Good Background Reading About the IOOS Can Be Found in Their Most Recent Summit Report

---1AC meant to be modular. There is an example 1AC with an environment and Sea Power advantage. Other advantages can be mixed and matched to make other 1ACs. Most advantages have 1AC and add on versions in the file

---Good background reading about the IOOS can be found in their most recent summit report http://www.iooc.us/summit/report/ ---FYI what is the IOOS

The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System, or IOOS®, is a coordinated network of people and technology that work together to compile and distribute data on our coastal waters, Great Lakes, and oceans

IOOS coastal and marine data (e.g., water temperature, water level, currents, winds, and waves) are collected by many different tools including satellites, buoys, tide gauges, radar stations, and underwater vehicles. A variety of tools is needed to collect data on global, national, regional, and local levels. Some of these tools are in the water collecting data while others may be on land or in space. Most of the data collected are streamed to a database, making them easier to access.

While many of these data collection tools already exist, the benefit of IOOS is the one common system to connect all of these data so that scientists can quickly find information to track, predict, manage, and adapt to changes in our marine environment.

IOOS data supports environmental efforts such as tracking harmful algal blooms and emergency response needs by assisting with search and rescue operations. IOOS delivers the data and information needed to increase the understanding of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes so decision makers can improve safety, enhance our economy, and protect our environment. ---Some of the main reform issues

The activities and members of the U.S. IOOS community are broad and complex. There are 18 Federal agencies involved in the U.S. IOOS program, as well as 11 U.S. IOOS Regional Associations that encompass efforts focused in U.S. coastal waters, the Great Lakes, and U.S. territories and their waters in the Pacific and the Caribbean. In addition, there are many Federal and academic scientists representing the U.S. Government in various United Nations-sponsored groups that plan and oversee global ocean observation programs. This diverse community is managed largely through cooperation rather than clear directive or budgetary authority, which has contributed to both the strong growth, and the integration weaknesses, of the U.S. IOOS program. The major themes and challenges we must focus on in the next decade include: ► Improve governance to address high-level coordination and support needs Pursue new funding mechanisms and potential public-private partnerships to complement traditional funding Develop a complete census of existing observing efforts ► Increase the breadth and scope of ocean observations to address increased demand Develop a web-based central "market-place" for bringing users, requirements, data providers, new technologies, and available data and products together ► Improve branding, attribution, and user awareness of U.S. IOOS and its many contributors and participants ► Develop common design processes and common data/product standards ► Increase the level of integration across the U.S. IOOS enterprise, moving from cooperative to more coordinated approaches ► Maintain forward momentum and continue to grow U.S. IOOS, while addressing needed improvements. Twenty-five major recommendations arose from the presentations and discussions of participants at the Summit. These cover the gamut of U.S. IOOS concerns, including governance, funding, user engagement and outreach, as well as design processes and integration. Detailed recommendations address: system design processes, alignment of system design and modeling, assessments, integration projects, expanded observation needs, new observing technologies, data management and communications, and modeling and analysis. Most of the recommendations are directed at various segments of the U.S. IOOS community, with a major focus on improving the integration of activities across those involved at the local, regional, national, and global levels. But several significant recommendations are also directed outside the immediate U.S. IOOS community to governing bodies who have oversight of the programs, like the National Ocean Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Ocean Caucuses of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. All recommendations are presented in Chapter Six of the Report. 1AC 1AC-Inherency Observation One: SQ efforts to create an integrated ocean observation system are inadequate-Expanded implementation of the IOOS is key to effective management of a laundry list of economic, security, and environmental threats U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship. Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable. Plan Plan: The United States federal government should substantially expand implementation of the integrated Ocean Observing System by increasing the breadth and scope of ocean observations and efforts to increase the integration of data collection and delivery. Plan: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration of the earth’s oceans by fully implementing the Integrated Ocean Observing System. 1AC – Environment Advantage Advantage One: Environment IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf Abstract— Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical variables to support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government, and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations. Ocean observation causes effective management policies Dr. Andrew Rosenberg 11, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform,” http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/

U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we know that while humans are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained — by vast oceans.¶ In addition to

supporting incredible biodiversity , oceans provide benefits to people in the form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and wind power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for technology developers, manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and develop new economic opportunities around the globe.

America can lead this global innovation.¶ Unfortunately, the health of our oceans is in serious decline; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are stressed, habitats for ocean life are degraded and

endangered marine species are struggling to recover. Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants, which in turn has stressed the communities and industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To turn the tide, our national, state and local leaders must make a commit ment to more

coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on sound science, and scientific work must be a funding priority in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide.¶ The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and Great Lakes — which was established by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy has the potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced monitoring, assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and are affected by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental, social and economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more effectively manage these resources and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to the Interagency Ocean

Policy Task Force, I believe that monitoring what is happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how the

