The Reading of the 1AC Was Good 2

The Reading of the 1AC was Good

Education on recycling in round is key to real world solutions Dinh 14 [Hao Dinh, Grow By Design Nonprofit CEO, “How might we establish better recycling habits at home?,” https://openideo.com/challenge/recycle-challenge/research/education-tools-good- recycling-habits, 4/17/14, AR] If you educate people on the benefits of recycling and provide them the resources that enables them to recycle, then they will recycle. A real world example prevented hundreds of disposable water bottles from ending up at the local landfill. During move- in day at a local university, there are usually hundreds of disposable plastic water bottles used and sent to the local landfill. This year, we partnered with the local university to provide reusable water bottles and free, filtered water to the people moving in. Additionally, when people were refilling their water bottles, we educated them on the advantages of using reusable water bottles. We received positive feedback during the event. A month later, we revisited the school and were VERY happy to see that students used the reusable water bottles we gave them during move- in day. From this experience, we strongly believe if you educate people & provide them the resources needed for them to recycle, they will.

Recycling Education changes future behaviors HUNBlog 09 [HUNBlog, blog on issues and news in science education, and on science in general, “Educating Society on Recycling,” http://hunblog.typepad.com/hunblog/2009/10/educating-society-on-recycling.html , 10/9/2009, AR] In order to sustain our planet we need to recycle . I am not the most avid recycler, but the current science course I am in has increased my concern for our planet. With the abuse we impose, I am concerned about how long Earth’s environment can provide us with the clean air and water we need for survival. After being educated I am more conscious of the need to recycle. Educating people on why they should recycle is vital in order to change behaviors, habits, and attitudes pertaining to conserving our planet. One of the excuses people use for not recycling is that it is inconvenient, but the benefits of recycling are worth being inconvenienced. Recycling preserve our environment by not releasing harmful gasses from decomposed waste into the environment, which keeps our air clean and healthy to breath. When we recycle paper products, trees are conserved leaving more trees in the environment to purify the air. The materials that do not decompose wash into our rivers, lakes, and oceans polluting our water. By recycling these materials, we preserve our drinking water supplies. Recycling saves land space because less waste is brought to the landfills. In my classroom, educating children on recycling will be a priority. The benefits of recycling will be discussed and modeled throughout the school year. Children need to be taught to recycle so they can help preserve our planet’s environment now and when they become adults . Simulation with nanotechnology and its intricacies is key to spur creative thinking on real world problems Uddin 01 [Mahbub Uddin, PhD and Professor in Engineering Science at Trinity University, “Nanotechnology Education,” http://www.actionbioscience.org/education/uddin_chowdhury.html, August 2001, AR] Nanotechnology will impact many aspects of daily life. The emerging field of nanoscience and nanotechnology is leading to a technological revolutio n in the new millennium. The application of nanotechnology has enormous potential to greatly influence the world in which we live. From consumer goods, electronics, computers, information and biotechnology, to aerospace defense, energy, environment, and medicine, all sectors of the economy are to be profoundly impacted by nanotechnology . Nanotechnology’s rapid growth provides challenges to our academic communities. In the United States, Europe, Australia, and Japan, several research initiatives have been undertaken both by government and members of the private sector to intensify the research and development in nanotechnology.1 Hundreds of millions of dollars have been committed. Research and development in nanotechnology is likely to change the traditional practices of design, analysis, and manufacturing for a wide range of engineering products. This impact creates a challenge for the academic community to educate [engineering and other bioscience] students with the necessary knowledge, understanding, and skills to interact and provide leadership in the emerging world of nanotechnology . Current status of nanotechnology education Institutions are not providing enough educational opportunities . The academic community is reacting slowly to prepare the workforce for emerging opportunities in nanotechnology. Currently, a small number of universities in the USA, Europe, Australia and Japan offer selective graduate programs in nanoscience and nanotechnology in collaboration with research centers. The primary mission of these centers is to conduct research and development in the area of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Some research centers also support an associated graduate program within the patron university. In addition, faculty members in various institutions conduct and manage research programs in the areas of nanotechnology and nanoscience supported by funding organizations. There are few graduate or undergraduate programs. In the United States, [some of the] universities that offer either graduate or undergraduate courses in nanoscience or nanotechnology are Clemson University, Cornell University, Penn State University, Rice University, University of Notre Dame and University of Washington.1 A handful of universities offer undergraduate engineering degrees in conjunction with undergraduate courses in nanoscience or nanotechnology. They [include] Virginia Commonwealth University, Penn State University and Flinders University in Australia. Focus on design, analysis and manufacture of nanocomponents, nanodevices and nanosystems. Nanotechnology in the curriculum The fundamental objective of nanotechnology is to model, simulate, design and manufacture nanostructures and nanodevices with extraordinary properties and assemble them economically into a working system with revolutionary functional abilities. Nanotechnology offers a new paradigm of groundbreaking material development by controlling and manipulating the fundamental building blocks of matter at nanoscale, that is, at the atomic/molecular level. Therefore, in order for our students to face the challenges presented by nanotechnology , the following educational goals should be applied : Provide understanding, characterization and measurements of nanostructure properties Provide ability for synthesis, processing and manufacturing of nanocomponents and nanosystems Provide ability for design, analysis and simulation of nanostructures and nanodevices Prepare students to conduct research and development of economically feasible and innovative applications of nanodevices in all spheres of our daily life. Learning should take place in and out of the classroom. Teaching strategies Nanotechnology should be taught by creating both knowledge-centered and learning-centered environments inside and outside the classroom .2 Because the technology is advancing so fast, activities that encourage creative thinking, critical thinking and life-long learning should be given the highest priority . Nanotechnology is an interdisciplinary science. Nanotechnology is truly interdisciplinary. An interdisciplinary curriculum that encompasses a broad understanding of basic sciences intertwined with engineering sciences and information sciences pertinent to nanotechnology is essential. [An introductory course, for example, can include the study of DNA, RNA, protein synthesis, recombinant techniques, genetic engineering, molecular chemistry, cell biology, physics, and other fields.]3,4,5,6,7,8 [Other suggestions for teaching strategies include:] Course design should incorporate science concepts from different fields. Introductory nanotechnology courses should be taught more from the perspectives of concept development and qualitative analysis rather than mathematical derivations. Every effort should be made to convey the big picture and how different learning exercises fit together to achieve course objectives. Each course should be taught at the appropriate level with required pre-requisites. Junior and senior design courses, specifically the capstone design courses, should integrate modeling, simulation, control and optimization of nanodevices and nanosystems into the course objectives. Every effort should be made to integrate concepts related to nanotechnology into all design courses. Interactive learning should be the hallmark of nanotechnology education. Add-ons/Advantages Science Diplomacy (Read on CPs as offense for USFG Key or Turn on DA)

US Science and Tech collapsing now-More S&T needed to maintain leadership – NSB report shows US will be overcome by Asian S&T NSF 12 – US government agency that supports research and education in science and engineering (“New Report Outlines Trends in U.S. Global Competitiveness in Science and Technology,” National Science Board, 1/17/12, http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=122859&, AR) The United States remains the global leader in supporting science and technology (S&T) research and development, but only by a slim margin that could soon be overtaken by rapidly increasing Asian investments in knowledge-intensive economies. So suggest trends released in a new report by the National Science Board (NSB), the policymaking body for the National Science Foundation (NSF), on the overall status of the science, engineering and technology workforce, education efforts and economic activity in the United States and abroad. "This information clearly shows we must re- examine long-held assumptions about the global dominance of the American science and technology enterprise," said NSF Director Subra Suresh of the findings in the Science and Engineering Indicators 2012 released today. "And we must take seriously new strategies for education, workforce development and innovation in order for the United States to retain its international leadership position," he said.

More S&T needed to maintain leadership – empirics prove Hummel et al 12 – Hummel - Ph.D in Mathematics, Chief Scientist at Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, former project manager at DARPA. Cheetham – Research Associate for Academic Centers and Programs at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, research and analytical support to policy development projects for DOD (Robert Hummel, Patrick Cheetham, Justin Rossi, “US Science and Technology Leadership, and Technology Grand Challenges,” Synesis, 2012, http://www.synesisjournal.com/vol3_g/Hummel_2012_G14- 39.pdf)//AR) The US enjoys a science and technology (S&T) enterprise that is the envy of the world. Our universities, industries, laboratories, and government institutions have developed and used technology that has driven economic benefits and secured superpower defense status. The US remains the leader in S&T innovation, a position enjoyed since World War II. While the health of the US S&T enterprise remains strong, there are considerable stresses within each major component. Some believe that the US position as leader in S&T could falter, at least in some fields. We review the stresses in various components of the S&T enterprise and the evidence of trends in S&T quality. We conclude that the enterprise maintains a leadership position for now. We believe that this leadership position, in order to be maintained, requires specific challenges, to aim at “goalposts.” While most of the work in the S&T fields result in incremental improvements to products and capabilities, certain grand challenges are within our grasp if the science and technology community is provided with specific directions and priorities. Much as the 1961 call by then-President Kennedy, for a manned mission to the moon and safe return with a deadline of less than a decade, provided an impetus for advances and accomplishments that benefited the nation, national security, and society in general, so too it should be possible to develop certain specific applications in reasonable time-frames that achieve new specific goals.

The plan is a long-term strategy that provides a platform for S&T leadership and U.S. Science Diplomacy in the International Sphere Dolan 12(Bridget M. Dolan, “Science and Technology Agreements as Tools for Science Diplomacy: A U.S. Case Study,” Science & Diplomacy, Vol. 1, No. 4 (December 2012), pg online @ http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/files/science_and_technology_agreements_as_tools_for_science_ diplomacy_science__diplomacy.pdf //um-ef, AR) As this paper has elaborated, U.S. decisions to enter into S&T agreements are often motivated by the desire to transform a diplomatic relationship , promote public diplomacy, enhance a diplomatic visit, and/or advance U.S. national security. An S&T agreement can be a limited one-time deliverable or it can be a launching pad for extensive engagement. While the discussions above have focused on drivers for S&T agreements from the U.S. perspective, for these agreements to be effective tools of science diplomacy, implementation matters. In the last decade, the number of S&T agreements involving the United States has doubled. At the same time allocation of U.S. federal resources to designated international programs that support engagement in science and technology has not kept pace.11 Some science diplomacy practitioners and academics in the U nited S tates and abroad are concerned that an S&T agreement with the U nited S tates, while once considered an important tool, is no longer taken seriously.12 As these types of formal intergovernmental agreements continue to expand, however , the long-term benefit to official and nongovernmental relations between countries depends upon the ability to foster substantial scientific cooperation. It is essential that these agreements and science diplomacy more generally—while cognizant of the realities of limited resources—are ambitious enough to foster meaningful international partnerships. And that solves every disad impact Fedoroff 8 – subcommittee on research and science education, committee on science and technology, House of Representatives, 110 Congress, administrator of USAID, science and technology advisor to the Secretary of State and US Department of State (Nina, “International Science and Technology Cooperation,” Government Printing Office, 4/2/2008, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-110hhrg41470/html/CHRG-110hhrg41470.htm, AR]

Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Ehlers, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to discuss science diplomacy at the U.S. Department of State. The U.S. is recognized globally for its leadership in science and technology. Our scientific strength is both a tool of “soft power” – part of our strategic diplomatic arsenal – and a basis for creating partnerships with countries as they move beyond basic economic and social development. Science diplomacy is a central element of the Secretary’s transformational diplomacy initiative, because science and technology are essential to achieving stability and strengthening failed and

fragile states. S&T advances have immediate and enormous influence on national and

global economies , and thus on the international relations between societies. Nation states, nongovernmental organizations, and multinational corporations are largely shaped by their expertise in and access to intellectual and physical capital in science, technology, and engineering. Even as S&T advances of our modern era provide opportunities for economic prosperity, some also challenge the relative position of countries in the world order, and influence our social institutions and principles. America must remain at the forefront of this new world by maintaining its technological edge, and leading the way internationally through science diplomacy and engagement. Science by its nature facilitates diplomacy because it strengthens political relationships, embodies powerful ideals, and creates opportunities for all. The global scientific community embraces principles Americans cherish: transparency, meritocracy, accountability, the objective evaluation of evidence, and broad and frequently democratic participation. Science is inherently democratic, respecting evidence and truth above all. Science is also a common global language, able to bridge deep political and religious divides. Scientists share a common language. Scientific interactions serve to keep open lines of communication and cultural

understanding . As scientists everywhere have a common evidentiary external reference system, members of ideologically divergent societies can use the common language of science to cooperatively address both domestic and the increasingly transnational and global problems confronting humanity in the 21st century. There is a growing recognition that science and technology will increasingly drive the successful economies of the 21st century. Science and technology provide an immeasurable benefit to the U.S. by bringing

scientists and students here , especially from developing countries, where they see democracy in action, make friends in the international scientific community, become familiar with American technology, and contribute to the U.S. and global economy. For example, in 2005, over 50% of physical science and engineering graduate students and postdoctoral researchers trained in the U.S. have been foreign nationals. Moreover, many foreign-born scientists who were educated and have worked in the U.S. eventually progress in their careers to hold influential positions in ministries and institutions both in this country and in their home countries . They also contribute to U.S. scientific and technologic development: According to the National Science Board’s 2008 Science and Engineering Indicators, 47% of full-time doctoral science and engineering faculty in U.S. research institutions were foreign-born. Finally, some types of science – particularly those that address the grand challenges in science and technology – are inherently international in scope and collaborative by necessity. The ITER Project, an international fusion research and development collaboration, is a product of the thaw in superpower relations between Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. President Ronald Reagan. This reactor will harness the power of nuclear fusion as a possible new and viable energy source by bringing a star to earth. ITER serves as a symbol of international scientific cooperation among key scientific leaders in the developed and developing world – Japan, Korea, China, E.U., India, Russia, and United States – representing 70% of the world’s current population.. The recent elimination of funding for FY08 U.S. contributions to the ITER project comes at an inopportune time as the Agreement on the Establishment of the ITER International Fusion Energy Organization for the Joint Implementation of the ITER Project had entered into force only on October 2007. The elimination of the promised U.S. contribution drew our allies to question our commitment and credibility in international cooperative ventures. More problematically, it jeopardizes a platform for reaffirming U.S. relations with key states. It should be noted that even at the height of the cold war, the United States used science diplomacy as a means to maintain communications and avoid misunderstanding between the world’s two nuclear powers – the Soviet Union and the United States. In a complex multi-polar world, relations are more challenging, the threats perhaps greater, and the need for engagement more paramount. Using Science Diplomacy to Achieve National Security Objectives The welfare and stability of countries and regions in many parts of the globe require a concerted effort by the developed world to address the causal factors that render countries fragile and cause states to fail. Countries that are unable to defend their people against starvation, or fail to provide economic opportunity, are susceptible to extremist ideologies, autocratic rule, and abuses of human rights. As well, the world faces common threats, among them climate change, energy and water shortages, public health emergencies, chemical warfare, terrorism, environmental degradation, poverty,

