BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF

WAVE TWO

OTEC AFF/NEG – WAVE TWO

AFF UPDATES

INHERENCY - - NO OTEC FUNDING NOW – 2-3

SOLVENCY - - INCENTIVES KEY – 4
AT: TECHNOLOGY KRITIKS – 5
AT: OTEC BAD FOR ENVIRONMENT – 6
AT: ENVIRONMENT KRITIKS – 7
AT: SPENDING DA (NON-UNIQUE) – 8

NEG UPDATES

NEG - - AT: WATER WARS ADV. – 9-10

NEG - - OTEC NOT EFFECTIVE – 11
NEG - - OTEC KILLS SPECIES – 12
NEG - - AT: OVERFISHING ADV. - 13

1
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

INHERENCY - - NO OTEC FUNDING NOW

OTEC is lacking funding to fulfill its vast potential.

Bromby ’07 (Robin Bromby is an author of many books in regard to Oceania and islands. “Value in sea of possibilities - Climate
Change: Special Report” November 24, 2007- Weekend Australian
<http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T4129054412&format=GNBFI&sort
=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T4129054418&cisb=22_T4129054417&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=244777&d
ocNo=2>)

Coming up in the rear is ocean thermal energy conversion, but this is viable usually only in the tropics. It is estimated
by the US National Renewal Energy Laboratory that the world's oceans absorb solar radiation equivalent to about 250 billion barrels of
oil in energy terms. Ocean thermal energy conversion, or OTEC, uses different temperatures at various depths -- so long as the
But the
temperatures between the warm surface and the cold deep water varies by at least 20C -- to drive a power-producing cycle.
economics are against the technology at this stage, according to the laboratory, and research into OTEC
has been suspended. There have also been thoughts of producing electricity using the deep ocean
currents, ocean winds and salinity gradients -- but so far these remain little more than pipe dreams.

OTEC is receiving minimal US funding.

Smith ’01 (Douglas Smith is the Senior Editor of Ieng “Big Plans for Ocean Power Hinge on Funding and Additional R&D” November
2001- Power Engineering <http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/126468/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Big-Plans-for-Ocean-Power-Hinge-
on-Funding-and-Additional-R&D/>)

Even though many years of research have gone into developing power from the sea, the technology is still in its infancy and it may
Funding is now
take a few more years for it to become an acceptable technology for generating large quantities of electricity.
being made available in the U.K. and Norway to research the possibility of developing large-scale wave and tidal power
plants for commercial operation. Unfortunately, here in the U.S., very little money is being budgeted for the
research and development of ocean power.

2
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

INHERENCY - - NO OTEC FUNDING NOW

The United States Federal Government has failed to properly fund OTEC.

Gizmag ’08 (Staff writer for gizmag, which is an emerging technology magazine, “Energy Island: unlocking the potential of the ocean as a renewable
power source “ 2008 gizmag <http://www.gizmag.com/energy-island-otec/8714/> DAH)

Energy Island isn’t the first project to portray OTEC as the solution to Earth’s power and pollution woes. Previous plans for the technology, most notably
John Craven’s , have been positively utopic. Craven saw OTEC not only as a source of cheap power and water, but also as a method for accelerating
crop growth, and, (no utopia would be complete without it), a provider of free air conditioning. Project Windfall , meanwhile, was a plan authored by a
Florida group that involved installing an OTEC plant in order to reduce the hurricanes that routinely ravage the east coast.

But while OTEC has captured the imagination of scientists, it has not had nearly so much success with governments. The United States
established the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority in 1974, viewing the high electricity costs of the state, and the dynamics of the
surrounding water, as the ideal testing ground for OTEC technology. The NEL successfully demonstrated a 250 kW closed-cycle plant in 1999,
but ultimately the money evaporated faster than the water, and Congress shifted attention to more economical areas of research.
OTEC could be commercially viable, said test director Luis Vega, but it needed “patient funding” to reach that stage.

Past Government attention to OTEC has been negative.

NREL ’07 (NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, “Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC)” 30 December 2006-
Angelfire, DAH <http://www.angelfire.com/mac/egmatthews/geotherapy/otec.html>)

The US Government has stopped Federal Research into OTEC, presumably because of the antipathy of the second Bush regime to
thinking about alternative energy or Climate Change in general, which they persist in denying is influenced by human activities. But
here is a useful description and survey of possible sites, with a map. It mentions probable sites in Australia, Hawaii and other
"developed" countries but does not advocate building plants in those countries. There is no physical reason why some these also could
not benefit, but perhaps at the time the paper was written oil companies (and the US government) didn't want a viable alternative to
their products.

