169 GT Sequestration CP SO2 DA

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein

Valerie
Sequestration Counterplan/SO2 DA
COUNTERPLAN/SO2 DA 1NC...........................................................................................................................3
.................................................................................................................................................................................3
**CARBON SEQUESTRATION COUNTERPLAN**.....................................................................................4
Sequestration is tight – 4 reasons.........................................................................................................................5
Offsets fossil fuel emissions...................................................................................................................................6
Solves climate change – stores 90% of emissions................................................................................................7
Solves climate change............................................................................................................................................8
Solves climate change/productivity......................................................................................................................9
Solves climate change – 100’s of years...............................................................................................................10
Solves better than nuke/wind/solar.....................................................................................................................11
TIMEFRAME – tech ready now........................................................................................................................12
Storage feasible ....................................................................................................................................................13
Storage feasible: aquifers = best option.............................................................................................................14
Storage feasible: aquifers = longterm................................................................................................................15
Storage feasible: works for 1,000 years.............................................................................................................16
Ocean = best place for storage............................................................................................................................17
Oceans = best place for storage...........................................................................................................................18
Deep lakes minimize leakage...............................................................................................................................19
A2: no tech – Norway proves..............................................................................................................................20
A2: no experience with tech................................................................................................................................21
A2: CO2 screws the ocean...................................................................................................................................22
A2: leakages irrevocably suck (pH levels).........................................................................................................23
A2: ocean injections kill deep-sea ecosystems...................................................................................................24
A2: ocean injections  leakage/eco disasters...................................................................................................25
**SO2 DA**.........................................................................................................................................................26
UX: SO2 emissions low now................................................................................................................................27
UX: SO2 emissions down 70%...........................................................................................................................28
UX: emissions decreasing now............................................................................................................................29
Link: Military.......................................................................................................................................................30
Link: Military.......................................................................................................................................................31
Link: Cap and Trade...........................................................................................................................................32
West Coast Love 1
Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Link: hydrogen.....................................................................................................................................................33
SO2  cooling......................................................................................................................................................34
SO2  cooling......................................................................................................................................................35
SO2  cooling......................................................................................................................................................36
SO2  cooling......................................................................................................................................................37
SO2  dimming...................................................................................................................................................38
SO2  dimming...................................................................................................................................................39
A2: SO2 causes acid rain....................................................................................................................................40
A2: SO2 hurts plants...........................................................................................................................................41
**AFF COUNTERPLAN ANSWERS**...........................................................................................................42
Accident  asphyxiation....................................................................................................................................43
Accident kills marine life.....................................................................................................................................44
pH changes  destruction of deep-sea ecosystems..........................................................................................45
Sequestration sucks – 4 reasons..........................................................................................................................46
Tech not developed...............................................................................................................................................47
**AFF SO2 DA ANSWERS**............................................................................................................................48
SO2 causes acid rain............................................................................................................................................49
SO2 causes acid rain............................................................................................................................................50
Acid rain bad........................................................................................................................................................51
Dimming bad – causes drought..........................................................................................................................52
Dimming bad – causes drought..........................................................................................................................53
West Coast Love 2

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
COUNTERPLAN/SO2 DA 1NC
Observation 1 – Counterplan Text: The United States federal government
should mandate the extraction of carbon dioxide from factory emissions
through carbon capture and storage. The United States federal government
should mandate the disposal of the removed carbon dioxide into the ocean.
Observation 2 – the counterplan competes via the net benefit
a. The plan drastically decreases SO2 emissions

Seth Dunn, 7/2k. Micropower: The Next Electrical Era. WORLDWAT C H A P E R
151.http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EWP151.pdf</span>.
Micropower’s carbon-saving benefits could be sizable. Studies indicate that the United States could cut power plant carbon
emissions by half or more by meeting new demand with microturbines, renewable energy, and fuel cells. In the developing
world, where half of new power generation over the next 20 years is projected to be built, comprising some $1.7 trillion in
capital investments, power sector carbon emissions are projected to triple under a business-as-usual scenario. RAND
Corporation reports suggest that widescale adoption of distributed power could help lower this trajectory by as much as 42
percent. These steps would also cut emissions of sulfur oxides by as much as 72 percent and nitrogen oxides by up to 46
percent, while lowering electricity prices by as much as 5 percent.81
b. SO2 solves warming – its atmospheric particles reflect harmful solar

radiation back into space
NASA, NO DATE, “Volcanoes and Global Cooling”, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/gsfc/service/gallery/fact_sheets/earthsci/volcano.htm
Volcanic eruptions are thought to be responsible for the global cooling that has been observed for a few years after a
major eruption. The amount and global extent of the cooling depend on the force of the eruption and, possibly, its latitude.
When large masses of gases from the eruption reach the stratosphere, they can produce a large, widespread cooling effect. As a
prime example, the effects of Mount Pinatubo, which erupted in June 1991, may have lasted a few years, serving to offset
temporarily the predicted greenhouse effect.
As volcanoes erupt, they blast huge clouds into the atmosphere. These clouds are made up of particles and gases, including
sulfur dioxide. Millions of tons of sulfur dioxide gas can reach the stratosphere from a major volcano. There, the sulfur dioxide
converts to tiny persistent sulfuric acid (sulfate) particles, referred to as aerosols. These sulfate particles reflect energy
coming from the sun, thereby preventing the sun's rays from heating the Earth.
Global cooling often has been linked with major volcanic eruptions. The year 1816 often has been referred to as "the year
without a summer." It was a time of significant weather-related disruptions in New England and in Western Europe with killing
summer frosts in the United States and Canada. These strange phenomena were attributed to a major eruption of the Tambora
volcano in 1815 in Indonesia. The volcano threw sulfur dioxide gas into the stratosphere, and the aerosol layer that formed led to
brilliant sunsets seen around the world for several years.
West Coast Love 3

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
**CARBON SEQUESTRATION COUNTERPLAN**
West Coast Love 4

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Sequestration is tight – 4 reasons
Sequestration restores degraded soils, enhances biomass production, purifies

water, and offsets fossil fuel emissions
Rattan Lal, School of Natural Resources at the College of Food, Agriculture and Environmental Science and Director of the Carbon
Management and Sequestration Center, Nov 2004, “Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change”, Carbon Management and
Sequestration Center, Geoderma, Volume 123, Issues 1-2, pgs 1-22,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V67-4C5PVX0-
1&_user=4257664&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000022698&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=4
257664&md5=96872213ffeafb81a441dd8c7eeed737
The increase in atmospheric concentration of CO2 by 31% since 1750 from fossil fuel combustion and land use change
necessitates identification of strategies for mitigating the threat of the attendant global warming. Since the industrial revolution,
global emissions of carbon (C) are estimated at 270±30 Pg (Pg=petagram=1015 G=1 billion ton) due to fossil fuel combustion
and 136±55 Pg due to land use change and soil cultivation. Emissions due to land use change include those by deforestation,
biomass burning, conversion of natural to agricultural ecosystems, drainage of wetlands and soil cultivation. Depletion of soil
organic C (SOC) pool have contributed 78±12 Pg of C to the atmosphere. Some cultivated soils have lost one-half to two-thirds
of the original SOC pool with a cumulative loss of 30–40 Mg C/ha (Mg=megagram=106 G=1 ton). The depletion of soil C is
accentuated by soil degradation and exacerbated by land misuse and soil mismanagement. Thus, adoption of a restorative land
use and recommended management practices (RMPs) on agricultural soils can reduce the rate of enrichment of atmospheric CO2
while having positive impacts on food security, agro-industries, water quality and the environment. A considerable part of the
depleted SOC pool can be restored through conversion of marginal lands into restorative land uses, adoption of conservation
tillage with cover crops and crop residue mulch, nutrient cycling including the use of compost and manure, and other systems of
sustainable management of soil and water resources. Measured rates of soil C sequestration through adoption of RMPs range
from 50 to 1000 kg/ha/year. The global potential of SOC sequestration through these practices is 0.9±0.3 Pg C/year, which
may offset one-fourth to one-third of the annual increase in atmospheric CO2 estimated at 3.3 Pg C/year. The cumulative
potential of soil C sequestration over 25–50 years is 30–60 Pg. The soil C sequestration is a truly win–win strategy. It
restores degraded soils, enhances biomass production, purifies surface and ground waters, and reduces the rate of
enrichment of atmospheric CO2 by offsetting emissions due to fossil fuel.
West Coast Love 5

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Offsets fossil fuel emissions

Sequestration offsets fossil fuel emissions
The term “soil C sequestration” implies removal of atmospheric CO2 by plants and storage of fixed C as soil organic matter.
The strategy is to increase SOC density in the soil, improve depth distribution of SOC and stabilize SOC by encapsulating it
within stable micro-aggregates so that C is protected from microbial processes or as recalcitrant C with long turnover time. In
this context, managing agroecosystems is an important strategy for SOC/terrestrial sequestration. Agriculture is defined as an
anthropogenic manipulation of C through uptake, fixation, emission and transfer of C among different pools. Thus, land use
change, along with adoption of RMPs, can be an important instrument of SOC sequestration (Post and Kwon, 2000). Whereas
land misuse and soil mismanagement have caused depletion of SOC with an attendant emission of CO2 and other
GHGs into the atmosphere, there is a strong case that enhancing SOC pool could substantially offset fossil fuel
emissions (Kauppi et al., 2001). However, the SOC sink capacity depends on the antecedent level of SOM, climate, profile
characteristics and management.
West Coast Love 6

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Solves climate change – stores 90% of emissions
Simply reducing fossil fuel usage fails – carbon capture has the potential to
reduce plant carbon emissions by 90%
The Standford News, 2007, “Researchers Examine Carbon Capture And Storage To Combat Global Warming”, Lexis
While solar power and hybrid cars have become popular symbols of green technology, Stanford researchers are exploring
another path for cutting emissions of carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas that causes global warming. Carbon capture
and storage, also called carbon sequestration, traps carbon dioxide after it is produced and injects it underground.
The gas never enters the atmosphere. The practice could transform heavy carbon spewers, such as coal power plants, into
relatively clean machines with regard to global warming.
"The notion is that the sooner we wean ourselves off fossil fuels, the sooner we'll be able to tackle the climate problem," said
Sally Benson, executive director of the Global Climate and Energy Project (GCEP) and professor of energy resources
engineering. "But the idea that we can take fossil fuels out of the mix very quickly is unrealistic. We're reliant on fossil
fuels, and a good pathway is to find ways to use them that don't create a problem for the climate."
Carbon capture has the potential to reduce more than 90 percent of an individual plant's carbon emissions, said Lynn
Orr, director of GCEP and professor of energy resources engineering. Stationary facilities that burn fossil fuels-such as power
plants or cement factories-would be candidates for the technology, he said.
Capturing carbon dioxide from small, mobile sources, such as cars, would be more difficult, Orr said. But with power plants
comprising 40 percent of the world's fossil fuel-derived carbon emissions, he added, the potential for reductions is
significant.
Not only can a lot of carbon dioxide be captured, but the Earth's capacity to store it is also vast, he added.
Estimates of worldwide storage capacity range from 2 trillion to 10 trillion tons of carbon dioxide, according to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its report on carbon capture and storage. Global emissions in 2004
totaled 27 billion tons, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration.
If all human-induced emissions were sequestered, enough capacity would exist to accommodate more than 100 years'
worth of emissions, according to Benson, coordinating lead author of the IPCC chapter on underground geological storage.
West Coast Love 7