food insecurity, and religious extremism . These threats can undermine the national security of the United States, both directly and indirectly. Many are blind to political boundaries, becoming regional or global threats. The United States has no monopoly on knowledge in a globalizing world and the scientific challenges facing humankind are enormous. Addressing these common challenges demands

common solutions and necessitates scientific cooperation , common standards, and common goals. We

must increasingly harness the power of American ingenuity in science and technology through strong partnerships with the science community in both academia and the private sector, in the U.S. and abroad among our allies, to advance U.S. interests in foreign policy. There are also important challenges to the ability of states to supply their

populations with sufficient food. The still-growing human population, rising affluence in emerging economies, and other factors have combined to create unprecedented pressures on global prices of staples such as edible oils and grains. Encouraging and promoting the use of contemporary molecular techniques in crop improvement is an essential goal for US science diplomacy. An essential part of the war on terrorism is a war of

ideas . The creation of economic opportunity can do much more to combat the rise of fanaticism than can any weapon. The war of ideas is a war about

rationalism as opposed to irrationalism. Science and technology put us firmly on the side of rationalism by providing ideas and opportunities that improve people’s lives. We may use the recognition and the goodwill that science still generates for the United States to achieve our diplomatic and developmental goals. Additionally, the Department

continues to use science as a means to reduce the proliferation of the weapons’ of mass

d estruction and prevent what has been dubbed ‘brain drain’. Through cooperative threat reduction activities, former weapons scientists redirect their skills to participate in peaceful, collaborative international research in a large variety of scientific fields. In addition, new global efforts focus on improving biological, chemical, and nuclear security by promoting and implementing best scientific practices as a means to enhance security, increase global partnerships, and create sustainability. Water Scarcity Add-On Water Shortages Coming Now Reuters 13 [“Water scarcity by 2030: True for every second person on earth, UN says,” http://rt.com/news/water-shortage-un-population-901/, 10/08/13, AR] About a half of the global population could be facing water shortages by 2030 when demand would exceed water supply by 40 percent, says United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Opening the Water Summit in Budapest, Hungary on Tuesday, the UN chief warned against unsustainable use of water resources. “Water is wasted and poorly used by all sectors in all countries. That means all sectors in all countries must cooperate for sustainable solutions. We must use what we have more equitably and wisely,” Ban said, as cited by the UN website. “By 2030 nearly half the global population could be facing water scarcity. Demand could outstrip supply by 40 per cent.” Governments cannot cope with the problem on their own, without the “full engagement” of all other players, including business, Ban underlined. Agriculture remains the largest consumer of freshwater. “There is growing urgency to reconcile its demands with the needs of domestic and industrial uses, especially energy production,” the UN Secretary General said. He urged industrial giants as well as small farmers to learn to get “more crop per drop” by using advanced irrigation technologies and focusing on “climate-resilient” rather than water intensive crops (i.e. rice). Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon takes a glass of water as he makes his opening speech for 'Budapest Water Summit 2013' on the stage of the Millenaris Cultural Center in Budapest on October 8, 2013 during the beginning of the summit. Ban Ki-moon pays a visit to Hungary to open this world conference for clean water. (AFP Photo)Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon takes a glass of water as he makes his opening speech for 'Budapest Water Summit 2013' on the stage of the Millenaris Cultural Center in Budapest on October 8, 2013 during the beginning of the summit. Ban Ki-moon pays a visit to Hungary to open this world conference for clean water. (AFP Photo) Climate change adds to the risk of water shortages in large parts of the world and that is another challenge that nations should cooperate on. “We must make sure that water remains a catalyst for cooperation not conflict among communities and countries,” Ban stressed. Global warming means not only more droughts, but also more floods. “That is why we must do everything we can to keep global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius above pre- industrial levels,” the UN chief said. Back in 2000, world leaders adopted Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Among them was to halve the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015. “While the MDG target for providing access to improved water sources has been reached, 780 million people lack this basic necessity,” Ban said on Tuesday. “Roughly 80 per cent of global wastewater from human settlements or industrial sources is discharged untreated. Water quality in at least parts of most major river systems still fails to meet basic World Health Organization standards.” About one-third of people on the planet drink water that is dangerous for health, while even a larger part of population lack adequate sanitation, according to the UN chief. “Some 2.5 billion people lack the dignity and health offered by access to a safe, decent toilet and protection from untreated waste. One billion people practice open defecation.” Such insanitary practices, common for many developing countries, are considered among the main causes of diarrhea – the second biggest killer of children in the world after pneumonia. “Even when it does not kill, repeated diarrhea can cause childhood stunting. These children are more vulnerable to disease and their brains do not develop as they should,” Ban’s speech at the Budapest Water Summit reads. In his words, investment in sanitation is a down- payment on a sustainable future, with economists estimating that every dollar spent can bring a five-fold return. “Our societies cannot prosper without clean, plentiful freshwater. People cannot thrive without adequate sanitation.” According to the United Nations, Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest number of water-stressed countries of any region. Water shortages access all internal links to extinction

Marlow 01 (Maude, Spring) National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians and IFG Committee on the Globalization of Water. “BLUE GOLD: The Global Water Crisis and the Commodification of the World's Water Supply,” http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/BlueGold.pdf. Perhaps the most devastating analysis of the global water crisis comes from hydrological engineer Michal Kravèík and his team of scientists at the Slovakia nongovernmental organization (NGO) People and Water. Kravèík, who has a distinguished career with the Slovak Academy of Sciences, has studied the effect of urbanization, industrial agriculture, deforestation, dam construction, and infrastructure and paving on water systems in Slovakia and surrounding countries and has come up with an alarming finding. Destroying water's natural habitat not only creates a supply crisis for people and animals, it also dramatically diminishes the amount of available fresh water on the planet. Kravèík describes the hydrologic cycle of a drop of water. It must first evaporate from a plant, earth surface, swamp, river, lake or the sea, then fall back down to earth as precipitation. If the drop of water falls back onto a forest, lake, blade of grass, meadow or field, it cooperates with nature to return to the hydrologic cycle. "Right of domicile of a drop is one of the basic rights, a more serious right than human rights," says Kravèík. However, if the earth's surface is paved over, denuded of forests and meadows, and drained of natural springs and creeks, the drop will not form part of river basins and continental watersheds, where it is needed by people and animals, but head out to sea, where it will be stored. It is like rain falling onto a huge roof, or umbrella; everything underneath stays dry and the water runs off to the perimeter. The consequent reduction in continental water basins results in reduced water evaporation from the earth's surface, and becomes a net loss, while the seas begin to rise. In Slovakia, the scientists found, for every 1 percent of roofing, paving, car parks and highways constructed, water supplies decrease in volume by more than 100 billion meters per year. Kravèík issues a dire warning about the growing number of what he calls the earth's "hot stains"—places already drained of water. The "drying out" of the earth will cause massive global warming, with the attendant extremes in weather: drought, decreased protection from the atmosphere, increased solar radiation, decreased biodiversity, melting of the polar icecaps, submersion of vast territories, massive continental desertification and, eventually, "global collapse." Carbon nanotech investment spurs desalination and solves Science Daily 11 [Science Daily, world-renown science magazine, “From seawater to freshwater with a nanotechnology filter,” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110531201217.htm, 6/20/2011, AR] the June 2011 issue of Physics World, Jason Reese, Weir Professor of Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics at the University of Strathclyde, describes the role that carbon nanotubes (CNTs) could play in the desalination of water, providing a possible solution to the problem of the world's ever-growing population demanding more and more fresh drinking water . Global population projections suggest that worldwide demand for water will increase by a third before 2030. But with more than a billion people already experiencing drinking-water shortages, and with a potential 3-6 oC increase in temperature and subsequent redistribution of rainfall patterns, things are likely to get even worse. CNTs -- essentially sheets of one-atom thick carbon rolled into cylinders -- have been investigated by Reese and his research group, using computer simulations, as a new way of addressing this challenge and transforming abundant seawater into pure, clean drinking water. Their technique is based on the process of osmosis -- the natural movement of water from a region with low solute concentration across a permeable membrane to a region with high concentration. But just as with most existing water-desalination plants, Reese's technique actually uses the opposite process of "reverse osmosis" whereby water moves in the opposite direction, leaving the salty water clean. One can imagine a large tank of water, separated into two sections by a permeable membrane, with one half containing fresh water and the other half containing seawater. The natural movement of water would move from the fresh water side to the seawater side to try and dilute the seawater and neutralize the concentrations. But in reverse osmosis a large amount of pressure is applied to the seawater side of the tank, which reverses the process, making water move into the fresh-water side and leave the salt behind. Although this process can remove the necessary salt and mineral content from the water, it is incredibly inefficient and producing the high pressures is expensive. Reese has, however, shown that CNTs can realistically expect to have water permeability 20 times that of modern commercial reverse- osmosis membranes, greatly reducing the cost and energy required for desalination. Additionally, CNTs are highly efficient at repelling salt ions, more so because specific chemical groups can be attached to them to create a specific "gatekeeper" function. As Reese writes, "The holy grail of reverse-osmosis desalination is combining high water-transport rates with efficient salt-ion rejection. While many questions still remain, the exciting potential of membranes of nanotubes to transform desalination and water-purification processes is clear, and is a very real and socially progressive use of nanotechnology." Nanolitter

Status Quo Nanotech Causes Toxic Poisoning of the Environment Through Nanolitter

Vandermolen 2k6 (LCDR Thomas D. Vandermolen, USN (BS, Louisiana Tech University; MA, Naval War College), is officer in charge, Maritime Science and Technology Center, Yokosuka, Japan. He was previously assigned as a student at the Naval War College, Newport Naval Station, Rhode Island. He has also served as intelligence officer for Carrier Wing Five, Naval Air Facility, Atsugi, Japan, and in similar assignments with US Special Operations Command, US Forces Korea, and Sea Control Squadron THIRTY-FIVE, Naval Air Station, North Island, California. AIR & SPACE POWER JOUNRAL, Fall, 2006, “Molecular nanotechnology and national security,” pg online @ http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj06/fal06/vandermolen.html //um-ef)

Environmental Damage. MNT was originally perceived as a potential cure-all for a variety of environmental problems: nanobots in the atmosphere, for example, could physically repair the ozone layer or remove greenhouse gases. Recently, however, Current NT is increasingly seen as a potential environmental problem in its own right. Both NT and MNT are expected to produce large quantities of nanoparticles and other disposable nanoproducts, the environmental effects of which are currently unknown. This “nanolitter,” small enough to penetrate living cells, raises the possibility of toxic poisoning of organs,

either from the nanolitter itself or from toxic elements attached to those nanoparticles.26

Nanolitter buildup will cause extinction

CRN 4 (Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, 4/19/04, “Disaster Scenarios”, http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/07/disaster_scenar.html //nz) Subquestion F: Environmental devastation by overproduction? Preliminary answer: It would be easy to build enough nano-litter to cause serious pollution problems. Small nano-built devices in particular will be difficult to collect after use. It will also be easy to consume enough energy to change microclimate and even global climate. Overpopulation is probably not a concern, even in the event of extreme life/health extension. The more people use high technology, the fewer children they seem to have. Provisional conclusion: Several plausible disaster scenarios appear to pose existential threats to the human race.

Nanorecycling produces no nanolitter and solves Losic 13 [ Dusan Losic, ARC Future Fellow School of Chemical Engineering at the The University of Adelaide, “Turning plastic bags into high-tech materials, ”http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-09/uoa-tpb092513.php, September 25, 2013, AR] The researchers were able to turn plastic into nanomaterial by having “grown” carbon nanotubes onto nanoporous alumina membranes. They used pieces of grocery plastic bags, which were vaporized in a furnace, to produce carbon layers that line the pores in the membrane to make the tiny cylinders – the carbon nanotubes. “Initially, we used ethanol to produce the carbon nanotubes. But my students had the idea that any carbon source should be useable,” Professor Losic explained. The huge potential market for carbon nanotubes depends on them being produced in high quantities more cheaply and uniformly. “In our laboratory, we’ve developed a new and simplified method of fabrication with controllable dimensions and shapes, and using a waste produce as the carbon source,” noted Professor Losic. Additional benefits to recycling these plastic grocery bags with their process is that it is catalyst and solvent free, which means the plastic waste can be used without generating poisonous compounds. Nano Good Warming

Nanotech key to solve warming – can create new sources of carbon free energy quickly Lane et. al 7 (Neal Lane, professor of physics at Rice University, was director of NSF from 1993 to 1998 and science advisor to President Clinton beginning in 1998. Thomas Kalil, assistant to the chancellor for science and technology at the University of California at Berkeley, was deputy assistant to the president for technology and economic policy and deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Clinton administration, 2007, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Present at the Creation, http://www.issues.org/21.4/lane.html)

Invest in nanotechnology for clean energy. Experts believe that combating global warming may require the ability to generate 15 to 30 terawatts of car-bon-free energy worldwide by 2050. By comparison, today’s total global energy consumption is a little less than 15 terawatts. Considering that 85 percent of our current global primary energy consumption is from fossil fuels, this is a daunting challenge. Researchers have identified a variety of ways in which nanotechnology could help solve our long-term energy challenges. These include a dramatic reduction in the cost of photovoltaics, direct photoconversion of light and water to produce hydrogen, and transformational advances in energy storage and transmission. The United States desperately needs an Apollo-type project to reduce the threat of climate change and its dependence on Middle East oil. Nanotechnology could play a key role in creating new sources of carbon-free energy that are competitive with fossil fuels. Solves Tech

Nanotech will be revolutionary technology and spur education Lane et. al 7 (Neal Lane, professor of physics at Rice University, was director of NSF from 1993 to 1998 and science advisor to President Clinton beginning in 1998. Thomas Kalil, assistant to the chancellor for science and technology at the University of California at Berkeley, was deputy assistant to the president for technology and economic policy and deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Clinton administration, 2007, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Present at the Creation, http://www.issues.org/21.4/lane.html)

Advocates made a number of arguments on behalf of the NNI, which we believe are still valid today. First, nanoscale S&E has the potential to be as important as previous general-purpose technologies, such as the steam engine, the transistor, and the Internet. At a size of 1 to 100 nanometers, materials, structures, and devices exhibit new and often useful physical, electrical, mechanical, optical, and magnetic properties. Second, expanded funding for nanotechnology can help revitalize the physical sciences and engineering, because it builds on disciplines such as condensed-matter physics, materials science, chemistry, and engineering. Third, the NNI will help attract and prepare the next generation of scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs. Because roughly two-thirds of the funding for the NNI flows to university researchers, it directly supports undergraduates, graduates, and postdocs. Fourth, it is clear that realizing the potential of nanotechnology will require supporting long-term high-risk research that is beyond the time horizons of corporations, which are understandably focused on nearer-term research and product development. As President Clinton noted in his Caltech speech, “Some of these [nanotechnology] research goals will take 20 or more years to achieve. But that is why . . . there is such a critical role for the federal government.” Finally, a 1998 technology evaluation concluded that global leadership in nanotechnology was up for grabs. We hoped that the NNI would allow the United States to strengthen its position in this critical technology.

