medium, there's a whole new world waiting for us out there."

158
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Construction is Feasible
Solar satellite construction is feasible, the cost remains an obstacle

Judith Burns, Science producer, BBC News, 12/7/07, “The final frontier for solar energy”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7131617.stm [Bapodra]

A recent study by the Pentagon concluded that a solar array in space was close to being technologically
feasible, and robotics should soon make the building of large structures in space safer and quicker.
Nasa has already begun work on a successor to the shuttle, which should bring the costs of space transport
down; currently, each launch costs nearly half a billion dollars.
Leopold Summerer of the European Space Agency believes the generation of solar power from space may
be only 20 years away.
But he adds that the cost of the undertaking will mean it will have to be another international effort along
the lines of the Space Station.
Robert Laine from EADS Astrium, the Anglo-French space company, says private sector involvement
could help reduce costs but governments would have to take the first steps.

Solar satellite technology has improved from older designs and are economically viable

Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in
Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing
Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space
Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future,
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml
[Bapodra]

The technology, as originally envisioned, posed daunting technical hurdles. Transferring electrical power
efficiently from a satellite in geosynchronous orbit would require a transmitting antenna on board the
satellite about one kilometer in diameter and a receiving antenna on the ground about 10 kilometers in
diameter. A project of this scale boggles the mind; government funding agencies shied away from investing
immense sums in a project whose viability was so unclear. NASA and the Department of Energy, which
had sponsored preliminary design studies, lost interest in the late 1970s.

In the last few years, however, the communications industry has announced satellite projects that suggest
the time has come to revisit the solar power satellite idea. By early in the next century, swarms of
communications satellites will be orbiting the earth at low altitude, relaying voice, video, and data to the
most remote spots on earth. These satellites will relay communication signals to earth on beams of
microwaves. The transmission of electrical power with a beam of microwaves was demonstrated as early as
1963, and projecting power and data along the same microwave beam is well within the state of the art.
Why not use the same beam to carry electrical power?
The new communications satellites will orbit at an altitude of only a few hundred miles. Instead of
hovering above a spot on the equator, low-orbiting satellites zip around the globe in as little as 90 minutes,
tracing paths that oscillate about the equator, rising and dipping as many as 86 degrees of latitude. Because
they are closer to the earth's surface, the solar collectors on the satellite can be a few hundred meters across
rather than 10 kilometers. And because the microwave beams they generate would spread out much less
than those from geosynchronous satellites, the ground rectennas could be correspondingly smaller and less
expensive as well. By piggybacking onto these fleets of communications satellites--and taking advantage of
their microwave transmitters and receivers, ground stations, and control systems--solar power technology
can become economically viable.

159
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Launch Harms
Launching solar satellites have no environment costs

Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual
transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) ,
Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences,
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra]

Narration: And what will be the cost – not in dollar terms – but to the environment? Will launching all this
stuff into space produce huge amounts of CO2?

Dr Lineweaver: When you launch solar panels … into outer space the rockets are burning mostly hydrogen
and oxygen and that produces as a waste gas water and so we’re not producing Co2 when we do that.

160
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

2AC Stuff- Now is key Exts


After previously being shelved, now is key time

CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the
research lost momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the technology,
Mankins told CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it seemed.
"The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles Miller, a
director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space. "The
environment is perfect for a new start."
Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural
resource depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy
back to Earth, Miller explained.
And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, encouraging the
U.S. government to spearhead the development of space power systems.

New sources of energy are needed now to keep up with rocketing demand
NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty",
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu]

With the world's population projected to skyrocket to 10 billion people by the year 2050, supplying
cheap, environmentally friendly electricity to meet basic needs will be a daunting challenge.
"We need new sources of electrical power," said John Mankins, Manager of Advanced Concepts
Studies at NASA Headquarters Office of Space Flight, "and we have been studying a variety of space
solar power concepts. Tremendous advances have been made in many relevant technologies in the
last fifteen years."

161
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Now is key—Maslow Window


The next few years are key for a space boom—Maslow Window provides infinite opportunity the
same time satellites come online
Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

This long-term approach to 21st Century space forecasting is based on the concept of a “Maslow
Window”, in which each successive economic boom (typically peaking every 56 years) does two
things: 1) it fuels the societal affluence required to spur large-scale technology and engineering
activities, and, more importantly, 2) it creates widespread ebullience by briefly elevating society
to the highest levels in Maslow’s hierarchy. This ebullience creates the atmosphere of social
well-being and confidence vital to undertake and support large, complex, risky, expensive,
multi-year programs and explorations. The confluence of societal affluence and ebullience is seen
only infrequently in modern times, when peaks in economic activity (following a 56 year cycle)
triggered the four great explorations (Lewis and Clark, Dr. Livingstone in Africa, the Polar
Expeditions, Apollo Moon) of the last 200 years.
In July, 2007 Fortune magazine termed the current worldwide expansion “the greatest
economic boom ever”. Continued rapid growth, assuming consistent government policies, is
projected by the Congressional Budget Office at least to 2011. This is precisely the trend one
would expect as we approach the economic boom presaging the next Maslow Window. For
example, based on economic data corresponding to the previous four Maslow Windows,
projected GDP for 2025 should reach between two and three times its current value.
Evidence for the near-term approach to Maslow Window-style ebullience is also provided by
travel industry statistics that indicate skyrocketing growth of adventure-type travel and extreme
sports (e.g., high altitude mountaineering). Indeed, in 2003 the Wall Street Journal estimated the
global market for adventure travel to be $ 245 billion. The beginning of the suborbital space
tourist industry is another key step in this direction.

162
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The Maslow Window will be around 2015


Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

As society ascends the Maslow hierarchy it eventually aspires to fulfill what Maslow called
“esteem needs,” reflecting a desire for respect from others and for others, and for self-esteem. Data
relevant to these needs has been tracked by The National Conference on Citizenship. Their Civic
Health Index (CHI) monitors 40 indicators across nine categories, including connections to civic
and religious groups, trust in other people, trends in philanthropy and volunteer work, and
awareness of current and world events.
Since 1975, subsequent to the close of the Apollo Maslow Window, the CHI has registered steep
declines of 7%, a trend viewed as a “substantial and troubling pattern.” However, their data may
indicate a turning point, demonstrating almost a 3 point recovery in the CHI since 1999, with a
renewed ascent up the Maslow hierarchy. This is the trend we would expect as increasing affluence
begins to elevate society back to the esteem and (eventually) the “cognitive” need levels that are
characteristic of past Maslow Windows.
Additional evidence favoring these projections comes from the well-documented “generations”
concept of William Strauss and Neil Howe (Generations, 1991). Recently, the changing
characteristics of successive generations have been correlated with long economic waves (about
56 years). As we approach the next Maslow Window in 2015, the Millennial generation will be
coming of age. As “Civics” they will be especially supportive of Maslow Window space activities;
two previous “Civics” presidents were John F. Kennedy (Apollo) and Ronald Reagan (Space
Station).
Growing international interest in non-space macro-engineering projects is also a reliable
indicator of the impending Maslow Window opening in 2015. A prime example is the proposed
$5B+ Panama Canal expansion project expected to be complete by 2015. The corresponding wave
of ebullience that normally heralds such an achievement was recently reflected in the national
referendum in 2006 where Panamanians approved the risky, expensive project by 76.8% of votes.

163
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
MASLOW WINDOWS ARE LIMITED—ONLY FOR A DECADE

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Public opinion" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

On the basis of public opinion polls Launius claims that popular support for Apollo was not as high
during the 1960s as typically assumed. He points to polls during the 1960s asking if the federal
government should fund human trips to the Moon that never rose above 45% approval and usually
slouched near 40%. In fact, in 1965 one third of the country favored reducing NASA’s budget, and
by 1969 — the year of the first human landing on the Moon — that percent had increased to 40% (it
skyrocketed to 55% in 1975!). This suggests that popular support for Apollo started to erode
almost as soon as the program was established, and supports the notion that Maslow Windows
can flourish for up to a decade but then rapidly decline.

164
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Timeframe Exts
Fully functional SPS will be fully developed by 2020

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

For purposes of coordinating activities among the various teams, “Model System
Categories” (MSCs) were defined. These range from relatively small-scale demonstrations to
very large-scale operational SPS systems. In broad terms, each MSC represents a
notional
projection of what may be achievable in a particular future timeframe in terms of
scale, technology,
missions, etc. Four are described here.
 M SC 1 year 2005, approx. power level 100 kW, Free-flyer, demo-scale commercial space option
MSC 2 year 2010, 100 kWPlanetary Surface System; demo-scale; space
exploration option
MSC 3 year 2015, ~10 MW Free-flyer; WPT, SPG and PMAD, Transportation; Large
demo; HEDS (“solar clipper”) option
MSC 4 year 2020, 1 GW Free-flyer; Full-scale solar power satellite commercial
space option

Timeframe is by 2020

CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

"It will take a great deal of effort, a great deal of thought and unfortunately a great deal of money,"
Keutersaid. "But it is certainly possible."
And Miller, of the Space Frontier Foundation, said he thinks it will be possible in the next 10 years.
"We could see the first operational power satellite in about the 2020 time frame if we act now," he
said.

165
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Energy Solvency
Solar satellites contain more energy than all oil reserves on Earth
CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

"A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous Earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one
year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil
reserves on Earth today," the report said.

Space has near infinite untapped energy


Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar
development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

Space is big - there is an awful lot of energy out there, and the crumbs we fight about here on Earth
are laughably tiny in comparison. Zettawatts from the Sun pass just through the region between
Earth and Moon - that's enough energy for each man, woman and child in the US to sustainably
power an entire US economy all to themselves. Even our terrestrial energy choices, fossil or renewable,
fission or wind, almost all derive from the energy profligacy of our Sun and other stars before it.
Gathering power in space and transmitting it to Earth should not be a mystery to us in this 21st
century. Communications satellites already do it routinely. One significant obstacle to power
applications, however, is regulatory: there is no spectrum allocated to power transmission, as there is
for communications.

Solar satellites provide more energy than everything else combined


NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

At the same press conference, over a dozen space advocacy groups announced a new alliance to
promote space solar power – the Space Solar Alliance for Future Energy. These supporters of space-
based solar power say the technology has the potential to provide more energy than fossil fuels, wind
and nuclear power combined.
The NSSO report says that solar-power-generating satellites could also solve supply problems in
distant places such as Iraq, where fuel is currently trucked along in dangerous convoys and the cost
of electricity for some bases can exceed $1 per kilowatt-hour – about 10 times what it costs in the US.
The report also touts the technology's potential to provide a clean, abundant energy source and
reduce global competition for oil.

One year of SBSP is almost all remaining oil energy combined


James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)
[JWu]

The space office sees energy supply as one of strategic importance as oil supplies dwindle; according
to a report by Germany's Energy Watch Group published last week, "peak oil" output occurred last year,
and will fall by 7% annually to half its present levels by 2030. The space office notes that all remaining
oil resources are estimated to contain 250 terawatt-years of energy; but that a one-kilometre wide
band in geosynchronous orbit receives about 212 TW-years of energy each year.

166
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

CHINA EXTS
China's space programs are all in its national interests
China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a
White Paper", viewed on Spacered;
http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the
state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of
outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind. As a developing
country, China's fundamental tasks are developing its economy and continuously pushing
forward its modernization drive.
The aims and principles of China's space activities are determined by their important status and
function in protecting China's national interests and implementing the state's development
strategy. The aims of China's space activities are: to explore outer space, and learn more about
the cosmos and the Earth; to utilize outer space for peaceful purposes, promote mankind's
civilization and social progress, and benefit the whole of mankind; and to meet the growing
demands of economic construction, national security, science and technology development and
social progress, protect China's national interests and build up the comprehensive national
strength.