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Solves climate change

Sequestration increases agronomic production, enhances water quality,
reduces sedimentation, and solves global warming
Sequestration Center, Geoderma, Volume 123, Issues 1-2, pgs 1-22
There are some estimates of the historic loss of C from geologic and terrestrial pools and transfer to the atmospheric pool.
From 1850 to 1998, 270±30 Pg of C were emitted from fossil fuel burning and cement production (Marland et al., 1999 and
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2000). Of this, 176±10 Pg C were absorbed by the atmosphere (Etheridge et al.,
1996 and Keeling and Whorf, 1999), and the remainder by the ocean and the terrestrial sinks. During the same period,
emissions from land use change are estimated at 136±55 Pg C (Houghton, 1995 and Houghton, 1999).
There are two components of estimated emissions of 136±55 Pg C from land use change: decomposition of vegetation
and mineralization/oxidation of humus or SOC. There are no systematic estimates of the historic loss of SOC upon
conversion from natural to managed ecosystems. Jenny (1980) observed that “among the causes held responsible for CO2
enrichment, highest ranks are accorded to the continuing burning of fossil fuels and the cutting of forests. The contributions of
soil organic matter appear underestimated.” The historic SOC loss has been estimated at 40 Pg by Houghton (1999), 55 Pg by
IPCC (1996) and Schimel (1995), 500 Pg by Wallace (1994), 537 Pg by Buringh (1984) and 60–90 Pg by Lal (1999). Until the
1950s, more C was emitted into the atmosphere from the land use change and soil cultivation than from fossil fuel combustion.
Whereas the exact magnitude of the historic loss of SOC may be debatable, it is important to realize that the process of SOC
depletion can be reversed. Further, improvements in quality and quantity of the SOC pool can increase
biomass/agronomic production, enhance water quality, reduce sedimentation of reservoirs and waterways, and mitigate
risks of global warming.
West Coast Love 8

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Solves climate change/productivity

Increases agricultural productivity and mitigates climate change
The SOC sequestration is a viable strategy both for countries that have signed the Kyoto Protocol and those that have
sought voluntary alternatives. Where land use/land use changes and soil management are a net sink for C, it is
important to identify and implement policy instruments that facilitate realization of this sink. The SOC sequestration
may also be credited under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM, Article 12), emission trading (Article 17) or joint
implementation activities (Article 6) of the Kyoto Protocol.
From a global policy perspective, it is equally important to recognize that restoration of degraded soils and ecosystems, and
increasing the SOC pool represent an enormous opportunity that cannot be ignored. A coordinated SOC sequestration
program implemented at a global scale could at the same time increase agricultural productivity especially in
developing countries, and mitigate climate change. It is thus important that international organizations (e.g., FAO, UNDP,
World Bank), developing countries concerned with food security (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia), and industrialized
countries concerned with climate change and environment pollution (e.g., U.S., Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia) join forces
and implement comprehensive programs to restore degraded soils to sequester C and enhance productivity.
West Coast Love 9

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Solves climate change – 100’s of years

Deep aquifers solve – they have the capacity to hold CO2 for centuries
Robert Socolow, BA in physics from Harvard, PhD in Theoretical High Energy Physics from Harvard, published author, co-
principal investigator of Princeton University’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative, Sept. 1997, “Fuels Decarbonization and Carbon
Sequestration: Report of a Workshop”, Princeton University,
http://www.princeton.edu/~cmi/research/Integration/Papers/decarbonization.pdf
A plausible technological approach is beginning to emerge for the successful human management of carbon on a global scale
indefinitely—without requiring, a priori, the sacrifice of the energy value of oil, gas, and coal. Using the vast quantities of
carbon in fossil fuels in new ways could significantly reduce the rate of increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. Implementing this “safer fossil” concept will require the traditional industries of oil, gas, and coal to assume a lead
role. Effective partnerships will require the involvement of industry, government, academia, national laboratories, and non-
governmental organizations. The core idea is to separate the energy function from the carbon content of fossil fuels. Fuels
would be “decarbonized” and used efficiently. The removed carbon would be deliberately “sequestered,” that is, disposed
of at a high concentration in such a way that the carbon does not reach the atmosphere for centuries or longer. Climate
concerns would be directly addressed. For example, natural gas could be “steam reformed” into hydrogen and carbon
dioxide. The hydrogen could provide the fuel for fuel cells and combustion systems where hydrogen has a comparative
advantage as a fuel. The carbon dioxide could be pumped into saline aquifers a kilometer or more below ground or into the
deep ocean. The sequestration capacity in the deep ocean and in deep aquifers appears to be adequate for at least several
centuries of carbon disposal, although in both cases there are important unresolved questions related to integrity of storage,
the interaction of deep and surface waters, accident hazard, and direct environmental impact. Earlier studies have explored the
sequestration of carbon dioxide produced at point sources, especially power plants. This report expands the objective to include
the sequestration of carbon dioxide that would ordinarily be produced at dispersed sites, as a result of combustion in vehicle
engines and at industrial and commercial facilities. Such a broad use of fossil fuels in ways compatible with the
sequestration of their carbon could permit a significant fraction of the carbon in the fossil fuels used over the next
several centuries not to be emitted directly to the atmosphere.
West Coast Love 10

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Solves better than nuke/wind/solar

Sequestration technology is better than a transition to nuke, wind or solar
energy
Klaus S. Lackner, 6/13/03, “Climate Change: A Guide to CO2 Sequestration”, Vol 300, no 5626, pg 1677-1678,
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/300/5626/1677
Cost predictions for sequestration are uncertain, but $30 per ton of CO2 (equivalent to $13 per barrel of oil or 25¢ per gallon
of gas) appears achievable in the long term. Initially, niche markets (for example, in enhanced oil recovery) would keep
disposal costs low, with capture at retrofitted power plants dominating costs. Over time, new power plant designs could
reduce capture costs, but the costs of disposal would rise as cheap sites fill up and demands on permanence and safety
tighten. Some applications--for example, in vehicles and airplanes--could accommodate the higher price of CO2 capture
from air, eliminating CO2 transport and opening up remote disposal sites.
Today's urgent need for substantive CO2 emission reductions could be satisfied more cheaply by available
sequestration technology than by an immediate transition to nuclear, wind or solar energy. Further development of
sequestration would assure plentiful, low-cost energy for the century, giving better alternatives ample time to mature.
West Coast Love 11

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
TIMEFRAME – tech ready now
Solvency is immediate – sequestration infrastructure is established now

Jet Fuel Intelligence, 2007, “US Lawmakers Craft Policies To Spur Alternative Energy” Lexis
With the Democratic-controlled Congress granting high priority to mitigating climate change and reducing oil dependence,
alternative energy policies are gaining momentum. Since a move to alternative energy from traditional fuels like oil and gas
would help alleviate climate change, Reicher said a price on carbon dioxide emissions would send a message to investors to
seek out cleaner technologies. "If you want to leverage private-sector investments, you need federal policies to stimulate clean
technologies," said Reicher . Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, for one, wants to keep tapping the abundant coal in his
state and at the same time address climate change through carbon sequestration. "Coal won't be a future unless there is
carbon sequestration," he said. Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is ready right now for full-scale deployment,
asserted Robert Socolow , a professor at Princeton University . BP's Carson refinery, which is expected to gasify 4,500 tons per
day of petcoke , is the best evidence for the readiness of CCS for full-scale deployment, he said. More importantly, the
captured carbon can be used for enhanced oil recovery, said Socolow , calling for policies to make the oil and gas industry and
the coal industry work together. Further, Socolow suggested that coal-to-liquids (CTL) facilities that are increasingly gaining
support in Congress should not be given tax credits unless they deploy CCS. He said policies supportive of CCS have to
supplement a cap-and-trade policy to reduce carbon dioxide and other climate change-causing greenhouse gas emissions.
West Coast Love 12

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Storage feasible
Aquifers solve
“Carbon sequestration,” in this context, means deliberately modifying today’s dominant energy technologies so that
carbon that would normally end up in the atmosphere is instead isolated from the atmosphere for a period of time
measured in centuries or longer. Several sequestration strategies appear feasible. For example, the carbon removed
from a fossil fuel could be sequestered as carbon dioxide deep in the ocean or deep underground in saline aquifers.
Vexing part-scientific, part-philosophical issues related to sequestration include the “permissible” level of impact on the
present-day environment and public health, as well as on future generations—if, for example, the sequestered carbon gradually
finds its way to the atmosphere. Juxtaposing “fuels decarbonization” and “carbon sequestration,” emphasizes that the two
concepts have the potential to be joined symbiotically in a new energy strategy, a strategy where they are opposite sides of the
same coin. If the carbon intensity of a fuel is diminished by decarbonization, the byproduct will be a carbon-rich waste stream.
The carbon in the waste stream can be sequestered instead of going directly to the atmosphere.For example, natural gas can be
processed to yield separate streams of hydrogen and carbon dioxide; subsequently, the hydrogen can provide the fuel for fuel
cells or combustion systems where hydrogen has a comparative advantage as a fuel, while the carbon dioxide is sequestered. A
novel world energy system emerges. In response to a heightened concern for greenhouse issues, the fossil fuel industries
are transformed, at least partially, into hydrogen production and distribution industries. The carbon dioxide waste
stream resulting from the processing of fossil fuel into hydrogen is injected into deep underground aquifers or into the
ocean in massive quantities.
West Coast Love 13

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Storage feasible: aquifers = best option
Sequestration is the most climate-responsive option – aquifers have the

capacity to contain millennia-worth of CO2
It would be preferable for the carbon in a fuel not to become a waste stream at all after the fuel is used, but rather to find a
second use with economic value. New uses of carbon dioxide in the fossil fuel industries may augment its current role in
enhanced oil recovery, while also providing for its sequestration. Discoveries in chemistry and bioprocessing could lead to
productive uses of carbon dioxide or carbon to produce chemicals, materials, or even food constituents, and some of these uses
may also be compatible with sequestration. The quantity of carbon in the carbon dioxide produced by fossil fuel combustion,
however, is currently many times larger than the quantity of carbon used in all industrial processes and products (a list that
includes asphalt, plastics, solvents, and thousands of other intermediate and final goods). Thus, at least in the near future, only
a small fraction of the fossil-fuel carbon used to provide energy can be used again. For the rest, direct sequestration seems to
be the most climate-responsive option. The concept of fuels decarbonization and carbon sequestration has taken on new
plausibility for two reasons: (1) hydrogen fuel cells are developing rapidly and could become one of the principal energy
conversion devices of the 21st century; and (2) estimates of the storage capacity available underground for the
sequestration of carbon dioxide have been revised upward, based on new geological insights. Both the ocean and deep
saline aquifers appear to have the capacity to contain centuries, if not millennia, ofcarbon dioxide released to the
environment by fossil fuels used at current rates, although leakage rates, accident hazards, and environmental impacts are
among the many unresolved issues at this time. Fuels decarbonization with carbon sequestration is just one of several
complementary approaches to reducing the rate of increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Other approaches include
efficiency improvements, fuel switching, carbon-free renewable and nuclear energy sources, biomass energy, and biological
sequestration of carbon dioxide. There is an evident need for a coordinated global research and development effort within
which all will receive increased attention.