Past attempts to find funding the creation of OTEC facilities has failed.

Smith ’07 (Larry Smith is the owner of Larry Smith Electronics Company that has to due with ocean navigation. “In Pursuit of OTEC in The Bahamas”
June 13 2007- Bahama Pundit <http://www.bahamapundit.com/2007/06/in_pursuit_of_o.html>) "At the southwest
corner of New Providence is an area of shallow heated sand flats which adjoin a 6,000-foot-deep underwater canyon," Bardelmeier
wrote in his proposal. "Onshore at this point is the government-owned electricity plant with its existing distribution systems...and the
cost of electric power in Nassau is among the highest in the western world." His [Bardelmeier’s] proposal called for a private corporation
to negotiate a 40-year contract with the government to build a 40,000kw OTEC power station at Clifton Cay, both as a demonstration
project and to sell power to BEC. He added that the US government might be willing to help fund the project. But Rockwell turned him
down.

3
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

SOLVENCY - - INCENTIVES KEY

OTEC is too expensive for private sector firms, it will require government incentives.

US Department of Energy ’05 (US Department of Energy, September 12 2005,

http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumer/renewable_energy/ocean/index.cfm/mytopic=50010, CW)

OTEC power plants require substantial capital investment upfront. OTEC researchers believe private sector
firms probably will be unwilling to make the enormous initial investment required to build large-scale plants
until the price of fossil fuels increases dramatically or until national governments provide financial
incentives. Another factor hindering the commercialization of OTEC is that there are only a few hundred land-
based sites in the tropics where deep-ocean water is close enough to shore to make OTEC plants feasible.

4
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

AT: TECHNOLOGY KRITIKS

Technology should be embraced, not criticized. Criticism is escapism from the way things are going to be and
doesn’t solve.

Drexler ’86 (K. Eric, Research Fellow @ Institute of Molecular Manufacturing “Engines of Creation”
http://www.foresight.org/EOC/index.html)

The habit of neglecting or denying the possibility of technological advance is a common problem. Some people believe
in snugly fitting limits because they have heard respected people spin plausible-sounding arguments for them. Yet it seems that some people must be responding more to
wish than to fact, after this century of accelerating advance. Snug limits would simplify our future, making it easier to understand and more comfortable to think about.
A belief in snug limits also relieves a person of certain concerns and responsibilities. After all, if natural forces will halt the technology race in a convenient and
automatic fashion, then we needn't try to understand and control it. Best of all, this escape doesn't feel like escapism. To contemplate visions of global decline must
give the feeling of facing harsh facts without flinching. Yet such a future would be nothing really new: it would force us toward the familiar miseries of the European
past or the Third World present. Genuine courage requires facing reality, facing accelerating change in a world that has no
automatic brakes. This poses intellectual, moral, and political challenges of greater substance. Warnings of bogus limits do double harm. First, they discredit
the very idea of limits, blunting an intellectual tool that we will need to understand our future. But worse, such warnings distract attention from our real problems. In
the Western world there is a lively political tradition that fosters suspicion of technology. To the extent that it first
disciplines its suspicions by testing them against reality and then chooses workable strategies for guiding change, this tradition can contribute mightily to the survival of
The world cannot afford to have their efforts
life and civilization. But people concerned about technology and the future are a limited resource.
squandered in futile campaigns to sweep back the global tide of technology with the narrow broom of Western
protest movements. The coming problems demand more subtle strategies. No one can yet say for certain what problems will prove
to be most important, or what strategies will prove best for solving them. Yet we can already see novel problems of great importance, and we can discern strategies with
varying degrees of promise. In short, we can see enough about the future to identify goals worth pursuing.