China's space plans include monitoring and communication satellites, and space preeminence
China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a
White Paper", viewed on Spacered;
http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

The 21st century will witness vigorous development of space activities across the world.
China is drafting a space development strategy and plans oriented to the 21st century
according to the actual demands and long-term target of national development to spur the
growth of the space industry.
Development Targets
The short-term development targets (for the next decade) are:
- To build up an earth observation system for long-term stable operation. The meteorological
satellites, resource satellites, oceanic satellites and disaster monitoring satellites can develop
into an earth observation system for long-term stable operation to conduct stereoscopic
observation and dynamic monitoring of the land, atmosphere, and oceanic environments of
the country, the peripheral regions and even the whole globe.
- To set up an independently operated satellite broadcasting and telecommunications system.
Positive support will be given to the development of commercial broadcasting and
telecommunications satellites such as geo-stationary telecom satellites and TV live
broadcasting satellites with long operating life, high reliability and large capacity, so as to
form China's satellite telecom industry.
- To establish an independent satellite navigation and positioning system. This will be
achieved by setting up a navigation and positioning satellite group step by step and
developing a relevant application system, which will eventually bring into being China's
satellite navigation and positioning industry;
The long-term development targets (for the next 20 years or more) are as follows:
To achieve industrialization and marketization of space technology and space applications.
The exploration and utilization of space resources shall meet a wide range of demands of
economic construction, state security, science and technology development and social
progress, and contribute to the strengthening of the comprehensive national strength;

167
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
- To establish a multi-function and multi-orbit space infrastructure composed of various
satellite systems and set up a satellite ground application system that harmonizes
spacecraft and ground equipment to form an integrated ground-space network system in
full, constant and long-term operation in accordance with the overall planning of the state;
- To establish China's own manned spaceflight system and carry out manned spaceflight
scientific research and technological experiments on a certain scale; and
- To obtain a more important place in the world in the field of space science with more
achievements and carry out explorations and studies of outer space.
- To upgrade the overall level and capacity of China's launch vehicles. This will be achieved
by improving the performance and reliability of the "Long-March" group, developing the
next generation of launch vehicles with non-toxic, non-polluting, high-performance and low-
cost qualities, forming a new group of launch vehicles and strengthening the capability of
providing international commercial launching services;
- To realize manned spaceflight and establish an initially complete R and D testing system
for manned space projects;
- To establish a coordinated and complete national satellite remote-sensing application
system by building various related ground application systems through overall planning,
setting up a remote-sensing data receiving, processing and distributing system covering
the whole country for data sharing, and forming a fairly complete application system in
major application fields of satellite remote-sensing; and
- To develop space science and explore outer space by developing a scientific research and
technological experiment satellite group of the next generation, strengthening studies of
space micro-gravity, space material science, space life science, space environment and
space astronomy, and carrying out pre-study for outer space exploration centering on the
exploration of the moon.

China is researching deep space exploration and space life


Space Daily, quoting a senior Chinese space official, Beijing Correspondent Staff Writers, Jul 20,
06 ("China To Develop Deep Space Exploration In 5 Years"
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China_To_Develop_
Deep_Space_Exploration_In_5_Years_999.html)[JWu]

A senior Chinese space agency official said Wednesday that China would actively plan its deep
space exploration over the next five years, focusing on lunar and Mars exploration. Sun
Laiyan, administrator of the China National Space Administration, said China would study the
distribution and utilization of lunar resources and terrestrial planetary science as well as exploring
scientific measures for supporting mankind's sustainable survival on Earth. Key research
areas will also include astronomy and solar physics, space physics and solar system exploration,
micro-gravity sciences and space life science. Sun urged Chinese scientists to increase their
understanding of star and universe evolution through the observation and study of the sun and black
holes.
In the next five years, Sun said, China will independently develop and launch an astronomical
satellite.

168
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Chinese will go into space by 2015—the only issue is whether it will be cooperative or confrontational
Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
(Contributions from Anny Wong, PhD, political scientist. "10 reasons why china is good for space"
http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/2008/06/22/10-reasons-why-china-is-good-for-space/)[JWu]

3. Energy-hungry China may decide to lead solar power satellite development. Facing $
trillions of energy infrastructure costs in the next 20 years, China may decide to develop this
inexhaustible energy source that would reduce both environmental pollution and strategic tensions.
2. China and U.S. (and others) may form a Grand Space Alliance for the 2015 Maslow
Window. If indeed we’re “less than 5 years from a new generation of Chinese leaders with
whom a far stronger relationship may be built,” — see Thomas Barnett — new options are
possible. With joint interests in global security, new energy sources, and the exploration of
space, China and the U.S. may decide that a “Football Game” model is more productive than
the previous Cold War space experience was. In an American professional football game there are
rules, big money, great excitement, intense competition, and winners and losers, but at the end of
the game both teams survive, learn, and remain friends; they also look forward to the next
game on the schedule. 1. A less attractive option is that China (and partners) may stimulate the
rapid development of space by challenging the U.S. in a Cold War-style confrontation,
complete with a Sputnik-like event. Reason #2 (above) is basically a model of greatly expanded
International Geophysical Year-style friendly cooperation. However, in 1957 it led to the surprise
launch of Sputnik which shocked America and triggered the 1960s race to space between two
very unfriendly countries.
As we draw closer to the 2015 Maslow Window it will become clearer which model of
international space development — “Football Game” or “Cold War”– will occur.

169
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Status Quo Solves


No solar power research funding now

Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar
development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

A review by the National Research Council (2) found the program to have a credible plan which
required significant funding increases. Rather than strengthening the program, however, all funding
for the space solar power group ceased after September 2001, and essentially no R&D work on power
from space is now being done in the US.

New government action key to catalyzing space

Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO
backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml
&headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu]

The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the
U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to
"retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other
policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early
demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development.
That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a
functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be
required to develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could
enable utilization of the moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space
exploration.

170
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Unreliable
Space solar energy is continuous, abundant, and can be beamed to anywhere

Andrzej Zwaniecki, USInfo Staff writer, site maintained by U.S. Department of State's Bureau of
International Information Programs, 8-20-07, ("Space solar energy has future, U.S. researchers say"
www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/20070820153255saikceinawz0.864773.html)[JWu]

Washington -- Beam solar energy directly from space, and disaster relief expeditions could power all
their equipment with no more than a few portable antennas and converters. Campers could use such
energy to cook dinners using nothing more than a cell phone-like device.
But the primary beneficiaries of such a technological feat would be the many communities that would be
able to tap into space solar energy fed into power grids. Terrestrial solar power stations already exist
throughout the world. But sunlight is eight times less intense on the earth’s surface than in its
geostationary orbit. So why not collect it in space and beam its energy to Earth via microwave power
beam, which can penetrate the atmosphere more efficiently, ask U.S. researchers.
They have proposed putting in orbit mega-satellites -- giant, possibly inflatable structures of photovoltaic
arrays and antennas -- that would do just that. At receiving stations on Earth, the beam could be
converted into electricity (or synthetic fuels), which, in contrast to power from terrestrial solar power
stations, would flow continuously to the grid independent of the season, weather or location.

Space has infinite energy just waiting to be tapped

Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar
development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

We already have an immense fusion reactor working for us in our solar system, ultimately
responsible for almost all our energy choices. All we really need to do is make better use of it
by tapping into it more directly.
Any rational energy policy for the United States must support the steps needed to make that
happen: increased investment in reducing launch costs, reserving radio frequency spectrum for
power transmission, and moving towards a billion dollars per year in a robust and diverse
program of R&D on space solar power.

171
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Hurts environment

The development of SBSP will be environmentally friendly

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

In the Space Frontier Foundation's credo, we have committed ourselves to protect


"the Earth's fragile biosphere" and to bring about a better life for the human race by
"utilizing the unlimited energy and material resources of space." With these goals in
mind, the Foundation is committed to an SBSP Campaign to reach out to the
environmental community and to ensure that “green principals” are used throughout any
development of SBSP in this nation.
The Space Frontier Foundation agrees with the NSSO-led report finding that
“although SBSP holds great promise to deliver clean and renewable energy to
all nations
of the world, the potential environmental impacts of the various systems and
mitigation
options to minimize those impacts require greater study.”
Therefore, the Space Frontier Foundation intends to hold the U.S. Government to
the specific recommendation in the report that “the U.S. Government ... must study the
potential environmental impacts of the various approaches early enough to
help make
effective choices between the various technical alternatives. These studies
should be led
by agencies with the required scientific expertise, credibility, and
independence, and
need to include all relevant stakeholders. Environmental studies should be
piggybacked
to demonstrations of the technologies to minimize the environmental impact in
the
eventual large-scale use of SBSP; therefore, maximizing the environmental
benefit of
SBSP.”

SBSP is environmentally clean

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

There are 6 billion human beings inhabiting this world. Six billion humans who
place demands on this Earth. Humans who want the Western standard-of-living and who
justifiably want all the conveniences of modern life. A fundamental challenge in this
century is how to provide for the world's growing energy needs. While meeting this
challenge, it is vital that we also protect the Earth's fragile biosphere. Space-Based Solar
Power, or SBSP, may be part of a combined solution for both energy and the

172
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
environment. SBSP has the potential to produce renewable energy in very large amounts,
in an economic and environmentally-friendly manner.

173
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Solar Panel Tech


Quantum dot panels are much more efficient and cheaper

Rice University, May 4, 2007 (ScienceNews adaptation of Rice U materials, " Quantum Dot Recipe May
Lead To Cheaper Solar Panels." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070502143631.htm)[JWu]

Rice University scientists today revealed a breakthrough method for producing molecular specks of
semiconductors called quantum dots, a discovery that could clear the way for better, cheaper solar
energy panels
The research, by scientists at Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN),
appears this week in the journal Small. It describes a new chemical method for making four-legged
cadmium selenide quantum dots, which previous research has shown to be particularly effective at
converting sunlight into electrical energy.
"Our work knocks down a big barrier in developing quantum-dot-based photovoltaics as an
alternative to the conventional, more expensive silicon-based solar cells," said paper co-author and
principal investigator Michael Wong, assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering.

Quantum dots would be highly efficient PVs

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

Very High Efficiency Photovoltaics


In addition to the above activities, which may be characterized as development
efforts, there are two longrange
research investigations into higher efficiency solar cells being undertaken. The first
involves utilization of
specific ranges of sunlight focused through a prism onto cells tailored to the
wavelengths and thusly is termed
“Rainbow”. The other takes advantage of an ensemble of quantum dots in a size
range that will capture most of the radiation from the terrestrial and space solar energy
spectrum. Such a collection of different size quantum dots can be regarded as an
array of semiconductors that are individually size tuned for optimal absorption at their
bandgaps throughout the solar energy emission spectrum. If successful,
theoretical efficiencies of 50 - 70% are
possible.

174
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Reception Tech

Space solar energy reception technologies already exist

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

Solar Dynamic (SD) power systems concentrate sunlight into a receiver where the energy is transferred to
a heat engine for conversion to electrical power. Brayton heat engines utilize a
turbine, compressor, and
rotary alternator to produce power using an inert gas working fluid. Lee Mason of
GRC [Ref 7] has devised a
system for use on a SSP shown in the schematic diagram of Figure 7.
A system study was performed comparing the cost, mass, and technical risk of various Solar Power
Generation (SPG) options for a solar dynamic system. For a 10MW SD system, the
results show
that at high power levels this technology is competitive with projected photovoltaic
systems.
Testing was performed by Wayne Wong of GRC [Refs. 8 and 9] to determine the
characterization of
high temperature secondary concentrator refractive materials in a typical SD
environment. Existing
analytical and design tools were utilized to design a prototypical refractive secondary
concentrator with a
concentration ratio of 10:1. This, combined with a primary concentrator of 1000:1 will
result in a very
high 10,000:1 ratio which permits a reasonable pointing accuracy requirement of
0.1°. The
performance of the sapphire concentrator was evaluated via an on-sun calorimeter
test. The tests
were conducted in the NASA GRC Solarthermal/ Vacuum Facility

175
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Beam-down Tech

Power beams down through lasers or microwaves

James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysectio
n.research)[JWu]

The NSSO suggests that an orbiting spacecraft with solar panel arrays would be
comparable to current ground-based installations spanning hectares and, eventually,
a few square kilometres. Then that energy can be sent to the ground - using, the
Pentagon suggests, a giant laser or microwave beam.