physical, biological, chemical and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact . The Joint Initiative report recommends fully supporting an ocean observation system that would integrate data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean , from buoys on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing technology high above the Earth.¶ The report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to have a better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in order to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy infrastructure near the coast.”¶ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound investment in improving our economy. The data and information collected from research activities will be used to inform coastal development , promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant marine-based recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation. Ocean ecosystems are collapsing – only the aff can mobilize international solutions Sherman ‘11 (Kenneth, 2011, “The application of satellite remote sensing for assessing productivity in relation to fisheries yields of the world’s large marine ecosystems,” ICES Journal of Marine Science, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ph.D, Director of U.S. LME Program, Director of the Narragansett Laboratory and Office of Marine Ecosystem Studies at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island) In 1992, world leaders at the historical UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized that the exploitation of resources in coastal oceans was becoming increasingly unsustainable, resulting in an international effort to assess, recover, and manage goods and services of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). More than $3 billion in support to 110 economically developing nations have been dedicated to operationalizing a five-module approach supporting LME assessment and management practices. An important component of this effort focuses on the effects of climate change on fisheries biomass yields of LMEs, using satellite remote sensing and in situ sampling of key indicators of changing ecological conditions . Warming appears to be reducing primary productivity in the lower latitudes, where stratification of the water column has intensified. Fishery biomass yields in the Subpolar LMEs of the Northeast Atlantic are also increasing as zooplankton levels increase with warming. During the current period of climate warming, it is especially important for space agency programmes in Asia, Europe, and the United States to continue to provide satellite-borne radiometry data to the global networks of LME assessment scientists. Overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and climate change are causing serious degradation in the world’s coastal oceans and a downward spiral in economic benefits from marine goods and services. Prompt and large-scale changes in the use of ocean resources are needed to overcome this downward spiral. In 1992, the world community of nations convened the first global conference of world leaders in Rio de Janeiro to address ways and means to improve the degraded condition of the global environment (Robinson et al., 1992). Ten years later (2002), at a follow-up World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg (Sherman, 2006), world leaders agreed to a Plan of Implementation for several marine-related targets including achievement of: (i) “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; (ii) introduction of the ecosystems approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; (iii) designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and (iv) maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. More recently, in Copenhagen in 2009, world leaders agreed to non-binding actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate the effects of global climate change. For the period 2010–2020, the international community of maritime nations is pursuing solutions for recovering depleted marine fish stocks, restoring degraded habitats, controlling pollution, nutrient overenrichment, and ocean acidification, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to climate change. This effort at improving the ecological condition of the world’s 64 large marine ecosystems (LMEs) is global in scope and ecosystems-orientated in approach (Sherman et al., 2005). LMEs are regions of 200 000 km2 or more, encompassing coastal areas from estuaries to the continental slope and the seaward extent of well-defined current systems along coasts lacking continental shelves (Figure 1). They are defined by ecological criteria including bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophically linked populations (Sherman, 1994). The LMEs produce 80% of the world’s marine fisheries yields annually and are growing sinks of coastal pollution and nutrient overenrichment. They also harbour degraded habitats (e.g. corals, seagrasses, mangroves, and oxygen-depleted dead zones). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a financial group located in Washington, DC, supports developing countries committed to the recovery and sustainability of coastal ocean areas, by providing financial and catalytic support to projects that use LMEs as the geographic focus for ecosystem-based strategies to reduce coastal pollution, control nutrient overenrichment, restore damaged habitats, recover depleted fisheries, protect biodiversity, and adapt to climate change (Duda and Sherman, 2002). Accelerating ocean loss causes extinction Alex David Rogers 6/20/11, Ph.D. in marine invertebrate systematics and genetics from the University of Liverpool is a Professor in Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford AND Dan Laffoley, PhD on marine ecology at the University of Exeter, and Senior Advisor, Marine Science and Conservation Global Marine and Polar Programme (IPSO Oxford, “International earth system expert workshop on ocean stresses and impacts”, July 20, 2011, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf) The workshop enabled leading experts to take a global view on how all the different effects we are having on the ocean are compromising its ability to support us. This examination of synergistic threats leads to the conclusion that we have underestimated the overall risks and that the whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts, and that degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted. It is clear that the traditional economic and consumer values that formerly served society well, when coupled with current rates of population increase, are not sustainable. The ocean is the largest ecosystem on Earth, supports us and maintains our world in a habitable condition. To maintain the goods and services it has provided to humankind for millennia demands change in how we view, manage, govern and use marine ecosystems. The scale of the stresses on the ocean means that deferring action will increase costs in the future leading to even greater losses of benefits. The key points needed to drive a common sense rethink are: • Human actions have resulted in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increased hypoxia. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are three symptoms that indicate disturbances of the carbon cycle associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth (e.g. Erwin, 2008; Veron, 2008a,b; Veron et al., 2009; Barnosky et al., 2011). • The speeds of many negative changes to the ocean are near to or are tracking the worstcase scenarios from IPCC and other predictions. Some are as predicted, but many are faster than anticipated, and many are still accelerating. Consequences of current rates of change already matching those predicted under the “worst case scenario” include : the rate of decrease in Arctic Sea Ice (Stroeve et al., 2007; Wang & Overland, 2009) and in the accelerated melting of both the Greenland icesheet (Velicogna, 2009; Khan et al., 2010; Rignot et al., 2011) and Antarctic ice sheets (Chen et al., 2009; Rignot et al., 2008, 2011; Velicogna, 2009 ); sea level rise (Rahmstorf 2007a,b; Rahmstorf et al., 2007; Nicholls et al., 2011); and release of trapped methane from the seabed (Westbrook et al., 2009; Shakova et al., 2010; although not yet globally significant Dlugokencky et al., 2009). The ‘worst case’ effects are compounding other changes more consistent with predictions including: changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand & Reid, 2003; Beaugrand 2004, 2009; Beaugrand et al., 2003; 2010; Cheung et al. 2009, 2010, Reid et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2011; Philippart et al., 2011; Schiel, 2011; Wassmann et al., 2011; Wernberg et al., 2011); changes in primary production (Behrenfeld et al., 2006; Chavez et al., 2011); changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms (Heisler et al., 2008; Bauman et al., 2010); increases in health hazards in the oceans (e.g. ciguatera, pathogens; Van Dolah, 2000; Lipp et al., 2002; Dickey & Plakas, 2009); and loss of both large, longklived and small fish species causing widespread impacts on marine ecosystems , including direct impacts on predator and prey species, the simplification and destabilization of food webs, reduction of resilience to the effects of climate change (e.g. Jackson et al. 2001; Pauly et al., 1998; Worm & Myers, 2003; Baum & Myers, 2004; Rosenberg et al., 2005; Worm et al., 2006; Myers et al., 2007; Jackson, 2008; Baum & Worm, 2009; Ferretti et al., 2010; Hutchings et al., 2010; WardkPaige et al., 2010; Pinskya et al., 2011). • The magnitude of the cumulative impacts on the ocean is greater than previously understood Interactions between different impacts can be negatively synergistic (negative impact greater than sum of individual stressors) or they can be antagonistic (lowering the effects of individual impacts). Examples of such interactions include: combinations of overfishing, physical disturbance, climate change effects, nutrient runoff and introductions of nonknative species leading to explosions of these invasive species, including harmful algal blooms, and dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2001, 2002; Daskalov et al., 2007; Purcell et al., 2007; Boero et al., 2008; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Bauman et al., 2010; VaquerkSunur & Duarte, 2010); increased temperature and acidification increasing the susceptibility of corals to bleaching (Anthony et al., 2008) and acting synergistically to impact the reproduction and development of other marine invertebrates (Parker et al., 2009); changes in the behavior, fate and toxicity of heavy metals with acidification (Millero et al., 2009; Pascal et al., 2010); acidification may reduce the limiting effect of iron availability on primary production in some parts of the ocean (Shi et al., 2010; King et al., 2011); increased uptake of plastics by fauna (Andrady 2011, Hirai & Takada et al. 2011, Murray & Cowie, 2011), and increased bioavailability of pollutants through adsorption onto the surface of microplastic particles (Graham & Thompson 2009, Moore 2008, Thomson, et al., 2009); and feedbacks of climate change impacts on the oceans (temperature rise, sea level rise, loss of ice cover, acidification, increased storm intensity, methane release) on their rate of CO2 uptake and global warming (Lenton et al., 2008; Reid et al 2009). • Timelines for action are shrinking . The longer the delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures. • Resilience of the ocean to climate change impacts is severely compromised by the other stressors from human activities, including fisheries, pollution and habitat destruction. Examples include the overfishing of reef grazers, nutrient runoff, and other forms of pollution (presence of pathogens or endocrine disrupting chemicals (Porte et al., 2006; OSPAR 2010)) reducing the recovery ability of reefs from temperaturekinduced mass coral bleaching (Hoeghk Guldberg et al., 2007; Mumby et al., 2007; Hughes et al., 2010; Jackson, 2010; Mumby & Harborne, 2010) . These multiple stressors promote the phase shift of reef ecosystems from being coralkdominated to algal dominated. The loss of genetic diversity from overfishing reduces ability to adapt to stressors. • Ecosystem collapse is occurring as a result of both current and emerging stressors. Stressors include chemical pollutants, agriculture runkoff, sediment loads and overkextraction of many components of food webs which singly and together severely impair the functioning of ecosystems. Consequences include the potential increase of harmful algal blooms in recent decades (Van Dolah, 2000; Landsberg, 2002; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Wang & Wu, 2009); the spread of oxygen depleted or dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2002; Diaz & Rosenberg, 2008; VaquerkSunyer & Duarte, 2008); the disturbance of the structure and functioning of marine food webs, to the benefit of planktonic organisms of low nutritional value, such as jellyfish or other gelatinousklike organisms (Broduer et al., 1999; Mills, 2001; Pauly et al. 2009; Boero et al., 2008; Moore et al., 2008); dramatic changes in the microbial communities with negative impacts at the ecosystem scale (Dinsdale et al., 2008; Jackson, 2010); and the impact of emerging chemical contaminants in ecosystems (la Farré et al., 2008 ). This impairment damages or eliminates the ability of ecosystems to support humans . • The extinction threat to marine species is rapidly increasing. The main causes of extinctions of marine species to date are overexploitation and habitat loss (Dulvy et al., 2009). However climate change is increasingly adding to this, as evidenced by the recent IUCN Red List Assessment of reforming corals (Carpenter et al., 2008). Some other species ranges have already extended or shifted polekwards and into deeper cooler waters (Reid et al., 2009); this may not be possible for some species to achieve, potentially leading to reduced habitats and more extinctions. Shifts in currents and temperatures will affect the food supply of animals, including at critical early stages, potentially testing their ability to survive. The participants concluded that not only are we already experiencing severe declines in many species to the point of commercial extinction in some cases, and an unparalleled rate of regional extinctions of habitat types (eg mangroves and seagrass meadows), but we now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. Unless action is taken now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, overexploitation, pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean. It is notable that the occurrence of multiple high intensity stressors has been a prerequisite for all the five global extinction events of the past 600 million years (Barnosky et al., 2009). Scenario 1 is coral: Ocean observation through IOOS is key to preserve coral reef ecosystems Dr .Rusty Brainard 9, PhD in Physical Oceanography from the US Naval Postgraduate School, Chief of the Coral Reef Ecosystem Division at the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center; Dr Kevin Wong, PhD in Biological and Agricultural Engineering from UC Davis; Ron Karl Hoeke, oceanographer for the Joint Institute of Marine and Atmospheric Research, M.S. in coastal oceanography from the Florida Institute of Technology and Doctoral candidate at James Cook University; Jamison Grove, E Smith, P Fisher-Pool, M Lammers, D Merritt, OJ Vetter, CW Young; “Coral reef ecosystem integrated observing system: In-situ oceanographic observations at the US Pacific islands and atolls,” Journal of Operational Oceanography Vol. 2 No. 2, http://www.pifsc.noaa.gov/library/pubs/Hoeke_etal_JOO_2009.pdf Coral reef ecosystems are among the most biologically diverse and productive ecosystems on earth. They provide economic and environmental services to hundreds of millions of people in terms of shoreline protection; areas of natural beauty and recreation; and sources of food, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, jobs, and revenue.1 At present, coral reef ecosystems worldwide are deteriorating at alarming rates due to local anthropogenic stressors, such as overexploitation, habitat destruction, disease, invasive species, land-based runoff, pollution, and marine debris; and to stressors associated with global cli-mate change, especially increased ocean temperatures and ocean acidification.2,3 A thorough understanding of coral reef ecosystem dynamics is required if these valuable natural resources are to be conserved and, in some cases, re-stored. In addition to basic research, an increased level of assessment and monitoring is required for the sustainable management and resilience of coral reefs, echoing calls for increased coastal monitoring at all latitudes.4,5,6¶ Overview of CREIOS ¶ In response to calls for increased assessment, monitoring, and mapping to facilitate improved management and con-servation of coral reef ecosystems, the United States Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) was established in 1998 byPresidential Executive Order. Through the coordinated ef-forts of its members, composed of federal agencies as wellas state, territorial, and freely associated state governments,the task force coordinates US efforts to protect, restore, and promote the sustainable use of the nation’s coral reef eco-systems. As part of this national effort, and in conjunction with ongoing efforts to establish an Integrated Ocean Ob-serving System (IOOS), the NOAA Coral Reef Conserva-tion Program initiated the development of CREIOS to provide a diverse suite of long-term ecological and environ-mental observations and information products over a broad range of spatial and temporal scales. The goal of CREIOS is to better understand the condition of and processes influencing the health of the nation’s coral reef ecosystems and to provide this information t o resource managers and policymakers to assist them in making timely, science-based management decisions to conserve coral reefs.