Nanotech can cure cancer and incentivizes universities to invest in their educational services Lane et. al 7 (Neal Lane, professor of physics at Rice University, was director of NSF from 1993 to 1998 and science advisor to President Clinton beginning in 1998. Thomas Kalil, assistant to the chancellor for science and technology at the University of California at Berkeley, was deputy assistant to the president for technology and economic policy and deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Clinton administration, 2007, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Present at the Creation, http://www.issues.org/21.4/lane.html)

The NNI funding has resulted in an expansion of fundamental understanding of nanoscale phenomena and many research results with potentially revolutionary applications. In widely cited journals such as Science, Nature, and Physical Review Letters,the percentage of journal articles related to nanoscale S&E has increased from 1 percent in 1992 to over 5 percent by 2003. The breadth of activity is impressive. For example , researchers are developing: ¶ The use of gold nanoshells with localized heating for the targeted destruction of malignant cancer cells, an approach that involves minimal side effects.¶ Genetically engineered viruses that can self-assemble inorganic materials such as gallium arsenide. ¶ Low-cost hybrid solar cells that combine inorganic “nanorods” with conducting polymers. ¶ A scale that can detect a zeptogram, the weight of a single protein.¶ Quantum dots that can “slow light,” opening the door to all-optical networks.¶ Nanoscale iron particles that can reduce the costs of cleaning up contaminated groundwater.¶ The increased funding has also triggered broader institutional responses at leading U.S. research universities. Universities are hiring more faculty in this interdisciplinary area, investing in new buildings that are capable of housing 21st-century nanoscience research and creating shared facilities for nanoscale imaging, characterization, synthesis, and fabrication. Colleges and departments are experimenting in educating truly interdisciplinary nanoscientists and engineers, with new courses, lab rotations, and two or more faculty mentors in different disciplines. Environment Nanotech solves the hydrogen economy- faster generation, integral to solve Walsh 7 (Ben, MSci PhD MRSC, “Environmentally Beneficial Nanotechnologies”, May 2007, http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/reports/reportpdf/report86.pdf //nz)

Hydrogen (and oxygen as a by‐product) can be generated through electrolysis or directly catalysed decomposition of water. Hydrogen can then potentially be stored indefinitely, although its small molecular size and gaseous nature make storage difficult when combined with the need for substantial energy densities. Using fuel cells, hydrogen can be reacted with oxygen (usually from the atmosphere) to generate water and usable electricity. Nanotechnology is likely to be a key component in generation, storage and use of hydrogen as a fuel source. If the electricity used to generate the hydrogen from water is produced via renewable means, this system could be used to store and transport excess electricity. Hydrogen has the potential to replace traditional hydrocarbons as the major source of energy in the UK. There are three stages to this process where nanotechnology is likely to play a leading role: • the generation of hydrogen from water • the storage of hydrogen • the controlled reaction of hydrogen with oxygen to form electricity (fuel cell). Hydrogen generation via electrolysis This method electrically charges two plates containing a catalyst which converts water into oxygen and hydrogen. Nanoparticles and nanostructures on the surface of these plates can increase the overall efficiency and speed of this process. This technique could reduce the cost of developing an extensive hydrogen transport network by greater production of hydrogen by the end user. Recent research into porphyrin (a common molecule used by plants in photosynthesis) nanotubes with particles of platinum coated onto their surface has shown promise as an effective catalyst for photolytic splitting of water. Although in its early stages, there is the potential for nanotechnology to provide a solution from an unexpected avenue. Light metal hydrides react with hydrogen, essentially encapsulating the hydrogen on the surface of the compound. To maximise hydrogen absorption, such materials are likely to be in the form of nanopowders or nanoporous matrices to expose the largest surface area to hydrogen gas. Therefore nanotechnology is integral to this method of hydrogen storage.

Nanotech solves fuel additives and efficiency, 7% improvement, tech available Walsh 7 (Ben, MSci PhD MRSC, “Environmentally Beneficial Nanotechnologies”, May 2007, http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/reports/reportpdf/report86.pdf //nz)

Fuel and lubricant additives are near or at ‐ market sol utions that can deliver small but globally significant carbon savings and emissions reductions through use in conventional engine systems without modification. We estimate that nanotechnology can deliver 7 % improvement in fuel consumption and pollution emissions across the two applications with greatest improvements in diesel engine fuel consumption and emissions. Given the concerns of climate change due to fossil fuel consumption and threats to public health from particulate emissions from road transport, there is a justification for government intervention for the common good. This could take the form of accelerating health and safety research, combined with support for validation trials. Given that this technology is currently available, it is possible to estimate its implementation cost. This is approximately £20‐£80 per tonne of carbon dioxide and therefore compares favourably with Defra’s figure of the social cost of carbon at around £70 per tonne. It also compares favourably with the cost of using bio ‐ diesel estimated to give a carbon cost of £140 per tonne of carbon dioxide. A key issue will be the trade off (if any) between support for such modest near market developments and support for longer term more radical changes that will deliver much greater environmental benefit, but will require greater system changes in order to achieve them. Supporting solely such near market solutions may simply reinforce the current fossil fuel based technology unless funding for alternative, more resource efficient technologies is provided at the same time. Nanocoatings for turbines is a much less contentious area in which conventional R&D support aids the development of advanced coatings. We estimate that nanotechnology based coatings and surface treatments are likely to improve turbine efficiencies by about 0.5% after fuller development. However potential risks are much lower and, because of the primacy of specification and approval procedures, government policy has much less capacity for influence. We propose therefore that there are no special policy issues of contention to be raised.

Nanotech solves solar cells - improves overall efficiency, and are extremely cheeap Walsh 7 (Ben, MSci PhD MRSC, “Environmentally Beneficial Nanotechnologies”, May 2007, http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/reports/reportpdf/report86.pdf //nz)

Photovoltaic technologies offer a potentially unlimited source of emission free, renewable energy by converting sunlight into electricity. The development of this alternative energy source is dependent on the availability of the energy generator and primarily solar radiation. This is clearly dependant on location and weather conditions. More favourable sites, such as Saharan Africa, can provide approximately 2,300KWh/m2 of energy per year, whereas, in the UK, the higher latitudes and less accommodating weather conditions result in practical levels possibly as low as 800KWh/m2 of energy per year. Based on current state of the art solar cells, this equates to approximately 20‐30m2 of solar cell required to power the average household. A potentially better metric than overall efficiency of a solar cell is to examine the cost of electricity generation. Currently, for the best suited sites, photovoltaic power generation, costs approximately €4‐5/W. Current estimates suggest that these costs can be reduced to €3.5/W by 2010 and €2/W by 2020, with a further decrease to about €1/W by 2030, but all these predictions are based on the assumption that major breakthroughs will occur in photovoltaic technologies. It is also assumed that energy conversion efficiencies will increase to between 30% and 50% after 2030. These major breakthroughs are, in part, predicted to emerge from the incorporation of nanotechnology. Nanoparticle silicon systems. It is hoped that by using nanoparticles of silicon the manufacturing costs can be reduced and (due to increases in surface area) the overall efficiency of the solar cell can be improved. However there are problems with the nanoparticles oxidising which limits the efficiency of the devices. New encapsulation technologies are required to abate this problem. Also the cost of silicon is a significant portion (approximately 40%) of the overall cost. Flexible film technology. A thin sheet of polymer can be coated in photovoltaic nanoparticles to create what is essentially a flexible solar cell. These flexible film solar cells could potentially be extremely cheap to produce (orders of magnitude cheaper than silicon cells). A major obstacle to the development of these systems is the development of a coating technology which provides flexible adhesion of the nanoparticles to the plastic film. Techniques such as inkjet printing or roll‐to‐roll printing may provide a high throughput solution.

Nanotech solves batteries- greater and faster charges Walsh 7 (Ben, MSci PhD MRSC, “Environmentally Beneficial Nanotechnologies”, May 2007, http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/reports/reportpdf/report86.pdf //nz)

The problems of range and power are being addressed. For example the Tesla Roadster fully electric sports car(due to be released in early 2008) has similar performance to a Porsche Boxster and has a range of 250 miles. However, its recharge time is still several hours. Nanotechnology is seen as a lead candidate to address this problem. In a Li‐ion battery, the recharge and discharge rate are limited by the rate of adsorption and desorption of lithium from the anode and cathode of the battery. An increase in surface area of the electrode will allow more lithium to absorb faster onto the surface of the electrode. Also, in theory, these systems can store greater charges because there is a larger surface area for the lithium to react with. Research on batteries involving nanotechnology is focused on developing nanostructured electrodes which provide a high surface area, are low cost, easy to produce and stable (to avoid reduction in battery performance over its lifetime). In the USA, Altairnano have replaced the carbon graphite electrode of a standard Li‐ion battery with a nanostructured lithium titanate spinel oxide (LTO) electrode. These electrodes are claimed to have a 100 times higher surface area than the standard graphite electrode speeding the recharge and discharge rate of the battery. The low reactivity of these materials reduces the reactions between the electrode and the electrolyte which can increase charging time. The low reactivity of the electrode also extends the lifetime of the battery and allows it to function in more extreme climates than conventional Li‐ion batteries. However, the battery holds less charge than a conventional Li‐ion battery. This battery system is being used by the Phoenix Motor Company (based in California) in an electric vehicle which is due for limited release in 2007. Using a special adaptor the car can be charged in under ten minutes or overnight using conventional mains plugs. It also addresses part of the stigma associated with electric powered vehicles, as it is certified for use on freeways, has a top speed of 95 mph and a range of 130 miles. It is planned to extend this range to 250 miles by 2008. Hence companies are claiming significant advances based on nanotechnologies in making electric cars competitive with liquid fuelled ones. These developments, if fully verified, are likely to be 5‐ 10 years from introduction onto the mass market. Qinetiq are collaborating with several major battery and automotive manufacturers to develop new batteries. The research is industrially sensitive but does involve using nanostructures to improve battery performance. Researchers at the University of St Andrews are developing nanostructured materials which are able to hold more lithium than standard Li‐ion battery electrodes. The development of these materials is likely to result in batteries with higher charge density. Bioterror

Nanotech solves bioterror and disease

Foladori et al 05 Professor at Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas; Invernizzi-Senior associate at the Wilson Center (Guillermo, Noela, “Nanotechnology and the Developing World:¶ Will Nanotechnology Overcome Poverty or¶ Widen Disparities?”, 2005, Vol. 2, Issue 3, Article 11, http://estudiosdeldesarrollo.net/administracion/docentes/documentos_pers onales/11947LBJ.pdf//VS) Ageing mechanisms could be retarded and ¶ even reversed, with the human lifespan’s being lengthened significantly. With these artificial sensors, a ¶ person could become a bionic being, improving her biological capacities and developing others. Some ¶ even envision nanotechnology applications that will improve human perception and ability at ¶ fundamental levels. The field of prostheses is also among the most promising.¶ In the materials field, one novelty will be intelligent nanoparticles. Your wardrobe, for example, ¶ could be reduced to one single article. The item of clothing you have will react to changes in ¶ temperature, rainfall, snow and sun, among other elements, keeping the body always at the programmed ¶ temperature. Furthermore, it will repel sweat and dust, which will mean that it will not require washing. ¶ As if this were not enough, it would stop bacteria or viruses from penetrating it, protecting it even from ¶ possible bioterrorist attacks. In the case of an accident, your clothes would have healing effects, offering ¶ first aid. The same that applies to clothing could be adapted to certain dwellings and modes of transport. ¶ Another novelty is that carbon nanotubes are stronger than steel and only 1/6 of its weight. This will have ¶ a special impact on the aerospace, construction, automobile industries and many others. The field of computer science will be one of the earliest industries affected and will enjoy the most ¶ revolutionary change. Computers can be a hundred times faster and much smaller and lighter, and can be ¶ custom built according to the tastes of the buyer in terms of design, size, shape, color, smell and ¶ resistance. Prototypes with built-in sensors will speed up designs, adapting to flexible production ¶ processes in different parts of the world, overcoming many of the barriers that distance now imposes. ¶ The old “just-in-time” production mode will become obsolete and may very well become the “as-youneed” mode of production. The possibilities for monopolistic concentration of production (global ¶ business enterprises) will multiply.¶ The combination of computerized systems, chemical laboratories, miniature sensors and living ¶ beings adapted to specific functions will revolutionize medicine (e.g., lab-on-a-chip) and also provide ¶ rapid solutions to the historical problems of contamination. Small bacteria with sensors may be able to ¶ consume bodies of water that have been contaminated by heavy metals, or decontaminate the atmosphere ¶ in record time. Nanocapsules with combined systems of sensors and additives will revolutionize the ¶ industries such as lubricants, pharmaceuticals and filters, to make no mention of others Immortality Nanotech revolutionizes biological functions—removes age restrictions— infinite resource access and space colonization solves overpopulation —our evidence assumes your warrants ***[not really sure how useful this card is, but it’s pretty badass]***

Merta 10 (E. Merta, University of New Mexico School of Law, Health Sciences Library, “THE NANOTECHNOLOGY AGENDA:¶ MOLECULAR MACHINES AND SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION¶ IN THE 21st CENTURY”, 3/22/2010, http://www.checs.net/checs_00/presentations/nanotech.htm//VS) The same technology, they say, can be used to prevent aging. Since aging is simply a breakdown in the biochemical processes of cells over time, and nanorobots can eventually be used to prevent any such breakdown, human cells and the bodies they form can be preserved in a healthy condition indefinitely. Inherent limits on the human lifespan need no longer exist in the nanotechnology era, and so they should be removed. Drexler and his colleagues thus favor the possibility of centuries-long life spans for any individual as a deliberate objective of human societies.[41] According to their worldview, the use of nanotechnology to preserve health and youth can and should enable the elimination of all weakness, infirmity, and limits on human ability. Any cellular or physiological process that exists in nature will, in all likelihood, be amenable to duplication and improvement by nanoscale devices. The resulting capability for full control of human cell structure and physiology will mean that handicaps like blindness, deafness, and paralysis need no longer exist. Artificial nanotech cells, organs, and limbs will permit elimination of age-old limits on strength, endurance, and agility. Bones could be made of diamond, for instance, or lungs rebuilt to breathe poisonous atmospheres. Brain enhancements by means of artificial, improved neurons will mean that limits on memory and intelligence need no longer exist. A single artificial neuron could store the entire Library of Congress, accessible to an individual on demand. Brains could have the ability to link directly via nanoengineered devices with computers, with other brains, or with the Internet. All persons, the nanotechnologist social agenda posits, should have access to physical and mental performance enhancements that seem, after extensive research, safe and beneficial.[42]¶ While nanotechnology alters the basics of human biology, nanotechnologists maintain, molecular manufacturing should be used to eliminate scarcity and poverty from society. In Drexler�s vision, self-replicating nanorobots able to reshape matter at will promise to bring abundance, prosperity, and comfort to the whole human population for the first time since humans arrived on Earth. In the age of nanotechnology, households inhabited by immortal, healthy, energetic enhanced humans could come equipped with home manufacturing devices able to provide all the basic necessities of life for very little cost. This low cost will result from three factors. First, the basic raw material of all manufacturing will become carbon, an element that the Earth�s environment provides in virtually limitless abundance. Second, the nanorobots that do the manufacturing will be self-replicating. You only need to build one � it will then copy itself as needed, for free, without human labor, so long as carbon raw materials are available. Third, Drexler predicates his vision on the argument that molecular manufacturing will ultimately be controlled by automated, artificial intelligence systems capable of operating largely without human direction. Such systems will be made possible, he contends, by nanomedical research into the structure and workings of the human brain. Self replication, abundant carbon, and artificial intelligence will, it is hoped, eliminate the scarcity of labor, raw materials and other resources that once limited the availability of products. Human material needs will be fulfilled simply by asking an automated manufacturing facility to make a desired object � whether it be food, a rocket engine, medical nanorobots, a kitchen knife, clothing, or a house. [43]¶ On the issue of nanotech solutions to scarcity, the nanotechnologists� argument again goes: since we can, we should. To them, the self evident desirability of eradicating poverty and ensuring a healthy, prosperous life for all human beings outweigh, on balance, any potential objections to nanotechnology. Confronting fears that greatly lengthened life spans would lead to even greater overpopulation than exists today, the nanotech visionaries respond that nano-driven material abundance would provide for the population � s needs while nano-enabled space travel would provide greatly expanded living space. The entire solar system, and perhaps beyond, would become the home of humanity. Individual mobility, freedom, opportunity, and prosperity would be available to an unprecedented extent. The science and technology community would be morally remiss, Eric Drexler writes, if it failed to pursue this opportunity to build a decent life for the whole human family and put an end to the most ancient forms of human suffering.[44] Energy Nanotech solves clean energy and environmental sustainability