West Coast Love 14

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Storage feasible: aquifers = longterm
Aquifers are hella big and are the best long-term option
Deep aquifers may be the largest long-term underground sequestration option. (“Deep” is defined to be deeper than 800
meters, or 2500 feet, the depth at which carbon dioxide in hydrostatic equilibrium reaches its critical pressure; at its critical
point the density of carbon dioxide is about half the density of water.) Such aquifers are saline, and usually they are
hydraulically separated from the shallower “sweet water” aquifers and surface water supplies used by people. Deep aquifers
are widely distributed below both the continents and the ocean floor. Their potential sequestration capacity may be
thousands of gigatons of carbon, corresponding to as much as a thousand years of carbon production from fossil fuels at
current rates of use. The sequestration capacity available in deep aquifers is many times larger if carbon dioxide can be
sequestered in large horizontal reservoirs instead of being limited to reservoirs that are analogous to the structural or
stratigraphic traps in which oil and gas are found. The judgment that many of the world’s abundant large horizontal reservoirs
will confine carbon dioxide is based on the expectation that the carbon dioxide will dissolve into the surrounding formation
water before migrating more than a few kilometers toward the basin margins. The idea that large horizontal reservoirs will
provide secure sequestration is relatively new; it has led to an increase in confidence that long-term sequestration of a
significant fraction of the next several centuries of carbon dioxide production from human activity may be feasible.
West Coast Love 15

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Storage feasible: works for 1,000 years
Aquifers can hold 2,000 years of CO2 emissions for up to 1,000 years
The world’s oceans represent the largest potential sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide. They already contain about 40,000
gigatons (billions of metric tons) of carbon, largely as bicarbonate and carbonate ions. Estimates of ultimate sequestration
capacity in the world’s oceans can be derived by choosing a nominal allowable change in the average acidity of all ocean
water: such estimates are in the range of 1,000-10,000 gigatons of carbon, the equivalent of 200 to 2,000 years of current
carbon emissions from fossil fuels. If the injected carbon dioxide can be incorporated in the general oceanic deep water
circulation, a residence time of up to 1,000 years can be anticipated. The surface layer of the ocean (roughly, the first 100
meters) contains some water that has come up from a great depth after being below the surface for centuries. In pre- industrial
times, the upwelling carbon dioxide brought the same amount of carbon dioxide into the surface ocean as the downwelling
carbon dioxide removed, with no net flow between the atmosphere and the ocean. As a result of the buildup of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere over, roughly, the past century, these flows are no longer in balance. Instead, there is a net flow of carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere to the upper layer of the ocean, currently at a rate of about 2 gigatons of carbon per year. The
ocean will eventually absorb roughly 90% of present-day atmospheric emissions. Thus, discharging carbon dioxide directly
into the ocean would accelerate a slow natural process by which anthropogenic carbon dioxide already enters the ocean
indirectly. The best injection option in the near-term appears to be dissolution at depths between 1,000 and 1,500 meters (3,000
to 5,000 feet) by pipeline or towed pipe. For the longer-term, however, very deep injection may be desirable. Laboratory
measurements reveal that the density of carbon dioxide exceeds the density of seawater beginning at a depth of 3,500 meters
(2.2 miles). Carbon dioxide placed on the ocean bottom at that depth or greater may form a relatively immobile “lake.”
West Coast Love 16

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Ocean = best place for storage

The ocean is a safe place to store CO2 – it already contains CO2, meaning
injections won’t change the carbon concentration drastically
Howard Herzog, MA and PhD in Chemical Engineering from MIT and program manager for the Carbon Sequestration Initiative, and
Dan Golomb, PhD from Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Professor at University of Massachusetts Lowell in air pollution and
control, 2004, “Carbon Capture and Storage from Fossil Fuel Use”, Encyclopedia of Energy, Vol 1,
http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/enclyclopedia_of_energy_article.pdf
By far, the ocean represents the largest potential sink for anthropogenic CO2. It already contains an estimated 40,000
GtC (billion metric tons of carbon) compared with only 750 GtC in the atmosphere and 2200 GtC in the terrestrial
biosphere. Apart from the surface layer, deep ocean water is unsaturated with respect to CO2. It is estimated that if all
the anthropogenic CO2 that would double the atmospheric concentration were injected into the deep ocean, it would
change the ocean carbon concentration by less than 2%, and lower its pH by less than 0.15 units. Furthermore, the
deep waters of the ocean are not hermetically separated from the atmosphere. Eventually, on a time scale of 1000 years,
over 80% of today’s anthropogenic emissions of CO2 will be transferred to the ocean. Discharging CO2 directly to the
ocean would accelerate this ongoing but slow natural process and would reduce both peak atmospheric CO2
concentrations and their rate of increase. In order to understand ocean storage of CO2, some properties of CO2 and
seawater need to be elucidated. For efficiency and economics of transport, CO2 would be discharged in its liquid phase. If
discharged above about 500 m depth, that is at a hydrostatic pressure less than 50 atm, liquid CO2 would immediately flash
into a vapor, and bubble up back into the atmosphere. Between 500 and about 3000 m, liquid CO2 is less dense than seawater,
therefore it would ascend by buoyancy. It has been shown by hydrodynamic modeling that if liquid CO2 were released in these
depths through a diffuser such that the bulk liquid breaks up into droplets less than about 1 cm in diameter, the ascending
droplets would completely dissolve before rising 100 m. Because of the higher compressibility of CO2 compared to seawater,
below about 3000 m liquid CO2 becomes denser than seawater, and if released there, would descend to greater depths. When
liquid CO2 is in contact with water at temperatures less than 10oC and pressures greater than 44.4 atm, a solid hydrate is
formed in which a CO2 molecule occupies the center of a cage surrounded by water molecules. For droplets injected into
seawater, only a thin film of hydrate forms around the droplets.
West Coast Love 17

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Oceans = best place for storage

Oceans are the bestest places for CO2 storage – they have an unlimited
capacity to absorb carbon, creating conditions that would support a stable
lake
Soren Anderson, department of Economics at the University of Michigan, and Richard Newell, Energy and Natural Resources
Division in the District of Columbia, 6/8/04, “Prospects for Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies”, Annual Review of
Environment and Resources, Vol 29, pg 109-142,
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.energy.29.082703.145619
Oceans have by far the largest potential capacity for storage of captured CO2. They already contain some 40,000 GtC of
carbon, mainly as stable carbonate ions, and have a virtually unlimited capacity to absorb even more (14). Natural ocean
uptake of CO2 is a slow process that works over millennia to balance atmospheric and oceanic concentrations.
Anthropogenic emissions of carbon have upset this balance, and there is currently an estimated net flow of 2 GtC per year from
the atmosphere to ocean surface waters, which are eventually transferred to the deeper ocean. Indeed, roughly 90% of present-
day emissions will eventually end up in the ocean, but we know little about the effect on marine organisms and ecosystems
(14).
Direct injection of captured CO2 into the ocean would greatly accelerate the process, bypassing the potentially damaging
atmospheric concentrations of CO2 but generating certain new risks. As with natural absorption, direct injection of CO2 increases
the acidity of the ocean—but at a rate that may not give marine organisms time to adapt. By applying what they deem an
acceptable increase in average ocean-water acidity, scientists have estimated the storage capacity of the ocean at roughly 1000 to
10,000 GtC (14). If 100% of global carbon emissions were captured and stored in the ocean, this would imply roughly 200 to
2000 years of emissions storage at the current global emissions rate of 6.1 GtC per year. Storage times of up to 500 years for two
thirds of the CO2 may be possible, provided it is injected initially at depths of 1000 meters or more (15, 73).
There are several potential methods for ensuring that injected CO2 reaches these depths (12, 15, 74). The most practical near-
term option appears to be injection at depths of 1000 to 1500 meters by a pipeline or towed pipeline, which would create a
rising stream of CO2 that would be absorbed into surrounding waters. Alternatively, a carefully controlled shallow release of
dense seawater and absorbed CO2 would sink to the deeper ocean, especially if aided by a natural sinking current—where salty
Mediterranean enters the Atlantic Ocean. Other experiments show that CO2 exceeds the density of seawater at 3000 meters and
deeper (29).
If CO2 is injected at these depths, it would, in theory, sink to the ocean floor to form a stable, isolated lake. Finally, solid
CO2, or “dry ice,” is 1.5 times as dense as surface-level seawater and blocks of it could be dropped into the ocean and sink to
depths sufficient for long-term storage (12, 15, 29). Unfortunately, refrigeration and compression of CO2 are quite costly.
West Coast Love 18

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Deep lakes minimize leakage

CO2 lakes minimize risk of leakage into the atmosphere
There are two primary methods under serious consideration for injecting CO2 into the ocean. One involves dissolution of
CO2 at mid-depths (1500-3000 m) by injecting it from a bottom mounted pipe from shore or from a pipe towed by a moving
CO2 tanker. The other is to inject CO2 below 3000 m, where it will form a "deep lake". Benefits of the dissolution method
are that it relies on commercially available technology and the resulting plumes can be made to have high dilution to minimize
any local environmental impacts due to increased CO2 concentration or reduced pH. The concept of a CO2 lake is based on
a desire to minimize leakage to the atmosphere. Research is also looking at an alternate option of injecting the CO2 in the
form of bicarbonate ions in solution. For example, seawater could be brought into contact with flue gases in a reactor vessel at
a power plant, and that CO2-rich water could be brought into contact with crushed carbonate minerals, which would then
dissolve and form bicarbonate ions. Advantages of this scheme are that only shallow injection is required (>200 m) and no pH
changes will result. Drawbacks are the need for large amounts of water and carbonate minerals.
West Coast Love 19

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: no tech – Norway proves
Sequestration works – Norway proves

Within the past year a carbon dioxide sequestration project was begun whose sole purpose is to prevent carbon dioxide from
reaching the atmosphere. Statoil, the largest Norwegian oil company, is separating carbon dioxide originally present in
the natural gas produced at Sleipner West, a gas reservoir in Norwegian waters in the North Sea, and is reinjecting the
carbon dioxide into a nearby reservoir, about 1,000 meters (3,000 feet) below the sea floor. In this first-of-a-kind
demonstration, Statoil is adapting existing technology and learning how to lower costs. Statoil is conducting this project in
response to a decision by the government of Norway to extend its carbon dioxide emissions tax to emissions associated with oil
and gas production. The tax is $55 per metric ton of carbon dioxide, the equivalent of $200 per metric ton of carbon. Also
imposed as a portion of the tax on gasoline, Norway’s tax is equivalent to about 50 cents per U.S. gallon. (Throughout this
report, we report numerical results in multiple units; see the Technical Appendix for unit conversions and definitions.) B. At
today’s scale of deployment in industry, fuel decarbonization and carbon sequestration are well matched; they might be
combined effectively in pilot programs.The steam reformers being built for oil refineries and chemical plants today are, at the
same time, both large providers of hydrogen and large point sources of carbon dioxide. Quantitatively, the magnitudes of the
point sources of carbon dioxide associated with today’s large hydrogen production units are well matched to the magnitudes of
carbon dioxide managed by today’s sequestration technology. Consider the following calculation. The typical hydrogen
production capacity of the large steam methane reformers currently being built is 1 billion Nm3 per year (100 million standard
cubic feet per day). Assuming that, measured by volume, three times as much hydrogen as carbon dioxide is produced (an
approximately energy-based balanced reaction—see technical appendix , the same plant is a source of 600,000 metric tons of
carbon dioxide per year (30 million cubic feet of carbon dioxide per day). By comparison the carbon dioxide point source
arising from natural gas production at Norway’s Sleipner West field, and now being sequestered, is 1 million metric
tons of carbon dioxide per year. Thus, the two carbon dioxide point sources are of comparable size. Of course, one cannot
conclude from this calculation alone that carbon dioxide capture from centralized hydrogen production is a viable idea, even
when the distance between a current fuel decarbonization site and a potential carbon sequestration site is small. But one can
conclude that at least one relevant sequestration technology is already at hand. It would seem worth exploring whether
some of the carbon dioxide point sources associated with industrial-scale hydrogen production at ammonia plants and
oil refineries could be the targets of pilot experiments designed to co-optimize hydrogen production and carbon
sequestration.
West Coast Love 20