176
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Launch Tech
All the technologies for shuttle launch will be available by 2nd generation RLV systems

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

The MagLifter launch assist concept is based upon the advancement and combination
of existing technologies to create a more efficient means to launch and propel
vehicles and payloads to Earth orbit by replacing the flight vehicle first stage with a
robust, ground based launch system. Implementation of the concept is expected to
result in lower flight vehicle weight, greater payload capacity and lower per-poundto-
orbit launch costs. Advancements in superconducting magnetic levitation and
propulsion systems and development of rocket based combined cycle engines will be
required before implementation of MagLifter is possible. Improvements in flight vehicle
materials and systems reliability/serviceability will be necessary before MagLifter
launches become routine. Proponents of the concept believe that required technological
advancements are achievable within the time frame targeted by NASA for
development of second-generation RLV systems.This study envisions the site characteristics,
ground-based facilities, systems and infrastructure necessary to support the
proposed launch technology.

Second generation RLVs will be available by 2010


SpaceRef News, 10/27/ 2k (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=2934)[JWu]

To help make space travel dramatically cheaper and safer than it is today, NASA is asking
industry, academia and others to propose technologies, experiments and other risk reduction
activities to be conducted over the next five years for the 2nd Generation Reusable Launch
Vehicle Program. This is the next major step in developing the "Highway to Space."
"Technologies developed and tested under the 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle
Engineering and Risk Reduction program will enable the start of full scale development of a
reusable launch system in 2005 -- with flight operations anticipated in the 2010 timeframe,"
program manager Dan Dumbacher said.

177
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Tech
Technology has developed greatly over last few decades
Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07
space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html [JWu]

Over the last few decades, the march of technology useful to SBSP has been significant, said
Neville Marzwell, Manager of Advanced Concepts and Technology Innovation at the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
"We have made tremendous progress in technology from 1977 to 2007," Marzwell reported. He
pointed to advances in micro and nano-electronics, lightweight inflatable composite structures,
ultra-small power management devices, as well as laboratory demonstration of photovoltaic
arrays that are close to 68 percent conversion efficiency.

Space solar tech has greatly advanced—there are no technology barriers


NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the consulting firm
Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square kilometres, required hundreds
of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a
former NASA research manager and active promoter of space solar power.
Economically unfeasible
After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically unfeasible in the 1970s.
Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics will bring the size
and cost down to a fraction of the original schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble
the equipment in space.
Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lower-cost space
launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power as a modern fossil-fuel
plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10 times that of the International Space
Station. Sending that material into orbit would require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US
currently launches fewer than 15 rockets each year.
In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental scientific
breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar power will be practical
in the next few decades.
"There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse.

Solar space power is feasible now—the only stumbling block is perception of cost
Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

The idea of using satellites to beam solar power down from space is nothing new—the Department of
Energy first studied it in the 1970s, and NASA took another look in the ’90s. The stumbling block has
been less the engineering challenge than the cost.
A Pentagon report released in October could mean the stars are finally aligning for space-based solar
power, or SBSP. According to the report, SBSP is becoming more feasible, and eventually could help
head off crises such as climate change and wars over diminishing energy supplies. “The challenge is
one of perception,” says John Mankins, president of the Space Power Association and the leader of
NASA’s mid-1990s SBSP study. “There are people in senior leadership positions who believe
everything in space has to cost trillions.”

178
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Microwave Beams Bad

Microwave beams aren't harmful

James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)
[JWu]

The first units to go up will generate between 10MW and 25MW of continuous power, enough for a town
of 25,000 people. If the energy is transmitted by microwave, a surface array one-tenth of a square
kilometre in size will be needed to pick it up. Larger beams will require larger collector arrays. But
wouldn't a microwave beam from space be equivalent to a deadly weapon? Unlike photovoltaic cells,
these antenna arrays are practically transparent, so crops could be planted under them.
"If a 2.45Ghz beam drifted off its target and ended up over a town, the effect would be negligible,"
says Lt Col Damphousse of the space office. "By the time the microwave reaches the surface it has
spread out considerably. The power density is one-sixth that of the noonday sun."

Beaming down microwaves isn't dangerous

NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty",
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu]

One possibility is to convert stored solar energy to microwave radiation and beam it down to a
combination rectifier-antenna, called a rectenna, located in an isolated area. The rectenna would
convert the microwave energy back to DC (direct current) power. According to Marzwell, the dangers
of being close to the microwave beam would be similar to the dangers of cell phone transmissions,
microwave ovens or high-power electrical transmission lines.
"There is a risk element but you can reduce it," said Marzwell. "You can put these small receivers in the
desert or in the mountains away from populated areas."

179
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Spending Link
Concentrating sunlight solves solar panel cost

NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty",
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu]

Even so, launching thousands of tons of solar arrays into space will be expensive. But there may be a
way to reduce the needed area of the arrays -- by concentrating sunlight.
"If you can concentrate the sun's rays through the use of large mirrors or lenses you get more for
your money because most of the cost is in the PV arrays," said Marzwell.
A drawback to concentrated sunlight is that it is hot. Focused radiation that's not converted to electricity
turns into heat -- enough to damage the arrays if there's too much excess warmth. Marzwell and his
colleagues at JPL are studying ways to capture waste heat and convert it to electricity by means of
thermal voltaic processes. Special coatings on the mirrors and lenses can also reject portions of the
sun's spectrum that PV arrays don't use, further reducing excess heat.

Trillion dollar costs were from 60s research—much progress has happened

NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the consulting firm
Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square kilometres, required hundreds
of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a
former NASA research manager and active promoter of space solar power.
Economically unfeasible
After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically unfeasible in the 1970s.
Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics will bring the size
and cost down to a fraction of the original schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble
the equipment in space.
Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lower-cost space
launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power as a modern fossil-fuel
plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10 times that of the International Space
Station. Sending that material into orbit would require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US
currently launches fewer than 15 rockets each year.
In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental scientific
breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar power will be practical
in the next few decades.
"There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse.

180
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Ground Solar Conditions

There are no clouds in space. 


Popular Science 6-13-08 ("10 audacious ideas to save the planet",
http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2008-06/10-audacious-ideas-save-planet)[JWu]

Putting solar panels in space has one obvious advantage: It’s never cloudy 22,000 miles up. On
average, there’s 8 to 10 times as much sunlight available in space as there is on Earth, where
atmosphere and weather get in the way. Now, with satellite launch costs dropping (about five thousand
dollars per pound today, versus $12,000 per pound a decade ago) and energy bills rising (already double
what they were in 2005), researchers are finally warming to the idea.

Space solar power solves night and cloudy conditions


NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power would use kilometre-sized solar panel arrays to gather sunlight in orbit. It
would then beam power down to Earth in the form of microwaves or a laser, which would be collected in
antennas on the ground and then converted to electricity. Unlike solar panels based on the ground, solar
power satellites placed in geostationary orbit above the Earth could operate at night and during
cloudy conditions.

Space solar power provides billions of times ground solar energy


National Space Society, independent, educational organization; preeminent citizen's voice on space 10/07,
(""An investment for today – an energy solution for tomorrow"
http://www.nss.org/legislative/positions/NSS-SSP-PositionPaper.pdf)[JWu]

The United States and the rest of the world need to find alternative sources of energy besides
fossil fuels. The National Space Society believes that one of the most important long-term
solutions for meeting those energy needs is Space Solar Power (SSP), which gathers energy from
sunlight in space and sends it to Earth. We believe that SSP can solve our energy and greenhouse
gas emissions problems. Not just help, not just take a step in the right direction; solve. SSP can
provide large quantities of energy to each and every person on Earth with very little
environmental impact. The NSS recommends that SSP be considered along with ground-based
solar collectors and wind turbines as a safe, renewable, and clean energy option.
Solar energy is routinely used on spacecraft today, and the solar energy available in space is literally
billions of times greater than we use today. The lifetime of the sun is an estimated 4 to 5 billion years,
making SSP a truly long-term energy solution. Space solar power can have an extremely small
environmental footprint, perhaps competitive with ground-solar and wind, because with sufficient
investments in space infrastructure, the SSP can be built from materials from space with zero terrestrial
environmental impact. Only energy receivers need be built on Earth. As Earth receives only one part in
2.3 billion of the sun's output, SSP is by far the largest potential energy source available, dwarfing all
others combined. Development cost and time, of course, are considerable. This makes SSP a long-term
solution rather than a short-term stop-gap, although there are some intriguing near-term possibilities. In
any case, SSP can potentially supply all the electrical needs of our planet.

181
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 DoD CP

DoD is cashstrapped; can't pay for the plan

Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07


(http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu]

Rouge said that moving out on the proposed SBSP effort would be the largest space venture yet,
making the Apollo Moon landing project "look like just a small little program." As a caveat,
however, he noted that the U.S. Department of Defense is cash-strapped and is not the financial
backer for such an endeavor.

182
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 International CP
PERM SOLVENCY:
___Country_X_ __ will cooperate with the US in space—GES proves

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("International space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

Several countries recently signed the “Global Exploration Strategy” (GES), including
Australia, Canada, China, ESA, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia,
Ukraine, the U.K., and the U.S.. This strategy focuses on why we are returning to the Moon and
what we envision doing there, with special emphasis on a comprehensive set of reasons for robotic
and human exploration of the Moon. The GES is clearly only the beginning of a new style of
international cooperation in space. Indeed, in his recent column in Aerospace America, Editor-at-
Large Jerry Grey concludes that, “…despite the current ISS (International Space Station) concerns,
there is no doubt that the internationalization of space is enjoying a new period of
ascendancy.”(February, 2008).

183
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 States CP

NASA key to explore space; only federal government can mandate NASA
Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO
backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml
&headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu]

The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the
U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to
"retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other
policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early
demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development.
That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a
functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be
required to develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could
enable utilization of the moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space
exploration.

Federal action extension to space solar power is key


Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Extend Federal Incentives for Other Carbon-Neutral Energy Technologies to SBSP: The U.S. Government
is providing major incentives to many other energy technologies, in support of energy independence and
clean renewable energy objectives. The Space Frontier Foundation believes it is completely reasonable to
ask for consistency in policy, and quite reasonable since the potential pay-off of SBSP is
so large.
The SBSP Study Group recommends that consistent with the U.S. Government incentives provided to
other carbon-neutral energy technologies, it is critical for the U.S. Government to provide similar
incentives to encourage private U.S. industry to co-invest in the development of SBSP systems.
Specifically, the following incentives should be provided to U.S. industry as soon as possible to encourage
private investment in the development and construction of SBSP systems:
• Carbon/Pollution Credits and Offsets: The Space Frontier Foundation believes that it should be rather
straight-forward for the U.S. Congress to clarify, to the extent necessary, that existing law and policy on
carbon/pollution credits and offsets also apply to SBSP.
o Legislation at both the federal and state level that specifies — and clarifies existing law as specifying —
that SBSP is eligible for all pollution credits, carbon credits, and carbon off-sets that are available to other
clean and
renewable energy sources such as wind, hydro, ground solar, and nuclear
• Extend Loan Guarantees to SBSP Developers & Operators: The nuclear power industry has been
given loan guarantees by the U.S. federal government. The Space Frontier Foundation urges the
Administration and the U.S. Congress to extend the same incentives to the SBSP industry.
o A federal loan guarantee program of up to 80% should be created for U.S. companies engaged in the
business of developing, owning and operating SBSP systems. This program should either be an extension
of, or modeled
after, the existing loan guarantee program provided to the nuclear power industry.

184
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Non-Uniques
Your arguments are non unique—small scale SBSP has been tested in the past

James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.researc
h)[JWu]

Over the past 40 years, microwave and laser power transmission systems have been tested
successfully in Europe, the US and Japan. Unmanned aircraft and lunar rovers receiving power from
a remote beam are proven applications. The Japanese have tested reactions in the ionosphere to
microwaves at the frequencies used for space solar power, and the results were positive. The only
remaining issue is to test a large-scale system.

185
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Spending Non-Uniques

Space solar power is a drop in the bucket compared to nuclear fusion spending

Tyler Hamilton, Toronto Star business columnist, author, 10-15-07 ("Space-based solar power back in
play" http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/266738)[JWu]

Again, the discussion has come up before. NASA and the U.S. Department of Defence have
together spent about $80 million (U.S.) over the last three decades studying the idea. Seems
like decent money, until you see that the U.S. government has spent about $21 billion over 50
years on that elusive energy utopia called nuclear fusion.
Perhaps it is time to give space-based solar power another look, given that such a system
might already exist today had it received the money dumped into fusion. Oil has surged past
$80 a barrel and there's a desperate need for low- or zero-carbon energy sources. Lob a few
bombs at Iran and the situation gets worse, not better.