Science Daily 05 (Science Daily Magazine, “Nanotechnology's Miniature Answers To Developing World's Biggest Problems”, 05/12/2005, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/050512120050.htm//VS) With a high degree of unanimity, panelists selected energy production, conversion and storage, along with creation of alternative fuels, as the area where nanotechnology applications are most likely to benefit developing countries.¶ "Economic development and energy consumption are inextricably linked," says Singer. "If nanotechnology can help developing countries to move towards energy self-sufficiency, then the benefits of economic growth will become that much more accessible."¶ Study leader Dr. Fabio Salamanca-Buentello explained that nano-structured materials are being used to build a new generation of solar cells, hydrogen fuel cells and novel hydrogen storage systems that will deliver clean energy to countries still reliant on traditional, non-renewable contaminating fuels.¶ As well, recent advances in the creation of synthetic nano-membranes embedded with proteins are capable of turning light into chemical energy.¶ "These technologies will help people in developing countries avoid recurrent shortages and price fluctuations that come with dependence on fossil fuels, as well as the environmental consequences of mining and burning oil and coal," he says. Ag Nanotech solves agricultural production and soil fertility

Science Daily 05 (Science Daily Magazine, “Nanotechnology's Miniature Answers To Developing World's Biggest Problems”, 05/12/2005, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/050512120050.htm//VS) Number two on the list is agriculture, where science is developing a range of inexpensive nanotech applications to increase soil fertility and crop production, and help eliminate malnutrition - a contributor to more than half the deaths of children under five in developing countries.¶ Nanotech materials are in development for the slow release and efficient dosage of fertilizers for plants and of nutrients and medicines for livestock. Other agricultural developments include nano-sensors to monitor the health of crops and farm animals and magnetic nano-particles to remove soil contaminants.¶

Agriculture production in developing countries is key to GLOBAL food security and poverty reduction

UN 08 (United Nations, “Addressing the global food crisis Key trade, investment and commodity policies in ¶ ensuring sustainable food security and ¶ alleviating poverty”, 2008, http://unctad.org/en/Docs/osg20081_en.pdf//VS) 15. There are less obvious structural long-term causes of the global ¶ food crisis that are just as significant and that have indeed led to have ¶ such a serious impact on food availability. These structural factors ¶ mainly affect the supply side – in particular, the difficulties many ¶ developing countries face in increasing agricultural production and ¶ productivity to meet food domestic consumption and for international ¶ trade. The causes of this production crisis have profound implications ¶ for food security (and poverty reduction) in terms of production, ¶ consumption and trade in developing countries. To a large extent, these ¶ problems stem from the inherent tensions that exist because the ¶ agriculture and food sectors are seen as being unlike any other economic ¶ sector. Such tensions raise important policy issues which will have to be ¶ addressed in a balanced manner so that factors that have contributed to ¶ the current crisis can be addressed for the benefit of all affected. ¶ 16. The fundamental factor underlying the supply shortage is that, ¶ particularly in the last two decades, agricultural productivity has been ¶ relatively low in developing countries and even decreasing in many ¶ LDCs – a symptom of long-term neglect of the agricultural sector. On ¶ average, annual agricultural productivity in LDCs (as measured by total ¶ factor production (land and labour)) between 1961 and 2003 showed a ¶ decline of 0.1 per cent, as against only about 0.6 per cent for developing ¶ countries. In LDCs and African countries, these low agriculture growth rates have had important adverse implications for economic ¶ growth and poverty reduction. Even in rapidly growing large developing ¶ countries such as India, however, many farmers continue to lead lives of ¶ mere subsistence Space Col/Asteroids

Nanotechnology key to launch vehicles—overcomes status quo cost hurdles

Globus et al 98 (A. Globus*, D. Bailey**, J. Han***, R. Jaffe****, C. Levit*****, R. Merkle******, D. Srivastava*******, * Senior Research Associate for Human Factors Research and Technology at San Jose State University at NASA Ames Research Center. Research associate at the Molecular Engineering Laboratory in the chemistry department of the University of California at Santa Cruz, ** senior scientist for the computational research department at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, *** professor in geotechnical engineering at Department of Civil, Environmental, & Architectural Engineering at the University of Kansas, ****no qualifications cited, ***** Creon Levit is a research scientist ¶ in the Advanced Supercomputing ¶ Division at NASA Ames Research ¶ Center, ****** computer scientist, researcher, and leading proponent of molecular manufacturing, ******* Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics¶ Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics, “NASA applications of molecular nanotechnology”, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, volume 51, pp. 145-152, 1998, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/NASAapplications.html//VS) Launch Vehicles¶ [Drexler 92a] proposed a nanotechnology based on diamond and investigated its potential properties. In particular, he examined applications for materials with a strength similar to that of diamond (69 times strength/mass of titanium). This would require a very mature nanotechnology constructing systems by placing atoms on diamond surfaces one or a few at a time in parallel. Assuming diamondoid materials, [McKendree 95] predicted the performance of several existing single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) vehicle designs. The predicted payload to dry mass ratio for these vehicles using titanium as a structural material varied from < 0 (the vehicle won't work) to 36%, i.e., the vehicle weighs substantially more than the payload. With hypothetical diamondoid materials the ratios varied from 243% to 653%, i.e., the payload weighs far more than the vehicle. Using a very simple cost model ($1000 per vehicle kilogram) sometimes used in the aerospace industry, he estimated the cost per kilogram launched to low-Earth- orbit for diamondoid structured vehicles should be $153-412. This would meet NASA's 2020 launch to orbit cost goals. Estimated costs for titanium structured vehicles varied from $16,000- 59,000/kg. Although this cost model is probably adequate for comparison, the absolute costs are suspect.¶ [Drexler 92b] used a more speculative methodology to estimate that a four passenger SSTO weighing three tons including fuel could be built using a mature nanotechnology. Using McKendree's cost model, such a vehicle would cost about $60,000 to purchase -- the cost of today's high-end luxury automobiles.¶ These studies assumed a fairly advanced nanotechnology capable of building diamondoid materials. In the nearer term, it may be possible to develop excellent structural materials using carbon nanotubes. Carbon nanotubes have a Young's modulus of approximately one terapascal -- comparable to diamond. Studies of carbon nanotube strength include [Treacy 96], [Yacobson 96], and [Srivastava 97a]. Nanotech key to light sail production—the impact is efficient interplanetary transportation Globus et al 98 (A. Globus*, D. Bailey**, J. Han***, R. Jaffe****, C. Levit*****, R. Merkle******, D. Srivastava*******, * Senior Research Associate for Human Factors Research and Technology at San Jose State University at NASA Ames Research Center. Research associate at the Molecular Engineering Laboratory in the chemistry department of the University of California at Santa Cruz, ** senior scientist for the computational research department at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, *** professor in geotechnical engineering at Department of Civil, Environmental, & Architectural Engineering at the University of Kansas, ****no qualifications cited, ***** Creon Levit is a research scientist ¶ in the Advanced Supercomputing ¶ Division at NASA Ames Research ¶ Center, ****** computer scientist, researcher, and leading proponent of molecular manufacturing, ******* Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics¶ Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics, “NASA applications of molecular nanotechnology”, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, volume 51, pp. 145-152, 1998, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/NASAapplications.html//VS) Interplanetary transportation¶ [Drexler 92b] calculates that lightsails made of 20 nm aluminum in tension should achieve an outward acceleration of ~14 km/s per day at Earth orbit with no payload and minimal structural overhead. For comparison, the delta V from low Earth to geosynchronous orbit is 3.8 km/s. Lightsails generate thrust by reflecting sunlight. Tension is achieved by rotating the sail. The direction of thrust is normal to the sail and away from the Sun. By directing thrust along or against the velocity vector, orbits can be lowered or raised. This form of transportation requires no reaction mass and generates thrust continuously, although the instantaneous acceleration is small so sails cannot operate in an atmosphere and must be large for even moderate payloads.

Nanotech key to space transportation technology

Nanotech key to small asteroid retrieval—that solves space colonization

Globus et al 98 (A. Globus*, D. Bailey**, J. Han***, R. Jaffe****, C. Levit*****, R. Merkle******, D. Srivastava*******, * Senior Research Associate for Human Factors Research and Technology at San Jose State University at NASA Ames Research Center. Research associate at the Molecular Engineering Laboratory in the chemistry department of the University of California at Santa Cruz, ** senior scientist for the computational research department at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, *** professor in geotechnical engineering at Department of Civil, Environmental, & Architectural Engineering at the University of Kansas, ****no qualifications cited, ***** Creon Levit is a research scientist ¶ in the Advanced Supercomputing ¶ Division at NASA Ames Research ¶ Center, ****** computer scientist, researcher, and leading proponent of molecular manufacturing, ******* Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics¶ Professor of Pediatrics and of Biochemistry and Biophysics, “NASA applications of molecular nanotechnology”, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, volume 51, pp. 145-152, 1998, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/NASAapplications.html//VS) In situ resource utilization is undoubtedly necessary for large scale colonization of the solar system. Asteroids are particularly promising for orbital use since many are in near Earth orbits. Moving asteroids into low Earth orbit for utilization poses a safety problem should the asteroid get out of control and enter the atmosphere. Very small asteroids can cause significant destruction. The 1908 Tunguska explosion, which [Chyba 93) calculated to be a 60 meter diameter stony asteroid, leveled 2,200 km2 of forest. [Hills 93] calculated that 4 meter diameter iron asteroids are near the threshold for ground damage. Both these calculations assumed high collision speeds. At a density of 7.7 g/cm3 [Babadzhanov 93], a 3 meter diameter asteroid should have a mass of about 110 tons. [Rabinowitz 97] estimates that there are about one billion ten meter diameter near Earth asteroids and there should be far more smaller objects.¶ For colonization applications one would ideally provide the same radiation protection available on Earth. Each square meter on Earth is protected by about 10 tons of atmosphere. Therefore, structures orbiting below the van Allen belts would like 10 tons/meter2 surface area shielding mass. This would dominate the mass requirements of any system and require one small asteroid for each 11 meter2 of colony exterior surface area. A 10,000 person cylindrical space colony such as Lewis One [Globus 91] with a diameter of almost 500 meters and a length of nearly 2000 meters would require a minimum of about 90,000 retrieval missions to provide the shielding mass. The large number of missions required suggests that a fully automated, replicating nanotechnology may be essential to build large low Earth orbit colonies from small asteroids.¶ A nanotechnology swarm along with an atomically precise lightsail is a promising small asteroid retrieval system. Lightsail propulsion insures that no mass will be lost as reaction mass. The swarm can control the lightsail by shifting mass. When a target asteroid is found, the swarm spreads out over the surface to form a bag. The interface to the sail must be active to account for the rotation of the asteroid -- which is unlikely to have an axis-of- rotation in the proper direction to apply thrust for the return to Earth orbit. The active interface is simply swarm elements that transfer between each other to allow the sail to stay in the proper orientation. Of course, there are many other possibilities for nanotechnology based retrieval vehicles. AT Nanotech Impossible

Nanotech is feasible—prefer this evidence—assumes your warrants

Nanotech risks are based off false assumptions – safety standards already in place and no support for risks

Salvi 8 – Vice President of NanoBusiness Alliance, Bachelor of Science in Computer Science (Aatish, “fake fears shouldn’t stop progress,” Los Angeles Times, 2/26/2008, http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/scimedemail/la-op-salvi- kimbrell26feb26,0,4037148.story)//RH Technological innovation is inevitable, and nanotechnology is the next step. A more appropriate question is what have we learned over the course of technological innovation that will ensure nanotechnological innovation is developed prudently and in a way that achieves all that we believe it will. We have learned much about the responsible development of technologies, which serves society well in commercializing nanotechnology. To date, for example, there have been no reported problems associated with any products using nanotechnology. This is because manufacturers are applying their risk mitigation and best practices consistently and responsibly. One cannot draw general conclusions about the risks of nanomaterials, let alone nanotechnology. The risks will depend on how we make specific products using nanotechnology and how we use them. George, you conclude that nanomaterials have enhanced intrinsic toxicity based on one variable — size. I have not seen a single scientific study to support that claim. In fact, studies have shown size is not the sole driver of hazard and is generally thought to be less important than surface properties. Sunscreen's use of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles has become a hot-button issue. You claim that these particles produce free radicals "causing DNA damage to human skin cells." Natural sunlight also causes DNA damage to skin cells, which is why we wear sunscreen. The World Health Organization estimates that cancers resulting from ultraviolet sun light exposure cause 60,000 deaths annually. The Environmental Working Group evaluated more than 900 sunscreens; of the top 100, 94 contained zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. It concluded: "Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are stable compounds that provide broad spectrum UVA and UVB protection, while the available studies consistently show very little or zero penetration of intact skin by these compounds, indicating that real world exposure to potential nano-sized particles in these products is likely very low (Borm 2006). The sun protection benefits, in contrast, are very high." George, your statement that "there is no method currently for limiting, controlling, or even measuring exposure to nanomaterials in the workplace" is simply wrong. Engineering controls (for examples, manufacturing in enclosed environments) can greatly reduce or nearly eliminate exposure. Furthermore, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has found that wearing personal protective equipment such as face masks prevent more than 99% of nanomaterials from entering the body. NIOSH also has visited nanomaterial manufacturers to quantify workplace nanoparticulate matter. In most of these facilities, the primary source of nanoparticulate matter is not the manufacturing process but emissions from the facilities' furnaces. In some cases, urban air contains more nanoparticles than air inside the manufacturing facility. George, you also say that nanomaterials have "unprecedented mobility" and might find their way into biological places that their larger counterparts cannot penetrate. Your observation neglects to note that certain nanoscale materials are designed to achieve this result. Cancer victims hope that nanoscale materials will travel to new biological frontiers and deliver cancer-curing relief. As for other engineered nanomaterials, your statement neglects to note that these materials are produced in controlled environments, under specific circumstances and for specific applications. Nanotechnology companies are committed to ensuring the safety of nanotech-enabled products. Such companies are taking proactive steps to ensure the safety of their workers, the public and the environment. They are partnering with NIOSH to develop data on workplace exposures; participating in the Environmental Protection Agency's Nanomaterials Stewardship Program to provide data on the existing nanomaterials in commerce; and practicing good product stewardship. Nanotechnology is already demonstrating that it will provide significant benefits to the public, our nation and the environment. We should not let generic fear of "nanotechnology risks" prevent us from harnessing this new frontier of innovation to create real products that provide compelling real-world benefits. AT: Grey Goo U.S. leadership key to development of safety measures that prevent gray goo – the impact is extinction