5
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

AT: OTEC BAD FOR ENVIRONMENT

Environmentalists should like OTEC – it’s sustainable and better than the alternative (nuclear power).
Robert Cohen February 1994 (Ph.D. from Cornell University Reflections on the status of federal ocean
energy R&D in the United States http://csf.colorado.edu/authors/Cohen.Robert/otecfunding-94.html)

Some leading environmentalists and energy people such as my friend Bob Williams -- still perceive OTEC as a
large, "central-station" option, which they don't like -- compared to dispersed energy options -- because of its
possible relationship to electrical utilities. Indeed, Denis Hayes, when he was head of SERI, took a televised pot
shot at ocean thermal and solar thermal, calling them both "turkeys". However, as events developed it is turning
out that the commercial evolution of OTEC technology will probably be via small (Ñ 5 MWe) land-based plants
at island locations in places like Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands and in many developing
nations, most of which are mainly relying on imported oil to generate their electricity. Some of those early
electricity markets will also use OTEC co products such as fresh water, coastal cooling, and mariculture, and
there will also be the development of OTEC-like "bottoming cycles" to conserve fuel. If they could only be
made aware of that scenario -- rather than recalling our development scenario of the 1970s -- one might expect
environmentalists to become natural proponents of OTEC, since its development scenario can now be perceived
as that of an "appropriate technology". Also, the environmentalists should welcome OTEC as a base load
alternative to nuclear, one that also has the potential (someday) of becoming a major global energy source for
supplying hydrogen (and other fuels and energy-intensive products) to dispersed markets.

6
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

AT: ENVIRONMENT KRITIKS

Perm solves best – moderation avoids local resentment and solves better.
New Scientist June 21, 2003 A greyer shade of green by Fred Pearce

Several factors are driving this sea change. First, there is an admission that hard-line conservation has a
chequered history, with more failures than successes, and that it often breeds resentment in local communities.
Secondly, there's the realisation that western environmentalists, however well-meaning, have no right to ride
roughshod over local sensibilities. Finally, they are riding the current fashion wave: the idea that environmental
protection and economic development don't have to be mutually exclusive. In fact, there are conservation
strategies that allow them to reinforce each other. And this ethos of "sustainable development", first made
popular at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro ten years ago, is taking many environmentalists in directions they
had never anticipated. There are ethical as well as practical objections to hard-line conservation. Dogmatic
environmentalism, says Martin, is "in some ways as narrow and selfish as the imperialism of old. Imperialism
imposed a system of development that took little or no account of the rights and needs of local people. Too
often, that same charge can be leveled against conservation projects." The charge is especially potent against
WWF, whose founders, including royals such as Prince Philip, were white hunters-turned-conservationists.
Most environmentalists outside the hard-core animal rights groups say they are in favour of conserving
traditional cultures. In practice that usually involves preserving their hunting traditions. So WWF quietly
supports the Inuit, who hunt polar bears, and the Gwich'in people, who hunt caribou as the animals travel
through northern Canada and Alaska on one of the greatest mammal migrations left on Earth.

7
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

AT: SPENDING DA (NON-UNIQUE)

Non-Unique: USFG has no fiscal discipline and will not in the future.

Chapman, 2008 (Steve Chapman, Chicago Tribune, Obama, McCain and the coming fiscal disaster, July 10, 2008,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0710chapmanjul10,0,7110404.column, A.X.)