SBSP costs a fraction of the war in Iraq, and has market returns
ABC News, 10-17-07 ("US considers solar energy from space,"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/17/2062368.htm)[JWu]

Yet Dr Lineweaver says the Pentagon's drive to secure energy in an oil-constrained future could lead
to the rapid development of a clean energy source.
"I think that anything that would lessen the tension between energy-starved and energy-overflowing
counties is very important," he said.
"You may know that the war in Iraq is $7 billion a month, or something, so you take just a small
fraction of that and put it into solar energy - that would be incredible.
"Not only because it would boost solar panel production on earth in normal things, and people would
have solar panels on their roofs, [but] because the price would probably come down by factors of two,
three, four, five, depending, because of economy of scale.
"And you'd have this interesting idea of putting photo panels in geostationary orbit."

SBSP will save money and create new markets

Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

The new report imagines a market-based approach. Eventually, SBSP may become enormously
profitable—and the Pentagon hopes it will lure the growing private space industry. The
government would fund launches to place initial arrays in orbit by 2016, with private firms taking
over operations from there. This plan could limit government costs to about $10 billion.

186
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2: SBSP Energy Too Expensive


Cost of electricity generated from SBSP would be close to energy costs in Iraq today

Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy,
National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+
anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

Perhaps the biggest news of the NSSO-led study is that the team uncovered something new that might
forever change the economic equation for space-based solar power. The report estimates that the
Department of Defense (DoD) is paying about $1 per kilowatt-hour for electricity in forward bases in
Iraq, when all indirect costs are
included. This is an order of magnitude higher in price than what Americans pay for electricity in their
homes. These higher electricity prices are not caused by gouging, but by the realities of war and how
electricity is generated for the warfighter. Currently, we pump oil out of the ground in the Middle East
or the continental United States, and then transport the oil to the Gulf coast where it is refined into
kerosene. We then pump the kerosene onto tankers, which must be guarded by the U.S. Navy, and
transport it to the Gulf region. We then pump the kerosene off the tankers into individual trucks,
which must be heavily guarded by American ground forces. Then, these convoys, which are primary
targets for asymmetric attacks by improvised explosive devices, must run a dangerous gauntlet through
a war zone. Finally, the kerosene is delivered to the forward bases, where it is converted into electricity.

187
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2: ASATs Create Space Debris


ASATs can be built that do not create space debris

Taylor Dinerman, consultant for the U.S. Defense Department, 1/22/07, “Sticky Airbags and Grapples:
Kinetic ASATs Without the Debris,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/789/1
Fortunately, a few years ago a proposal was floated for as class of weapons that would destroy target
spacecraft without directly creating any debris. This type of "co-orbital" ASAT would approach its
target and envelop it with an airbag covered in a type of sticky substance. It would then fire a
thruster so that the conjoined satellites would burn up in the atmosphere. If it worked as designed, no
debris would be created. In practice it would be no easy task to design, test, and operate such a weapon, but
it is not beyond the state of the art and would not create any debris. Figuring out what kind of sticky
material is right for such a system would, by itself, be a fascinating project. The substance might have
applications in other military and perhaps civil space systems. If the sticky airbag solution proves too
difficult, the same goals might be reached using an ASAT equipped with grappling arms that would
grasp the target before pushing down towards the atmosphere. The challenges of such a system are
evident, not the least of which would be the need for some sort of decision-making software that would
choose the best places to seize the enemy satellite during the final moments before contact.

188
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Int’l PERM SOLVENCY:


___Country_X_ __ will cooperate with the US in space—GES proves

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("International space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

Several countries recently signed the “Global Exploration Strategy” (GES), including
Australia, Canada, China, ESA, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia,
Ukraine, the U.K., and the U.S.. This strategy focuses on why we are returning to the Moon and
what we envision doing there, with special emphasis on a comprehensive set of reasons for robotic
and human exploration of the Moon. The GES is clearly only the beginning of a new style of
international cooperation in space. Indeed, in his recent column in Aerospace America, Editor-at-
Large Jerry Grey concludes that, “…despite the current ISS (International Space Station) concerns,
there is no doubt that the internationalization of space is enjoying a new period of
ascendancy.”(February, 2008).

189
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Micro-meteorides—
They don't cause functional failure (no impact), and centers of shattering bring Earth radiation into the Sun-
facing solar panels, thus INCREASING output (turn)

Aceti et al, (R. Aceti & G. Drolshagen, European Space Research & Technology Centre, Norway;
J.A.M. McDonnell, Unispace Kent, UK; T.Stevenson, Mare Crisium, UK) November 94
("0Micrometeoroids and Space Debris - The Eureca Post-Flight Analysis" ESA (European Space
Agency) Bulletin Nr. 80, http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bullet80/ace80.htm)[JWu]

Impact damage to Eureca hardware caused no system or subsystem failures. This is partly because the
multi-layer (MLI) structure retains particles up to a certain size very efficiently. The critical size for
complete penetration of the 20 layers of insulation was only exceeded in two places, luckily causing no
further damage at either site. Any loss in thermal-control function due to the particle impacts was
negligible.
As far as the solar arrays are concerned, due to the massive redundancy and cross-strapping, even the
most extensive form of damage - for example if a cell was completely cracked perpendicular to the
current flow - would have caused only a small power loss. There is no evidence to suggest that extreme
damage of this sort occurred anywhere on the Eureca arrays. Rather, it was confined to localised
shattering of cells and cell cover glasses, thereby removing a tiny fraction of the sunlight-collecting area
(curiously, it is possible to increase the output of solar cells slightly by introducing centres of
scattering which bring in Earth albedo radiation not normally seen by Sun-pointing arrays). A
significant number of impacts penetrated cells, and in some cases the structure. Despite the large number
of impact sites recorded, their overall effect at system level was trivial. There is, however, evidence
from elsewhere to suggest that impacts may cause electromagnetic and shock effects such as those seen on
ESA's Giotto spacecraft during its Comet Halley encounter and on the Olympus geostationary
telecommuni-cations satellite. No link has yet been established between the failures seen on Eureca and
the disruptive effect of any impact. Nevertheless, work in this field continues, and definitive results may
depend upon further measurements of in-orbit phenomena.
Conclusion
The main findings of the detailed visual survey of Eureca's external surfaces can be sum-marised as
follows:
There was no functional failure on Eureca that could be related to an impact.
On the front sides of the solar arrays, more than 1000 impact features can be seen with the naked eye.
71 impact punctures in the outer layer of the thermal blankets were detected on the main spacecraft body
(non-penetrating impacts Three impacts were found on the ESA logo plate and 11 more on the scuff plates.
The impact features identified range in size from 100 microns to several millimetres. The largest crater
diameter on the solar arrays is 6.4 mm. The largest feature on the main body is a 2 mm hole in the
ESA/ERNO logo plate.
A surprisingly high proportion of the impacts on the solar-cell cover glasses - about 30% - show signs of
directionality by having a non-spherical crater shape.

190
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Politics Links- Congress Supports

Space based solar power recieving strong support from congress


National Space Society, 2-28-08, “Space Exploration Alliance Members Press Congress
For Full Authorized Levels of NASA Funding”, http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:mNyybCscXG8J:www.nss.org/news/releases/pr20080228.html+space+exploration+congress
+support&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us [E.Berggren]

Other issues discussed during the meetings included continued support for NASA's robotic
science missions and the integral role that space exploration plays in solving Earth's pressing
energy and environmental needs. Several Congressional offices explicitly requested more details
about the National Security Space Office's recent study of space-based solar power solutions,
which noted that “[a] single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous earth orbit experiences
enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known
recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today.”

191
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Congress Supports Space Exploration

Congress overwhelming supports space exploration.


Jeff Foust, Staff writer and reporter for the space review, 6-30-08, http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:TA1NTReYIe4J:www.thespacereview.com/article/1160/1+space+exploration+congress+pop
ular&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=us [E.Berggren]

You don’t notice these things until they’re taken away, he said, and cited the intense media
coverage of the Columbia accident as an example: “That is not a sign of a country that is
apathetic about the space program.” Likewise, the strong support given to the Vision for Space
Exploration by Congress in 2005, when it overwhelmingly passed a NASA authorization bill
that endorsed the exploration effort, is another sign of the deep support for space by the
American public. “The evidence that our space legacy is part of our culture is that no one any
longer actually pays attention to it, but the moment you take it away, [people ask], ‘What have
you done with it?’”

Bipartisan support for NASA space exploration


NYT,4-30-08, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/us/15moon.html?_r=1&sq=space
%20exploration&st=cse&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&scp=3&adxnnlx=1216599009-
XuQs+mFoNcTZ/p0hHAtXhQPs [E.Berggren]

This push for additional NASA funding mirrors a similar effort in the Senate, lead by Senator
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX). The bi-partisan nature of
both efforts illustrates how space exploration rises above the politically-charged bitterness
that often divides members of Congress. The Committee for the Advocacy of Space
Exploation strongly supports the effort to increase NASA funding. It is critical that Project
Constellation receive necessary funding to accelerate the development of the Orion spacecraft
and Ares rockets, so as to minimize the gap between the final flight of the Shuttle and the first
flight of Orion. This will not only reduce American dependance upon Russia for access to Earth
orbit, but will greatly advance the twin goals of returning astronauts to the Moon and sending an
expedition to Mars.

Space exploration bipartisan


States News Service, 6-20-08, “HOUSE BILL BOOSTS NASA AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
PROGRAMS”, L/N [E.Berggren]

The funding plan is $2.9 billion more than the administration's budget proposal. "This is an
important step forward for programs in two vital areas that affect our country," said Marion
Blakey, AIA president and CEO. "The bill demonstrates continued bi-partisan support of the
Next Generation Air Transportation System and our space exploration policy, both of which
depend on a robust NASA budget." The House plan includes an additional $1 billion to
accelerate development of the Orion spacecraft and Ares 1 launch vehicle. "The additional
funding is a substantial step forward to reduce the impending five-year gap in our ability to
travel to space when the space shuttle retires in 2010," Blakey said. "The House should be
recognized for its leadership in taking action to reduce this gap." NASA's NextGen-related
research will help increase the safety, security and capacity of air transportation operations while
protecting the environment. NextGen improvements will be implemented over the next 10 years.

192
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons unpopular

Space weapons programs remain unpopular in congress


Theresa Hitchens, Vice President, Center for Defense Information, 9-14-05,
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/dv/hitchens-05_12_01_/hitchens-
05_12_01_en.pdf [E.Berggren]

What I can also say is that even if the new presidential policy blesses the Pentagon’s space
warfare strategy, it remains unclear whether Congress will be willing to fund it much beyond
basic technology research. Space is an exceedingly expensive place. To fully implement the
capabilities necessary to fight “in, from and through” space, hundreds of billions would have to
be dedicated to developing new weapons, launching thousands of new on-orbit assts, and
maintaining those systems once they are deployed. With launch costs remaining at $22,000 per
kilogram, and current satellites in LEO weighing up to 4,000 kilograms, the price tag rapidly
becomes exorbitant – hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. Further, Congress is already
expressing concerns about the costs of today’s Air Force space programs that have nothing to do
with controversial ASAT or space-strike systems. Programs such as the Transformational
Satellite System designed to replace current military communications satellites, and the Space
Radar to replace aging U.S. early warning satellites, are years behind schedule and tens of
millions dollars over budget. Congressional reaction to Air Force budget requests for new space
weapons programs based on unproven and yet undeveloped technologies may well not be all that
favorable. In addition, space weapons remain controversial politically and the concept unpopular
with broad U.S. public opinion – and a unilateral move by the United States to weaponize space
is likely to also face harsh international political resistance and possible backlash as other
nations seek to compete with their own space weapons programs. Indeed, recognizing these
facts, the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces, which is responsible for the
military space budget, plans to hold hearings sometime in June on the question of “space
control” and space weaponization.

193
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding Bipartisan

Strong bipartisan support in the house and the senate for increased NASA funding
STEWART M. POWELL, staff writer for the Houtson Chronical Washington Bureau, 6-11-08,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:naxCDdljWOUJ:www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/space/5830045.html+nasa+funding+popul
ar+congress&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us [E.Berggren]

WASHINGTON — The White House on Tuesday forcefully rejected a popular, bipartisan effort
in Congress to hand NASA $2.9 billion for three additional shuttle flights to the international
space station before retirement of the shuttle fleet in 2010. Some, like Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, said they would push for additional NASA funding, with or without White House
approval. There is strong bipartisan support for increased NASA funding in the Senate,
which will act after the House gives its funding plan final approval.