Bailey 3 – Ronald, award-winning science correspondent for Reason magazine; former Fellow in Environmental Journalism at the Competitive Enterprise Institute; former Lecturer at Harvard, MIT, and U-Virginia; named one of the personalities who have made the "most significant contributions" to biotechnology [Dec, http://reason.com/archives/2003/12/01/the-smaller-the-better/2] Gray Goo The second nanotechnology risk that worries ETC Group activists is runaway self-replication. Mooney points to a scenario suggested by Eric Drexler himself in The Engines of Creation: Self-replicating nanobots get out of control and spread exponentially across the landscape, destroying everything in their path by converting it into copies of themselves. In this scenario, the biosphere is transformed by rampaging nanobots into "gray goo." But according to Nobelist Richard Smalley, "Self-replicating nanorobots like those envisioned by Eric Drexler are simply impossible to make." Mihail Roco likewise dismisses such nanobots as "sci fi," insisting there is "common agreement among scientists that they cannot exist." Drexler replies, reasonably enough, that we know nanoassembly is possible because that's what living things do. Cells, using little machines such as ribosomes, mitochondria, and enzymes, precisely position molecules, store and access assembly instructions, and produce energy. Some have quipped that biology is nanotechnology that works. As that analogy suggests, there is a close affinity between nanotechnology and biotechnology. "The separation between nanotechnology and biotechnology is almost nonexistent," said Minoo Dastoor, a senior adviser in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Office of Aerospace Technology, at the National Nanotechnology Initiative's conference in April. For future missions, NASA needs machines that are resilient, evolvable, self-sufficient, ultra-efficient, and autonomous. "Biology seems to be able to do all these things very elegantly and efficiently," noted Dastoor. "The wet world of biology and the dry world of nanotechnology will have to live side by side and merge." The fact is that no one has yet definitively shown that Drexler's vision of molecular manufacturing using nanoassemblers is impossible. So let's suppose Smalley and Roco are wrong, and such nanobots are possible. How dangerous would self-replicating nanobots be? One of the ironies of the debate over regulation of nanotechnology is that it was nanotech boosters like Drexler who first worried about such risks. To address potential dangers such as the uncontrolled self-replication envisioned in his gray goo scenario, Drexler and others founded the Foresight Institute in 1989. Over the years, Foresight devised a set of guidelines aimed at preventing mishaps like a gray goo breakout. Among other things, the Foresight guidelines propose that nanotech replicators "must not be capable of replication in a natural, uncontrolled environment." This could be accomplished, the guidelines suggest, by designing devices so that they have an "absolute dependence on a single artificial fuel source or artificial 'vitamins' that don't exist in any natural environment." So if some replicators should get away, they would simply run down when they ran out of fuel. Another proposal is that self-replicating nanotech devices be "dependent on broadcast transmissions for replication or in some cases operation." That would put human operators in complete control of the circumstances under which nanotech devices could replicate. One other sensible proposal is that devices be programmed with termination dates. Like senescent cells in the human body, such devices would stop working and self-destruct when their time was up. "The moratorium is not a new proposal," says Foresight Institute President Christine Peterson. "Eric Drexler considered that idea a long time ago in The Engines of Creation and dismissed it as not a safe option. With a moratorium, we, the good guys, are going to be sitting on our hands. It's very risky to let the bad guys be the ones developing the technology. To do arms control on nanotechnology, you'd better have better nanotechnology than the bad guys." Software entrepreneur Ray Kurzweil is confident that nanotech defenses against uncontrolled replication will be stronger than the abilities to replicate. Citing our current ability to reduce computer viruses to nuisances, Kurzweil argues that we will be even more vigilant against a technology that could kill if uncontrolled. Smalley suggests we can learn how to control nanotech by looking at biology. The natural world is filled with self-replicating systems. In a sense, living things are "green goo." We already successfully defend ourselves against all kinds of self-replicating organisms that try to kill us, such as cholera, malaria, and typhoid. "What do we do about biological systems right now?" says Smalley. "I don't see that it's any different from biotechnology. We can make bacteria and viruses that have never existed before, and we'll handle [nanobots] the same way." Nanotech theorist Robert Freitas has written a study, "Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous Nano-replicators With Public Policy Recommendations," which concludes that all "scenarios examined appear to permit early detection by vigilant monitoring, thus enabling rapid deployment of effective defensive instrumentalities." Frei-tas persuasively argues that dangerous self-replicating nanobots could not emerge from laboratory accidents but would have to be made on purpose using very sophisticated technologies that would take years to develop. Laundry list

Science Daily 05 (Science Daily Magazine, “Nanotechnology's Miniature Answers To Developing World's Biggest Problems”, 05/12/2005, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/050512120050.htm//VS) 5. Drug delivery systems: including nano-capsules, dendrimers (tiny bush-like spheres made of branched polymers), and "buckyballs" (soccerball-shaped structures made of 60 carbon atoms) for slow, sustained drug release systems, characteristics valuable for countries without adequate drug storage capabilities and distribution networks. Nanotechnology could also potentially reduce transportation costs and even required dosages by improving shelf-life, thermo-stability and resistance to changes in humidity of existing medications;¶ 6. Food processing and storage: including improved plastic film coatings for food packaging and storage that may enable a wider and more efficient distribution of food products to remote areas in less industrialized countries; antimicrobial emulsions made with nano-materials for the decontamination of food equipment, packaging, or food; and nanotech-based sensors to detect and identify contamination;¶ 7. Air pollution remediation: including nanotech-based innovations that destroy air pollutants with light; make catalytic converters more efficient, cheaper and better controlled; detect toxic materials and leaks; reduce fossil fuel emissions; and separate gases.¶ 8. Construction: including nano-molecular structures to make asphalt and concrete more resistant to water; materials to block ultraviolet and infrared radiation; materials for cheaper and durable housing, surfaces, coatings, glues, concrete, and heat and light exclusion; and self-cleaning for windows, mirrors and toilets.¶ 9. Health monitoring: several nano-devices are being developed to keep track of daily changes in patients' physiological variables such as the levels of glucose, of carbon dioxide, and of cholesterol, without the need for drawing blood in a hospital setting. This way, patients suffering from diabetes would know at any given time the concentration of sugar in their blood; similarly, patients with heart diseases would be able to monitor their cholesterol levels constantly.¶ 10. Disease vector and pest detection control: including nano-scale sensors for pest detection, and improved pesticides, insecticides, and insect repellents.

Nano Bad Nano Econ Decline Nanotech causes disruption of the basis of the economy

CRNano 08 (CRNano, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology TM is an affiliate of World Care, “online: http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm)

The purchaser of a manufactured product today is paying for its design, raw materials, the labor and capital of manufacturing, transportation, storage, and sales. Additional money—usually a fairly low percentage—goes to the owners of all these businesses. If personal nanofactories can produce a wide variety of products when and where they are wanted, most of this effort will become unnecessary. This raises several questions about the nature of a post-nanotech economy. Will products become cheaper? Will capitalism disappear? Will most people retire—or be unemployed? The flexibility of nanofactory manufacturing, and the radical improvement of its products, imply that non- nanotech products will not be able to compete in many areas. If nanofactory technology is exclusively owned or controlled, will this create the world's biggest monopoly, with extreme potential for abusive anti-competitive practices? If it is not controlled, will the availability of cheap copies mean that even the designers and brand marketers don't get paid? Much further study is required, but it seems clear that molecular manufacturing could severely disrupt the present economic structure, greatly reducing the value of many material and human resources, including much of our current infrastructure. Despite utopian post-capitalist hopes, it is unclear whether a workable replacement system could appear in time to prevent the human consequences of massive job displacement.

Nano-built products perpetuate poverty

CRNano 08 (CRNano, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology TM is an affiliate of World Care, “online: http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm)

By today's commercial standards , products built by nanofactories would be immensely valuable. A monopoly would allow the owners of the technology to charge high rates for all products, and make high profits. However, if carried to its logical conclusion, such a practice would deny cheap lifesaving technologies (as simple as water filters or mosquito netting) to millions of people in desperate need. Competition will eventually drive prices down, but an early monopoly is likely for several reasons. Due to other risks listed on this page, it is unlikely that a completely unregulated commercial market will be allowed to exist. In any case, the high cost of development will limit the number of competing projects. Finally, a company that pulls ahead of the pack could use the resulting huge profits to stifle competition by means such as broad enforcement of expansive patents and lobbying for special-interest industry restrictions. The price of a product usually falls somewhere between its value to the purchaser and its cost to the seller. Molecular manufacturing could result in products with a value orders of magnitude higher than their cost. It is likely that the price will be set closer to the value than to the cost; in this case, customers will be unable to gain most of the benefit of "the nanotech revolution". If pricing products by their value is accepted, the poorest people may continue to die of poverty, in a world where products costing literally a few cents would save a life. If (as seems likely) this situation is accepted more by the rich than by the poor, social unrest could add its problems to untold unnecessary human suffering. A recent example is the agreement the World Trade Organization was working on to provide affordable medicines to poor countries—which the Bush administration partially prevented (following heavy lobbying by American pharmaceutical companies) despite furious opposition from every other WTO member. Nano Health Problems Inhaled Nanoparticles go inside the brain and heart Deardorff 12 Julie Deardorff, Chicago Tribune reporter http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-10/health/ct-met- nanotechnology-20120710_1_nanoparticles-sunscreens-chad-mirkin “Scientists: Nanotech-based products offer great potential but unknown risks” The particles can alter how products look or function because matter behaves differently at the nanoscale, taking on unique and mysterious chemical and physical properties. Materials made of nanoparticles may be more conductive, stronger or more chemically reactive than those containing larger particles of the same compound.¶ "Everything old becomes new when miniaturized," said Chad Mirkin, director of the International Institute for Nanotechnology at Northwestern University. "This gives scientists a new playground, one focused on determining what those differences are and how they could be used to make things better."¶ But the development of applications for nanotechnology is rapidly outpacing what scientists know about safe use. The unusual properties that make nanoscale materials attractive may also pose unexpected risks to human health and the environment, according to scientific literature on the subject.¶ "We haven't characterized these materials very well yet in terms of what the potential impacts on living organisms could be," said Kathleen Eggleson, a research scientist at the Center for Nano Science and Technology at the University of Notre Dame.¶ Scientists don't know how long nanoparticles remain in the human body or what they might do there. But research on animals has found that inhaled nanoparticles can reach all areas of the respiratory tract; because of their small size and shape, they can migrate quickly into cells and organs. The smaller particles also might pose risks to the heart and blood vessels, the central nervous system and the immune system, according to theU.S. Food and Drug Administration.¶ Animal studies have shown that some nanoscale materials can cross the protective blood-brain barrier, which could allow pharmaceuticals to deliver medicine directly to the brain to treat tumors or other conditions. But there also is evidence that some nanoparticles could cause damage through oxidative stress and other mechanisms if they reached the brain.¶ Still unknown is "how significant (potential damage) would be, how much nanomaterial would be needed to cause appreciable harm and how well the body would be able to deal with the material and recover," said Andrew Maynard, director of the University of Michigan Risk Science Center.¶ ¶ Though nanomaterials have been used in consumer products for more than a decade, the FDA acknowledged for the first time in April that they differ from their bulk counterparts and have potential new risks that may require testing. In draft guidelines on the safety of nanomaterials in cosmetic products, the agency advised companies to consult with the FDA to find out the best way to test their products.¶ Rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach, the FDA plans to assess nano-enabled products on a case-by-case basis, according to the guidelines. "There is nothing inherently good or bad about a nanomaterial," said Mirkin, who nevertheless thinks each class of material should be considered a new form of matter and reviewed for safety.¶ Several government reports have raised concerns over the lack of environmental, health and safety testing of nanomaterials that are expected to enter the market over the next decade. In 2009, developers generated $1 billion from the sale of nanomaterials; the market is expected to explode to $3 trillion by 2015, according to a report by the National Research Council. Nanotech Crime Nanotech easily employed by criminals and terrorists

CRNano 08 (CRNano, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology TM is an affiliate of World Care, “online: http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm)

Criminals and terrorists with stronger, more powerful, and much more compact devices could do serious damage to society. Defenses against these devices may not be installed immediately or comprehensively. Chemical and biological weapons could become much more deadly and easier to conceal. Many other types of terrifying devices are possible, including several varieties of remote assassination weapons that would be difficult to detect or avoid. As a result of small integrated computers, even tiny weapons could be aimed at targets remote in time and space from the attacker. This will not only impair defense, but also will reduce post-attack detection and accountability. Reduced accountability could reduce civility and security, and increase the attractiveness of some forms of crime. If nanofactory-built weapons were available from a black market or a home factory, it would be quite difficult to detect them before they were launched; a random search capable of spotting them would almost certainly be intrusive enough to violate current human rights standards. Grey goo can be used as a tool for blackmail

CRNano 08 (CRNano, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology TM is an affiliate of World Care, “online: http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm

Although grey goo has essentially no military and no commercial value, and only limited terrorist value, it could be used as a tool for blackmail. Cleaning up a single grey goo outbreak would be quite expensive and require severe physical disruption of the area of the outbreak (atmospheric and oceanic goos deserve special concern for this reason). Another creating and releasing a self-replicating entity apparently is irresistible to a certain personality type, as shown by the large number of computer viruses and worms in existence tolerate a community of "script kiddies" releasing many modified versions of goo. Development and use of molecular manufacturing poses absolutely no risk of creating grey goo by accident at any point. However, goo type systems do not appear to be ruled out by the laws of physics, and we cannot ignore the possibility that the five stated requirements could be combined deliberately at some point, in a device small enough that cleanup would be costly and difficult. irresponsible misuse of powerful technologies. Having lived with the threat of nuclear weapons for half a century, we already know that. may become a concern requiring special policy. Grey goo will be highly difficult to build, however, and non-replicating nano-weaponry may be substantially more dangerous and more imminent. NOTE: In June 2004, which puts the perceived grey goo threat into perspective.