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: no experience with tech

Extraction and storage technology is 60 years old – it’s efficient, and there’s
no risk of accidents
Many view CCS as a promising third alternative to relying solely on increasing energy efficiency and switching to less carbon-
intensive energy sources. Carbon capture technologies themselves are not new. Specialized chemical solvents were
developed more than 60 years ago to remove CO2 from impure natural gas. These solvents are still in use. Several
industries, such as food-processing and power plants, use the same or similar solvents to recover CO2 from their flue gases.
Finally, a variety of alternative methods are used to separate CO2 from gas mixtures during the production of hydrogen for
petroleum refining, ammonia production, and other industries (28). Although capture technologies are considered relatively
mature, some believe that substantial technical improvements and cost reductions could be realized if applied on a large scale
(15).å
Oil producers have significant experience with some carbon storage technologies. As prices rose in the late 1970s and early
1980s, U.S. producers found it profitable to extract oil from previously depleted fields by means of enhanced oil recovery
(EOR) methods. These methods involve injecting liquefied CO2 to repressurize the field, which facilitates the extraction of
additional oil but can also store the injected CO2. Falling energy prices caused these particular capture operations to shut down,
but the use of EOR methods continues. It accounts for 9 million (metric) tons of carbon (MtC), about 80% of the CO2 used by
U.S. industry every year (14, 29). Most injected CO2 is currently extracted from natural formations, however, and does not
represent a net reduction in emissions.
Worldwide, the only known industrial operation engaged in CCS for the explicit purpose of avoiding carbon emissions is
Statoil's natural gas mining operation off the shore of Norway. Rather than pay Norway's hefty carbon emissions tax of $140/tC
in 2000 (20), Statoil has been compressing and injecting the captured CO2 into an aquifer below the ocean floor since 1996, at
a cost of approximately $55/tC (30). The project incurred an incremental investment cost of $80 million dollars, with an annual
tax savings of $55 million dollars. Scientific monitoring of the site indicates that the aquifer is indeed holding the injected
CO2, though continuing observation will provide a better indication of storage stability (31).
Although CCS technologies are currently not widely used as a way to avoid carbon emissions, we have already seen that it is
technically feasible to capture CO2 from flue gases and store it in geologic formations. In this review, we examine
opportunities for applying CCS technologies on a much larger scale, considering issues of cost and timing. We also describe
remaining environmental uncertainties and risks, particularly in the section on transportation and storage.
West Coast Love 21

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: CO2 screws the ocean

Released liquid CO2 droplets would dissolve in ocean water before they were
released into atmosphere
By far, the ocean represents the largest potential sink for anthropogenic CO2. It already contains an estimated 40,000 GtC
(billion metric tons of carbon) compared with only 750 GtC in the atmosphere and 2200 GtC in the terrestrial biosphere. Apart
from the surface layer, deep ocean water is unsaturated with respect to CO2. It is estimated that if all the anthropogenic CO2
that would double the atmospheric concentration were injected into the deep ocean, it would change the ocean carbon
concentration by less than 2%, and lower its pH by less than 0.15 units. Furthermore, the deep waters of the ocean are not
hermetically separated from the atmosphere. Eventually, on a time scale of 1000 years, over 80% of today’s anthropogenic
emissions of CO2 will be transferred to the ocean. Discharging CO2 directly to the ocean would accelerate this ongoing but
slow natural process and would reduce both peak atmospheric CO2 concentrations and their rate of increase. In order to
understand ocean storage of CO2, some properties of CO2 and seawater need to be elucidated. For efficiency and economics
of transport, CO2 would be discharged in its liquid phase. If discharged above about 500 m depth, that is at a hydrostatic
pressure less than 50 atm, liquid CO2 would immediately flash into a vapor, and bubble up back into the atmosphere. Between
500 and about 3000 m, liquid CO2 is less dense than seawater, therefore it would ascend by buoyancy. It has been shown by
hydrodynamic modeling that if liquid CO2 were released in these depths through a diffuser such that the bulk liquid
breaks up into droplets less than about 1 cm in diameter, the ascending droplets would completely dissolve before rising
100 m. Because of the higher compressibility of CO2 compared to seawater, below about 3000 m liquid CO2 becomes denser
than seawater, and if released there, would descend to greater depths. When liquid CO2 is in contact with water at
temperatures less than 10oC and pressures greater than 44.4 atm, a solid hydrate is formed in which a CO2 molecule occupies
the center of a cage surrounded by water molecules. For droplets injected into seawater, only a thin film of hydrate forms
around the droplets.
West Coast Love 22

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: leakages irrevocably suck (pH levels)

No risk of fluctuations in pH levels – dispersal of CO2 injections means marine
organisms won’t be exposed to lethal conditions
Discharging CO2 into the deep ocean appears to elicit significant opposition, especially by some environmental groups.
Often, discharging CO2 is equated with dumping toxic materials into the ocean, ignoring that CO2 is not toxic, that dissolved
carbon dioxide and carbonates are natural ingredients of seawater, and as stated before, atmospheric CO2 will eventually
penetrate into deep water anyway. This is not to say that seawater would not be acidified by injecting CO2. The magnitude of
the impact on marine organisms depends on the extent of pH change and the duration of exposure. This impact can be
mitigated by the method of CO2 injection, e.g. dispersing the injected CO2 by an array of diffusers, or adding
pulverized limestone to the injected CO in order to buffer the carbonic acid.
West Coast Love 23

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: ocean injections kill deep-sea ecosystems
Ocean acidity is inevitable – dispersal of injected CO2 avoids catastrophic

consequences for sea life
Despite the large potential capacity, the negative environmental effects of ocean storage are the most uncertain of the storage
options and seem likely to be the highest. The primary issue would be the increased acidity of the ocean, with potential effects
such as corrosion of organisms with calcium carbonate shells or skeletal structures. One should keep in mind, however, that
the ocean will eventually absorb about 90% of present-day atmospheric emissions anyway, also leading to increased
acidity. But direct injection would also lead to more rapid and localized effects. If injected CO2 is sufficiently dispersed, as
could occur from a deeply towed pipeline, then mortality of marine organisms could, in principle, be largely avoided.
The high concentrations of CO2 needed for shallow-water injection could lead to significant increases in acidity over several
kilometers (12) and could have serious adverse impacts on marine organisms. For most methods, however, acidity would
increase primarily at depths of 1000 meters or greater, with potentially less serious environmental effects if the CO2 remains in
the deep ocean where there is a lower abundance of marine organisms. Nonetheless, Siebel & Walsh (75) find evidence that
deep-sea organisms are highly sensitive to even modest pH changes, indicating that small perturbations in CO2 or pH may have
important consequences for the ecology of the deep sea and for the global biogeochemical cycles dependent on deep-sea
ecosystems.
West Coast Love 24

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: ocean injections  leakage/eco disasters
Risk of leakage is small – CO2 would dissolve in ocean water

Although depleted oil and gas reservoirs represent the best near-term storage option, deep aquifers may represent a better
option in the longer term, as shown in Table 3. Deep aquifers, whose locations are mapped in Figure 1, are generally better
matched to sources of emissions than oil and gas reservoirs, implying lower transport costs. Whereas the specific properties of
oil and gas reservoirs are better understood, the potential U.S. storage capacity of aquifers is much larger, ranging from 1 GtC
to 150 GtC (68) and providing storage for up to 100 years of emissions. Estimated costs are about $5/tC to $45/tC stored, with
a base case estimate of about $10/tC (64).
Although there is uncertainty regarding the environmental effects of CO2 storage in aquifers, most studies suggest that
adverse effects can be mitigated by choosing suitable locations (69). Suitable aquifers will have an impermeable cap,
prohibiting the release of injected CO2, and high permeability and porosity below, allowing large quantities of injected
CO2 to be distributed uniformly (15). Most such aquifers are saline and separated geologically from shallower
freshwater aquifers and surface water supplies used by humans. Theoretically, there is the potential for leakage into
groundwater drinking supplies, but the risk is small. Several states have in fact permitted the limited storage of various
liquid and gaseous wastes in deep aquifers. Injected CO2 would likely displace formation water at first but would eventually
dissolve into pore fluids. Under ideal circumstances, chemical reactions between absorbed CO2 and surrounding rock would
lead to the formation of highly stable carbonates, which may result in longer storage times (52).
West Coast Love 25

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
**SO2 DA**
West Coast Love 26

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
UX: SO2 emissions low now

SO2 emissions low now – the Clean Air Act imposed strict regulations
A. Denny Ellerman, Sloan School of Management and Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, and Juan-Pablo Montero, Department of Industrial Engineering, Catholic University of Chile, Santiago,
Chile and Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2/26/98, “The Declining
Trend in Sulfur Dioxide Emissions: Implications for Allowance Prices”,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WJ6-45J59WG-
J&_user=4257664&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000022698&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=4
257664&md5=b847aaf63469e3285c39e115bccbd46f
The low price of allowances has been a frequently noted feature of the implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990.2 This legislation imposed a 50% reduction of acid rain precursor emissions, primarily sulfur dioxide
by what is the largest public policy experiment in the use of fully tradable emission permits.3 These permits, called
allowances, convey the right to emit 1 ton of SO in the year of issuance or any subsequent year. Early estimates of
allowance prices ranged from $250 to 400.4 Some early bilateral allowance trades were reported at prices within this range;
however, the first annual auction, in March 1993, cleared at a price of $131. At the time, this price was viewed as too low, but
subsequent auctions and the development of a sizeable private market for allowances continue to indicate an early Phase I price
at or below this figure.5, 6 This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion and growing literature on the reasons for low
allowance prices.7 In particular, we draw attention to the decline in SO emissions prior to 1995, the year in which Title IV
became effective. When2 Title IV was enacted in 1990, SO emissions were not expected to fall, particularly2 with rising coal
use. An unanticipated decline in SO emissions would have2 implications for allowance prices: they would be lower because the
reduction in SO emissions imposed by Title IV is less than had been expected. The effectively2 constrained and economically
meaningful reduction in emissions is to be measured from what would have occurred absent the cap, not from some earlier year
nor from earlier forecasts of expected emissions. If earlier estimates of counterfactual emissions erred on the high side, actual
costs would be lower than predicted and vice versa. In this paper, we conclude that SO emissions have declined mostly for2
reasons unrelated to Title IV. As a result, the emission constraint imposed by Title IV is less binding, and the marginal cost of
compliance, as well as the price of allowances, can be expected to be lower than had been initially predicted.
West Coast Love 27