NASA funding is bipartisan


SapceRef.com, report on congressional budget hearing, 7-22-05, “Bipartisan Compromise Yields
Positive Results for NASA”, http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:bS_6pchkPs8J:www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html%3Fpid
%3D17475+space+exploration+bipartisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us [E.Berggren]

Washington, DC) Intense, constructive negotiations produced NASA Authorization legislation


that today received widespread bipartisan support in the U.S. House of Representatives. H.R.
3070, the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, passed by a vote of 383-15. "We've come a long
way with regard to providing clear policy and funding direction in this bill," stated House
Science Committee Ranking Member Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN). "The large margin of passage
today reflects the House's wisdom in funding the Administration's exploration initiative in a way
that doesn't undercut NASA's other core areas. Make no mistake, overwhelming passage should
not be misunderstood as a blanket endorsement of the Moon-Mars initiative. Rather it is strong
policy guidance from the House that aeronautics, education and scientific research are key
NASA areas that are at least as important as human exploration."

Bipartisan support for NASA funding


Richard M. Jones, writer for theAmerican Institute of Physics, 6-12-08,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:4vAMPCXSW1gJ:www.aip.org/fyi/2008/065.html+space+exploration+bipartisan&hl=en&c
t=clnk&cd=15&gl=us [E.Berggren]

A strongly bipartisan bill to reauthorize NASA and its programs for FY 2009 is now being
considered by the full House. While H.R. 6063, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Authorization Act of 2008, is expected to pass the House, the Office of
Management and Budget has issued a statement declaring "the Administration strongly opposes"
the bill.

194
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding Partisan

NASA funding is partisan


Alex Howerton, writer and reporter for The Space Review, 2-25- 08, http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:9G5uHK15-
XkJ:www.thespacereview.com/article/1067/1+nasa+funding+partisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=25&gl=u
s [E.Berggren]

Space spending is a highly visible and easy target, especially because the public at large does not
see the immediate relevance of space development, or how it can augment other desirable
activities, such as environmental monitoring and job creation. Moreover, NASA and the space
advocacy community on the whole do a rather lackluster job of communicating these benefits to
a wider audience. The result is that space spending is usually in the front of the line for the
budget guillotine. A Harris Poll conducted in April 2007 listed respondents’ answer to this
question: “If spending had to be cut on federal programs, which two federal program(s) do you
think the cuts should come from?” The space program received the sharpest blow of the
hypothetical budget ax, at 51%, followed distantly by welfare and defense at 28%. This is the
state of public perception, even though NASA’s fiscal year 2007 federal budget allocation was
less than 1%, while defense came in at 19%, and unemployment and welfare registered 13%. It
is nearly impossible to establish stable NASA funding in this political and cultural climate.

195
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding unpopular


Increases in NASA funding unpopular
Space Politics Magazine, 4-17-07, “Bipartisan nonsupport and big targets”,
http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:I_T_AF2bWe8J:www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/17/bipartisan-nonsupport-and-big-targets/
+nasa+funding+bipartisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us [E.Berggren]

Was Calvert making an attack against the Democratic leadership in the House? No. “There is a
dangerous trend of bipartisan nonsupport in funding NASA in Congress,” he said. He mentioned
two amendments to the original FY07 appropriations bill on the House floor last summer that
would have either prevented NASA from spending any money on Mars exploration efforts, and
another that would have transferred NASA funds to other programs. While both amendments
were defeated (a moot point, as it turned out, since that appropriations bill was never enacted and
replaced with a continuing resolution), “The reality is that members of both parties
supported these amendments, and by a large margin.” That doesn’t bode well for NASA
during the FY2008 budget process. “You can bet that NASA will be the target again this year
unless we prepare to defend NASA funding against grabs from other areas.”

196
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Plan Costs PC
Plan drains political capital

Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07


(http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu]

Peter Teets, Distinguished Chair of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, said that SBSP
must be economically viable with those economics probably not there today. "But if we can find a way
with continued technology development ... and smart moves in terms of development cycles to bring clean
energy from space to the Earth, it's a home run kind of situation," he told attendees of the meeting.
"It's a noble effort," Teets told Space News. There remain uncertainties in SBSP, including closure on
a business case for the idea, he added.
"I think the Air Force has a legitimate stake in starting it. But the scale of this project is going to
be enormous. This could create a new agency ... who knows? It's going to take the President
and a lot of political will to go forward with this," Teets said.

197
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Negative Stuff- 1NC FRONTLINE

THE FALL OF U.S. HEGEMONY IS INEVITABLE—EVERY ATTEMPT TO


SUSTAIN IT WILL CAUSE TERRORIST BACKLASH AND RESISTANCE
Parag Khanna expert on geopolitics and global governance, Director of the Global Governance
Initiative and Senior Research Fellow in the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation
08 ("Waving Goodbye to
Hegemony".newamerica.net/publications/articles/2008/waving_goodbye_hegemony_6604, January 27)
[JWu]

It is 2016, and the Hillary Clinton or John McCain or Barack Obama administration is nearing the end of its
second term. America has pulled out of Iraq but has about 20,000 troops in the independent state of
Kurdistan, as well as warships anchored at Bahrain and an Air Force presence in Qatar. Afghanistan is
stable; Iran is nuclear. China has absorbed Taiwan and is steadily increasing its naval presence around the
Pacific Rim and, from the Pakistani port of Gwadar, on the Arabian Sea. The European Union has expanded
to well over 30 members and has secure oil and gas flows from North Africa, Russia and the Caspian Sea, as
well as substantial nuclear energy. America's standing in the world remains in steady decline.
Why? Weren't we supposed to reconnect with the United Nations and reaffirm to the world that
America can, and should, lead it to collective security and prosperity? Indeed, improvements to America's
image may or may not occur, but either way, they mean little. Condoleezza Rice has said America has no
"permanent enemies," but it has no permanent friends either. Many saw the invasions of Afghanistan
and Iraq as the symbols of a global American imperialism; in fact, they were signs of imperial
overstretch. Every expenditure has weakened America's armed forces, and each assertion of power has
awakened resistance in the form of terrorist networks, insurgent groups and "asymmetric" weapons
like suicide bombers. America's unipolar moment has inspired diplomatic and financial
countermovements to block American bullying and construct an alternate world order. That new
global order has arrived, and there is precious little Clinton or McCain or Obama could do to resist its
growth.

TERRORISM DESTROYS THE GOVERNMENT, THE ECONOMY, AND OUTWEIGHS ALL OTHER
IMPACTS
Robert, Chesney, Law Clerk to the Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan (S.D.N.Y.); J.D., Harvard Law School November 97, November,
1997, 20 Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J. 29

The horrible truth is that the threat of nuclear terrorism is real, in light of the potential existence of a
black market in fissile material. Nuclear terrorists might issue demands, but then again, they might not.
Their target could be anything: a U.S. military base in a foreign land, a crowded U.S. city, or an empty
stretch of desert highway. In one fell swoop, nuclear terrorists could decapitate the U.S. government or
destroy its financial system. The human suffering resulting from a detonation would be beyond
calculation, and in the aftermath, the remains of the nation would demand both revenge and
protection. Constitutional liberties and values might never recover.

198
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space exploration will cause environmental exploitation, nuclear wars, and epidemics
Bruce Gagnon. Coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, 1999
(Bruce K., "Space Exploration and Exploitation," http:/lwww.space4peace.orglarticleslscandm.htm)

199
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Major wars rollback our Maslow Window and destroy SBSP investment, turning competitiveness

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-
physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08
("Global conflict" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] (MEP is macro-
engineering project)

The last 200 years teach us that every 56 years or so, when an unparalleled economic boom produces the
exceptional affluence and eventually even the widespread ebullience that we call a Maslow Window, there
is both good news and bad news. The good news is major human explorations like Apollo and
spectacular macro-engineering projects like the Panama Canal. The bad news is the tragic death and
destruction associated with a major war like W.W. I.
In the last 200 years there are no exceptions: every Maslow Window ended shortly before a
major war. Although the wars themselves may not have directly terminated Maslow Windows, the
destructive psychological and economic effects of the wars were sufficient to reduce the
unusually high ebullience and affluence characteristic of society during a typical Maslow
Window.
However, one bad omen is that the most recent Maslow Window (Apollo) was clearly terminated
directly by the intensification of the Vietnam War in 1968. During this time there was campus
unrest, budget and political pressure, and considerable anti-war feeling across the U.S..
President Nixon responded by canceling the last three Apollo missions (18, 19, and 20) and
eventually by terminating the entire manned space program except for the Shuttle.
It is sobering to consider what might have happened if Vietnam had exploded just a few years
earlier. All the Moon landings — not just the last 3 — might have been lost. Indeed, the most
troubling and uncertain wildcard for the 2020s is the timing of future major military conflicts
and their negative effects for society, including the potential loss of MEPs and the long-term
postponement of human expansion into the cosmos.

Many barriers to development


CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

But a number of obstacles still remain before solar satellites actually get off the ground, said
Jeff Keuter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington-based research
organization. "Like any activity in space, there are enormous engineering challenges," he said.
One major barrier is a lack of cheap and reliable access to space, a necessity for launching
hundreds of components to build what will be miles-long platforms. Developing robotic
technology to piece the structures together high above Earth will also be a challenge. Then there
is the issue of finding someone to foot what will be at least a billion-dollar bill.

200
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

It takes 40 years to develop just 10% of US energy


Popular Mechanics, January 08 ("Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier."
popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

As envisioned, massive orbiting solar arrays, situated to remain in sunlight nearly continuously, will
beam multiple megawatts of energy to Earth via microwave beams. The energy will be transmitted to
mesh receivers placed over open farmland and in strategic remote locations, then fed into the nation’s
electrical grid. The goal: To provide 10 percent of the United States’ base-load power supply by 2050.
Ultimately, the report estimates, a single kilometer-wide array could collect enough power in one year to
rival the energy locked in the world’s oil reserves.
While most of the technology required for SBSP already exists, questions such as potential
environmental impacts will take years to work out. “For some time, solar panels on Earth are going
to be much cheaper,” says Robert McConnell, a senior project leader at the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory in Colorado. “This is a very long-range activity.”

Solar cells are too inefficient to be deployed

James E. Dudenhoefer and Patrick J. George, Glenn Research Center for NASA, July 2k, "Space solar
power satellite technology development at the Glenn research center: an overview",
http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2000/TM-2000-210210.pdf [JWu]
Solar cells of the current generation are heavy, expensive and hard to deploy considering the
enormous numbers needed for SSP. Thin film cells represent one viable option for the future
[Fig5].
They hold promise for low mass, low cost, and high production capability by
depositing special materials in very thin (microns) layers on rolled substrates
similar to newspaper printing. In addition, they are flexible, which lends themselves
for deposition on lightweight deployable / inflatable structures needed for
packaging of extremely large arrays in launch vehicles. Unfortunately, the materials
considered for these structures (i.e. kapton), do not have the high temperature properties
needed to allow cell growth deposition.

Launch problems prevent space satellites

Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE
IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,”
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf (Malek)

If a nation wishes to conduct surprise surveillance or reconnaissance on an adversary, that nation’s space
assets must either be able to maneuver or be launched rapidly in response to a tasking. Maneuvering
costs fuel, which is often in short supply on non-refueling, long-mission spacecraft placed in orbit by non-
reusable launch vehicles. It is simply not economical from a launch cost perspective to increase the
fraction of satellite weight represented by fuel. Unfortunately, rapidity and responsiveness are not
characteristics of current US space launch systems.