Nano Arms race Nanotech leads to dangerously unstable arms race

CRNano 08 (CRNano, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology TM is an affiliate of World Care, “online: http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm)

Molecular manufacturing raises the possibility of horrifically effective weapons. As an example, the smallest insect is about 200 microns; this creates a plausible size estimate for a nanotech-built antipersonnel weapon capable of seeking and injecting toxin into unprotected humans. The human lethal dose of botulism toxin is about 100 nanograms, or about 1/100 the volume of the weapon. As many as 50 billion toxin-carrying devices—theoretically enough to kill every human on earth—could be packed into a single suitcase. Guns of all sizes would be far more powerful, and their bullets could be self-guided. Aerospace hardware would be far lighter and higher performance; built with minimal or no metal, it would be much harder to spot on radar. Embedded computers would allow remote activation of any weapon, and more compact power handling would allow greatly improved robotics. These ideas barely scratch the surface of what's possible.

Nanotech can easily spiral out of control and lead to mass destruction and fascism William Nelson Joy (is an American computer scientist. Joy co-founded Sun Microsystems in 1982 along with Vinod Khosla, Scott McNealy and Andreas von Bechtolsheim, and served as chief scientist at the company until 2003.) 00¶ http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html?pg=3&topic=&topic_set=

Part of the answer certainly lies in our attitude toward the new - in our bias toward instant familiarity and unquestioning acceptance. Accustomed to living with almost routine scientific breakthroughs, we have yet to come to terms with the fact that the most compelling 21st-century technologies - robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology - pose a different threat than the technologies that have come before. Specifically, robots, engineered organisms, and nanobots share a dangerous amplifying factor: They can self-replicate. A bomb is blown up only once - but one bot can become many, and quickly get out of control.¶ Much of my work over the past 25 years has been on computer networking, where the sending and receiving of messages creates the opportunity for out-of-control replication. But while replication in a computer or a computer network can be a nuisance, at worst it disables a machine or takes down a network or network service. Uncontrolled self-replication in these newer technologies runs a much greater risk: a risk of substantial damage in the physical world.¶ Each of these technologies also offers untold promise: The vision of near immortality that Kurzweil sees in his robot dreams drives us forward; genetic engineering may soon provide treatments, if not outright cures, for most diseases; and nanotechnology and nanomedicine can address yet more ills. Together they could significantly extend our average life span and improve the quality of our lives. Yet, with each of these technologies, a sequence of small, individually sensible advances leads to an accumulation of great power and, concomitantly, great danger.What was different in the 20th century? Certainly, the technologies underlying the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) - nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) - were powerful, and the weapons an enormous threat. But building nuclear weapons required, at least for a time, access to both rare - indeed, effectively unavailable - raw materials and highly protected information; biological and chemical weapons programs also tended to require large-scale activities.¶ The 21st-century technologies - genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR) - are so powerful that they can spawn whole new classes of accidents and abuses. Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents and abuses are widely within the reach of individuals or small groups. They will not require large facilities or rare raw materials. Knowledge alone will enable the use of them.¶ Thus we have the possibility not just of weapons of mass destruction but of knowledge-enabled mass destruction (KMD), this destructiveness hugely amplified by the power of self-replication.¶ I think it is no exaggeration to say we are on the cusp of the further perfection of extreme evil, an evil whose possibility spreads well beyond that which weapons of mass destruction bequeathed to the nation-states, on to a surprising and terrible empowerment of extreme individuals. Nanotech could create a utopian future and it’s inevitable William Nelson Joy (is an American computer scientist. Joy co-founded Sun Microsystems in 1982 along with Vinod Khosla, Scott McNealy and Andreas von Bechtolsheim, and served as chief scientist at the company until 2003.) 00 http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html?pg=3&topic=&topic_set=

The many wonders of nanotechnology were first imagined by the Nobel-laureate physicist Richard Feynman in a speech he gave in 1959, subsequently published under the title "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom." The book that made a big impression on me, in the mid-'80s, was Eric Drexler'sEngines of Creation, in which he described beautifully how manipulation of matter at the atomic level could create a utopian future of abundance, where just about everything could be made cheaply, and almost any imaginable disease or physical problem could be solved using nanotechnology and artificial intelligences.¶ A subsequent book,Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, which Drexler cowrote, imagines some of the changes that might take place in a world where we had molecular-level "assemblers." Assemblers could make possible incredibly low-cost solar power, cures for cancer and the common cold by augmentation of the human immune system, essentially complete cleanup of the environment, incredibly inexpensive pocket supercomputers - in fact, any product would be manufacturable by assemblers at a cost no greater than that of wood - spaceflight more accessible than transoceanic travel today, and restoration of extinct species.¶ I remember feeling good about nanotechnology after readingEngines of Creation. As a technologist, it gave me a sense of calm - that is, nanotechnology showed us that incredible progress was possible, and indeed perhaps inevitable. If nanotechnology was our future, then I didn't feel pressed to solve so many problems in the present. I would get to Drexler's utopian future in due time; I might as well enjoy life more in the here and now. It didn't make sense, given his vision, to stay up all night, all the time. Case Defense Cleanup Efforts Fail Ocean cleanups fail—microplastics make collection difficult, we would kill off vital populations of plankton

PPC 2010 — Plastic Pollution Coalition, an organization dedicated to finding safe methods to clean up various plastic toxins, including marine debris, through topic education/discourse and global connectivity (“Ocean Cleanups,” Common Misconceptions, 2010, available at http://plasticpollutioncoalition.org/learn/common- misconceptions/, accessed July 19th, 2014)

By most estimates, hundreds of millions of metric tons of plastic debris currently floats in the ocean. The plastic is fragmented into small pieces, scattered throughout the water column. There are no visible islands of trash anywhere, but rather a ocean soup laced with plastic. This makes cleaning the oceans a very difficult proposition, technically or economically. Any cleanup has the potential to not only remove the plastics but also the plankton, which is the base of the food chain, and is responsible for capturing half of the CO2 of our atmosphere and generating half of the oxygen we need to breathe. We applaud the efforts of any group inspired by a vision of clean oceans and healthy sea life, and working to put an end to plastic pollution. But we also caution that these efforts would only succeed if we work together to stop the millions of metric tons of plastic that is dumped into the ocean each year. Plastic Pollution Coalition believes in stopping plastic pollution at the source. This is something we can do now. Aff argument: Plastic High Plastic in the ocean is increasing Madren 12 Carrie Madren (Report and write articles for a variety of publications including Scientific American, Maryland Life magazine, American Forests, AAAS MemberCentral (American Assoc for the Advancement of Science), Washingtonian, The Washington Post's Capital Business, Interpreter magazine and more. Studied at GWU and Wesleyan) July 16, 2012 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/plastic-in-oceans-may-help-some-species/ Plastic's durability helped to make it a popular miracle material in the early 20th century. Its omnipresence, however, may now be disrupting ecosystems in some surprising ways. A new study by researchers at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif., shows that the concentration of plastic has increased by 100 times over the past 40 years in the

North Pacific Subtropical Gyre—an enormous calm spot in the middle of a clockwise rotation of ocean currents that falls between East Asia and the West Coast of the U.S., with Hawaii as its approximate midpoint. The size of the area is estimated to be more than 18 million square kilometers. Preempts Globalization has made war obsolete – great powers and rising states need international institutions to survive Ikenbarry, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, and Deudney, professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, 2009 (Daniel and G. John, Jan/Feb, “The Myth of the Autocratic Revival,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 88, Issue 1, p. 8) It is in combination with these factors that the regime divergence between autocracies and democracies will become increasingly dangerous. If all the states in the world were democracies, there would still be competition, but a world riven by a democratic-autocratic divergence promises to be even more conflictual. There are even signs of the emergence of an "autocrats international" in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, made up of China, Russia, and the poorer and weaker Central Asian dictatorships. Overall, the autocratic revivalists paint the picture of an international system marked by rising levels of conflict and competition, a picture quite unlike the "end of history" vision of growing convergence and cooperation. This bleak outlook is based on an exaggeration of recent developments and ignores powerful countervailing factors and forces. Indeed, contrary to what trhe revivalists describe, the most striking features of the contemporary international landscape are the intensification of economic globalization, thickening institutions, and shared problems of interdependence. The overall structure of the international system today is quite unlike that of the nineteenth century. Compared to older orders, the contemporary liberal-centered international order provides a set of constraints and opportunities — of pushes and pulls — that reduce the likelihood of severe conflict while creating strong imperatives for cooperative problem solving. Those invoking the nineteenth century as a model for the twenty-first also fail to acknowledge the extent to which war as a path to conflict resolution and great-power expansion has become largely obsolete. Most important, nuclear weapons have transformed great-power war from a routine feature of international politics into an exercise in national suicide. With all of the great powers possessing nuclear weapons and ample means to rapidly expand their deterrent forces, warfare among these states has truly become an option of last resort. The prospect of such great losses has instilled in the great powers a level of caution and restraint that effectively precludes major revisionist efforts. Furthermore, the diffusion of small arms and the near universality of nationalism have severely limited the ability of great powers to conquer and occupy territory inhabited by resisting populations (as Algeria, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Iraq have demonstrated). Unlike during the days of empire building in the nineteenth century, states today cannot translate great asymmetries of power into effective territorial control; at most, they can hope for loose hegemonic relationships that require them to give something in return. Also unlike in the nineteenth century, today the density of trade, investment, and production networks across international borders raises even more the costs of war. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan, to take one of the most plausible cases of a future interstate war, would pose for the Chinese communist regime daunting economic costs, both domestic and international. Taken together, these changes in the economy of violence mean that the international system is far more primed for peace than the autocratic revivalists acknowledge. The autocratic revival thesis neglects other key features of the international system as well. In the nineteenth century, rising states faced an international environment in which they could reasonably expect to translate their growing clout into geopolitical changes that would benefit themselves. But in the twenty-first century, the status quo is much more difficult to overturn. Simple comparisons between China and the United States with regard to aggregate economic size and capability do not reflect the fact that the United States does not stand alone but rather is the head of a coalition of liberal capitalist states in Europe and East Asia whose aggregate assets far exceed those of China or even of a coalition of autocratic states. Moreover, potentially revisionist autocratic states, most notably China and Russia, are already substantial players and stakeholders in an ensemble of global institutions that make up the status quo, not least the UN Security Council (in which they have permanent seats and veto power). Many other global institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, are configured in such a way that rising states can increase their voice only by buying into the institutions. The pathway to modernity for rising states is not outside and against the status quo but rather inside and through the flexible and accommodating institutions of the liberal international order. The fact that these autocracies are capitalist has profound implications for the nature of their international interests that point toward integration and accommodation in the future. The domestic viability of these regimes hinges on their ability to sustain high economic growth rates, which in turn is crucially dependent on international trade and investment; today's autocracies may be illiberal, but they remain fundamentally dependent on a liberal international capitalist system. It is not surprising that China made major domestic changes in order to join the WTO or that Russia is seeking to do so now. The dependence of autocratic capitalist states on foreign trade and investment means that they have a fundamental interest in maintaining an open, rulebased economic system. (Although these autocratic states do pursue bilateral trade and investment deals, particularly in energy and raw materials, this does not obviate their more basic dependence on and commitment to the WTO order.) In the case of China, because of its extensive dependence on industrial exports, the WTO may act as a vital bulwark against protectionist tendencies in importing states. Given their position in this system, which so serves their interests, the autocratic states are unlikely to become champions of an alternative global or regional economic order, let alone spoilers intent on seriously damaging the existing one. The prospects for revisionist behavior on the part of the capitalist autocracies are further reduced by the large and growing social networks across international borders. Not only have these states joined the world economy, but their people — particularly upwardly mobile and educated elites — have increasingly joined the world community. In large and growing numbers, citizens of autocratic capitalist states are participating in a sprawling array of transnational educational, business, and avocational networks. As individuals are socialized into the values and orientations of these networks, stark: "us versus them" cleavages become more difficult to generate and sustain. As the Harvard political scientist Alastair Iain Johnston has argued, China's ruling elite has also been socialized, as its foreign policy establishment has internalized the norms and practices of the international diplomatic community. China, far from cultivating causes for territorial dispute with its neighbors, has instead sought to resolve numerous historically inherited border conflicts, acting like a satisfied status quo state. These social and diplomatic processes and developments suggest that there are strong tendencies toward normalization operating here. Finally, there is an emerging set of global problems stemming from industrialism and economic globalization that will create common interests across states regardless of regime type. Autocratic China is as dependent on imported oil as are democratic Europe, India, Japan, and the United States, suggesting an alignment of interests against petroleum-exporting autocracies, such as Iran and Russia. These states share a common interest in price stability and supply security that could form the basis for a revitalization of the International Energy Agency, the consumer association created during the oil turmoil of the 1970s. The emergence of global warming and climate change as significant problems also suggests possibilities for alignments and cooperative ventures cutting across the autocratic-democratic divide. Like the United States, China is not only a major contributor to greenhouse gas accumulation but also likely to be a major victim of climate-induced desertification and coastal flooding. Its rapid industrialization and consequent pollution means that China, like other developed countries, will increasingly need to import technologies and innovative solutions for environmental management. Resource scarcity and environmental deterioration pose global threats that no state will be able to solve alone, thus placing a further premium on political integration and cooperative institution building. Analogies between the nineteenth century and the twenty-first are based on a severe mischaracterization of the actual conditions of the new era. The declining utility of war, the thickening of international transactions and institutions, and emerging resource and environmental interdependencies together undercut scenarios of international conflict and instability based on autocratic-democratic rivalry and autocratic revisionism. In fact, the conditions of the twenty-first century point to the renewed value of international integration and cooperation.