Satellite monitoring essential- key to overall ecosystem health Robinson ‘10 (Ian, 2010, Discovering the Ocean from Space [electronic resource] The unique applications of satellite oceanography / by Ian S. Robinson., BA and MA Mechanical Sciences, Cambridge University, PhD Engineering Magneto-hydrodynamics, University of Warwick, 1973, Higher and Senior Scientific Officer, Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Bidston, Lecturer, senior lecturer and reader, University of Southampton Department of Oceanography, Head of Department of Oceanography, Professor, University of Southampton School of Ocean and Earth Science, Professorial Fellow, Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton) However, there is one aspect of reef biology in which the wider overview provided by satellite oceanography techniques has become essential, and important enough to require this subsection to itself. This is the issue of coral bleaching, and the role that satellite monitoring of sea surface temperature (SST) plays in identifying regions where reefs are at risk of bleaching. Corals are underwater animals that attach themselves to stony substrates. The order of corals known as stony corals, or scleractinians, are found as large colonies of individual coral polyps, each of which produces limestone deposits. Over the years these deposits have created the large reef systems found in shallow tropical and temperate seas, which provide a unique habitat for rich and complex ecosystems (see, e.g., pp. 117–141 in Barnes and Hughes, 1999). Corals thrive by hosting within their cells symbiotic algae called Zooxanthellae, which provide the coral with oxygen and organic compounds resulting from photosynthesis, while themselves obtaining from the coral carbon dioxide and other chemical compounds needed for photosynthesis. The algae give coral reefs their rich coloration and the symbiotic relationship is essential for the health of the whole reef ecosystem. Coral bleaching is the name given to the situation when corals are subject to physiological stress and respond by ejecting the zooxanthellae. The departure of the algae is visually evident because corals lose the pigments that give them their yellow or brown coloration. In this case the white limestone substrate that the corals have deposited shows through the translucent cells of the polyps which then appear pale or even white. If the stress is quickly removed the algae return within a few weeks and the corals recover, but if the stress is prolonged for many weeks the corals will die and continue to appear stark white. The loss of live corals eventually causes damage to the whole reef ecosystem. Consequently coral-bleaching events pose a serious threat that is taken seriously by marine environmental managers.

Independently prevents extinction Philippine Daily Inquirer ‘2 [“REEFS UNDER STRESS”, 12-10, L/N] The artificial replacement of corals is a good start. Coral reefs are the marine equivalent of rainforests that are also being destroyed at an alarming rate not only in the Philippines but all over the world. The World Conservation Union says reefs are one of the "essential life support systems" necessary for human survival, homes to huge numbers of animals and plants. Dr. Helen T. Yap of the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines said that the country's coral reefs , together with those of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, contain the biggest number of species of plants and animals. "They lie at the center of biodiversity in our planet ," she said. Scenario 2 is ocean acidification IOOS observations stop ocean acidification Iglesias-Rodriguez et al. 2010 M. Debora, School of Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED GLOBAL OCEAN ACIDIFICATION OBSERVATION NETWORK http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/176715/1/FCXNL-09A02b-2113336-1-Iglesias- Rodriguez_OceanObs09_PlenaryPaper_Acidification_formatted.pdf

One of the biggest challenges facing the community is to unveil the mechanisms behind biological adaptation over realistic time frames and thereby determine which species do or do not have the ability to adapt to future ocean acidification . Most experimental approaches used to date only address physiological responses to environmental selection pressure rather than long-term adaptation. There is an urgent need to conduct manipulations involving time-scales of multiple generations (cell division, generation of organisms) and environmental change at rates representative of those experienced by biota in the open ocean (Boyd et al., 2008 ). Monitoring potential adaptation in real time in the field, particularly in those areas of high susceptibility to ocean acidification (polar latitudes, upwelling zones) will provide information central to representing and forecasting the repercussions of ocean acidification on biota. Information from these platforms will be used to calibrate the findings in the laboratory experiments/mesocosms with strains/populations and to inform policy makers and marine resource managers. Data repositories of detailed carbonate chemistry, biological performance and molecular adaptation to environmental selection pressure will not only provide first hand information about natural selection processes in real time but will also answer fundamental questions of how changes in carbon chemistry alter the abundance and physiology of functional groups. While work with single strains/species provides valuable information about regulation of processes, it does not account for the complexity of natural populations, physical transport effect, interactions between bacteria and viruses and eukaryotic phytoplankton, mortality, etc. Many countries are presently engaged in ocean acidification research and monitoring activities, for example, the EU projects EPOCA, MEECE and MedSeA, the German BIOACID project, the UK Ocean Acidification Research Programme, US (emerging program supported by NSF, NOAA, NASA, USGS) , and Japan MoE and MEXT Ocean Acidification Research Programmes. The proposed activities will require a coordinated international research effort that is closely linked with other international carbon research programs, such as the CLIVAR/CO2 Repeat Hydrography Program. The SOLAS-IMBER Working Group on Ocean Acidification (http://www.imber.info/C_WG_SubGroup3.html) and the IOCCP could play roles to coordinate and integrate, at the international level, the research, training and outreach activities. The Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and interface with the data synthesis activities, data archiving and international data management activities of the carbon and ocean acidification programs . The main role of the Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network is to gain a robust understanding of the chemical and biological impacts of ocean acidification by conducting (1) time- series measurements in open ocean and coastal observatories at several levels of organization from molecular to ecosystem level; (2) in-situ manipulations and mesocosm experiments, and autonomous measurements aboard voluntary observing ships; and (3) global and regional monitoring using satellite data. Cooperation with well established international programs such as the IODP, and forming a global network with good spatial and temporal coverage will be central to its success . The application of genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic approaches to studying oceanic ecosystem may open new opportunities for understanding the organisms control on elemental cycles though time. Robotic in-situ devices deployed on moorings can be powerful tools and are now available as autonomous samplers, to report on genomic data of microbial community composition (Greenfield et al., 2006; 2008; Scholin et al, 2008). Building this global time series to assess changes in ocean chemistry and biology will improve coupling between biogeochemistry, physiology, and modelling and play a major role in provid ing sound scientific evidence to society and decision makers on the consequences of future acidification of oceans, seas and coastal waters and on the time scales required for CO2 emissions reduction to reduce the risks from acidification.9. CONCLUDING REMARKS The rate of change in ocean pH and carbon chemistry is expected to accelerate over this century unless societal decisions reduce CO2 emissions dramatically. Quantifying how these changes are going to affect ecosystem functioning, ocean biogeochemistry and human society is a priority. Emerging technology in the oceanographic community is revolutionizing the way we sample the oceans. An integrated international interdisciplinary program of ship-based hydrography, time-series moorings, floats and gliders with carbon system, pH and oxygen sensors, and ecological surveys is already underway. This network will incorporate new technology to investigate changes at many levels of organization (from molecular to ecosystem level to global) to determine the extent of the large-scale changes in the carbon chemistry of seawater and the associated biological responses to ocean acidification in open ocean as well as coastal environments. Many countries have endorsed these activities, and it will be the responsibility of leading countries and institutions to ensure continuity of these efforts in ocean acidification research and monitoring activities. The Global Ocean Acidification Observation Network will benefit from and interface with the data synthesis activities, data archiving and international data management activities of the carbon and ocean acidification programs.

Acidification destroys the ecosystem- management key Sean D. Connell ’13, Professor of Marine Biology at the University of Adelaide, August 26, 2013, “The other ocean acidification problem: CO2 as a resource among competitors for ecosystem dominance," http://royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1627/20120442 Ocean acidification is often considered in terms of its direct negative effects on the growth and calcification of organisms with calcareous shells or skeletons. We argue that this focus overlooks the important role of ocean acidification as a resource, which can enhance the productivity of algae known to influence the status of kelp forests and coral reefs (i.e. mat-forming algae or mats). We have highlighted how ocean acidification can indirectly tip the competitive balance towards dominance by mats through mechanisms that generate new space (e.g. disturbance or storm events), which enables colonization and persistence of mats rather than the original kelp or coral state. Ocean acidification, therefore, has the capacity to act as a resource that shift s the status of subordinates into dominant competitors. Consequently, human activities that alter the availability of resources have important implications for the relative competitive abilities of major e cosystem components . We suggest that additional stressors will influence the effect of ocean acidification on producers, and that many cumulative impacts may reflect multiplicative rather than additive interactions. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we argue that if these synergies involve local stressors, then environmentally mediated ecosystem shifts may be greatly ameliorated by managing local stressors. Nevertheless, there are few assessments of whether management of local processes can weaken the feedbacks that reinforce altered state and enable the reversibility of phase-shifts. Importantly, we suggest that in the face of changing climate (e.g. ocean acidification and temperature), effective management of local stressors (e.g. water pollution and overfishing) may have a greater contribution in determining ecosystem states than currently anticipated. Thus, we highlight how ocean acidification has the potential to influence competitive abilities via changes in resource availability, with implications for the stability and persistence of the system as a whole .