The problem is simple and depressingly familiar. This year, federal spending will exceed federal revenue by
more than $400 billion. Given the weak state of the economy, the deficit will get worse before it gets better.
Actually, it may never get better, because the current shortfall coincides with the start of the most dreaded fiscal
event of all time: the retirement of the Baby Boomers, who will soon consume eye-popping amounts in Social
Security and Medicare.
If that's not bad enough, Bruce Willis is not on hand to intercept the doomsday object before it arrives. Worse
yet, neither Barack Obama nor John McCain wants the job.
The latest proof came when McCain unveiled his economic plan, in which he vows to eliminate the deficit in four years. His plan to balance the budget is simple: He
plans to balance the budget. Exactly which programs he will trim to reach that goal are anyone's guess.
For someone with a reputation as a fearless foe of congressional earmarks and pork-barrel waste, McCain is
amazingly timid in taking on the rest of the budget. About his only specific proposal is a one-year freeze in
those discretionary programs that don't involve defense or veterans.
McCain doesn't say how much that would save, but it wouldn't be a lot. Those expenditures amount to only 17 percent of all federal outlays. Eighty-three percent of the
budget would keep on growing. After a year, so would the other 17 percent.
He vows to follow up with "comprehensive spending controls." But promising to control spending in general means promising to control nothing in particular.
Just because voters will go along with a vague limit on total outlays doesn't mean they are willing to surrender funds going to them or their favorite causes. It's one
thing to inform a toddler that he shouldn't eat too much candy. It's another to take the Tootsie Roll Pop out of his hand.
The Republican standard-bearer, however, acts as though the task will be easy. Among the methods offered in this plan: "Eliminate broken programs. The federal
government itself admits that one in five programs do not perform." How about naming one? How about promising to pound a stake through its heart?
When it comes to spending, though, Obama is even worse. The National Taxpayers Union Foundation added up
all the promises made by the two candidates and found that McCain's would cost taxpayers an extra $68 billion
a year. Obama's add up to $344 billion a year.
The Illinois senator's pledge to get tough on unnecessary expenditures is as solid as cotton candy. Among his vows is to "slash earmarks to no greater than what they
were in 2001," but earmarks make up less than 2 percent of the budget. Trying to restore fiscal discipline by cutting earmarks is like trying to lose weight by adopting an
exercise program for your left index finger.
Obama claims he'll pay for all his new spending with new revenues and spending cuts. But like McCain, he has
been hazy on the details. And it will be far easier for him to get Congress to approve new spending than to enact
the measures needed to pay for it. Unless Obama is willing to take on his own party with the veto pen, we
should expect four more years of irresponsible budgeting.
His only defense is that he would not have to make up as much lost revenue as his rival. The Tax Policy Center says his tax plan would cut federal receipts by $2.7
trillion over the next decade, compared with $3.6 trillion for McCain.
The details differ, but the basic picture is the same regardless of who wins: Washington will spend more, red ink
will roll down like a mighty river, and we as a nation will continue to dodge the critical choices we face.

8
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

NEG - - AT: WATER WARS ADV.

“Water Wars” are highly improbable in general, countries would rather cooperate
than have conflict over water.
Basedau ’05 (Matthais Basedau, author of; Hamburg African Studies, German Overseas Institute, 2005,
http://books.google.com/books?id=hWrEcl2ydzEC&pg=PA300&lpg=PA300&dq=%22water+wars%22+%2B+%22improbable%22&sou
rce=web&ots=RCJjDQFJ4Q&sig=A8qh8v_1BEGgAWOQWieq1K7rMyU&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result, CW)

“Where local-scale disputes over access to water have occasionally resulted in bloodshed and
loss of life, the growing ethos of inter-state cooperation and collaboration supports the assertion
that it is highly improbable that southern African states would ever engage each other
in true water wars.” (Ashton and Turton 2004: 17).
Waters wars are improbable in general, and even more in the southern Africa context. A unique
aspect of the southern African situation relates to the way the recent political history has shaped
the national and regional approaches to water resource management. Apartheid, colonialism and
delayed decolonization and the associated violent conflicts have left deep wounds in southern
African societies. Against this historical background of all-encompassing structural and overt
violence, political elites and the overwhelming majority of ordinary citizens alike are tired of
violent conduct of conflict. This on the other hand means that there is a mental openness for
integration and cooperation which serves as a fertile ground for the integrated management of
shared transboundary water resources, which under other circumstances might easily lend
themselves as causes for escalating conflict. And finally, the role of the regional hegemonic
power has to be considered. The RSA as the “benevolent hegemon”, is determining to a large
extend the course of developments in southern Africa. The RSA is the most developed and
industrialized country of the SADC region, and at the same time it is the one of the most water-
stressed countries, with water availability being a potential limiting factor to its economic growth,
and hence with an extraordinarily high demand for “foreign” water. It is also the most influential
single political player in the SADC region. And this player has committed itself to an integrative-
cooperative approach in the utilization of its power potential, not least with regard to water
resources.

9
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

10
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

NEG - - AT: WATER WARS ADV.

“Water Wars” may be scary, but following the example of history, which has a tendency to repeat itself,
countries are most likely to resolve the conflict diplomatically, rather than go to war.
Doyle ’06 (ALISTER DOYLE, STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN Sep 18 2006, Environmental correspondent, http://www.mg.co.za/article/2006-09-18-water-wars-
loom-but-none-in-past-4nbsp500-years, CW)