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
UX: SO2 emissions down 70%
SO2 emissions on the decline – China decreased its emissions by 70% in the
past 9 years
Beijing 2008, 7/20/08, “Beijing minus 2 million cars”, The Official Website of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games”,
http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/olympiccities/beijing/n214464457.shtml
(BEIJING, July 20) –246 "blue sky" days were reported in 2007 in Beijing, an increase of over one and a half fold over the
number of "blue sky" days in 1998, reported Xinhua.
Since Beijing declared its intention of hosting the Games of the XXIX Olympiad in 1998, the city's residents have seen
marked improvement in their daily lives. Thanks to measures regarding environmental protection, such as the one that went
into effect on July 20, limiting the number of cars on the roads, Beijingers are breathing fresher air and seeing clearer skies.
Starting on Sunday, motor vehicles in Beijing will be restricted from being on the roads on days that they are not pre-approved
for, according to their license plate numbers, following Olympic regulations. This, along with other regulations already in place
in the capital city, means a decrease of about 2 million motor vehicles on the roads every day. The emissions from motor
vehicles in Beijing are blamed as one of the major sources of the city's pollution.
Experts estimate that during the Games, these restrictions can decrease motor vehicle pollution by 63%, or 118,000 tons of
floating pollutants.
Since 1998, Beijing has invested 1.4 billion yuan to control pollution in the city, concentrating on limiting the
contamination coming from coal production, motor vehicles, and factories.
Comparing data between 1998 and 2007, sulfur dioxide has decreased by 69.8%, carbon monoxide by 39.4% and nitrogen
dioxide by 10.8%.
West Coast Love 28

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
UX: emissions decreasing now

SO2 emissions decreasing now – power plants are reducing emissions by one-
third
Associated Press, 7/13/08, “1 power plant to add, another to lower pollution”, http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-va--
appalachian-emiss0713jul13,0,3719715.story
ABINGDON, Va. - A coal-fired power plant under construction in Wise County will add to southwest Virginia's air pollution, but an
existing generating station nearby will reduce some of its emissions.
The process for approving air permits for the $1.8 billion Dominion Virginia Power plant resulted in a discovery that Appalachian
Power's Clinch River plant could exceed its permitted sulfur dioxide emissions.
Under a consent order between the utility and the state Department of Environmental Quality, Appalachian will reduce its emissions
by about one-third, company spokesman John Shepelwich said Friday.
"We haven't ever been in noncompliance, Shepelwich said, but "under the worst case, we could exceed the standards."
Appalachian has a current limit of 28,000 tons per year of sulfur dioxide, but the consent order issued last month will cut the
maximum to about 19,000 tons at the Russell County plant. The company plans to achieve that limit by Jan. 1.
Dominion's 585-megawatt Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center will be allowed to emit just over 600 tons of sulfur dioxide a year,
meaning a net decrease in emissions of that pollutant allowed in the region.
Appalachian's plant will achieve the reduction by burning more low-sulfur coal, Shepelwich said. A mixer will be installed at the 50-
year-old plant to monitor and blend the types of coal burned to achieve the lower sulfur level.
In addition, the consent order calls for four monitors to be placed in the area to monitor the sulfur dioxide emissions. If they reach a
certain level, Shepelwich said, the plant will cut back on generation of electricity at the 705-megawatt plant.
The limit on sulfur dioxide exceeds one requirement of a nearly $80 million settlement reached last fall between Appalachian's parent,
American Electric Power, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. That agreement requires the Clinch River plant to reduce
sulfur dioxide emissions to 21,700 tons a year by Jan. 1, 2010, then to 16,300 by Jan. 1, 2015.
Under that settlement, Appalachian also is required to cut nitrogen dioxide emissions at the plant. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
dioxide contribute to acid rain.
West Coast Love 29

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Link: Military
A transition to commercial fuel cells would cut US emissions, including sulfur
oxides, by 72% - this is their 1AC evidence
West Coast Love 30

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Link: Military
The plan drastically decreases SO2 emissions

West Coast Love 31

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Link: Cap and Trade
Cap and trade programs mandate decreased SO2 emissions

Mark Peters, staff writer for the Wall Street Journal, 7/11/08, “Court Strikes Down Emission Rule, In Blow to Bush Administration”,
Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121581135469946937.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The EPA program faced opposition from states and the power industry, challenging in federal court the regulations finalized in
2005. Their concerns ranged from the costs of compliance to the speed at which the rules addressed pollution carried by winds
across state lines.
The court decision had an immediate effect on environmental markets established more than a decade ago to reduce acid rain.
The EPA rule aimed to make additional improvements in air quality through an existing cap-and-trade system
established for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
Prices dropped sharply in response to the ruling, with sulfur dioxide allowance prices trading as low as $102.50 apiece Friday
after closing around $300 on Thursday, according to Evolution Markets, an advisory and brokerage for coal and environmental
markets.
"Supply and demand shifted with the stroke of pen here," said Peter Zaborowsky, a managing director at Evolution Markets.
The EPA rule was to combat the movement of particulate matter from power plants in the Midwest to the East Coast by
tightening the cap on sulfur dioxide emissions and establishing a new cap on emissions of nitrogen oxides. The rules
would have required power plants, starting in 2010, to use two allowances instead of one to emit a ton of sulfur dioxide, nearly
cutting the supply of allowances in half, Zaborowsky said.
The ruling went in favor of the power industry, with Duke Energy Co. (DUK) and other utilities saying the EPA regulations
would have increased costs because allowances would have been allocated unfairly. At the same time, states applauded the
ruling, saying the decision eliminated an EPA program that failed to adequately address the issue of air pollution.
West Coast Love 32

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Link: hydrogen
A hydrogen economy would eliminate SO2 emissions

United States Department of Energy, February 2002, “A National Vision of America’s Transition to a Hydrogen Economy – to 2030
and beyond”,
http://books.google.com/books?id=DJpz2yleougC&pg=PA257&lpg=PA257&dq=%22The+combustion+of+fossil+fuels+accounts+for
+the+majority%22&source=web&ots=_ipV5QUC_h&sig=wUbkwUvHZCQhlUb3VUbbGFQ9CLY&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&
resnum=1&ct=result
The combustion of fossil fuels accounts for the majority of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions released into the
atmosphere. Although international efforts to address global climate change have not yet resulted in policies that all nations
have accepted, there is growing recognition that steps to reduce greenhouse gases are needed, and many countries are adopting
policies to accomplish that end. Energy and transportation companies, many of which have multi-national operations, are
actively evaluating alternative sources of energy. Hydrogen can play an important role in a low-carbon global economy, as
its only byproduct is water. With the capture and sequestration of carbon from fossil fuels, hydrogen is one path for coal, oil,
and natural gas to remain viable energy resources, should strong constraints on carbon emissions be required. Hydrogen
produced from renewable resources or nuclear energy results in no net carbon emissions.
West Coast Love 33

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  cooling
Sulfur dioxide causes cooling – it absorbs sunlight and reflects radiation back
into space – volcanic eruption at Pinatubo proves
Chris Mooney, senior correspondent for The American Prospect and published author focusing on science in politics, 6/23/08, “Can a
Million Tons of Sulfur Dioxide Combat Climate Change?”, Wired Magazine, http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/16-
07/ff_geoengineering?currentPage=all
The stratospheric sulfate experiment has already had its proof of concept — courtesy of planet Earth. On June 15, 1991, Mount
Pinatubo, which for months had been rumbling, belching, and terrorizing the main Philippine island of Luzon, finally blew its
top in an explosion so powerful that it carried 500 feet of the mountain's peak along with it. It was the second-largest volcanic
eruption of the 20th century, 10 times the size of the Mount Saint Helens explosion in 1980 and the first of its scale to occur
with modern scientific technologies in place — especially satellites — to measure the global environmental and climatic effect.
Pinatubo's eruption didn't just unleash huge mud slides and lava flows; it also fired an ash stream 22 miles into the air,
injecting 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. Over the following months, a massive haze gradually
dispersed across the globe. Meanwhile, the sulfur dioxide component underwent chemical reactions to form a
particulate known as sulfate aerosol (in essence, droplets of water and sulfuric acid), which absorbs sunlight and
reflects some of it back into space.
The climatic effect of this volcanic eruption was rapid, dramatic, and planetary in scale. In a year, the global average
temperature declined by half a degree Celsius, and researchers observed less summer melt atop the Greenland ice sheet.
Of course, that got scientists thinking. Not only could we mimic volcanoes by seeding the stratosphere with extra sulfur, but if
we were really clever, we could design particles to do an even better job at scattering sunlight. University of Calgary climate
scientist and geoengineering expert David Keith has suggested that we might ultimately find a particle that can be placed still
higher up in the atmosphere, in the region called the mesosphere, above the ozone layer, where it would cause fewer problems.
The evidence from Pinatubo showed that such an intervention will definitely cool the planet. Furthermore, it would
work quickly and wouldn't alter the atmosphere permanently: Depending upon the starting elevation, stratospheric sulfate
aerosol will stay in the atmosphere for only a year or two. (Though this could also be seen as a drawback: If you cool the planet
artificially by injecting sulfur and then stop suddenly, things warm back up more quickly than before.)
The next question, of course, is how to get the particles up there. Various proposals have suggested using artillery, balloons,
suspended hoses, military jets, or even converted 747s. Then there is the question of where to deposit the sulfur. There are
different elevations to consider, as well as planetary location. A number of scientists, most recently Wood and Caldeira in a yet-
unpublished paper, propose dispensing the gas over the Arctic — after all, that's where global warming is felt most powerfully
and where cooler temperatures would help restore sea ice and stabilize Greenland.
West Coast Love 34