Independently causes extinction Rogers 2/17 [Alex Rogers, Scientific Director of IPSO and Professor of Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, 2014, “The Ocean’s Death March,” http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/17/the-oceans-death-march/]

This problem is unquestionably serious, and here’s why: The rate of change of ocean pH (measure of acidity) is 10 times faster than 55 million years ago. That period of geologic history was directly linked to a mass extinction event as levels of CO2 mysteriously went off the charts. Ten times larger is big, very big, when a measurement of 0.1 in change of pH is consistent with significant change! According to C.L.Dybas, On a Collision Course: Oceans Plankton and Climate Change, BioScience, 2006: “This acidification is occurring at a rate [10-to-100] times faster [depending upon the area] than ever recorded.” In other words, as far as science is concerned, the rate of change of pH in the ocean is “off the charts.” Therefore, and as a result, nobody knows how this will play out because there is no known example in geologic history of such a rapid change in pH. This begs the biggest question of modern times, which is: Will ocean acidification cause an extinction event this century, within current lifetimes? The Extinction Event Already Appears to be Underway According to the State of the Ocean Report, d/d October 3, 2013,International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO): “This [acidification] of the ocean is unprecedented in the Earth’s known history. We are entering an unknown territory of marine ecosystem change… The next mass extinction may have already begun.” According to Jane Lubchenco, PhD, who is the former director (2009-13) of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the effects of acidification are already present in some oyster fisheries, like the West Coast of the U.S. According to Lubchenco: “You can actually see this happening… It’s not something a long way into the future. It is a very big problem,” Fiona Harvey, Ocean Acidification due to Carbon Emissions is at Highest for 300M Years, The Guardian October 2, 2013. And, according to Richard Feely, PhD, (Dep. Of Oceanography, University of Washington) and Christopher Sabine, PhD, (Senior Fellow, University of Washington, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean): “ If the current carbon dioxide emission trends continue… the ocean will continue to undergo acidification, to an extent and at rates that have not occurred for tens of millions of years… nearly all marine life forms that build calcium carbonate shells and skeletons studied by scientists thus far have shown deterioration due to increasing carbon dioxide levels in seawater,” Dr. Richard Feely and Dr. Christopher Sabine, Oceanographers, Carbon Dioxide and Our Ocean Legacy, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April 2006. And, according to Alex Rogers, PhD, Scientific Director of the International Programme on the State of the Ocean, OneWorld (UK) Video, Aug. 2011: “I think if we continue on the current trajectory, we are looking at a mass extinction of marine species even if only coral reef systems go down , which it looks like they will certainly by the end of the century.” “Today’s human-induced acidification is a unique event in the geological history of our planet due to its rapid rate of change. An analysis of ocean acidification over the last 300 million years highlights the unprecedented rate of change of the current acidification. The most comparable event 55 million years ago was linked to mass extinctions… At that time, though the rate of change of ocean pH was rapid, it may have been 10 times slower than current change,” IGBP, IOC, SCOR [2013], Ocean Acidification Summary for Policymakers – Third Symposium on the Ocean in a High- CO2 World, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm, Sweden, 2013. Fifty-five million years ago, during a dark period of time known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), huge quantities of CO2 were somehow released into the atmosphere, nobody knows from where or how, but temperatures around the world soared by 10 degrees F, and the ocean depths became so corrosive that sea shells simply dissolved rather than pile up on the ocean floor. “Most, if not all, of the five global mass extinctions in Earth’s history carry the fingerprints of the main symptoms of… global warming, ocean acidification and anoxia or lack of oxygen. It is these three factors — the ‘deadly trio’ — which are present in the ocean today. In fact, (the situation) is unprecedented in the Earth’s history because of the high rate and speed of change,” Rogers, A.D., Laffoley, D. d’A. 2011. International Earth System Expert Workshop on Ocean Stresses and Impacts, Summary Report, IPSO Oxford, 2011. Zooming in on the Future, circa 2050 – Location: Castello Aragonese Scientists have discovered a real life Petri dish of seawater conditions similar to what will occur by the year 2050, assuming humans continue to emit CO2 at current rates. This real life Petri dish is located in the Tyrrhenian Sea at Castello Aragonese, which is a tiny island that rises straight up out of the sea like a tower. The island is located 17 miles west of Naples. Tourists like to visit Aragonese Castle (est. 474 BC) on the island to see the display of medieval torture devices. But, the real action is offshore, under the water, where Castello Aragonese holds a very special secret, which is an underwater display that gives scientists a window 50 years into the future. Here’s the scoop: A quirk of geology is at work whereby volcanic vents on the seafloor surrounding the island are emitting (bubbling) large quantities of CO2. In turn, this replicates the level of CO2 scientists expect the ocean to absorb over the course of the next 50 years. “When you get to the extremely high CO2 almost nothing can tolerate that,” according to Jason-Hall Spencer, PhD, professor of marine biology, School of Marine Science and Engineering, Plymouth University (UK), who studies the seawater around Castello Aragonese (Elizabeth Kolbert, The Acid Sea, National Geographic, April, 2011.) The adverse effects of excessive CO2 are found everywhere in the immediate surroundings of the tiny island. For example, barnacles, which are one of the toughest of all sea life, are missing around the base of the island where seawater measurements show the heaviest concentration of CO2. And, within the water, limpets, which wander into the area seeking food, show severe shell dissolution. As a result, their shells are almost completely transparent. Also, the underwater sea grass is a vivid green, which is abnormal because tiny organisms usually coat the blades of sea grass and dull the color, but no such organisms exists. Additionally, sea urchins, which are commonplace further away from the vents, are nowhere to be seen around the island. The only life forms found around Castello Aragonese are jellyfish, sea grass, and algae; whereas, an abundance of underwater sea life is found in the more distant surrounding waters. Thus, the Castello Aragonese Petri dish is essentially a dead sea except for weeds. This explains why Jane Lubchenco, former head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, refers to ocean acidification as global warming’s “equally evil twin,” Ibid. To that end, a slow motion death march is consuming life in the ocean in real time, and we humans are witnesses to this extinction event . Scenario 3 is Algae Blooms IOOS solves HABs and waterborne pathogens Tom Malone 11, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PhD in Biology from Stanford University, and Mary Culver, manager of the Applied Sciences Program at the NOAA Coastal Services Center and Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management in Charleston, SC, Ph.D. in Oceanography from the Univ. of Washington, “Managing Public Health Risks: Role of Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)” in Oceans and Public Health: Risks and Remedies from the Sea, p 25-26, google books The cumulative effects of natural hazards, human activities, and climate change are and will continue to be most pronounced in the coastal zone where people and ecosystem goods and services are most concentrated, exposure to natural hazards is greatest, and inputs of energy and matter from land, sea, and air converge (Costanza et al, 1993; McKay and Mulvaney, 2001; Nicholls and Small, 2002; Small and Nicholls, 2003). Changes occurring in coastal waters affect public health and well-being, the safety and efficiency of marine operations, and the capacity of ecosystems to support goods and services (including the sustainability of living marine resources and biodiversity). Although these changes tend to be local in scale, they are occurring in coastal ecosystems worldwide and are often local expressions of larger scale variability and change, including both natural and anthropogenic drivers or “forcings”:¶ Natural hazards (Epstein, 1999; Flather, 2000; Michaels et al., 1997)¶ Global warming and sea level rise (Barry et al., 1995; Levitus et al., 2000; Najjar et al., 1999)¶ Basin scale changes in ocean-atmosphere interactions (El Nino Southern Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation, and Pacific Decadal Oscillation) (Barber and Chavez, 1986; Beaugrand et al., 2003; Koblinsky and Smith, 2001; Wilkinson et al., 1999)¶ Human alterations of the environment (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution [GESAMP], 2001; Heinz Center, 2002; Peierls et al., 1991; Vitousek et al., 1997),¶ Exploitation of living resources (Jackson et al., 2001; Myers and Worm, 2003)¶ Introductions of nonnative species (Carlton, 1996; Hallegraeff, 1998)¶ Each of these drivers of change has been shown to influence human health risks, from exposure to waterborne human pathogens to the toxins produced by harmful algae bloom (HAB) organisms (affecting people through direct contact, inhalation of aerosols, and seafood consumption). The clearest and most direct impacts on the oceans and human health occur in coastal areas that are subject to intense human use (sewage discharge, agriculture and aquaculture practices, human habitation and recreation, fishing, etc.) and are susceptible to flooding from tsunamis, storm surges, and excessive rainfall associated with tropical storms and monsoons (National Research Council [NRC], 1999). There is also increasing evidence that global scale changes in the abundance and distribution of both waterborne and vector-borne diseases are occurring in response to global warming and changes in the hydrological cycle (Colwell, 1996; Epstein, 1999; Hains and Parry, 1993; Rogers and Packer, 1993).¶ Ecosystem-Based Approaches to Managing Health Risks ¶ The oceans and Great Lakes are conduits for many pathogenic microorganisms and their toxins (Table CS1-3). Their distributions and exposure risks in aquatic systems are governed by their sources; their behavior once introduced into the aquatic environment (e.g., rates of growth, mortality, migration, buoyancy, etc.); their place in the food web; and by water motions that transport, disperse, or concentrate them. The most effective ways to reduce the immediate cost of lives and human suffering from exposure to waterborne pathogens and harmful algal blooms is to detect changes in risk more rapidly , provide timely accurate predictions of changes in risk in both time and space, and control the sources (e.g., reduce inputs of untreated sewage wastes that transport pathogens, reduce land-based inputs of anthropogenic nutrients that stimulate some HAB organisms, and reduce the temporal and spatial extent of coastal flooding that can promote events such as cholera epidemics and the growth of HAB organisms).¶ Increases in risk to levels that lead to beach and shellfish bed closures are typically localized, episodic, and dynamic. Consequently, rapid, timely, and accurate assessments of risk are difficult if not impossible based on traditional sampling regimes (e.g. monthly or biweekly monitoring of sewage outfalls and daily shoreline sampling at a limited number of beach sites). Remote sensing and the development of species-specific in situ sensors for waterborne pathogens and HABs thus have great potential for providing the means to address these challenges.¶ For example, satellite-based synthetic aperture radar (SAR) provides high resolution (<100 m) active microwave observations of sea surface roughness that are independent of cloud cover and time of day. At surface wind speeds between 2 m sec-1 and 7 m sec-1, areas with biogenic or anthropogenic surfactant films that dampen small waves are detected by SAR as patterns of low backscatter return. Studies in the Southern California Bight illustrate the ability of SAR to detect and track the fate of storm-water runoff and sewage discharge (DiGiacomo et al., 2004; Svejkovsky and Jones, 2001). In combination with field surveys, land-based high-frequency radar, and numerical models, these studies demonstrate the potential for rapid detection and timely predictions that can be used to inform management and mitigation decisions that reduce public health risks and increase the economic and social value of beaches and living resources. The IOOS provides a platform for achieving these objectives. Solves, and existing systems are insufficient Tom Malone 11, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PhD in Biology from Stanford University, and Mary Culver, manager of the Applied Sciences Program at the NOAA Coastal Services Center and Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management in Charleston, SC, Ph.D. in Oceanography from the Univ. of Washington, “Managing Public Health Risks: Role of Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)” in Oceans and Public Health: Risks and Remedies from the Sea, p 30-31, google books Harmful algal blooms and waterborne pathogens are important cases in point. Ecosystem-based management strategies are aimed at preventing HABs (e.g., reduce nutrient loading) and pathogen contamination (e.g., sewage treatment) before they occur, mitigating their effects (e.g., close shellfish beds, close beaches, move net pens of cultured salmon) and controlling them once they occur (e.g., reducing their magnitude, containing their distribution). Achieving these objectives requires the development of four related capabilities for both implementing adaptive management and assessing their efficacy: More rapid detection of waterborne pathogens, and HAB organisms and their toxins Timely predictions of where and when public health risks are likely to be unacceptably high Timely forecasts of trajectories and contaminated water masses in time and space Products developed that provide relevant information at the appropriate time and space scales and in the format needed for the user community to implement prevention, mitigation, and control strategies Rapid detection is a high priority for both waterborne pathogens and HABs, and molecular techniques offer a way forward. For example, species-specific DNA probes from ribosomal sequences have the potential to provide accurate and rapid diagnostic tools for the evaluation of environmental samples (NRC, 1999). When combined with polymerase chain reaction (PCR), these probes allow detection of an increasing number of pathogens and indicators. The recent application of real-time PCR to field diagnostics of microbial pathogens reveals the potential of this approach for rapid and reliable detection of pathogens in aquatic systems. The IOOS will provide a platform for testing and deploying sensors that directly measure biological and chemical variables, such as pathogens and toxins, in near real-time to verify the location and intensity of events. To the extent that allochtonous waterborne pathogens behave as passive particles with known half-lives and their sources are well documented and quantified, the development of operational nowcasting and forecasting abilities depends primarily on more rapid detection of pathogens and increases in the spatial resolution of hydrodynamic models. The HAB challenge is more complex. It will not be possible to develop operational models for HAB prediction based on environmental conditions until the combination of environmental factors that promote the growth and accumulation of one species over others are quantified and physical-biological interactions are parameterized (e.g., how environmental factors such as turbulence, advective transport, light, nutrient, grazing, and inherent biological attributes interact with each other to favor the development of a given species). Developing this capacity will require significant advances in our understanding of the processes of species succession, in the development of coupled, data assimilating physical-ecological models; and in the capacity to estimate the distribution and abundance of HAB species and toxins rapidly with time-space estimates of physical and chemical fields using a combination of in situ and remote sensing techniques. These include (1) more accurate estimates of sea surface chlorophyll a and accessory pigment fields on space scales of < 1 km based on ocean leaving radiance measurements from satellites and aircraft (improve the skill of coastal algorithms and increase spatial resolution), (2) long-term, high resolution time series by instrumenting moorings and fixed platforms with sensors to measure apparent optical properties and nutrient concentrations (N, P, Si) synoptically with temperature, salinity, currents, and waves; (3) techniques for rapid, species-specific identification and enumeration, including near real-time measurement and telemetry of HAB cell densities; (4) techniques for more rapid measurement of HAB toxins, including in situ detection and near real-time telemetry; and (5) rapid access to data from both in situ and satellite-based observations. Until then, statistical models will be used to predict where and when HABs are likely to occur based on historical records of the location, frequency, and magnitude of HABs or on correlations of HABs with environmental variables or indices. This not only places a high priority on research (predictive models, real-time sensing technologies), it places a high priority on detection: initially, IOOS must focus on the development of the capacity to detect HAB organisms and toxins routinely and rapidly in the context of changes in the distribution of key environmental factors. To these ends, priority should be placed on the establishment of a global network of sentinel (early warning) and reference (to develop climatologies of HABs and associated environmental conditions) stations for long- term time series observations and the development of an integrated data communications and management system for rapid access to and dissemination of data on HAB organisms’ abundance, toxin concentrations, and key environmental variables (temperature, salinity, surface waves and currents, concentrations of inorganic and organic forms of N, P and Si). This information from an IOOS system integrated with epidemiological data on symptoms and diseases in human and animal populations will provide a comprehensive data source to assess the risks and health impacts associated with HABs. Programs such as those described in the Gulf of Mexico and Great Lakes and others on the U.S. West Coast , in Washington state, southern California, and central California, provide early warning systems for HABs, but they will have a limited lifetime unless they are made operational as part of a multipurpose, integrated observing system for the oceans, Great Lakes, and coastal ecosystems. The incorporation of well-tested detection and forecasting systems for HABs and pathogens into the IOOS bridges the gap between advances in science and the application of these advances to develop information products for the public good.