Extinction outweighs war and ethics Bostrum, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford, directs the Oxford Future of Humanity Institute, 2012 (Nick, 3-6-12, The Atlantic“We’re Underestimating the Risk of Human Extinction,” interview with Ross Anderson, correspondent at The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/were-underestimating-the-risk-of- human-extinction/253821, accessed 7-15-12) Bostrom, who directs Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute, has argued over the course of several papers that human extinction risks are poorly understood and, worse still, severely underestimated by society. Some of these existential risks are fairly well known, especially the natural ones. But others are obscure or even exotic. Most worrying to Bostrom is the subset of existential risks that arise from human technology, a subset that he expects to grow in number and potency over the next century.¶ Despite his concerns about the risks posed to humans by technological progress, Bostrom is no luddite. In fact, he is a longtime advocate of transhumanism---the effort to improve the human condition, and even human nature itself, through technological means. In the long run he sees technology as a bridge, a bridge we humans must cross with great care, in order to reach new and better modes of being. In his work, Bostrom uses the tools of philosophy and mathematics, in particular probability theory, to try and determine how we as a species might achieve this safe passage. What follows is my conversation with Bostrom about some of the most interesting and worrying existential risks that humanity might encounter in the decades and centuries to come, and about what we can do to make sure we outlast them.¶ Some have argued that we ought to be directing our resources toward humanity's existing problems, rather than future existential risks, because many of the latter are highly improbable. You have responded by suggesting that existential risk mitigation may in fact be a dominant moral priority over the alleviation of present suffering. Can you explain why? ¶ Bostrom: Well suppose you have a moral view that counts future people as being worth as much as present people. You might say that fundamentally it doesn't matter whether someone exists at the current time or at some future time, just as many people think that from a fundamental moral point of view, it doesn't matter where somebody is spatially---somebody isn't automatically worth less because you move them to the moon or to Africa or something. A human life is a human life. If you have that moral point of view that future generations matter in proportion to their population numbers, then you get this very stark implication that existential risk mitigation has a much higher utility than pretty much anything else that you could do. There are so many people that could come into existence in the future if humanity survives this critical period of time--- we might live for billions of years, our descendants might colonize billions of solar systems, and there could be billions and billions times more people than exist currently. Therefore, even a very small reduction in the probability of realizing this enormous good will tend to outweigh even immense benefits like eliminating poverty or curing malaria, which would be tremendous under ordinary standards. Nano K2 Ecosystems Plastic in the ocean has created a new ecosystem—cleaning up may do more harm than good for biodiversity

Zhang 1/1 — Sarah Zhang, journalist for Gizmodo news website, has studied neurobiology at Harvard and specializes in cases including science and technology (“Our Trash Has Become A New Ocean Ecosystem Called ‘The Plastisphere,’” Gizmodo, January 1st, 2014, Available at http://gizmodo.com/our-trash-has-become-a-new-ocean- ecosystem-called-the-1492238056, Accessed on July 19th, 2014)

Sure, we all know pollution destroys ecosystems, but, for better or for worse, pollution can create ecosystems, too. The billions of tiny pieces of plastic that are now floating in our oceans are exactly that: a novel ecosystem humans have unwittingly made by throwing away too much plastic. Microbes and insects that might have no business thriving in the middle of the ocean suddenly have found a new home amidst all that drifting plastic. If you took a boat out to the so-called Pacific garbage patch—a swirling region of the ocean where plastic is trapped by wind and ocean currents—you won't find anything resembling a "garbage patch." The water would actually look quite pristine—until you drag a net through it to reveal floating flecks of plastic, mostly glitter-sized or smaller. The amount of plastic in the region has grown 100 fold in the last 40 years, but it still really doesn't look like much. Yet these barely visible pieces of plastic are completely remaking the ocean. Sea skaters, for example, have found a plastic breeding ground paradise. The water insect skims across the ocean surface eating plankton and laying its eggs on the hard surfaces of flotsam, which is now in abundance as plastics have taken over our world. A 2012 study found that skater eggs increased with micro-plastic pieces in the ocean. Occasionally, bigger pieces of plastic will show up enveloped in thousands of sea skater eggs, like a one-gallon plastic jug covered with 70,000 of them, 15 layers thick. The effects of a sea skater explosion will ripple out through the food chain, possibly benefitting some organisms but not others. Is it good? Is it bad? All we can say for sure is that the balance of the ocean ecosystem will likely change. The open ocean suddenly has a lot more hard, durable surfaces for organisms like the sea skater and barnacles—artificial islands of a sort for these tiny, landless creatures. Microbes, too, have found a new home in all the plastic debris. What's more, microbes can hitch a ride on their floating plastic home, making an otherwise unlikely journey from land to the middle of the sea. A study earlier this year cataloged some of the microbes living in the plastisphere, many of them new to science; especially abundant were Vibrio, a group of bacteria including those that cause cholera. But scientists are still working to figuring out the role of all these bacteria. "Each one of these plastic bits is a circle of life—one microbe's waste is another microbe's dinner," one of the study's authors told the LA Times. The microbes may even be breaking down the plastic, making microscopic pits that the team found in the plastic pieces. To look on the cheery side, perhaps this means we could find microbes to help degrade otherwise long-lasting plastic. But this points toward something else, too: The plastic itself is interacting with the environment. Plastic pieces are like tiny sponges that soak up toxins such as pesticides from the water and leach them out again when broken down. Animals that eat the microplastics, like gooseneck barnacles, for example, can pass the plastics and the toxins up the food chain. A similar problem is happening in the Great Lakes, which have been contaminated by microbeads from exfoliating soap. When it comes to individual species, though, there are winners and losers in the new plastisphere, which makes telling tidy story about ocean plastics hard. Certainly it makes sense to stop pouring plastics into the water, but how far should we go to reverse it? Plastic-capture schemes may do more harm than good, scooping up zooplankton, an important source of food for many creatures, along with plastic. Humans might just have to learn to live with the plastisphere we've inadvertently made. The plastisphere is a complete ecosystem with over 1,000 life forms— removing plastic hurts biodiversity

Zettler 13 — Erik Zettler, administrator, microbial ecologist, biologist, and researcher at the Sea Education Association since 1997, has participated in over 50 research cruises with SEA and UNOLS over four continents (“The ‘Plastisphere:’ A new marine ecosystem,” Ocean Portal, Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History website, July 30th, 2013, available at http://ocean.si.edu/blog/plastisphere-new-marine- ecosystem, July 19th, 2014)

Any floating object in the ocean tends to attract life; fishermen know this and deploy floating buoys to concentrate fish for harvesting. Plastic marine debris is no different and, at microscopic scales, microbes such as bacteria, algae and other single-celled organisms gather around and colonize plastic and other objects floating in water. Even small pieces of plastic marine debris the size of your pinky nail can act as microbe aggregating devices. We call this community of microbes growing as a thin layer of life (a biofilm) on the outside of plastic the “plastisphere,” analogous to the layer of life on the outside of planet Earth called the “biosphere." Using plastic samples collected during Sea Education Association student research cruises, we are studying what kinds of microbes live in the plastisphere, how they colonize the surfaces of plastic, and how they might affect marine ecosystems. Scanning electron micrographs reveal a complex geography of microbial life on the cracked and pitted surfaces of plastic pieces that have been aging and weathering in the ocean. Tracy Mincer, a scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution studying this new community, refers to it as a “microbial reef” because it is a complete ecosystem with primary producers (like plants), grazers, predators, and decomposers, just like the community of larger organisms found on the complex surface of a coral reef. One of our most interesting discoveries is a type of cell that we call “pit formers,” spherical cells that appear to be embedded in the surface of the plastic pieces. These may somehow contribute to the breakdown of plastic marine debris, which would have implications for what happens to plastic in the ocean over the long term. Linda Amaral-Zettler at the Marine Biological Lab used genetic techniques that allow us to look at the microbes' DNA to reveal surprisingly high biodiversity, with over 1,000 kinds of microbes on a single small piece of plastic only 5mm or less across. What's even more remarkable is that some of the organisms are not normally encountered in the open ocean, but are able to survive there by clinging to the plastic bits. The genetic work also turned up unexpectedly large numbers of the common marine bacterial genus Vibrio; most Vibrio are not harmful but some species can be associated with diseases in humans and animals. We are isolating and studying Vibrio cultures from marine plastic to see if any of them cause disease. Because plastic persists for so long, microbes in the plastisphere can be transported long distances, making them a potential source of invasive species. If microbes are being moved around in the ocean from a variety of differing ecosystems, they could be impacting the native microbial populations and the larger organisms that depend on those microbes. The plastisphere could also modify plastic debris to make the plastic more, or less, harmful to marine ecosystems. No plastic growth Plastic in the ocean is the same amount Madren 12 Carrie Madren (Report and write articles for a variety of publications including Scientific American, Maryland Life magazine, American Forests, AAAS MemberCentral (American Assoc for the Advancement of Science), Washingtonian, The Washington

Post's Capital Business, Interpreter magazine and more. Studied at GWU and Wesleyan) July 16, 2012 ¶ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/plastic-in-oceans-may-help-some-species/

The study, published online on May 9 in Biology Letters, also documented for the first time a rise in egg densities of Halobates sericeus, a water strider that lays its eggs on floating objects. The team collected and analyzed data on bits of plastic less than five millimeters across in the North Pacific Ocean, including records from two recent voyages, published data from other sources and data developed from archived samples in the Scripps collection taken in the early 1970s. Author Miriam Goldstein, who is a biological oceanography Ph.D. candidate at Scripps, notes that a 2011 study that examined the North Atlantic Subtropical Gyre found no increase in plastic since 1986. Plan Popular Otec popular in u.s. senate Otec Corporation 3/6 http://www.otecorporation.com/feasibility-study-for-worlds-first-us-based-commercial-otec- plant-and-swac-system-in-usvi The Honorable Shawn-Michael Malone, President of the USVI Senate, commented on his signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) authorizing OTE’s feasibility study. “The most fundamental duty of government is to protect the health and welfare of its citizens,” said Senator Malone. “These clean energy technologies have the potential to improve the air quality and environment for our residents, and to provide the foundation for meaningful economic development. Therefore, it is our duty as elected representatives to explore the feasibility and possible benefits of OTEC and SWAC for the people of USVI.”¶ Ocean Thermal Energy Corporation Executive Chairman Jeremy P. Feakins echoed Senator Malone’s comments regarding the need to study the feasibility, and benefits of these technologies: “Thanks to the leadership of the USVI, we will be moving forward to thoroughly evaluate the applicability of OTEC, SWAC, and their associated fresh water and sustainable food production for the people here.” Feakins added, “If the feasibility study bears out that these clean technologies are well-suited to USVI consistent with preliminary data, their installation here could have a tremendous positive impact in terms of long-term energy-independence and economic development based upon this Territory’s most abundant renewable local resource… the ocean.”¶ Emmanuel Brochard, DCNS Vice President OTEC programs further noted: “The testing and development work conducted by DCNS over the last five years on a high- power, floating offshore OTEC solution has allowed the development of an on-shore OTEC model. This system, that can be coupled with a SWAC (Sea-Water Air Conditioning) installation or other applications as freshwater production or aquaculture, appears from available information to be particularly well-suited to island sites as USVI. We are proud to be a partner for the USVI OTEC study, which combines the expertise and strength of OTE and DCNS. This partnership is the promise for our companies of joint development of clean, secure energy and abundant fresh water for millions of people around the world.”¶ Under the 2013 agreement between OTE and DCNS, OTE will serve as the developer that will build, own and operate on-shore and off-shore OTEC systems and SWAC systems globally, as well as securing financing. DCNS will be the EPC contractor for these systems in selected international markets. The projects will be pursued together by OTE and DCNS with direction from the Joint Marketing Council established by the companies.¶ According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), there are more than 100 countries and territories world-wide, including USVI, with conditions appearing favorable for OTEC and SWAC facilities. And with many of these locations having numerous sites for these clean technologies, there are literally hundreds of potential OTEC and SWAC applications in the tropics and subtropics, where 3 billion people live. Plastic K2 Mammals Plastic allows mammals to reproduce Madren 12 Carrie Madren (Report and write articles for a variety of publications including Scientific American, Maryland Life magazine, American Forests, AAAS MemberCentral (American Assoc for the Advancement of Science), Washingtonian, The Washington Post's Capital Business, Interpreter magazine and more. Studied at GWU and Wesleyan) July 16, 2012 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/plastic-in-oceans-may-help-some-species/

Higher concentrations of floating plastic debris offer more opportunities for the pelagic strider to lay eggs. This marine insect—closely related to pond striders—spends its entire life out on the open ocean and takes its place in the food web by consuming zooplankton and larval fish and being eaten by crabs, fish and seabirds.¶ Floating objects are historically rare in the North Pacific. “Striders would have been lucky to find a feather or a bit of floating wood,” Goldstein says. Now floating plastic pieces are more common and offer a surface on which striders can lay their bright yellow, rice grain–size eggs.¶ Although researchers found an increase in eggs, they did not find an increase in the insects themselves. That could be because there were not enough samples from the early 1970s with which to adequately compare them, but equally likely crabs or small surface-feeding fish may be eating the eggs, Goldstein notes.¶ Researchers are concerned that this proliferation of plastic may be giving striders, microbes, animals and plants that grow directly on the plastic an advantage over oceanic animals that are not associated with hard surfaces, such as fish, squid, tiny crustaceans and jellyfish. “While these organisms [that grow directly on the plastic] are native, they're kind of like weeds,” Goldstein explains, in that they grow, reproduce and die quickly. In contrast, the organisms in the water column tend to be more biodiverse. More than half of the ocean is part of the subtropical gyres, and changing the way that these gyres function by adding lots of plastic trash could have unpredictable consequences. “While our study only looks at one little insect in one area of the ocean, it shows that tiny pieces of plastic do have the potential to alter the ecology of the open sea,” she says. Solvency No disease solvency for CNTs—medical applications cause cancer Lulea U 11 — The Luleà University of Technology publishes an article about the work of Sofie Högberg, PhD in engineering and researcher at the same university (“Researcher warns of health risks with carbon nanotubes,” Science Daily, January 19th, 2011, Available at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110118092134.htm, Accessed July 21, 2014)

Carbon nanotubes are a modern and extremely light material that can add desirable properties to many industrial products, but they may be a health hazard. A new doctoral dissertation at Luleå University of Technology in Sweden shows that extremely small fibers such as c arbon n ano t ube s can make their way far into the lungs, which in the worst case can present an increased risk of developing cancer. "My research substantiates the concerns about health effects and is one reason we should be careful when handling with these materials," says Sofie Högberg, who now holds a PhD in engineering from the Division of Fluid Mechanics at Luleå University of Technology. The result of her work indicates that the fibers that are most likely to make their way far into the lungs , perhaps all the way to the alveoli, are those with a diameter of c. 10 - 100 nanometers (1 nanometer = one billionth of a meter) and a length of 1-10 micrometers. This is a common size for c arbon n ano t ube s . In her research, she developed equations to describe the movements of a fiber. She then solved these equations numerically for a large number of fibers in a geometry and a flow field that represents the airways, in order to see what proportion of the inhaled fibers might be thought to fasten, depending on parameters like particle size and form. The field of nanotechnology has been burgeoning in recent years, and today there are more than 1,000 nanoproducts on the market. The technology involves modifying material virtually at the level of the atom. Carbon nanotubes are a popular nanomaterial because of their combination of favorable properties that are desirable in many industrial products. By adding a small amount of carbon nanotubes it's possible to create materials that are strong yet still light in weight. However, with a diameter on the nanoscale and a highly elongated form, this extremely small particle can constitute a health risk. "There are concerns, among others, that c arbon n ano t ube s may lead to mesothelioma , a cancer form that previously has been associated only with asbestos," says Sofie Högberg.