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  cooling
Aerosols promote cooling by increasing cloud absorption, allowing them to

reflect solar radiation away from Earth
William Cotton, Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University, “Human Impacts on Weather And Climate, 4/9/07,
Cambridge Press, 2nd edition, http://icecap.us/docs/change/aerosols.pdf
Clouds, we have seen, are good reflectors of solar radiation and therefore contribute significantly to the net albedo of the
Earth system. We thus ask, how might aerosol particles originating through anthropogenic activity influence the radiative
properties ofclouds and thereby affect climate? First of all, there are indications that in urban areas aerosols make clouds `dirty'
andthereby decrease the albedo of the cloud aerosol layer and increase the absorptance of the clouds Kondrat'yev et al., 1981.
This effect appears to be quite localized; being restricted to over and immediately downwind of major urban areas, particularly
cities emitting large quantities of black soot particles. Kondrat'yev et al.\ noted that the water samples collected from the clouds
they sampled were actually dark in color. A potentially more important impact of aerosol on clouds and climate is that they can
serve as a source of cloud condensation nuclei CCN and thereby alter the concentration of cloud droplets. Twomey 1974 first
pointed out that increasing pollution results in greater CCN concentrations and greater numbers of cloud droplets, which,
in turn, increase the reflectance of clouds. Subsequently, Twomey 1977 showed that this effectwas most influential for optically
thin clouds; clouds having shallow depths or littlecolumn integrated liquid water content. Optically thicker clouds, he argued, are
already very bright, and are therefore susceptible to increased absorption by the presence of dirty aerosol. In Twomey's words:
``it an increase in global pollution could, at the same time, make thin clouds brighter and thick clouds darker, the crossover in
behavioroccurring at a cloud thickness which depends on the ratio of absorption to the cube root of drop nucleus concentration.
The sign of the net global effect, warming or cooling,therefore involves both the distribution of cloud thickness and the
relative magnitude ofthe rate of increase of cloud-nucleating particles vis-a-vis particulate absorption.}"Subsequently,
Twomey et al. 1984 presented observational and theoretical evidence indicating that the absorption effect of aerosols is small and
the enhanced albedo effect plays a dominate role on global climate. They argued that the enhanced cloud albedo has a magnitude
comparable to that of greenhouse warming see Chapter 11 and acts to coolthe atmosphere. Kaufman et al.1991 concluded that
although coal and oil emit 120 times as many CO2 molecules as SO2 molecules, each SO2 molecule is 50-1100 times as effective
in cooling the atmosphere than each CO2 molecule is in warming it. This is by virtue of the SO2 molecules' contribution to CCN
production and enhanced cloud albedo.Twomey suggests that if the CCN concentration in the cleaner parts of the atmosphere,
such as the oceanic regions, were raised to continental atmospheric values, about 10%more energy would be reflected to space by
relatively thin cloud layers. He also points out that an increase in cloud reflectivity by 10% is of greater consequence than a
similar increase in global cloudiness. This is because while an increase in cloudiness reduces the incoming solar radiation, it also
reduces the outgoing infrared radiation. Thus both cooling and heating effects occur when global cloudiness increases. In
contrast, an increase in cloud reflectance due to enhanced CCN concentration does not appreciably affect infrared radiation but
does reflect more incoming solar radiation which results in a net cooling effect.
West Coast Love 35

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  cooling
SO2 causes cooling – it converts into sulfuric acid particles that reflect the
sun’s rays and prevent them from heating the Earth
NASA, NO DATE, “Volcanoes and Global Cooling”, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/gsfc/service/gallery/fact_sheets/earthsci/volcano.htm
Volcanic eruptions are thought to be responsible for the global cooling that has been observed for a few years after a
major eruption. The amount and global extent of the cooling depend on the force of the eruption and, possibly, its latitude.
When large masses of gases from the eruption reach the stratosphere, they can produce a large, widespread cooling effect. As a
prime example, the effects of Mount Pinatubo, which erupted in June 1991, may have lasted a few years, serving to offset
temporarily the predicted greenhouse effect.
As volcanoes erupt, they blast huge clouds into the atmosphere. These clouds are made up of particles and gases, including
sulfur dioxide. Millions of tons of sulfur dioxide gas can reach the stratosphere from a major volcano. There, the sulfur dioxide
converts to tiny persistent sulfuric acid (sulfate) particles, referred to as aerosols. These sulfate particles reflect energy
coming from the sun, thereby preventing the sun's rays from heating the Earth.
Global cooling often has been linked with major volcanic eruptions. The year 1816 often has been referred to as "the year
without a summer." It was a time of significant weather-related disruptions in New England and in Western Europe with killing
summer frosts in the United States and Canada. These strange phenomena were attributed to a major eruption of the Tambora
volcano in 1815 in Indonesia. The volcano threw sulfur dioxide gas into the stratosphere, and the aerosol layer that formed led to
brilliant sunsets seen around the world for several years.
West Coast Love 36

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  cooling
Aerosols counteract at least 75% of CO2 effects
WorldNetDaily.com, 6-10-03, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32992

It turns out there's a silver lining to the cloud of smog that drapes large cities around the world, as an international team of
atmospheric scientists conclude pollution protects the planet from "global warming." The revelation, reported by New
Scientist, came out of a workshop in Dahlem, Berlin, earlier this month that was attended by the likes of Nobel laureate Paul
Crutzen and Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin, the former chairman of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, or IPCC. "It looks like the warming today may be only about a quarter of what we would have got without
aerosols," Crutzen told New Scientist. "You could say the cooling has done us a big favor." The IPCC and other proponents of
global warming believe the past century of human economic activities – especially the burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal –
have vastly increased the amount of carbon dioxide, which traps heat in the Earth's atmosphere. Proponents say this acceleration of
the "greenhouse effect," has caused an estimated increase in the Earth's temperature of 0.6 degrees Celsius. Using computer
models, the IPCC predicts this global warming could amount to an increase in the earth's average temperature by as much as 10.4
degrees over the next century. The panel has warned the long term consequences of this warming range from warmer winters and
hotter summers to the melting of the polar icecaps and a rise in mean sea level that will inundate coastal cities and cause
devastating droughts, floods, violent storms and spark outbreaks of cholera and malaria. According to New Scientist, IPCC
scientists have long suspected aerosols, particles from burning rainforests, crop waste and fossil fuels that block sunlight
counteract the warming effect of carbon dioxide emissions by about 25 percent. Now the news out of the Berlin workshop is
the aerosols thwart 75 percent of the warming effect. That would mean they prevented the planet from becoming almost
two degrees warmer than it is now. Scientists examined direct measurements of the cooling effect of aerosols reported in the
May issue of Science by Theodore Anderson of the University of Washington in Seattle. Earlier calculations only had been
inferred from "missing" global warming predicted by climate models.
West Coast Love 37

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  dimming
SO2 condensation enhances the planetary albedo, cooling the planet
American Meteorogical Society, 7/13/92, “Model Simulations of the Competing Climatic Effects of SO2 and CO2”,
http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-
0442(1993)006%3C1241%3AMSOTCC%3E2.0.CO%3B2&ct=1
Sulfur dioxide-derived cloud condensation nuclei are expected to enhance the planetary albedo, thereby cooling the
planet. This effect might counteract the global warming expected from enhanced greenhouse gases. A detailed treatment of
the relationship between fossil fuel burning and the SO2 effect on cloud albedo is implemented in a two-dimensional model for
assessing the climate impact. Although there are large gaps in our knowledge of the atmospheric sources and sinks of sulfate
aerosol, it is possible to reach some general conclusions. Using a conservative approach, results show that the cooling induced
by the SO2 emission can presently counteract 50% of the CO2 greenhouse warming. Since 1980, a strong warming trend
has been predicted by the model, 0.15°C, during the 1980–1990 period alone. The model predicts that by the year 2060 the SO2
cooling reduces climate warming by 0.5°C or 25% for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) business as usual
(BAU) scenario and 0.2°C or 20% for scenario D (for a slow pace of fossil fuel burning). The hypothesis is examined that the
different responses between the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and the Southern Hemisphere (SH) can be used to validate the
presence of the SO2-induced cooling. Despite the fact that most of the SO2-induced cooling takes place in the Northern
Hemispheric continents, the model-predicted difference in the temperature response between the NH and the SH of −0.2°C in
1980 is expected to remain about the same at least until 2060. This result is a combined effect of the much faster response of the
continents than the oceans and of the larger forcing due to CO2 than due to the SO2. The climatic response to a complete filtering
of SO2 from the emission products in order to reduce acid rain is also examined. The result is a warming surge of 0.4°C in the
first few years after the elimination of the SO2 emission.
West Coast Love 38

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2  dimming
Aerosols create more, reflective cloud cover

Dr. David M. Chapman, May 2006, Honorary Associate, School of Geosciences, University of Sydney. “Global Warming, are we
hiding behind a smokescreen?” Geodate, Vol. 19 Issue 2, p6-8, 3p
But that is not all. Aerosols provide the condensation nuclei for most cloud droplets and studies have shown that aerosols of
human origin increase the density of cloud droplets, but result in smaller-sized droplets. The small cloud droplets do not
form into raindrops as readily as do the larger natural droplets. Studies comparing clouds over pollution tracks with adjacent
less-polluted zones have shown that clouds in both zones were of similar size and contained similar amounts of water, but average
droplet size in the polluted clouds was much smaller; when precipitation was observed outside pollution tracks, there was lower or
nil precipitation within them (Ramanathan, et al, 2001). It is also true that clouds of smaller droplets have higher albedo or
reflectivity, leading to further reductions in global irradiance.
West Coast Love 39

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: SO2 causes acid rain
1. SO2 doesn’t cause acid rain – it never reaches the atmosphere and rains
out quickly
Chris Mooney, senior correspondent for The American Prospect and published author focusing on science in politics, 6/23/08, “Can a
Million Tons of Sulfur Dioxide Combat Climate Change?”, Wired Magazine, http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/16-
07/ff_geoengineering?currentPage=all
Caldeira's response is that it's hard to see how those consequences would be anywhere near as nasty as simply letting global
warming go unchecked. But the more geoengineering becomes a matter of public debate and concern, the more the downsides of
a remade world come under scrutiny. First, there's the fear that injecting sulfate into the stratosphere could destroy much-needed
ozone, which also declined markedly after Pinatubo.
Another possible side effect is acid rain. But sulfur dioxide pollution from coal-burning power plants, one of the prime
causes of acid rain in the past, never reaches the stratosphere — it remains in the atmosphere's lowest layer, the
troposphere, and rains out quickly as a result. The stratospheric sulfate from geoengineering would stay up longer and be
more stable, so we would need less of it to begin with, which somewhat weakens the acid rain argument.
2. Acid rain is good – mitigation of it leads to warming – studies prove

Science Daily, 7/8/99, “Price for Decreased Acid Rain Could May Be Increased Global Warming”,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990708075951.htm
"In the atmosphere, sulfur dioxide gas emitted by burning coal and oil is converted into sulfate aerosols that enhance the reflection of
solar radiation, thereby tending to cool Earth's surface," said Michael Schlesinger, a U. of I. atmospheric scientist. "In recent studies,
we found that decreasing the sulfur dioxide emissions led to significant regional warming in North America, Europe and Asia."
The studies were based on provisional greenhouse-gas and sulfur dioxide emissions developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. The IPCC is producing a Special Report on Emissions Scenarios, in part as background for the IPCC Third
Assessment Report scheduled to be completed in 2001. In the special report there are four scenario families for the future emissions of
greenhouse gases and sulfur dioxide.
To explore the potential effects, Schlesinger and his U. of I. colleagues -- Sergey Malyshev, Eugene Rozanov, Fanglin Yang and
Natalia Andronova -- first used a simple climate/ocean model to calculate the change in global-mean surface temperature for the sulfur
dioxide emissions of the four Special Report scenarios, as well as for the non-interventionist IS92a scenario of the IPCC Second
Assessment Report.
"These global-mean temperatures were then used to scale the geographical distributions of temperature change simulated by our
atmospheric general circulation/mixed-layer-ocean model for a tenfold increase in present-day sulfur dioxide emissions, both
individually and jointly from six geographical regions," Schlesinger said.
The increasing sulfur dioxide emissions of the IS92a scenario result in a cooling contribution that helps to offset some of the
greenhouse gas-induced warming, Schlesinger said, but the decreasing sulfur dioxide emissions of the four SRES scenarios result
in the opposite: a significant warming of portions of North America, Europe and the North Atlantic, and Siberia.
"Thus it appears that mitigation of the acid-rain problem by future reductions in sulfur dioxide emissions exacerbates the
greenhouse-warming problem by enhancing the warming in and near the regions where the sulfur dioxide emissions are
reduced," Schlesinger said.
Schlesinger presented the group's findings in Bonn, Germany, at a joint meeting of the IPCC and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific
and Technical Advice of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
West Coast Love 40