Sensing images key to prevent algal blooms from destroying fish stocks Robinson, 10 (Ian, 2010, Discovering the Ocean from Space [electronic resource] The unique applications of satellite oceanography / by Ian S. Robinson., BA and MA Mechanical Sciences, Cambridge University, PhD Engineering Magneto-hydrodynamics, University of Warwick, 1973, Higher and Senior Scientific Officer, Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Bidston, Lecturer, senior lecturer and reader, University of Southampton Department of Oceanography, Head of Department of Oceanography, Professor, University of Southampton School of Ocean and Earth Science, Professorial Fellow, Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, JPL) However, there are some aspects of aquaculture management in which remote sensing does offer benefits, and has the potential to be used operationally. These are concerned with providing warning of marine environmental hazards that come from the coastal sea adjacent to a sheltered bay or estuary where a fish farm is located. This is the circumstance where information supplied from satellites about the wider geographical context is useful. Physical hazards such as storms or anomalous wave conditions are best predicted through routine meteorological forecasting, and do not benefit from specific remote-sensing input other than that already assimilated in wind and wave forecasts (see Chapter 8). However, the hazard of harmful algal blooms, which can be catastrophic for fish stocks, is one problem in which remote sensing can play a role if circumstances are appropriate. Sometimes an algal bloom originates from some distance away, and it may be just chance circumstances of wind and tid e which bring it towards the aquaculture site. Such blooms can be monitored from space (Yin et al., 1999) using a combination of ocean color and SST sensors. Fishery management prevents extinction VOA, 10 (Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1, http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Bluefin-Tuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing-- 111159869.html)

Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance of marine life in check . Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller organisms might affect the entire underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far, those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the sale of bluefin tuna. "Scientists tell us that when a top predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if you let these large fish become depleted because they anchor the ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain. Government officials and members of environmental groups met in Paris in mid- November to discuss fishing regulations that may affect all life on Earth. Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says the bluefin is in jeopardy . "The fish is in worse shape than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us to this point. " The quotas are designed to let fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but even within quotas, there's consistent lack of enforcement , fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to near-extinction followed increased Japanese demand for fresh sushi starting in the 1970s and 80s. And fishing practices that target the two primary regions in which blue fin spawn: the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart," said Sue Lieberman. "If you want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light on a bigger problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish it's estimated have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing like that," said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale fishing. Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it." "If countries really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious about enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. " Management of fish species on the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's about the very future of our planet ," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and we can't keep … and governments can't keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen to the fishing industry; we'll worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury." IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf Abstract— Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical variables to support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government, and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations. Solves SCS fishing disputes Caitlin Werrell 14, and Francesco Femia, Co-Founders & Directors of the Center for Climate and Security, “Fisheries and Conflict Zones: The Critical Role of Satellite Technology,” http://climateandsecurity.org/2014/01/07/fisheries-and-conflict-zones-the-critical-role-of-satellite- technology/ Al-Abdulrazzak continues with an interesting and important point about the utility of satellite technology, especially for collecting data in difficult-to-reach regions:¶ These results, which provide the first example of fisheries catch estimates from space, speak to the potential of satellite technologies for monitoring fisheries remotely, particularly in areas that were once considered too dangerous or expensive for fisheries surveillance and enforcement. For example, we were able to reveal and account for 17 illegal operating traps in Qatar, and suggest that similar methods can be used to expose other illegal marine practices such as monitoring activities in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and assessing the magnitude of oil spills.¶ This utility of satellite technology would also apply to zones of instability and conflict, where fisheries data (and other sorts of data, including water and climate information) are of critical importance for assessing vulnerability and instability, but are difficult- to-impossible to collect due to circumstances on the ground. For example, see NASA’s satellite data on freshwater losses in the Middle East (the Tigris-Euphrates- Western Iran region) – of critical importance in an unstable region where many ground-based data sources sources lay in zones inaccessible to researchers.¶ Satellites may also be crucial, for example , in tracking fisheries dynamics in the contested South China Sea , which because of a warming ocean, is seeing fish stocks gradually moving northwards. Accurate data and monitoring could be crucial in this area, as geopolitical tensions between China, its Asian neighbors, and the United States, over claims to the sea, could be non-trivially affected by such changes (see Will Rogers’ discussion of this in a CNAS report from 2012).¶ In short, satellite technologies are critical in a changing (and unstable) world. We should not allow the pressures of austerity to make us forget this. Those are the most likely scenario for SCS conflict Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt 12, China and Northeast Asia director for the International Crisis Group, former IR fellow at CFR, June 25 2012, “Fish Story,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/06/25/fish_story Consider it a lesson in how a common fishing run-in can turn into a crisis that can bring an entire region to its knees. Despite the overwhelming preoccupation with the potentially abundant energy reserves in the South China Sea, fishing has emerged as a larger potential driver of conflict. Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam rely on the sea as an economic lifeline. And China is the largest consumer and exporter of fish in the world. And as overfishing continues to deplete coastal stocks through Southeast Asia, fishermen are venturing out further into disputed waters.¶ All this is worsening a trend of harassment, confiscation of catch and equipment, detention, and mistreatment of fishermen. Further fueling tensions is the way countries in the region are wielding unilateral fishing bans to assert jurisdiction over disputed waters under the pretext of environmental protection. Worryingly, the claims of sovereignty also serve to justify greater civilian patrols in the sea -- opening up still more possibilities of run- ins with fishing vessels. And when ships go bump in the night, growing nationalist sentiment limits governments' ability to resolve the disputes and sows the seeds for future problems.