201
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Micro-meteoroids in space will kill satellites


Amateur Radio News, Nov 06 http://www.arrl.org/files/qst-binaries/nt0z.pdf [JWu]

If you think there’s no danger—you’re wrong. Satellites have recently been killed by
micrometeoroids encountered during meteor showers far less active than those predicted for the 1997-
2003 Leonids. And Mir, the Hubble Space Telescope and US space shuttles have been visibly damaged by
debris and micrometeoroid collisions.
What might happen to the manmade satellites now in orbit during a meteor storm 10,000 times more
intense than normal—with particle impact speeds exceeding 150,000 miles an hour?
What indeed! Those conditions were measured during the tremendous 1966 Leonids storm, and scientists
are worried that we’ll see a repeat performance (or one or more showers of lesser, yet potentially destructive
intensity) during November Leonids showers over the next several years.
Physical collisions alone are cause for concern, but a second threat may be even more ominous.
Because of the tremendous impact velocities involved (closing with the Earth at 71 km per second, the
Leonids are the fastest-colliding cometary fragments known), the highly charged plasma clouds generated
by the impacts of even extremely small Leonids particles may be powerful enough to kill satellites that
would have been minimally affected by the physical collisions.

High-voltaic arcs will rip apart the platform


Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

The current state-of-the-art voltage level for photovoltaic arrays is 160v used on the International
Space
Station. It is estimated that the arrays for a SSP platform would have to operate at 1000v or
higher. At these higher levels it is known that self-destructive arcing occurs [Fig 6]. Design and
manufacturing techniques to prevent such damage are in the process of
development by Dale Ferguson of GRC [Refs 5 and 6]. In order to utilize existing
facilities and equipment, initial development is being performed at the 300-volt level.

202
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Satellite arcing destroys satellites and solar cells

T. Kitamura et al.; Sanmaru, Y.; Kawasaki, T.; Hosoda, S.; Toyoda, K.; Mengu Cho
Discharges and Electrical Insulation in Vacuum, 2006. ISDEIV apos;06. International Symposium on
Volume 2, Issue , 25-29 Sept. 2006 Page(s):nil4 - nil4 (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?
url=/iel5/4193815/4194906/04194989.pdf?temp=x)[JWu]

Recently, an arcing on satellite solar array due to interaction between space plasma and the array
threatening safety of spacecraft is a big issue. The arcing causes degradation of solar array at
malfunction of instruments on satellites. The discharge is caused by differential potential between
satellite body and insulator surfaces like coverglass of solar array, which are charged by ambient plasma.
This single shot discharge is called "primary arc". The primary arc can evolve to so-called "sustained
arc" that permanently short-circuits adjacent solar cells or a solar cell and conductive substrate. In order
to prevent arcs on the surface of solar array, it is necessary to carry out arc tests simulating discharge
phenomenon on solar array. In this paper, we investigated the effect of plasma environments on sustained
arcs. GaAs solar cells were used for the test. Laboratory tests were carried out with an external circuit
simulating a spacecraft power system. Solar array coupon panels simulating the hot and return ends of a
string circuit were tested under various combinations of string voltage and string current. We revealed that
the threshold conditions for sustained arc formation were different in test plasma environment even when
the string voltage and the string current are same.

203
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

COLONIZATION BAD EXTS – Virus Turn


Space travel causes virus epidemics
Robert Roy Britt, Senior science writer, managing editor of LiveScience, 1/21/2k
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/flu_in_space_000121.html

So say Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe of the University of Wales at Cardiff. And while
there is much doubt by many other scientists that the flu comes from space, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe
are generating a lot of interest with their idea.
In a new paper, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Indian journal Current Science, the
researchers present data that show how previous periods of high sunspot activity coincided with flu
pandemics (large-scale epidemics). A roughly 11-year cycle of solar activity is increasing now and is
expected to peak soon, other scientists agree.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe say we can expect another flu pandemic to accompany the solar peak
"within weeks." By that claim, perhaps debate over their research will soon be settled.
Injecting the flu into our atmosphere
The researchers say that the virus, or a trigger that causes it, is deposited throughout space by dust in the
debris stream of comets, which are thought by many researchers to harbor organic material. As Earth
passes through the stream, dust (and perhaps the virus) enters our atmosphere, where it can lodge for
two decades or more, until gravity pulls it down.

New virus spread risks extinction

David Franz, Chief Biological Scientist, Midwest Research Institute, 2005 MICROBE

As Nobel laureate Josh Lederberg stated, “Pandemics are not acts of God, but are built into the
ecological relations between viruses, animal species and human species. There will be more surprises,
because our fertile imagination does not begin to match all the tricks that nature can play. The survival of
humanity is not preordained. The single biggest threat to [hu]man’s continued dominance is the virus.

204
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

205
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

HEG BAD EXTS


Heg is unsustainable and will cause nuclear conflict and terrorism
Christopher Layne, Prof Intl Relations at Texas A&M, 2006 The Peace of Illusions, p. 191-2

Hegemony has proven to be an elusive goal for the great powers that have sought it. The European great
powers that bid for hegemony did so because they were on a geopolitical treadmill. For them, it seemed as
if security was attainable only by eliminating their great power rivals and achieving continental hegemony.
And it is this fact that invested great power politics with its tragic quality, because the international
system’s power-balancing dynamics doomed all such bids to failure. The United States, on the other
hand, has never faced similar pressures to seek security through a hegemonic grand strategy, and, too often,
instead of enhancing U.S. security as advertised, America’s hegemonic grand strategy has made the
United States less secure. In the early twenty-first century, by threatening to embroil the United States in
military showdowns with nuclear great powers and exposing the United States to terrorism, the pursuit
of hegemony means that “over there” well may become over here. Objectively, the United States
historically has enjoyed an extraordinarily high degree of immunity from external threat, a condition that
has had nothing to do with whether it is hegemonic and everything to do with geography and its military
capabilities. Consequently, the United States has, should it wish to use it, an exit ramp—offshore balancing
—that would allow it to escape from the tragedy of great power politics that befalls those that seek
hegemony. The failure of the United States to take this exit ramp constitutes the real tragedy of American
diplomacy.

Hegemony causes terrorism


Christopher Layne, Prof Intl Relations at Texas A&M, 2006 The Peace of Illusions, p. 144

Strictly speaking, terror attacks such as those mounted by al Qaeda are not balancing, because, in realist
international relations theory, balancing is a form of state behavior. However, in the case of Osama bin
Laden and al Qaeda, terrorism often is an asymmetric strategy pursued by groups that are not states
but would like to control one (in this case, Saudi Arabia). Balancing’s core concept is the idea of a
counterweight, specifically the ability to generate sufficient capabilities to match – or offset – those of a
would-be, or actual, hegemon. Although nonstate terrorist organization like al Qaeda lack the material
capabilities to engage in this type of counterbalancing, their behavior reflects some key attributes of
balancing. Beyond connoting the creation of a counterweight, balancing also signifies opposition, or
resistance, to a hegemon. Although groups like al Qaeda cannot counterbalance American hegemony, they
are engaged in a related form of behavior: undermining U.S. hegemony by raising its costs to the United
States. Deplorable though they are, from this perspective al Qaeda’s attacks on the American homeland
and U.S. interests abroad are attempts to attain its own clearly defined geopolitical objectives of removing
the U.S. military presence from the Persian Gulf, forcing Washington to alter its stance in the Israel-
Palestinian dispute, and causing internal unrest that culminates in the overthrow of conservative Arab
regimes aligned with the United States. In other words, while its actions may not fit the strict definition of
counterbalancing, al Qaeda has sought to undermine U.S. hegemony and thereby compel changes in
America’s hegemonic regional strategy in the Persian Gulf.

206
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Solar Cells
Status quo solar cells suck; "thin film" cells can't stand the heat

Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer
Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of
Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems
Engineering Office
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report.
pdf)[JWu]

Solar cells of the current generation are heavy, expensive and hard to deploy considering the
enormous numbers needed for SSP. Thin film cells represent one viable option for the future [Fig
5].
They hold promise for low mass, low cost, and high production capability by
depositing special materials
in very thin (microns) layers on rolled substrates similar to newspaper printing. In
addition, they are
flexible, which lends themselves for deposition on lightweight deployable / inflatable
structures needed
for packaging of extremely large arrays in launch vehicles. Unfortunately, the materials
considered for
these structures (i.e. kapton), do not have the high temperature properties needed to allow cell
growth
deposition.

207
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Micrometeoroids Ext
A one millimeter micrometeoroid can cause holes in space satellites

Aceti et al, (R. Aceti & G. Drolshagen, European Space Research & Technology Centre, Norway;
J.A.M. McDonnell, Unispace Kent, UK; T.Stevenson, Mare Crisium, UK) November 94
("0Micrometeoroids and Space Debris - The Eureca Post-Flight Analysis" ESA (European Space
Agency) Bulletin Nr. 80, http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bullet80/ace80.htm)[JWu]

Every spacecraft in Earth orbit is exposed to a flux of space debris and meteoroid particles. Currently
more than 7000 large man-made objects orbiting in near-Earth space can be tracked from the ground with
radar or by optical means. A much larger number of smaller man-made debris items and micrometeoroids
that are orbiting the Earth cannot be detected from the ground. These particles are a hazard for both long-
term missions and large spacecraft.
While the risk of collision with a large piece of debris or a large meteoroid is very small, particles less than
one millimetre in size cause craters visible to the naked eye. Typical impact velocities are 10 km/s for
space debris and 20 km/s for meteoroids. Larger particles can penetrate the outer shielding of a
spacecraft and can damage its internal equipment. As a result of this threat, designers have to consider
the risk of particle impacts in the planning of every space mission. In addition, particle fluxes in space are
also of considerable scientific interest.

208
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Requires too much Krypton


Each satellite requires 4 years of the world production of krypton

Steve Oleson, Research Engineer at NASA Glenn Research Center, 08/’99, “Advanced Electric
Propulsion for Space Solar Power Satellites”, Glenn Technical Reports Server,
http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/1999/TM-1999-209307.pdf (alex werner)
Due to the large amounts of fuel required for the many nodes, a more plentiful fuel than the xenon used
today will be needed for the Hall thruster. Krypton propellant was chosen over xenon propellant due to its
better availability (roughly 10 times xenon) for so many large spacecraft. 7 As much as 2000 MT of
krypton will be needed to deliver the entire sun tower spacecraft. Currently, the world yearly
production of krypton is from 200 to 500 MT. Thus several years of production would need to be
stockpiled for the complete mission.

209
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Treaty with Russia prevents Beaming


Treaty with Russia prevents laser beam-down

NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty",
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu]

Lasers are also under consideration for beaming the energy from space. Using lasers would eliminate
most of the problems associated with microwave but under a current treaty with Russia, the U.S. is
prohibited from beaming high-power lasers from outer space.

210
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Causes Cancer


AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, SPACE CAUSES CANCER!!!!
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, 12/80, Ionizing Radiation
Risks to Satellite Power Systems (SPS) Workers in Space, for the U.S. Department of
Energy (alex werner)

“Thus, for example, in 10,000 workers who completed ten missions with an exposure of 40 rem per
mission, 320 to 2,000 additional deaths, in excess of the 1640 deaths from normally occurring cancer,
would be expected. These estimates would indicate a 20 to 120 percent increase in cancer incidence in the
work-population.”

211
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

DOD COUNTERPLAN
DOD COUNTERPLAN
Text: The U.S. Department of Defense should ________________________________________.

Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media
and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/
SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

DoD as Anchor Tenant Customer: The key to every business is having dependable
and reliable customer(s). The availability of a dependable anchor tenant
customer,
who is willing to pay $1 or more per kilowatt hour for large amounts of power, is
a
major step forward.
The SBSP Study Group recommends that the DoD should immediately
conduct a
requirements analysis of underlying long-term DoD demand for secure, reliable,
and mobile energy delivery to the warfighter, what the DoD might be willing to
pay for a SBSP service delivered to the warfighter and under what terms and
conditions, and evaluate the appropriateness and effectiveness of various
approaches to signing up as an anchor tenant customer of a
commerciallydelivered
service, such as the NextView acquisition approach pioneered by the
National GeoSpatial-imaging Agency.