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
A2: SO2 hurts plants
1. Dimming makes plants healthier – it promotes photosynthesis
David Adam, staff writer for the Gaurdian, and Farquhar (mentioned in the article) is a climate scientist at the Australian
National University in Canberra, 12/18/03, “Goodbye Sunshine”, The Guardian,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2003/dec/18/science.research1
More importantly, what impact could global dimming have? If the effect continues then it's certainly bad news for solar power, as
darker, cloudier skies will reduce its meagre efficiency still further. The effect on photosynthesis, and so on plant and tree growth, is
more complicated and will probably be different in various parts of the world. In equatorial regions and parts of the southern
hemisphere regularly flooded with light, photosynthesis is likely to be limited by carbon dioxide or water, not sunshine, and light
levels would have to fall much further to force a change. In fact, in some cases photosynthesis could paradoxically increase
slightly with global dimming as the broken, diffuse light that emerges from clouds can penetrate deep into forest canopies
more easily than direct beams of sunlight from a clear blue sky.
But in the cloudy parts of the northern hemisphere, like Britain, it's a different story and if you grow tomatoes in a greenhouse you
could be seeing the effects of global dimming already. "In the northern climate everything becomes light limiting and a reduction in
solar radiation becomes a reduction in productivity," Cohen says. "In greenhouses in Holland, the rule of thumb is that a 1% decrease
in solar radiation equals a 1% drop in productivity. Because they're light limited they're always very busy cleaning the tops of their
greenhouses."
2. Aerosols enhance plant productivity – Pinatubo proves

David M. Chapman, Honorary Associate at the School of Geosciences at the University of Sydney, 5/06, “Global Warming: are we
hiding behind a smokescreen?” Geodate, Vol. 19, Issue 2, p6-8,
The impact of global dimming on agriculture is largely via photosynthesis and the principal limitation on this process in
full sunlight is the concentration of CO2. Most plant canopies usually consist of several leaf layers in which the incoming solar
radiation decreases exponentially from layer to layer; therefore low light levels at which photosynthesis is light-limited are
common within crop canopies. However, shade within vegetation canopies is greatly reduced on cloudy and/or very hazy days,
compared to clear sunny days. On sunny days the rays of the sun shine directly on the plants, but when it is hazy or cloudy much
or all of the incoming radiation is bounced off cloud droplets or atmospheric particles, forming what is called the diffuse
fraction of solar radiance. Vegetation is sensitive to changes in the diffuse fraction, and Roderick et al (2001) concluded that
an unexpected decline in atmospheric CO2 observed following the Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991 was, at least in part,
caused by increased vegetation uptake of CO2 as a response to enhancement of the diffuse fraction by volcanic aerosols.
Because aerosols in the atmosphere increase the diffuse fraction, it may seem that they would help to enhance plant
productivity, but light is not the only limiting factor: there is also water.
West Coast Love 41

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
**AFF COUNTERPLAN ANSWERS**
West Coast Love 42

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Accident  asphyxiation
A CO2 release would be lethal, causing widespread asphyxiation
The integrity of carbon dioxide sequestration is important not only to prevent the adverse climate impacts of carbon
dioxide leaking too rapidly into the atmosphere, but also to prevent catastrophic releases, both from reservoirs and
pipelines. Air with only 25% carbon dioxide is lethal. Because carbon dioxide gas is heavier than air, a large release at
ground level could displace air locally in valleys and home basements and cause asphyxiation. Much experience resides in
the oil and gas industry to prevent catastrophic releases. As with hydrogen safety, those most involved are risk averse. They
recommend choosing pilot projects with no foreseeable adverse consequences of containment failure, such as projects where
sequestration is in aquifers near the coast but below the sea floor.
West Coast Love 43

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Accident kills marine life

A CO2 leakage would kill marine life – pH fluctuation wipes out plankton,
bacteria, and bottom-dwelling plants
Effects on marine organisms and marine ecosystems of injection of carbon dioxide into the deep ocean have been little
studied. The most significant impacts will come indirectly, from the lowered pH that results when additional carbon
dioxide is added to seawater. Depending on the method of release, pH can be expected to vary from as low as 4 very near
the injection point, to its ambient value of about 8. Zooplankton, bacteria, and bottom-dwelling plants and animals
living at the depth of injection would be the principal organisms affected.
West Coast Love 44

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
pH changes  destruction of deep-sea ecosystems

The effects of ocean storage could be disastrous – injections of CO2 lead to
acidity and pH changes that would threaten deep-sea ecosystems
Despite the large potential capacity, the negative environmental effects of ocean storage are the most uncertain of the
storage options and seem likely to be the highest. The primary issue would be the increased acidity of the ocean, with
potential effects such as corrosion of organisms with calcium carbonate shells or skeletal structures. One should keep in
mind, however, that the ocean will eventually absorb about 90% of present-day atmospheric emissions anyway, also leading to
increased acidity. But direct injection would also lead to more rapid and localized effects. If injected CO2 is sufficiently
dispersed, as could occur from a deeply towed pipeline, then mortality of marine organisms could, in principle, be largely
avoided. The high concentrations of CO2 needed for shallow-water injection could lead to significant increases in acidity
over several kilometers (12) and could have serious adverse impacts on marine organisms. For most methods, however,
acidity would increase primarily at depths of 1000 meters or greater, with potentially less serious environmental effects if the
CO2 remains in the deep ocean where there is a lower abundance of marine organisms. Nonetheless, Siebel & Walsh (75) find
evidence that deep-sea organisms are highly sensitive to even modest pH changes, indicating that small perturbations in
CO2 or pH may have important consequences for the ecology of the deep sea and for the global biogeochemical cycles
dependent on deep-sea ecosystems.
West Coast Love 45

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Sequestration sucks – 4 reasons
Sequestration sucks in 4 ways – CO2 could leak back into the atmosphere,
marine organisms die, pH fluctuates, and pollutants are injected along with
CO2 – all lead to eutrophication
Despite the large potential capacity, the negative environmental effects of ocean storage are the most uncertain of the storage
options and seem likely to be the highest. The primary issue would be the increased acidity of the ocean, with potential effects
such as corrosion of organisms with calcium carbonate shells or skeletal structures. One should keep in mind, however, that the
ocean will eventually absorb about 90% of present-day atmospheric emissions anyway, also leading to increased acidity. But
direct injection would also lead to more rapid and localized effects. If injected CO2 is sufficiently dispersed, as could occur
from a deeply towed pipeline, then mortality of marine organisms could, in principle, be largely avoided. The high
concentrations of CO2 needed for shallow-water injection could lead to significant increases in acidity over several kilometers
(12) and could have serious adverse impacts on marine organisms. For most methods, however, acidity would increase
primarily at depths of 1000 meters or greater, with potentially less serious environmental effects if the CO2 remains in the deep
ocean where there is a lower abundance of marine organisms. Nonetheless, Siebel & Walsh (75) find evidence that deep-sea
organisms are highly sensitive to even modest pH changes, indicating that small perturbations in CO2 or pH may have
important consequences for the ecology of the deep sea and for the global biogeochemical cycles dependent on deep-sea
ecosystems.
Brewer et al. (76) suggest that deep-ocean sequestration may be a solution with long residence time, but not permanent and not
without ecological consequences of hydrate volume expansion and dissolution. Caldeira (77) and Johnston & Santillo (60)
identify two primary concerns with ocean sequestration: leakage of stored carbon into the atmosphere; and unknown
consequences on marine organisms of elevated CO2 concentrations, reduced ocean pH, and trace pollutants injected
along with industrial CO2. Huessemann et al. (78) evaluate the potential effects of ocean CO2 storage on marine nitrogen
chemistry, suggesting that lower pH would inhibit nitrification and ammonia oxidation, which would cause accumulation
of ammonia that could change phytoplankton abundance and community structure and cause unpredictable
eutrophication.
West Coast Love 46

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Tech not developed

Possible impacts of sequestration aren’t yet understood – leakages could be
lethal
The capacity of aquifers to sequester carbon is many times larger if large horizontal aquifers are available for sequestration,
relative to the situation where only aquifers analogous to those in which oil and gas are found can be used. Accordingly, the
basic physical and chemical processes determining how long carbon dioxide sequestered in large horizontal aquifers
will stay isolated from the atmosphere needs to be better understood. One goal is to predict retention times accurately.
There is also a need to understand leakage of carbon dioxide from deep saline aquifers from the point of view of
avoiding the contamination of overlying sweet-water aquifers. And there is a need to be assured that leaks do not result
in a buildup of lethal pockets of carbon dioxide in valleys or in individual basements.
West Coast Love 47

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
**AFF SO2 DA ANSWERS**
West Coast Love 48

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
SO2 causes acid rain

Sam Phamornsuwana, quals unknown, last updated 4/8/08, originally created 1/15/08, “Causes, Effects and Solutions of Acid Rain”,
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hall/9111/DOC.HTML
"Acid Rain," or more precisely acid precipitation, is the word used to describe rainfall that has a pH level of less than 5.6. This
form of air pollution is currently a subject of great controversy because of it's worldwide environmental damages. For the last
ten years, this phenomenon has brought destruction to thousands of lakes and streams in the United States, Canada, and parts of
Europe. Acid rain is formed when oxides of nitrogen and sulfite combine with moisture in the atmosphere to make nitric and
sulfuric acids. These acids can be carried away far from its origin. This report contains the causes, effects, and solutions to
acid rain.
The two primary sources of acid rain are sulfur dioxide (SO2), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Sulfur dioxide is a
colourless, prudent gas released as a by-product of combusted fossil fuels containing sulfur. A variety of industrial
processes, such as the production of iron and steel, utility factories, and crude oil processing produce this gas. In iron and steel
production, the smelting of metal sulfate ore, produces pure metal. This causes the release of sulfur dioxide. Metals such as
zinc, nickel, and copper are commonly obtained by this process. Sulfur dioxide can also be emitted into the atmosphere by
natural disasters or means. This ten percent of all sulfur dioxide emission comes from volcanoes, sea spray, plankton, and
rotting vegetation. Overall, 69.4 percent of sulfur dioxide is produced by industrial combustion. Only 3.7 percent is caused by
transportation.
West Coast Love 49

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie

Almanac of Policy Issues, 8/6/02, “What is Acid Rain and What Causes It?”,
http://www.policyalmanac.org/environment/archive/acid_rain.shtml
Dry deposition refers to acidic gases and particles. About half of the acidity in the atmosphere falls back to earth through dry
deposition. The wind blows these acidic particles and gases onto buildings, cars, homes, and trees. Dry deposited gases and
particles can also be washed from trees and other surfaces by rainstorms. When that happens, the runoff water adds those acids to
the acid rain, making the combination more acidic than the falling rain alone.
Prevailing winds blow the compounds that cause both wet and dry acid deposition across state and national borders, and
sometimes over hundreds of miles. Scientists discovered, and have confirmed, that sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides
(NOx) are the primary causes of acid rain. In the US, About 2/3 of all SO2 and 1/4 of all NOx comes from electric power
generation that relies on burning fossil fuels like coal.
Acid rain occurs when these gases react in the atmosphere with water, oxygen, and other chemicals to form various acidic
compounds. Sunlight increases the rate of most of these reactions. The result is a mild solution of sulfuric acid and nitric acid.
West Coast Love 50