CNTs don’t solve for new technology—they wear out after 40 hours and can’t carry a charge between tubes. Ost 11 — Laura Ost reports findings from the National Institute of Standards and Technology Material Measurements Lab (“NIST Uncovers Reliability Issues for Carbon Nanotubes in Future Electronics,” NIST Tech Beat, August 16, 2011, Available at http://www.nist.gov/mml/acmd/cnt- 081611.cfm, Accessed July 21, 2014) Carbon nanotubes offer big promise in a small package. For instance, these tiny cylinders of carbon molecules theoretically can carry 1,000 times more electric current than a metal conductor of the same size. It's easy to imagine c arbon n ano t ubes replacing copper wiring in future nanoscale electronics. But—not so fast. Recent tests at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) suggest device reliability is a major issue. Copper wires transport power and other signals among all the parts of integrated circuits; even one failed conductor can cause chip failure. As a rough comparison, NIST researchers fabricated and tested numerous nanotube interconnects between metal electrodes. NIST test results, described at a conference this week,* show that nanotubes can sustain extremely high current densities (tens to hundreds of times larger than that in a typical semiconductor circuit) for several hours but slowly degrade under constant current . Of greater concern, the metal electrodes fail—the edges recede and clump—when currents rise above a certain threshold. The circuits failed in about 40 hours. While many researchers around the world are studying nanotube fabrication and properties , the NIST work offers a n early look at how these materials may behave in real electronic devices over the long term. To support industrial applications of these novel materials, NIST is developing measurement and test techniques and studying a variety of nanotube structures, zeroing in on what happens at the intersections of nanotubes and metals and between different nanotubes. "The common link is that we really need to study the interfaces," says Mark Strus, a NIST postdoctoral researcher. In another, related study published recently,** NIST researchers identified failures in carbon nanotube networks —materials in which electrons physically hop from tube to tube . Failures in this case seemed to occur between nanotubes, the point of highest resistance, Strus says. By monitoring the starting resistance and initial stages of material degradation, researchers could predict whether resistance would degrade gradually—allowing operational limits to be set—or in a sporadic, unpredictable way that would undermine device performance. NIST developed electrical stress tests that link initial resistance to degradation rate, predictability of failure and total device lifetime. The test can be used to screen for proper fabrication and reliability of nanotube networks.

Turn—Nanotech advancement may lead to superweapons and other ethical, economic and medical concerns. Bonsor and Strickland 07 — Kevin Bonsor and Jonathan Strickland. Bonsor has a bachelors degree in journalism and Strickland is a technological researcher for “How Stuff Works,” and host of a podcast centered around the mechanics of advanced technology (“How Nanotechnology Works,” How Stuff Works Website, October 7, 2007, Available at http://science.howstuffworks.com/nanotechnology5.htm, Accessed on July 21, 2014)

The most immediate challenge in nanotechnology is that we need to learn more about materials and their properties at the nanoscale. Universities and corporations across the world are rigorously studying how atoms fit together to form larger structures. We're still learning about how quantum mechanics impact substances at the nanoscale. Because elements at the nanoscale behave differently than they do in their bulk form, there's a concern that some nanoparticles could be toxic. Some doctors worry that the nanoparticles are so small, that they could easily cross the blood-brain barrier, a membrane that protects the brain from harmful chemicals in the bloodstream. I f we plan on using nanoparticles to coat everything from our clothing to our highways, we need to be sure that they won't poison us. Closely related to the knowledge barrier is the technical barrier. In order for the incredible predictions regarding nanotechnology to come true, we have to find ways to mass produce nano-size products like transistors and nanowires. While we can use nanoparticles to build things like tennis rackets and make wrinkle-free fabrics, we can't make really complex microprocessor chips with nanowires yet. There are some hefty social concerns about nanotechnology too. Nanotechnology may also allow us to create more powerful weapons , both lethal and non-lethal. Some organizations are concerned that we'll only get around to examining the ethical implications of nanotechnology in weaponry after these devices are built. They urge scientists and politicians to examine carefully all the possibilities of nanotechnology before designing increasingly powerful weapons. If nanotechnology in medicine makes it possible for us to enhance ourselves physically, is that ethical? In theory, medical nanotechnology could make us smarter, stronger and give us other abilities ranging from rapid healing to night vision. Should we pursue such goals? Could we continue to call ourselves human, or would we become transhuman -- the next step on man's evolutionary path? Since almost every technology starts off as very expensive, would this mean we'd create two races of people -- a wealthy race of modified humans and a poorer population of unaltered people? We don't have answers to these questions, but several organizations are urging nanoscientists to consider these implications now, before it becomes too late. Not all questions involve altering the human body -- some deal with the world of finance and economics. If molecular manufacturing becomes a reality, how will that impact the world's economy? Assuming we can build anything we need with the click of a button, what happens to all the manufacturing jobs? If you can create anything using a replicator, what happens to currency? Would we move to a completely electronic economy? Would we even need money?

Laundry list of problems with CNTs—prefer our evidence, it assumes the precautionary measures put forth by the UK Health and Safety Executive. Maynard 09 — Andrew Maynard, Director of the Risk Science Center at University of Michigan, Chairman of the UM Environmental Health Sciences Department, and Research Scientist in the field of science policy. He also has experience with politics and communication in Washington D.C. (“Working safely with carbon nanotubes,” March 17th, 2009, Available at http://2020science.org/2009/03/17/working-safely-with-carbon-nanotubes/, Accessed July 21, 2014) So you want to make or use carbon nanotubes, but you are worried about handling then safely. What do you do? The good news is that the UK H ealth and S afety E xecutive has just published an information sheet that addresses just this question. Risk management of carbon nanotubes is (according to the blurb) “specifically about the manufacture and manipulation of carbon nanotubes, and has been prepared in response to emerging evidence about the toxicology of these materials.” But is it any good ? Here’s my initial take: HSE recommends a precautionary approach for managing the risks of all carbon nanotubes. This is a good move. The evidence so far—which admittedly is sparse—points towards all forms of carbon nanotubes being more harmful in the lungs than non-nanotube forms of carbon. Of course, it depends on how you define “precautionary,” but “looking before you leap” seems a reasonable translation in this case. No mention is made of possible exposure when working with c arbon n ano t ube - containing products. HSE’s information sheet is clear that exposure to nanotubes can occur when making the stuff, when using it, and when researching its properties. But there is no mention of what could occur when machining, grinding or cutting a product containing c arbon n ano t ube s . To be fair, research so far indicates that in most cases, once carbon nanotubes are embedded in a product they are unlikely to come out. But if a precautionary approach is to be taken, it seems sensible to at least ask whether there is a chance that exposure to the material will occur while working with carbon nanotube-containing products. The review of new evidence neglects particle-like effects in the lungs. The information sheet revolves around concerns over asbestos-like behavior and certain types of carbon nanotubes, which is understandable given the unpleasantness and latency period of diseases like mesothelioma. But current research suggests that e ven clumps of c arbon n ano t ube s that don’t look like asbestos fibers are more toxic if inhaled than might be imagined. Last July, Anna Shvedova and colleagues published research showing that inhaling non asbestos-like single walled carbon nanotubes at concentrations currently recommended as safe by many manufacturers could be harmful. In other words, it isn’t just asbestos-like behavior that we need to be concerned with here. Use of carbon nanotubes appears to be discouraged in the absence of information on inhalation hazards. The information sheet states: “HSE views CNT’s [carbon nanotubes] as being substances of very high concern. Although the recent findings only apply to some CNTs we think a precautionary approach should be taken to the risk management of all CNTs, unless sound documented evidence is available on the hazards from breathing in CNTs. If their use cannot be avoided, HSE expects a high level of control to be used.” I may be reading this section wrong, but the message seems to be: If you don’t have a good handle on how harmful the substance you are using might be, don’t use it. But if you absolutely must, do everything possible to reduce exposures to a minimum. As there are no definitive data on carbon nanotube toxicity yet, this advice seems to boil down to the use of carbon nanotubes being discouraged. Given the economic potential here, I’m interested in how this will play with industry. Recommended qualitative risk management actions will reduce exposures… At the heart of the information sheet is advice on steps to reduce exposure to airborne carbon nanotubes when working with the substance. These are solid, generic, good occupational hygiene practices—“use appropriate work processes,” “control exposures at source,” “make sure exposures are controlled at all times” etc. And if followed, they should lead to fewer people being exposed to less material. But I do wonder how practical some of them are for dealing with certain forms of carbon nanotubes—especially when it comes to working in fume cupboards and keeping material wet where possible. … But there are few indications of “how much is enough.” Qualitative actions abound in the information sheet: “use appropriate work processes;” “provide suitable work equipment;” maintain “adequate control of exposure at all times.” But such advice is hard to apply in the absence of any information on what processes are “appropriate,” how suitability is determined, and when “adequate control” is achieved. I’m sure the point here is that any actions to reduce exposures are better than none. But without quantitative benchmarks, the chances are that some people will be exposed to worryingly high levels of carbon nanotubes (under the “we tried our best” arguement), while others will struggle to obtain exposure levels that are needlessly low. On balance, I have to commend the HSE on coming out with the information sheet on the ground that any information is better than no information, and I’m sure that some will find it helpful. But I do worry that the information provided isn’t specific enough to either protect peoples’ health effectively, or provide nanotech businesses with the help they need to do the right thing without over-doing it. And unfortunately, the document fails to provide links to other sources of information that may help remove some of the ambiguity (see some of the documents below for instance).

CNTs fail—dependent on specific temperatures to work, and they don’t integrate with normal electronics. Liao et al 10 — Albert Liao, Rouholla Alizadegan, Zhun-Yong Ong, Sumit Dutta, Feng Xiong, K. Jimmy Hsia, Eric Pop, the numerous qualifications are listed in the article to save space here (“Thermal Dissipation and Variability in Electrical Breakdown of Carbon Nanotube Devices,” Research Paper for Physical Review B 82 205406, Published 2010, Available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.4350.pdf, Accessed July 21, 2014)

Carbon nanotubes ( CNT s) have excellent intrinsic electrical and thermal properties, and thus are being considered potential candidates for nanoscale circuits,1 heat sinks2 or thermal composites.3 However, their physical properties depend on temperature, and thus are directly affected by power dissipation during electrical operation.4-6 Joule heating in CNTs goes beyond degrad- ing electrical performance, posing reliability concerns as in other electronics. Electrical Joule breakdown has also been used to remove metallic CNTs in integrated circuits;7-9 however the technique is not precise, owing to the lack of fine control over CNT heat dissipation. It is pre- sently understood that the thermal boundary conductance (TBC) at CNT interfaces with the environment, substrate, or contacts plays the limiting role in thermal dissipation.10-12 In addition, the interaction of CNTs with the environment may also change their effective thermal conductivity.13, 14 However, little is currently known about the details of the thermal interaction between CNTs and common dielectrics, including the roles of dielectric surface roughness or of CNT diameter and chirality (e.g. metallic vs. semiconducting). No solvency for CNTs for at least six years—that’s when the first transistors will become technologically viable. Simonite 7/1 — Tom Simonite, editor for NewScientist Magazine and MIT’s IT editor for hardware and software, does research on algorithms and the future of computer chips in San Francisco at MIT’s office there (“IBM: Commercial Nanotube Transistors Are Coming Soon,” MIT Tech Review, July 1st 2014, Available at http://www.technologyreview.com/news/528601/ibm- commercial-nanotube-transistors-are-coming-soon/, Accessed on July 21, 2014)

A project at IBM is now aiming to have transistors built using c arbon n ano t ube s ready to take over from silicon transistors soon after 2020. According to the semiconductor industry’s roadmap, transistors at that point must have features as small as five nanometers to keep up with the continuous miniaturization of computer chips. “That’s where silicon scaling runs out of steam, and there really is nothing else,” says Wilfried Haensch, who leads the company’s nanotube project at the company’s T.J. Watson research center in Yorktown Heights, New York. Nanotubes are the only technology that looks capable of keeping the advance of computer power from slowing down, by offering a practical way to make both smaller and faster transistors, he says.

CNT tech is too primitive to solve—the only working computer is the equivalent of a 1971 model. Bourzac 13 — Katherine Bourzac, freelance journalist and former editor for MIT Technology Review’s Material Science section, and MIT Science Writing graduate (“The First Carbon Nanotube Computer,” MIT Tech Review, September 25, 2013, Available at http://www.technologyreview.com/news/519421/the-first-carbon-nanotube-computer/, Accessed July 21, 2014)

For the first time, researchers have built a computer whose central processor is based entirely on carbon nanotubes, a form of carbon with remarkable material and electronic properties. The computer is slow and simple, but its creators, a group of Stanford University engineers, say it shows that carbon nanotube electronics are a viable potential replacement for silicon when it reaches its limits in ever-smaller electronic circuits. The c arbon n ano t ube processor is comparable in capabilities to the Intel 4004 , that company’s first microprocessor , which was released in 1971 , says Subhasish Mitra, an electrical engineer at Stanford and one of the project’s co-leaders. The computer , described today in the journal Nature, runs a simple software instruction set called MIPS. It can switch between multiple tasks ( counting and sorting numbers ) and keep track of them, and it can fetch data from and send it back to an external memory. CNTs fail—they break too often, and little improvement over time. Yamamoto et al 11 — Go Yamamoto, Keiichi Shirasu, Toshiyuki Hashida, Toshiyuki Takagi, Ji Won Suk, Jonho An, Richard Piner, and Rodney Ruoff, individual qualifications inside the article (“Nanotube fracture during the failure of carbon nanotube/ alumina composites,” Science Direct, February 24, 2011, Available at http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0008622311002867/1-s2.0- S0008622311002867-main.pdf?_tid=76636a00-1138-11e4-b286- 00000aacb35f&acdnat=1405989673_12e099d54a84c9394343aaacd32d5853, Accessed on July 21, 2014)

Advanced engineering ceramics such as Al2O3, Si3N4, SiC and ZrO2 produced by conventional manufacturing technology have high stiffness, excellent thermostability and relatively low density, but extreme brittle nature restricted them from many structural applications [1]. In order to overcome the toughness problem, incorporation of particulates, flakes and short/long fibers into ceramics matrix, as a second phase, to produce tougher ceramic materials is an eminent practice for decades [2 ]. Recently, researchers have focused on the carbon nanomaterials, in particular carbon nanotubes (CNTs), which are nanometer-sized tubes of single- (SWCNTs) or multi-layer graphene (MWCNTs) with outstanding mechanical, chemical and electrical properties [3–7], motivating their use in ceramic composite materials as a fibrous reinforcing agent. Until now, however, most results for strengthening and toughening have been disappointing , and only little or no improvement have been reported in CNT /ceramic composite materials [8,9], presumably owing to the difficulties in homogeneous dispersion of CNTs in the matrix and in formation of adequate interfacial connectivity between two phases.

No solvency—CNTs are meant to be used for visual displays, not internal wiring Strus 11 — Trace Dominguez quotes Mark Strus, a postdoc NIST researcher and PhD in Mechanical Engineering (“When Will Carbon Nanotubes Save The World?” Discovery News, December 28th, 2011, Available at http://news.discovery.com/tech/biotechnology/carbon- nanotubes-111228.htm, Accessed on July 21, 2014)

Though the nanotubes seem ill-fitted for computer chips, Mark Strus, another NIST postdoctoral researcher, said, " C arbon n ano t ube networks may not be the replacement for copper in logic or memory devices, but they may turn out to be interconnects for flexible electronic displays or photovoltaics."