212
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

EFFICIENCY COUNTERPLAN
Energy efficiency and renewables are critical to save the Army vast energy consumptions

Eileen Westervelt, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 2005, “September Energy
Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/
specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytrendsreportfromarmycorps.pdf (Bapodra)

World oil production is at or near its peak and current world demand exceeds the supply. Saudi Arabia is
considered the bellwether nation for oil production and has not increased production since April 2003.
After peak production, supply no longer meets demand, and prices and competition increase. The proved
reserve lifetime for world oil is about 41 years, most of this at a declining availability. Our current throw-
away nuclear cycle will consume the world reserve of low-cost uranium in about 20 years. Unless we
dramatically change our consumption practices, the Earth’s finite resources of petroleum and natural gas
will become depleted in this century. Coal supplies may last into the next century depending on technology
and consumption trends as it starts to replace oil and natural gas. We must act now to develop the
technology and infrastructure necessary to transition to other energy sources and energy efficient
technologies. Policy changes, leap-ahead technology breakthroughs, cultural changes, and significant
investment is requisite for this new energy future. Time is essential to enact these changes. The process
should begin now. Our best options for meeting future energy requirements are energy efficiency and
renewable sources. Energy efficiency is the least expensive, most readily available, and environmentally
friendly way to stretch our current energy supplies. This ensures that we get the most benefit from every
Btu used. It involves optimizing operations and controls to minimize waste and infusing state of the art
technology and techniques where appropriate. The potential savings for the Army is about 30 percent of
current and future consumption. Energy efficiency measures usually pay for themselves over the life cycle
of the application, even when only face value costs are considered.

213
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

IRAQ NEG
Too many alternate causalities for the plan to solve in Iraq

Andrew Garfield, Senior Fellow at the FPRI, is a former European director of the Terrorism Research
Center, deputy director of International Policy Institute (IPI) at King's College London, and senior director
of Influence and Insight for the Lincoln Group, former senior British military, former senior policy advisor
at the UK Ministry of Defense. 2006 ("British perspectives on the US effort to stabilize and reconstruct
Iraq" http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2006/1012/fpri/garfield_british.html)[JWu]

By invading Iraq, the U. S. and its Coalition partners have undertaken probably the most
challenging nation building exercise since the end of World War II. The Coalition has set itself
the task of fundamentally transforming Iraqi society, restoring stability to a war- and
sanctions-ravaged country and reconstructing Iraq's political order. This monumental task has
been further complicated by a succession of well-documented strategic errors, tactical blunders,
and operational shortcomings.
The list would surely include: the commitment of too few troops, often with the wrong
equipment and training for counterinsurgency warfare; hasty turnover of responsibility to
unready Iraqis in the search for an early exit; and failure to seal the borders as part of a larger
strategy to gain regional support for the project. Further aggravating the situation is the predictable
emergence of a tenacious, resilient, and complex insurgency. This enemy continues to demonstrate
its ability to challenge the most powerful conventional military in the world. So far, the U. S.
military has achieved only tactical parity with this adversary.

Many alt causes for Iraq


Eric Peltz et al, senior management systems analyst and director of the logistics program within RAND
Arroyo Center; Marc Robbins, senior management scientist at RAND; Ken Girardini is a
senior operations researcher at RAND, Spring 06 ("Iraq and beyond",
rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/spring2006/sustain.html)[JWu]

When ground forces attacked in March 2003, there were not enough cargo trucks to move the
needed supplies. This shortage was due to both higher-than-anticipated demands on trucks and
factors that limited their number. As a result, supplies ran low for all commodities except fuel.
(Compared to other commodities — such as food, water, and ammunition — fuel had been the
subject of better planning and received greater resources.)
The advancing combat units also lacked the communications equipment needed to order repair
parts while on the move. This became particularly problematic for the army’s 3rd Infantry
Division, because it had to rely on parts, prepositioned in Kuwait, that fell far short of adequate.
Soon after the invasion, severe problems cropped up in the distribution of supplies from the United
States. These problems substantially delayed delivery of repair parts to U.S. troops in Iraq. In
fact, the inventories of repair parts held by major combat units shrank to less than ten percent of the
parts needed to repair broken equipment.
Shipments from the United States were hobbled initially by miscommunication between the army
and the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency on how to consolidate shipments stateside. This generated
an unexpected re-sorting workload in theater, which in turn led to delays and some “lost” shipments,
as units in Iraq often received items intended for other units. Later, as the scale and pace of stability
operations grew, the demand for repair parts and other supplies outstripped the capacity of the major
stateside distribution center supporting OIF. It took nine months for the Defense Logistics
Agency to gain funding approval, increase capacity, and work off the backlog.
As the heavy pace of operations continued into the summer of 2003 and beyond, the army’s
inventories ran low on a wide range of repair parts. There were insufficient national war reserves,
insufficient replenishment capabilities, and insufficient funding. Combined, these factors caused

214
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
the backorder rate for key repair parts managed by the army, such as engines, to skyrocket to 35
percent of all orders (see the centerpiece). Recovery from these problems extended into late 2005.

Satellites destroy trust and relations with Iraq


Chicago Tribune, June 2 2008, "US satellite spying on Iraq, officials say"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-intel-iraq-02-jul02,0,4980992.story?track=rss [JWu]

WASHINGTON -- Caught off guard by recent Iraqi military operations, the United States is using
spy satellites that ordinarily are trained on adversaries to monitor the movements of the American-
backed Iraqi army, current and former U.S. officials say.
The stepped-up surveillance reflects breakdowns in trust and coordination between the two forces.
Officials said it was part of an expanded intelligence effort launched after American commanders
were surprised by the timing of the Iraqi army's violent push into Basra three months ago.
The use of the satellites puts the United States in the unusual position of employing some of its most
sophisticated espionage technology to track an allied army that American forces helped create,
continue to advise, and often fight alongside.
The satellites are "imaging military installations that the Iraqi army occupies," said a former U.S.
military official, who said slides from the images had been used in recent closed briefings at U.S.
facilities in the Middle East. "They're imaging training areas that the Iraqi army utilizes. They're
imaging roads that Iraqi armored vehicles and large convoys transit."
Military officials and experts said the move showed concern by U.S. commanders about whether
their Iraqi counterparts would follow U.S. guidance or keep their coalition partners fully informed.
"It suggests that we don't have complete confidence in their chain of command, or in their
willingness to tell us what they're going to do because they may fear that we may try to get them not
to do it," said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a website about intelligence and military
issues.

Relations key to Iraqi stability


Office of Press Secretary, Nov 26 07 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071126-1.html

The U.S. and Iraqi "Declaration of Principles" is a shared statement of intent that establishes common
principles to frame our future relationship. This moves us closer to normalized, bilateral relations
between our two countries. With this declaration, leaders of Iraq and the United States commit to begin
negotiating the formal arrangements that will govern such a relationship.
Iraq's leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America, and we seek an enduring
relationship with a democratic Iraq. We are ready to build that relationship in a sustainable way
that protects our mutual interests, promotes regional stability, and requires fewer Coalition forces.

US-Iraq relationship helps fight terrorism


Office of Press Secretary, Nov 26 07 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071126-1.html

The relationship envisioned will include U.S.-Iraqi cooperation in the political, diplomatic, economic
and security arenas. The United States and Iraq intend to negotiate arrangements based upon a range of
principles:
Political and Diplomatic: The U.S. and Iraq have committed to strengthening Iraq's democratic institutions,
upholding the Iraqi Constitution, supporting Iraqi national reconciliation, and enhancing Iraq's position in
regional and international organizations, so that it may play a constructive role in the region.
Economic: Both countries have agreed to support the development of Iraqi economic institutions and
further integration into international financial institutions, to encourage all parties to abide by their
commitments made in the International Compact with Iraq, to assist Iraq in its efforts to recover illegally
exported funds and properties and to secure debt relief, and to encourage the flow of foreign investments to

215
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Iraq.
Security: To support the Iraqi government in training, equipping, and arming the Iraqi Security Forces so
they can provide security and stability to all Iraqis; support the Iraqi government in contributing to the
international fight against terrorism by confronting terrorists such as Al-Qaeda, its affiliates, other
terrorist groups, as well as all other outlaw groups, such as criminal remnants of the former regime; and to
provide security assurances to the Iraqi Government to deter any external aggression and to ensure the
integrity of Iraq's territory.

216
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NO CHINA RACE
China's space guiding principles are peaceful and cooperative

China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White
Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

IV. International Cooperation


China persistently supports activities involving the peaceful use of outer space, and maintains that
international space cooperation should be promoted and strengthened on the basis of equality and
mutual benefit, mutual complementarity and common development.
Guiding Principles
The Chinese government holds that international space cooperation should follow the fundamental
principles listed in the "Deceleration on International Cooperation on Exploring and Utilizing Outer Space
for the Benefits and Interests of All Countries, Especially in Consideration of Developing Countries'
Demands," which was approved by the 51st General Assembly of the United Nations in 1996. China
adheres to the following principles while carrying out international space cooperation:
- The aim of international space cooperation is to peacefully develop and use space resources for the
benefit of all mankind.
- International space cooperation should be carried out on the basis of equality and mutual benefit,
mutual complementarity and common development, and the generally accepted principles of international
law.
- The priority aim of international space cooperation is to simultaneously increase the capability of space
development of all countries, particularly the developing countries, and enable all countries to enjoy the
benefits of space technology.
- Necessary measures should be adopted to protect the space environment and space resources in the course
of international space cooperation.

217
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China's space program is marked by multilateral cooperation

China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White
Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu]

China's participation in international space cooperation started in the mid-1970s. During the last two
decades or more, China has joined bilateral, regional, multilateral and international space
cooperation in different forms, such as commercial launching service, which have yielded extensive
achievements.
1. Bilateral Cooperation: Since 1985, China has successively signed inter-governmental or inter-agency
cooperative agreements, protocols or memorandums, and established long-term cooperative relations
with a dozen countries, including the United States, Italy, Germany, Britain, France, Japan, Sweden ,
Argentina, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine and Chile. Bilateral space cooperation is implemented in various
forms, from making reciprocal space programs and exchanges of scholars and specialists, and sponsoring
symposiums, to jointly developing satellite or satellite parts, and providing satellite piggyback service
and commercial launching service.
In 1993, a Sino-German joint venture - EurasSpace GmbH - was established, and a contract on the
development and manufacture of Sinosat-1 was signed with DASA and Aerospeciale in 1995. Sinosat-1,
which was successfully launched in 1998, was the first cooperative project on satellite development
between the Chinese and European aerospace industries.
The collaboration between China and Brazil on the project of an earth resources satellite is making good
progress, and the first such satellite was successfully launched by China on October 14, 1999. In addition to
cooperation on complete satellites, China and Brazil are cooperating in the areas of satellite technology,
satellite application and satellite components. The cooperation between China and Brazil in the space sector
has set a good example for the developing countries in "South-South Cooperation" in the high-tech field.
2. Regional Cooperation: China attaches great importance to space cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region.
In 1992,
China, Thailand, Pakistan and some other countries jointly sponsored the "Asian-Pacific Multilateral Space
Technology Cooperation Symposium. " Thanks to the impetus of such regional cooperation, the
governments of China, Iran, the Republic of Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan and Thailand signed the
"Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Small Multi-Mission Satellite and Related Activities"
in Thailand in April 1998. Besides the signatory countries, other countries in the Asia-Pacific region may
also join the cooperative project, which has helped to enhance the progress of space technology and space
application in the Asia- Pacific region.
3. Multilateral Cooperation: In June 1980, China dispatched an observer delegation to the 23rd Meeting
of UN COPUOS for the first time, and on November 3, 1980, China became a member country of the
committee. Since then, China has participated in all the meetings of UN COPUOS and the annual
meetings held by its Science, Technology and Law Sub-committee. In 1983 and 1988, China acceded to
the "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer
Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies," "Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the
Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space," "Convention on International
Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, " and "Convention on Registration of Objects Launched
into Outer Space," and has strictly performed its responsibilities and obligations.

218
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

BIZCON LINK
Plan hurts business confidence

Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07


(http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu]

Peter Teets, Distinguished Chair of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, said that SBSP
must be economically viable with those economics probably not there today. "But if we can find a way
with continued technology development ... and smart moves in terms of development cycles to bring clean
energy from space to the Earth, it's a home run kind of situation," he told attendees of the meeting.
"It's a noble effort," Teets told Space News. There remain uncertainties in SBSP, including closure on
a business case for the idea, he added.
"I think the Air Force has a legitimate stake in starting it. But the scale of this project is going to
be enormous. This could create a new agency ... who knows? It's going to take the President
and a lot of political will to go forward with this," Teets said.