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Acid rain bad
Acid rain kills fish, trees, plants and causes heart and lung disease in humans
Aurae Beidler, BA from the University of Oregon, 2/22/08, “The Harmful Effects of Acid Rain”, Suite101, http://climate-
change.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_harmful_effects_of_acid_rain
Acid rain has a negative effect on plants and animals. Once the acid gets into the water cycle it can cause the acidification of
lakes and streams. The National Surface Water Survey (NSWS) identified over a thousand lakes and thousands of streams in the
United States, where some form of acidification has taken place. Of these lakes and streams, 75 percent of the acidity in the lakes
was directly due to acid rain. 50 percent of the streams had been affected by acid rain. Many areas of the Northeastern United
States and Eastern Canada contain lakes and streams affected by acidification from acid rain.
Changes in the pH of lakes and streams affected by acid rain can result in a decrease in the variety of fish, plants and
animals living in or near the water. Some animals and plants cannot tolerate the higher levels of acid. Snails, clams and bass are
examples of animals that can only tolerate a small increase in acidity.
Acid rain destroys trees and plants by causing damage to leaves and dissolving nutrients in the surrounding soil. Trees in
higher elevations, have a greater risk for damage due to acid rain because they have greater exposure to clouds carrying sulfur
dioxide and nitrogen oxide.
Acid rain can also have a devastating effect on man-made structures, such as those made of stone and metal. Bronze statutes and
marble monuments are deteriorated by acid rain. Costly repairs and maintainence is required to clean acidic compounds resulting
from dry deposition collecting on buildings.
One important misconception to clear up about acid rain is its direct harm to humans. Acid rain falls from the sky just like regular
rain, without odor or taste. Acid rain is not directly harmful to humans. Yet, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are harmful
pollutants before they combine with water and oxygen to form acid rain. These gases cause harmful particles that can be
inhaled by humans, causing lung and heart disorders.
West Coast Love 51

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Dimming bad – causes drought

Dimming causes drought and famine – cooling means less rain formation, lack
of water, crop failure
Jennifer Akina, BA from the Metropolitan State College of Denver, 3/23/07, “Drought: Effect of Global Dimming”,
http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/6305/jennifer_akina.html
Air pollutants such as soot, ash and sulfur dioxide are created from the use of fossil fuels which contribute to what scientists
call global dimming. In short, global dimming occurs when clouds reflect more of the sun's rays back into space than they
normally would, thus, allowing less heat and energy to reach the earth's surface. Recent research has shown that global
dimming is likely to be the main cause behind the devastating droughts that have killed millions of people in so little as
the past three decades.
To better explain the process of global dimming, normal clouds are created when water droplets combine with natural air-borne
particles like pollen. But, when these air-borne particles become polluted by soot and ash, clouds are formed with a much
larger number of water droplets making the clouds "thicker" and more reflective of sun's rays. Sun rays which play a crucial
role in making the earth a living, working ecosystem. Although global dimming may sound like a perfect counter measure
to global warming, it is in fact the cause behind such global catastrophe's as the Ethiopian droughts in the 1970s and
1980s, killing millions of helpless villagers, along with the more recent European heat wave in 2003 left thousands dead.
Scientists who have been studying this meteorological phenomenon believe that the reflection of the sun's heat has caused
the oceans in the northern hemisphere to become cooler. As a result, less rain has formed across the planet because of less
evaporation leading to clouds and rain. Crucial moisture once keeping areas livable, like that of Africa and other
countries, is no longer filling lakes and rivers. (Horizon)
Most recently in Somalia these water shortages are once again proving to be devastating. Those affected have to walk for hours
just to find bone dry riverbeds. The water they are able to salvage after many labor intensive hours is muddy and full of
harmful microbes that are further contributing to the growing death tolls. For those lucky enough to find drinkable water, the
amount of exertion used is likely to kill them. The people of Somalia are thirsty, starving and are growing very weary.
Drinking water is being limited to a few glasses per day. Within those three or four glasses are the cooking and washing
water. If these people aren't able to do all of the normal day to day tasks such as: cooking, washing and drinking, life becomes
dreary and starts to deteriorate. According to Mohamed Elmi, a manger of the aid agency regional program in a recent
Canadian based CBC.CA news quote, "People cannot survive on just three glasses of water a day when the temperature is
hitting 40 [Celsius] degrees." Some children there have been forced to drink their own urine because they are so thirsty and are
becoming delirious.
We are learning how global dimming can be the cause behind mass destruction - of human life as well as plants and
animals within our brittle ecosystem. While we all do not experience first hand the devastation of drought, that doesn't mean
that what is happening halfway across the globe couldn't someday affect America. A way to help would be to play a larger role
in decreasing the harmful air-pollutants that contribute to global dimming and, for that matter, anything which perpetuates the
decay of earth. There are small things which can affect and benefit our future, such as purchasing hybrid cars or cutting back
on water usage and so on. By taking action, the quality of life increases for everyone who shares this fragile planet.
West Coast Love 52

Warming Counterplan
DDI 2008 Turnstein
Valerie
Dimming bad – causes drought
Dimming kills millions – prevents rainfall, which causes famine and drought
BBC, 1/15/05, “Global Dimming,”, Professor Veerabhadran Ramanathan is a Professor of Applied Ocean Sciences, Distinguished
Professor of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, Director at the Center for Clouds, Chemistry & Climate, Chief Scientist chief
scientist for the Central Equatorial Pacific Experiment,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_trans.shtml).
RAMANATHAN: Basically the Global Dimming we saw in the North Indian Ocean, it was contributed on the one hand by the
particles themselves shielding the ocean from the sunlight, on the other hand making the clouds brighter. So this insidious soup,
consisting of soot, sulphates, nitrates, ash and what have you, was having a double whammy on the Global Dimming.
NARRATOR: And when he looked at satellite images, Ramanathan found the same thing was happening all over the world. Over
India. Over China, and extending into the Pacific. Over Western Europe... extending into Africa. Over the British Isles. But it was
when scientists started to investigate the effects of Global Dimming that they made the most disturbing discovery of all. Those
more reflective clouds could alter the pattern of the world's rainfall. With tragic consequences. NEWS REPORT -
MICHAEL BUERK VOICE OVER: Dawn, and as the sun breaks through the piercing chill of night on the plain outside Korum it
lights up a biblical famine, now in the 20th Century. This place say workers here is the closest thing to hell on earth. NARRATOR:
The 1984 Ethiopian famine shocked the world. It was partly caused by a decade's long drought right across sub-Saharan
Africa - a region known as the Sahel. For year after year the summer rains failed. At the time some scientists blamed
overgrazing and poor land management. But now there's evidence that the real culprit was Global Dimming. The Sahel's
lifeblood has always been a seasonal monsoon. For most of the year it is completely dry. But every summer, the heat of the sun
warms the oceans north of the equator. This draws the rain belt that forms over the equator northwards, bringing rain to the Sahel.
But for twenty years in the 1970s and 80s the tropical rain belt consistently failed to shift northwards - and the African monsoon
failed. For climate scientists like Leon Rotstayn the disappearance of the rains had long been a puzzle. He could see that pollution
from Europe and North America blew right across the Atlantic, but all the climate models suggested it should have little effect on
the monsoon. But then Rotstayn decided to find out what would happen if he took the Maldive findings into account. DR LEON
ROTSTAYN (CSIRO Atmospheric Research): What we found in our model was that when we allowed the pollution from Europe
and North America to affect the properties of the clouds in the northern hemisphere the clouds reflected more sunlight back to
space and this cooled the oceans of the northern hemisphere. And to our surprise the result of this was that the tropical rain bands
moved southwards tracking away from the more polluted northern hemisphere towards the southern hemisphere. NARRATOR:
Polluted clouds stopped the heat of the sun getting through. That heat was needed to draw the tropical rains northwards. So the life
giving rain belt never made it to the Sahel. DR LEON ROTSTAYN: So what our model is suggesting is that these droughts in the
Sahel in the 1970s and the 1980s may have been caused by pollution from Europe and North America affecting the properties of
the clouds and cooling the oceans of the northern hemisphere. NARRATOR: Rotstayn has found a direct link between Global
Dimming and the Sahel drought. If his model is correct, what came out of our exhaust pipes and power stations contributed
to the deaths of a million people in Africa, and afflicted 50 million more. But this could be just of taste of what Global
Dimming has in store. PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: The Sahel is just one example of the monsoon system. Let
me take you to anther part of the world. Asia, where the same monsoon brings rainfall to three point six billion people,
roughly half the world's population. My main concern is this air pollution and the Global Dimming will also have a
detrimental impact on this Asian monsoon. We are not talking about few millions of people we are talking about few
billions of people. NARRATOR: For Ramanathan the implications are clear. PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN:
There is no choice here we have to cut down air pollution, if not eliminate it altogether.
West Coast Love 53

169 GT Sequestration CP SO2 DA

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

169 GT Sequestration CP SO2 DA

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Warming Counterplan

DDI 2008 Turnstein

West Coast Love 2

Observation 2 – the counterplan competes via the net benefit

a. The plan drastically decreases SO2 emissions

b. SO2 solves warming – its atmospheric particles reflect harmful solar

West Coast Love 3

**CARBON SEQUESTRATION COUNTERPLAN**

West Coast Love 4

Sequestration is tight – 4 reasons

Sequestration restores degraded soils, enhances biomass production, purifies

West Coast Love 5

Offsets fossil fuel emissions

West Coast Love 6

Solves climate change – stores 90% of emissions

West Coast Love 7

Solves climate change

West Coast Love 8

Solves climate change/productivity

West Coast Love 9

Solves climate change – 100’s of years

West Coast Love 10

Solves better than nuke/wind/solar

West Coast Love 11

TIMEFRAME – tech ready now

Solvency is immediate – sequestration infrastructure is established now

West Coast Love 12

West Coast Love 13

Storage feasible: aquifers = best option

Sequestration is the most climate-responsive option – aquifers have the

West Coast Love 14

Storage feasible: aquifers = longterm

West Coast Love 15

Storage feasible: works for 1,000 years

West Coast Love 16

Ocean = best place for storage

West Coast Love 17

Oceans = best place for storage

West Coast Love 18

Deep lakes minimize leakage

West Coast Love 19

A2: no tech – Norway proves

Sequestration works – Norway proves

West Coast Love 20

A2: no experience with tech

West Coast Love 21

A2: CO2 screws the ocean

West Coast Love 22

A2: leakages irrevocably suck (pH levels)

West Coast Love 23

A2: ocean injections kill deep-sea ecosystems

Ocean acidity is inevitable – dispersal of injected CO2 avoids catastrophic

West Coast Love 24

A2: ocean injections  leakage/eco disasters

Risk of leakage is small – CO2 would dissolve in ocean water

West Coast Love 25

West Coast Love 26

UX: SO2 emissions low now

West Coast Love 27

UX: SO2 emissions down 70%

West Coast Love 28

UX: emissions decreasing now

West Coast Love 29

CARBON SEQUESTRATION COUNTERPLAN

AFF COUNTERPLAN ANSWERS

AFF SO2 DA ANSWERS