Nuclear war – high risk of miscalc Hellman 12 (Martin, Professor @ Stanford University, http://nuclearrisk.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/another-early-warning-sign/~~23more-1138)

The “World Anti-Fascist War” is what we call World War II – a war in which Japanese aggression killed almost 20 million Chinese, most of them civilians. The infamous “Rape of Nanking” is the best known of numerous atrocities and war crimes that Japan inflicted on China. This is not to say that the Senkaku/Diaoyu should be returned to China, only that we need to be aware of how high emotions run on both sides, and that China has some legitimate grievances from the past. And, of course, Japan was not uniquely blood thirsty. Millions of Chinese died at Chinese hands during the Chinese Civil War; the mistakes of Mao’s Great Leap Forward led to millions of deaths; and the Cultural Revolution killed somewhere between half a million and three million more Chinese, some by public beatings that could be likened to atrocities during the Rape of Nanking. Given the level of irrationality that is possible on both sides, and the reasonable arguments that each side can advance for its claims to these islands, it is not in our national security interests to issue security guarantees to Japan over these islands. There is too much risk that our “insurance policy” will have to pay off, potentially with a nuclear war and millions of American deaths. Such an outcome is unlikely, but if we keep risking small chances of being destroyed, eventually one will realize that potential. 1AC Sea Power Advantage Advantage Two: Sea Power US data collection declining—lower data return rate and disconnected sensors Gagosian 14(Robert, April 25, Testimony of ¶ Robert B. Gagosian ¶ President and CEO of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership ¶ Before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science , ) Recent hypotheses suggest that the extreme weather events we have had t.his past year may be¶ attributable to a persistent shift in the jet stream due to a rapidly melting polar region as well as a warmei¶ North Pacific Ocean. If this is t.he case, ice storms in Mobile, Alabama or monsoon-like rain events in¶ Boulder, Colorado, may become more frequent, along with their significant economic costs.¶ Unfortunately, as the demand for more and better data and information to understand ocean and¶ atmospheric trends increases, we are instead losing our capabilities to collect data at sea and from space¶ to build more capable and accurate long-term forecasts. For instance, the inability to service the buoys¶ comprising the TAO Array (Tropical Atmosphere Ocean project in the equatorial Pacific) has resulted in¶ a degradation of the data return rate to just 40 percent capacity from an optimally operating systeml. Thi:¶ situation greatly reduces our ability to accurately forecast El Nifio and La Nina strengths and thus risks¶ proper preparation to deal with episodes of droughts and flooding.¶ Given that the ocean absorbs, stores and transfers most of the heat (and a high percentage of the carbon)¶ on our planet, the ability to understand, forecast and prepare for extreme weather events requires¶ investments in basic research to better understand air-ice-sea interactions as well as observations of the¶ physical environment from space, land and sea. Without this basic knowledge and prediction capabilities¶ on regional and seasonal scales, we are essentially flying blind in terms of managing resources (e.g.¶ agriculture, fisheries, freshwater) and protecting public health. There are many major natural threats¶ facing our nation and significant challenges ahead in understanding, forecasting and mitigating them, all¶ of which require significant financial resources. We believe that our appropriations requests would¶ enable our nation to maintain the assets and capabilities necessary to better understand the physical,¶ chemical, geological and biological changes to the natural environment and use this information to help¶ Of course, the ocean also impacts life beyond weather, climate and extreme events.

IOOS key to navy battle space awareness—greater weapon performance and better reaction time to threats West 7(Dick, September, Consortium for Ocean Leadership and Retired Rear Admiral USN, EMBRACING THE ¶ FULL SPECTRUM OF ¶ IOOS ENVIRONMENTAL ¶ INFORMATION ¶ FOR MDA, http://oceanleadership.org/files/MDA_Proceedings_lowres.pdf) Working toward complete ¶ Maritime Domain Awareness will ¶ require utilizing the Integrated ¶ Ocean Observing System ¶ (IOOS) to provide the data and ¶ operations necessary to perform ¶ assessments such as forecasts and ¶ observations. A fully operable ¶ IOOS will integrate the regional ¶ systems and allow research data to ¶ be fully interoperable for a wide ¶ variety of operational needs. In ¶ most situations, real-time data and ¶ a fully integrated system allow ¶ for assessments to have a higher ¶ degree of spatial and temporal ¶ variables, greater impact from ¶ sensor or weapon performance, ¶ and a better reaction time to threats. ¶ Limiting factors to accomplishing at relatively low resolutions; provide ¶ boundary and initial conditions ¶ for higher resolution models until ¶ information is given for a specific ¶ local area. Limiting factors to accomplishing ¶ this include the lack of accessible ¶ data due to security issues, lack ¶ of fully developed databases, ¶ and compatibility issues with ¶ data collection. Another limiting ¶ factor, and consequently the most ¶ important, is the difficult transition ¶ from research information to an ¶ operational system. Possible ¶ solutions to making such a ¶ transition easier include co-locating ¶ researchers and operations staff and ¶ keeping inter-agency cooperation a ¶ high priority. Being able to develop ¶ that transition from research to ¶ usable information will contribute ¶ to building IOOS stronger and more ¶ usable for the different customers ¶ including the military and assisting ¶ them with what they need to have ¶ Maritime Domain Awareness. Scenario One is Deterrence Naval power is key to prevent multiple scenarios for extinction—land forces are becoming irrelevant England et al 11(Mr. England is a former secretary of the Navy. Mr. Jones is a former commandant of the Marine Corps. Mr. Clark is a former chief of naval operations., July 11, The Necessity of U.S. Naval Power, WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303339904576406163019350934) All our citizens, and especially our servicemen and women, expect and deserve a thorough review of critical security decisions. After all, decisions today will affect the nation's strategic position for future generations.¶ The future security environment underscores two broad security trends. First, international political realities and the internationally agreed-to sovereign rights of nations will increasingly limit the sustained involvement of American permanent land-based, heavy forces to the more extreme crises. This will make offshore options for deterrence and power projection ever more paramount in support of our national interests.¶ Second, the naval dimensions of American power will re-emerge as the primary means for assuring our allies and partners, ensuring prosperity in times of peace, and countering anti-access, area-denial efforts in times of crisis. We do not believe these trends will require the dismantling of land-based forces, as these forces will remain essential reservoirs of power. As the United States has learned time and again, once a crisis becomes a conflict, it is impossible to predict with certainty its depth, duration and cost.¶ That said, the U.S. has been shrinking its overseas land-based installations, so the ability to project power globally will make the forward presence of naval forces an even more essential dimension of American influence.¶ What we do believe is that uniquely responsive Navy-Marine Corps capabilities provide the basis on which our most vital overseas interests are safeguarded. Forward presence and engagement is what allows the U.S. to maintain awareness, to deter aggression, and to quickly respond to threats as they arise. Though we clearly must be prepared for the high-end threats, such preparation should be made in balance with the means necessary to avoid escalation to the high end in the first place.¶ The versatility of maritime forces provides a truly unmatched advantage. The sea remains a vast space that provides nearly unlimited freedom of maneuver. Command of the sea allows for the presence of our naval forces, supported from a network of shore facilities, to be adjusted and scaled with little external restraint. It permits reliance on proven capabilities such as prepositioned ships.¶ Maritime capabilities encourage and enable cooperation with other nations to solve common sea-based problems such as piracy, illegal trafficking, proliferation of W.M.D., and a host of other ills, which if unchecked can harm our friends and interests abroad, and our own citizenry at home. The flexibility and responsiveness of naval forces provide our country with a general strategic deterrent in a potentially violent and unstable world. Most importantly, our naval forces project and sustain power at sea and ashore at the time, place, duration, and intensity of our choosing.¶ Given these enduring qualities, tough choices must clearly be made, especially in light of expected tight defense budgets. The administration and the Congress need to balance the resources allocated to missions such as strategic deterrence, ballistic missile defense, and cyber warfare with the more traditional ones of sea control and power projection. The maritime capability and capacity vital to the flexible projection of U.S. power and influence around the globe must surely be preserved, especially in light of available technology. Capabilities such as the Joint Strike Fighter will provide strategic deterrence, in addition to tactical long-range strike, especially when operating from forward- deployed naval vessels.¶ Postured to respond quickly, the Navy-Marine Corps team integrates sea, air, and land power into adaptive force packages spanning the entire spectrum of operations, from everyday cooperative security activities to unwelcome—but not impossible—wars between major powers. This is exactly what we will need to meet the challenges of the future.