219
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

OIL DA LINKS
SSP would provide all the energy in the world, making oil obselete
National Space Society, independent, educational organization; preeminent citizen's voice on space 10/07,
(""An investment for today – an energy solution for tomorrow"
http://www.nss.org/legislative/positions/NSS-SSP-PositionPaper.pdf)[JWu]

Solar energy is routinely used on spacecraft today, and the solar energy available in space is
literally billions of times greater than we use today. The lifetime of the sun is an estimated 4 to 5
billion years, making SSP a truly long-term energy solution. Space solar power can have an
extremely small environmental footprint, perhaps competitive with ground-solar and wind, because
with sufficient investments in space infrastructure, the SSP can be built from materials from space
with zero terrestrial environmental impact. Only energy receivers need be built on Earth. As Earth
receives only one part in 2.3 billion of the sun's output, SSP is by far the largest potential
energy source available, dwarfing all others combined. Development cost and
time, of course, are considerable. This makes SSP a long-term solution rather than a short-term stop-
gap, although there are some intriguing near-term possibilities. In any case, SSP can potentially
supply all the electrical needs of our planet.

One year of SBSP provides almost all remaining oil energy combined

James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier",
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)
[JWu]

The space office sees energy supply as one of strategic importance as oil supplies dwindle; according
to a report by Germany's Energy Watch Group published last week, "peak oil" output occurred last year,
and will fall by 7% annually to half its present levels by 2030. The space office notes that all remaining
oil resources are estimated to contain 250 terawatt-years of energy; but that a one-kilometre wide
band in geosynchronous orbit receives about 212 TW-years of energy each year.

Space has infinite energy that will replace oil

Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar
development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu]

We already have an immense fusion reactor working for us in our solar system, ultimately
responsible for almost all our energy choices. All we really need to do is make better use of it by
tapping into it more directly.
Any rational energy policy for the United States must support the steps needed to make that happen:
increased investment in reducing launch costs, reserving radio frequency spectrum for power
transmission, and moving towards a billion dollars per year in a robust and diverse program of R&D
on space solar power.

220
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SPENDING LINKS
Plan costs 1 trillion dollars

CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu]

NASA and the United States Department of Energy studied the concept throughout the 1970s,
concluding that although the technology was feasible, the price of putting it all together and
sending it to outer space was not.
"The estimated cost of all of the infrastructure to build them in space was about $1 trillion," said
John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and president of the Space Power Association. "It
was an unimaginable amount of money."

Plan costs 10 billion and takes 10 years

NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space"
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power would use kilometre-sized solar panel arrays to gather sunlight in orbit. It
would then beam power down to Earth in the form of microwaves or a laser, which would be collected in
antennas on the ground and then converted to electricity. Unlike solar panels based on the ground, solar
power satellites placed in geostationary orbit above the Earth could operate at night and during cloudy
conditions.
"We think we can be a catalyst to make this technology advance," said US Marine Corps lieutenant colonel
Paul Damphousse of the NSSO at a press conference yesterday in Washington, DC, US.
The NSSO report (pdf) recommends that the US government spend $10 billion over the next 10 years
to build a test satellite capable of beaming 10 megawatts of electric power down to Earth.

221
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA WON'T DO PLAN


NASA would not pursue space solar power. Current priorities prove

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,”
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek

There was no follow-up to this study, partly because of a lack of urgency in the era of cheap energy that
existed a decade ago and also because NASA did not, and does not today, see itself as an auxiliary to the
Department of Energy. NASA does science and exploration and not much else. Along with its
contractors it can develop new technologies that apply directly to those two missions, but outside of that it
will resist being forced to spend money on projects that it does not see as falling within those two
missions.
Technology development in general has been cut back. The NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts has
been closed. There is a minimal ongoing effort to build up some technologies that may in the future be
useful for reusable launch vehicle development, but it is hard to see how this fits into a coherent future
program. The agency has its priorities and is ruthlessly sticking to them.

Space solar power through NASA is seen as encroachment onto other department’s turfs

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,”
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek

NASA is not the US Department of Spatial Affairs: it does not have the statutory authority to control,
regulate, or promote commercial space activities such as telecommunications satellites, space tourism,
space manufacturing, or space solar power. Such powers are spread throughout the government in places
like the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation, the Department of Commerce, and elsewhere.
Even if NASA were somehow to get the funds and the motivation to do space solar power, these other
institutions would resist what they would recognize as an encroachment on their turf.

NASA has no room for space solar power programs

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,”
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek

Until the shuttle is retired and NASA has a new and secure method of getting people into space, either
with the Orion capsule on top of the Ares 1 or perhaps another rocket, or using the SpaceX Dragon capsule
and Falcon 9 combination, there is no room for any other major programs. It will require all they can
do to cope with their current programs and to deal with a new president and his or her
administration. They don’t need any more distractions right now.

222
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SQUO SOLVES
Space based solar energy inevitable

Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,”
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek
At some point within the next four years the president is going to have to decide whether to go ahead
with this new and potentially unlimited source of energy or to put it back into limbo. The case for it is
growing stronger every time the price of oil goes up or, more to the point, every time we suffer from a
blackout or a near-miss. For example, a couple of months ago many large electric customers in Texas
were asked to shut down their operations because there was not enough wind to spin the numerous wind
turbines that have been sprouting up all over that state.

Plan to be enacted in the near future

Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy,
National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?
q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+
anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us, Malek

For this reason, the business case for Space-Based Solar Power may close in the very near future with
reasonable and appropriate actions by the U.S. Government.

Reusable launch vehicle capabilities are being solved for at rapid rates with out government
incentives

Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE
IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,”
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf, Malek

International and US companies are currently “…racing to build the world’s first commercial
reusable launch vehicle to serve the booming telecommunications satellite market. The winner of this new
space race could earn a lock on…lucrative contracts to launch up to 2,000 next-generation communications
satellites over the next decade.”7 There are currently at least five US companies participating in the
commercial race. These companies have articulated some pretty heady goals and “…plan to slash launch
costs to just a third or even a fifth of today’s average launch price of $5000/lb.”8 Such a reduction in
launch costs would continue fueling the boom in satellite operations. It is important to note that the
government does not fund these companies and “…unlike most history-making spaceplane projects,
these efforts will be funded largely with private money from wealthy individuals and companies.”9 The
government is funding a completely separate reusable launch vehicle effort in coordination with
industry. The Government RLV Status section of this chapter details this combined effort. The
combination of these two programs may yield success much earlier than either program would produce in
isolation. The rapid development of small and inexpensive Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers by
the commercial sector in response to commercial economic forces is an apt analogy. These commercial
receivers in turn greatly influenced the design and implementation of military receivers. The launch vehicle
government and private industry effortmay well follow the same model. The most apparent haracteristic
of this government-industry fusion in the GPS receiver analogy was the speed at which developments
occurrence.

223
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

PRIVATE INVESTMENT NOW

There's private investment in the space industry now


Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("space
entrepreneurs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

As the space tourism industry prepares for launch, today’s aspiring space adventurers are not limited to
just reading about cosmic joys, but will soon experience them personally. Bert Rutan, the dean of space-
tourism advocates, who won the $ 10 million X-Prize in 2004, believes he can fly 100,000 passengers on
his suborbital spaceships by 2020! Rutan is currently supplying spaceships to British billionaire Richard
Branson’s Virgin Galactic and expects the first launch in 2010 for about $ 200,000 per person.
Branson’s passengers will zoom to 60 miles altitude and officially enter space. The first-ever space
tourism price war is taking shape according to the Wall Street Journal (3/26/08) as XCOR Aerospace
will offer thrill-seekers a ride to 37 miles altitude featuring 2 minutes of zero-g, for only $ 100,000.

Private space industry is on the rise


Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("space
entrepreneurs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] (MEP is macro-engineering
project)

The space tourism industry can be thought of as a spectacular, but secondary MEP — analogous to the
famous 1912 passenger ship the Titanic (minus the sinking!) — heralding the approaching Maslow
Window of 2015. Because of their innovations, space entrepreneurs stimulate public, business,
government, and even international interest in space as they develop new concepts that challenge
historical approaches and promise new adventures and profits. Wave Guide 6 posts will monitor the space
entrepreneurs’ progress and their impact on the rapidly approaching 2015 Maslow Window.

224
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Inevitable

SPACE RACE INEVITABLE AROUND 2013

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and
science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

This is a hallmark of Maslow Windows: loosening of federal and other purse strings to pursue a lofty
goal of international significance. In 1969 U.S. News & World Report reported that although initial cost
estimates for the Moon project had been up to $ 40 B, “Congress raised hardly any questions (and)…
Initial funds were appropriated swiftly to send Project Apollo on its way.”
As we approach the 1960s-style economic boom of the next Maslow Window (fully ramped-up by
2015) these patterns will repeat. In short: 1) a major Sputnik-like shock will occur near 2013 (1957 +
56) involving probably China and their international partners; see Wave Guide 5, 2) the American
public will raise urgent questions about the viability of American math and science education and demand
reforms, and 3) the new “Space President”, a John F. Kennedy-like figure, will respond by committing
the U.S. to spectacular, unprecedented activities in space with essentially unanimous support from
Congress; see Wave Guide 3.

International space race and colonization are inevitable

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and
science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

The intersection of projected trajectories for the world’s current and future space powers suggests there
will be a major international event just prior to the opening of the next Maslow Window (near 2015).
The Nominal Model timelines (see Forecasts page) suggest this will occur near 2013 (Sputnik year 1957 +
56) and will have an impact on the U.S. and world comparable to Sputnik’s launch in 1957. One
likely model is that an international consortium of space powers (ICSP) – possibly led by China – will
announce their comprehensive plan for the large-scale colonization and utilization of space, probably
including the Moon and possibly Mars. In addition to lunar settlements and orbiting solar power
stations, their agenda might include plans for LEO and lunar hotels. Moon hotels are hardly a new idea; the
Shimizu Corporation (Tokyo) had impressive designs over 20 years ago when we had meetings with them
in connection with a NASA rfp at General Dynamics space headquarters in San Diego. Interestingly,
despite their sophisticated concepts, Shimizu did not feature their space projects on their website before and
I am unable to find any mention of them now. Based on the current interest levels and cooperation
capabilities of many countries, this ICSP scenario seems very reasonable. For example, both Japan and
the U.S. have announced plans to send people back to the Moon within 12 years, and China (possibly
in cooperation with Russia) wants to establish a lunar base shortly thereafter. India also has lunar
ambitions. And Russia, through its American broker Space Adventures, already offers private citizens their
own personal trip around the Moon (for a hefty fee). Russia also claims to be ahead in a “race to Mars” that
they expect to win by 2025.

225
Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF
DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT
Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA has plans for space by 2020

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Nasa
programs and MEPs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

Since its inception in 2004, NASA’s official Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) has met with mixed
reviews. It promised a return to the Moon by 2020 and eventually a crewed mission to Mars. Along the way
a new Orion crew vehicle will fly by 2014 and Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles will be developed. Critics’
complaints include unrealistic cost estimates and schedules. Former NASA scientist Paul Spudis has deeper
concerns, “The VSE in NASA terms has become all about building the new Orion and Ares vehicles with
very little tying these spacecraft to their destinations….NASA still doesn’t really understand what its
mission is…” Spudis recommends: “We’re going to the Moon to learn how to live and work on another
world. It’s that simple.”

Space renaissance, race, and colonization are inevitable

Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics
professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic
growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu]

A variety of long-term indicators – economic, social, technological, and political – strongly suggest
that a new international space race will take shape during the next 5 – 10 years. This unprecedented
thrust into space is expected to significantly exceed the scale and scope of the 1960’s Apollo Moon
program and will culminate by 2025 in a variety of major activities in space such as humans on Mars,
tourists on the Moon, and solar power satellites in LEO.
Long-term patterns in the economy, technology, and exploration over the last 200 years appear to have
predictive power for the 21st Century. In particular, a roughly 56-year cycle was identified, where
macro-engineering projects (e.g., Panama Canal), significant human explorations (e.g., Lewis and
Clark), and major military conflicts (e.g., Civil War) tended to cluster together, near economic booms.
The bottom-line forecast is that the decade from 2015 to 2025 will be the analog of the 1960s, bringing a
global focus on achievement in space exploration and a Camelot-like zeitgeist. The purpose of this
Weblog is to evaluate these forecasts based on macroeconomics and macrohistory, by comparing them to
events and trends from around the world in 10 Wave Guide areas.

226