With a steady stream of bleak predictions that "water wars" will be fought over dwindling supplies in the 21st
century, battles between two Sumerian city-states 4,500 years ago seem to set a worrying precedent.
But the good news, many experts say, is that the conflict between Lagash and Umma over irrigation rights in
what is now Iraq was the last time two states went to war over water.
Down the centuries since then, international rivals sharing waters such as the Jordan River, the Nile, the Ganges
or the Parana have generally favoured cooperation over conflict.
So if history can be trusted, things may stay that way.
"The simple explanation is that water is simply too important to fight over," said Aaron Wolf, a professor at
Oregon State University. "Nations often go to the brink of war over water and then resolve their differences."
Since the war between Lagash and Umma, recorded on a stone carving showing vultures flying off with the
heads of defeated Umma warriors, no wars have been fought and 3,600 international water treaties have been
signed, he said.
Yet politicians regularly warn that water shortages caused by surging populations and climate change could trigger conflicts this
century in a world where a billion people in developing countries lack access to clean drinking water.
"Fierce competition for fresh water may well become a source of conflict and wars in the future," United Nations Secretary General
Kofi Annan said in 2001. The English word "rival" even comes from the Latin "rivalis" meaning "someone sharing a river".
Other experts say international "water wars" are unlikely.
"I don't really expect wars over water because ... the benefits of collaboration are so great," said Frank
Rijsberman, head of the International Water Management Institute (IWMI).

11
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

NEG - - OTEC NOT EFFECTIVE

OTEC Is to costly and not efficient enough to be an effective alternative energy source
Odum ’00 (Howard T. Odum, February 28, 2000, Environmental Engineering sciences, University of Florida.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V2S-3YNY72H-
7&_user=29621&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000003958&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=29621&md5=21806b3e1f9e867ed462
2073ef4ce8eb, CW)

In the proposed OTEC system there is a little net energy yield, but the net energy ratio (1.4) is less than electric power
from old growth wood (3.6), fossil fuel (2.5–3.5) and from nuclear power (4.5) [3]. The energy investment ratio (218) is
much higher than typical values of 7 in developed countries, which means that the plan may be too costly in use of
purchased resources to be economical. With a solar transformity of 2, the thermal gradient energy is little more
concentrated than the original solar insolation. Energy evaluation helps explain why solar technology is not competitive.

12
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

NEG - - OTEC KILLS SPECIES

OTEC has massive drawbacks. It is incredibly expensive, can kill off corals as well as fish.

Stein ’94 (Ben P. Stein, "Sea's got the power - Alternative Energy - Special Earth Day Action Issue: Make Waves". Science World.
April 15, 1994. FindArticles.com. 10 Jul. 2008.)

Yet, cool as it sounds, OTEC does have some drawbacks. Like many other alternative energy projects, says
Nelson Ho, chairperson of the Sierra Club's Hawaii chapter, OTEC may look harmless when tried at one small
experimental plant. But when you expand the technology for large-scale use, unexpected problems can appear.

For instance, after cold water runs through one OTEC cycle, it is warmed to about 10 [degrees] C--too warm to
be reuse in the other OTEC process, but colder than Hawaii's tropical surface waters. Returning this cold water
(25,00 liters per minute in Hawaii to the coastal surface could harm some sea creatures. Tropical corals, for
instance, die off quickly below 18 [degrees] C NELH's Daniel admits.

Another concern is that the cold deep-sea water is very rich in dissolved nutrients. Says Daniel, "That could
cause lots of algae to grow at the surface" because the nutrients act as fertilizer for these microscopic plant-like
organisms. An increase in algae could use up the water's oxygen supply and kill fish.

Finally, there's the cost. Much of OTEC's machinery including the massive pipes that collect deep-sea water, is
very expensive. The OTEC technology may turn out to be too costly for those less-developed tropical
countries most likely to benefit from it.

13
BAYLOR DEBATE CAMP OTEC AFF
WAVE TWO

NEG - - AT: OVERFISHING ADV.

Overfishing is being solved now.

Butler, 2007(Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com, July 9, 2007, “How to save the world's oceans from overfishing: An interview with
the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Mike Sutton”, http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0709-interview_mike_sutton.html \, MK)

Despite these dire trends, the situation is changing. Today some of the world's largest
environmental groups are focused on addressing the health of marine life and oceans, while
sustainable fisheries management is at the top of the agenda for intergovernmental bodies.
Conservation groups are working with governments to establish marine reserves, ban destructive
fishing practices, protect key species, and educate consumers, though progress is slow in the
face of continued lobbying by industry. Some believe the best approach to addressing overfishing
is to bring industry on board, using the argument that sustainable practices will ensure the
industry survives for the next generation of fishermen.

14