No major power in a world of naval power Allen et al 7(James T. Conway --¶ General, U.S. Marine Corps, ¶ Commandant of the Marine Corps,¶ Gary Roughead --¶ Admiral, U.S. Navy, ¶ Chief of Naval Operations,¶ Thad W. Allen --¶ Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard ,¶ Commandant of the Coast Guard, October, A Cooperative Strategy ¶ for ¶ 21st Century Seapower, http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf) Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous ¶ to global stability as war among major powers. Maintenance and ¶ extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower advantage is a key ¶ component of deterring major power war. While war with another great ¶ power strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous ¶ effects demands that it be actively deterred using all elements of national ¶ power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—our lethality, ¶ global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, ¶ and operational agility—provide the joint commander with a range ¶ of deterrent options. We will pursue an approach to deterrence that ¶ includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate against aggressors ¶ conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces. ¶ Win our Nation’s wars. In times of war, our ability to impose local sea ¶ control, overcome challenges to access, force entry, and project and ¶ sustain power ashore, makes our maritime forces an indispensable ¶ element of the joint or combined force. This expeditionary advantage ¶ must be maintained because it provides joint and combined force ¶ commanders with freedom of maneuver. Reinforced by a robust sealift ¶ capability that can concentrate and sustain forces, sea control and power ¶ projection enable extended campaigns ashore. Scenario Two is Taiwan Naval power is key to prevent China attack on Taiwan Hultin & Blair 6(Jerry MacArthur HULTIN and Admiral Dennis BLAIR, Naval Power and Globalization: ¶ The Next Twenty Years in the Pacific, Jerry M. Hultin is former president of Polytechnic Institute of New York University From 1997 to 2000 Mr. Hultin served as Under Secretary of the Navy., Dennis Cutler Blair is the former United States Director of National Intelligence and is a retired United States Navy admiral who was the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific region, http://engineering.nyu.edu/files/hultin%20naval%20power.pdf) Even if the interaction of US and Chinese decisions in future avoids a global naval arms ¶ race centered in the Pacific, China will still have a capable regional navy. World events may put ¶ China and the United States on opposite sides of an issue or crisis, leading to a maritime ¶ confrontation. The most likely location for this scenario is Taiwan. Successful deterrence ¶ depends on the United States having strong naval capability on station or quickly deployable so ¶ that there is no incentive to China or other adversaries to initiate hostilities. ¶ The second Pacific area in which the United States must maintain a deterrent capability ¶ based on naval power is around the Korean Peninsula. North Korea is a failing state, but so long ¶ as Kim Jong II and his successors maintain their position of power, they will need to be deterred ¶ from military aggression. ¶ ¶ To maintain deterrence, American naval strategy in the Pacific must preserve its alliance ¶ base, its forward deployed posture and its ability to reinforce quickly to assert maritime ¶ superiority throughout any crisis situation. ¶ ¶ Taiwan ¶ ¶ The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 remains a sound basis for forming the deterrent aspect ¶ of US naval strategy for Taiwan. It states that any change of Taiwan’s status must be by peaceful ¶ means, and that the United States will make defensive capabilities available for Taiwan and ¶ maintain American forces to reinforce Taiwan’s defense if China threatens or attacks it. Just as ¶ importantly, the United States has made it clear that it also opposes any Taiwanese attempts to ¶ change its status towards independence. ¶ ¶ Currently, Chinese use of force against Taiwan cannot achieve military success - ¶ Taiwanese forces with American support can defeat Chinese unprovoked aggression at all levels ¶ from blockade through full-scale invasion. American naval strategy will need to maintain this ¶ balance as regional Chinese maritime and air power grows. This will require a combination of ¶ continued sales of defensive systems.and training assistance to Taiwan along with upgrading the ¶ U.S. navy’s missile defenses and anti-submarine systems and capabilities. There are heavy ¶ economic and diplomatic penalties to China for using force against Taiwan. U.S. strategy must ¶ be to ensure that, even if it is willing to accept these economic and diplomatic costs, China ¶ cannot succeed in seizing and holding Taiwan. ¶ ¶ Copyright, September 2006 Page 12 of 16 ¶ However, although the People’s Liberation Army cannot achieve military success against ¶ Taiwan, it can cause extensive military, human and economic damage. If it is willing to pay the ¶ political, economic and military costs, China can “teach Taiwan a lesson” for pursuing ¶ independence. For this reason, the current military balance among Taiwan, China and the United ¶ States is currently stable, offering advantages to neither side to change the status quo. It is very ¶ clear that there would only be losers from conflict, not winners. An important objective of the ¶ deterrence and defense objectives of US naval strategy in the Pacific is to maintain that stable ¶ balance as China increases its military power. That causes nuclear war Glaser 11(Charles, April, Will China’s Rise lead to War?, Charles Glaser-- Professor of Political Science and International Affairs; Director, Institute for Security and Conflict Studies, Foreign Affairs, vol. 90, Issue 2) A crisis over Taiwan could fairly easily escalate to nuclear war, because each ¶ step along the way might well seem rational to the actors involved. Current U.S. ¶ policy is designed to reduce the probability that Taiwan will declare ¶ independence and to make clear that the United States will not come to Taiwan's ¶ aid if it does. Nevertheless, the United States would find itself under pressure to ¶ protect Taiwan against any sort of attack, no matter how it originated. Given the different interests and perceptions of the various parties and the limited control ¶ Washington has over Taipei's behavior, a crisis could unfold in which the United ¶ States found itself following events rather than leading them. ¶ Such dangers have been around for decades, but ongoing improvements in ¶ China's military capabilities may make Beijing more willing to escalate a Taiwan ¶ crisis. In addition to its improved conventional capabilities, China is modernizing ¶ its nuclear forces to increase their ability to survive and retaliate following a ¶ large-scale U.S. attack. Standard deterrence theory holds that Washington's ¶ current ability to destroy most or all of China's nuclear force enhances its ¶ bargaining position. China's nuclear modernization might remove that check on ¶ Chinese action, leading Beijing to behave more boldly in future crises than it has ¶ in past ones. Scenario Three is Trade Naval power is key to global trade—allows for the safe transport of goods Eaglen and McGrath 11(Mackenzie and Bryan, May 16, Thinking About a Day Without Sea Power: Implications for U.S. Defense Policy, Mackenzie Eaglen is Research Fellow for National Security in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation. Bryan McGrath is a retired naval officer and the Director of Delex Consulting, Studies and Analysis, The Heritage Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/thinking-about-a-day-without-sea-power-implications-for-us- defense-policy) If the United States slashed its Navy and ended its mission as a guarantor of the free flow of transoceanic goods and trade, globalized world trade would decrease substantially. As early as 1890, noted U.S. naval officer and historian Alfred Thayer Mahan described the world’s oceans as a “great highway…a wide common,” underscoring the long-running importance of the seas to trade.[12]¶ Geographically organized trading blocs develop as the maritime highways suffer from insecurity and rising fuel prices. Asia prospers thanks to internal trade and Middle Eastern oil, Europe muddles along on the largesse of Russia and Iran, and the Western Hemisphere declines to a “new normal” with the exception of energy-independent Brazil.¶ For America, Venezuelan oil grows in importance as other supplies decline. Mexico runs out of oil—as predicted—when it fails to take advantage of Western oil technology and investment. Nigerian output, which for five years had been secured through a partnership of the U.S. Navy and Nigerian maritime forces, is decimated by the bloody civil war of 2021. Canadian exports, which a decade earlier had been strong as a result of the oil shale industry, decline as a result of environmental concerns in Canada and elsewhere about the “fracking” (hydraulic fracturing) process used to free oil from shale.¶ State and non-state actors increase the hazards to seaborne shipping, which are compounded by the necessity of traversing key chokepoints that are easily targeted by those who wish to restrict trade. These chokepoints include the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran could quickly close to trade if it wishes. More than half of the world’s oil is transported by sea. “From 1970 to 2006, the amount of goods transported via the oceans of the world…increased from 2.6 billion tons to 7.4 billion tons, an increase of over 284%.”[13] In 2010, “$40 billion dollars [sic] worth of oil passes through the world’s geographic ‘chokepoints’ on a daily basis…not to mention $3.2 trillion… annually in commerce that moves underwater on transoceanic cables.”[14] These quantities of goods simply cannot be moved by any other means. Thus, a reduction of sea trade reduces overall international trade.¶ U.S. consumers face a greatly diminished selection of goods because domestic production largely disappeared in the decades before the global depression. As countries increasingly focus on regional rather than global trade, costs rise and Americans are forced to accept a much lower standard of living. Some domestic manufacturing improves, but at significant cost.¶ In addition, shippers avoid U.S. ports due to the onerous container inspection regime implemented after investigators discover that the second dirty bomb was smuggled into the U.S. in a shipping container on an innocuous Panamanian-flagged freighter. As a result, American consumers bear higher shipping costs. The market also constrains the variety of goods available to the U.S. consumer and increases their cost.¶ A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report makes this abundantly clear. A one-week shutdown of the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports would lead to production losses of $65 million to $150 million (in 2006 dollars) per day. A three-year closure would cost $45 billion to $70 billion per year ($125 million to $200 million per day). Perhaps even more shocking, the simulation estimated that employment would shrink by approximately 1 million jobs.[15] These estimates demonstrate the effects of closing only the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports.¶ On a national scale, such a shutdown would be catastrophic. The Government Accountability Office notes that:¶ [O]ver 95 percent of U.S. international trade is transported by water[;] thus, the safety and economic security of the United States depends in large part on the secure use of the world’s seaports and waterways. A successful attack on a major seaport could potentially result in a dramatic slowdown in the international supply chain with impacts in the billions of dollars.[16]¶ As of 2008, “U.S. ports move 99 percent of the nation’s overseas cargo, handle more than 2.5 billion tons of trade annually, and move $5.5 billion worth of goods in and out every day.” Further, “approximately 95 percent of U.S. military forces and supplies that are sent overseas, including those for Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, pass through U.S. ports.”[17]

Trade collapse causes war Griswold 7(Daniel, April 20, Trade, Democracy and Peace: The Virtuous Cycle, Daniel T. Griswold is director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies., http://www.cato.org/publications/speeches/trade-democracy- peace-virtuous-cycle) The world has somehow become a more peaceful place.¶ A little-noticed headline on an Associated Press story a while back reported, “War declining worldwide, studies say.” In 2006, a survey by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found that the number of armed conflicts around the world has been in decline for the past half-century. Since the early 1990s, ongoing conflicts have dropped from 33 to 17, with all of them now civil conflicts within countries. The Institute’s latest report found that 2005 marked the second year in a row that no two nations were at war with one another. What a remarkable and wonderful fact.¶ The death toll from war has also been falling. According to the Associated Press report, “The number killed in battle has fallen to its lowest point in the post-World War II period, dipping below 20,000 a year by one measure. Peacemaking missions, meanwhile, are growing in number.” Current estimates of people killed by war are down sharply from annual tolls ranging from 40,000 to 100,000 in the 1990s, and from a peak of 700,000 in 1951 during the Korean War.¶ Many causes lie behind the good news—the end of the Cold War and the spread of democracy, among them—but expanding trade and globalization appear to be playing a major role in promoting world peace. Far from stoking a “World on Fire,” as one misguided American author argued in a forgettable book, growing commercial ties between nations have had a dampening effect on armed conflict and war. I would argue that free trade and globalization have promoted peace in three main ways.¶ First, as I argued a moment ago, trade and globalization have reinforced the trend toward democracy, and democracies tend not to pick fights with each other. Thanks in part to globalization, almost two thirds of the world’s countries today are democracies—a record high. Some studies have cast doubt on the idea that democracies are less likely to fight wars. While it’s true that democracies rarely if ever war with each other, it is not such a rare occurrence for democracies to engage in wars with non-democracies. We can still hope that has more countries turn to democracy, there will be fewer provocations for war by non-democracies.¶ A second and even more potent way that trade has promoted peace is by promoting more economic integration. As national economies become more intertwined with each other, those nations have more to lose should war break out. War in a globalized world not only means human casualties and bigger government, but also ruptured trade and investment ties that impose lasting damage on the economy. In short, globalization has dramatically raised the economic cost of war.¶ The 2005 Economic Freedom of the World Report contains an insightful chapter on “Economic Freedom and Peace” by Dr. Erik Gartzke, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Dr. Gartzke compares the propensity of countries to engage in wars and their level of economic freedom and concludes that economic freedom, including the freedom to trade, significantly decreases the probability that a country will experience a military dispute with another country. Through econometric analysis, he found that, “Making economies freer translates into making countries more peaceful. At the extremes, the least free states are about 14 times as conflict prone as the most free.”¶ Effect of Economic Freedom on Militarized Interstate Disputes¶ By the way, Dr. Gartzke’s analysis found that economic freedom was a far more important variable in determining a countries propensity to go to war than democracy.¶ A third reason why free trade promotes peace is because it allows nations to acquire wealth through production and exchange rather than conquest of territory and resources. As economies develop, wealth is increasingly measured in terms of intellectual property, financial assets, and human capital. Such assets cannot be easily seized by armies. In contrast, hard assets such as minerals and farmland are becoming relatively less important in a high-tech, service economy. If people need resources outside their national borders, say oil or timber or farm products, they can acquire them peacefully by trading away what they can produce best at home. In short, globalization and the development it has spurred have rendered the spoils of war less valuable. Add Ons 2AC Disease Ocean mapping and explorations solves diseases – cures are within species Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”, http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/

In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it (relatively) affordable and accessible came to an end after 30 years. Those three decades provided numerous technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag of nearly $200 billion, the program had its champions and its detractors. It was, however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing the American spirit of innovation and leadership. With the iconic space program ending, many people have asked, "What’s next? What is the next giant leap in scientific and technological innovation ?" Today a possible answer to that question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean . You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration . After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau" introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy . Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge , or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods. Disease spread will cause extinction Leather 10/12/11 (Tony, “The Inevitable Pandemic” http://healthmad.com/conditions-and- diseases/the-inevitable-pandemic/, PZ) You will have pictured this possible scenario many times, living in a country where people are suddenly dropping like flies because of some mystery virus. Hospitals full to overflowing, patients laid out in corridors, because of lack of room, health services frustrated, because they just can’t cope. You feel panic with no way of knowing who will be the next victim, intimate personal contact with anyone the death of you, quite possibly. This is no scene from a movie, or even a daydream, but UK reality in 1998, when the worst influenza epidemic in living memory swept savagely across the country. Whilst this was just one epidemic in one country, how terrifying is the idea that a global pandemic would see this horror story repeated many times over around the globe, death toll numbers in the millions. Humanity is outnumbered many fold by bacteria and viruses, the deadliest of all killers among these microscopic organisms. Death due to disease is a threat we all live with daily, trusting medical science combat it, but the fact is, frighteningly, that we have yet to experience the inevitable pandemic that might conceivably push humanity to the edge of extinction because so many of us become victims. Devastating viral diseases are nothing new. Bubonic plague killed almost half all Roman Empire citizens in542AD. Europe lost three quarters of the population to the Black Death in 1334. One fifth of Londoners succumbed to the 1665 Great Plague, and Russia was the site of the first official influenza pandemic, in 1729, which quickly spread to Europe and America, at the costs of many thousands of lives. Another epidemic of so-called Russian flu, originating in 1889 in central Asia spreading rapidly around the world, European death toll alone 250,000 people. In 1918 so-called Spanish Influenza killed 40million people worldwide, another strain originating Hong Kong in 1969 killed off 700,000, a 1989 UK epidemic killing 29,000. Small numbers, granted, as compared to the world population of seven billion, but the truth is that, should a true world pandemic occur, western governments will of course want to save their own people first, potentially globally disastrous. World Health Organisation laboratories worldwide constantly monitor and record new strains of virus, ensuring drug companies maintain stockpiles against most virulent strains known, maintaining a fighting chance of coping with new pandemics. They do theoretical models of likely effects of new pandemics, their predictions making chilling reading. Put into perspective, during a pandemic, tanker loads of antiviral agents, which simply do not exist would be needed so prioritizing vaccination recipients would be inevitable. Such a pandemic would, in UK alone, be at least 10 times deadlier than previously experienced, likely number of dead in first two months 72,000 in London alone. Any new virus would need a three to six month wait for effective vaccine, so the devastation on a global scale, flu virus notoriously indifferent to international borders, would be truly colossal. Our knowledge of history should be pointing the way to prepare for that living nightmare of the next, inevitable world pandemic. The microscopic villains of these scenarios have inhabited this planet far longer than we have, and they too evolve. It would be comforting to think that humanity was genuinely ready, though it seems doubtful at best. 2AC Climate Data gathering is key to resolve climate change Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf) National security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a matter of national security and may even be a denning security challenge of the 21st century. Nonetheless, some national security professionals have yet to full)' conceptualize how climate change could impact their areas of responsibility, or whether they need to analyze potential implications at all. What is more, they currently lack the "actionable- data necessary to generate requirements, plans, strategies, training and materiel to prepare for future challenges, 'though the scope and quality of available scientific information has improved in recent years, this information docs not always reach - or is not presented in a form that is useful to - the decision makers who need it. Closing this gap between national security policy makers who consume information and the scientists who produce it is essential for the nation to effectively deal with the national security implications of climate change. Today, a thin thread of climate information links producer and consumer communities, but different needs, priorities, processes and cultures separate them - in addition to a divisive political debate surrounding the validity of climate science. As new public policies, regulations and laws come into effect and the consequences of climate change become more obvious, the demand for information is likely to surge. Multiple barriers impede improved communication, the producer community tends to be stove- piped. Even though consumers often need interdisciplinary science and analysis. Consumers, who may also be stove-piped in various agencies or subject areas, may lack familiarity with or access to these separate communities, as well as the tools or time to navigate scientific information and disciplines. Indeed, the immediate needs of consumers do not align well with the longer timelines Involved in scientific inquiry, and consumer communities have not signaled the kinds of actionable data they require in order to make decisions. Broadly speaking, scientists do not commonly serve public policy goals, at least not directly. And the academic community does not necessarily value communication with non-scientific constituencies. To make matters worse, there is a clear shortage of "translators" who can interpret climate science into actionable information for policy makers. Finally, a two-way conversation about such information requires trusting relationships, which, for a variety of reasons, may not always exist between the scientific and national security policy communities. Scientists and national security professionals can bridge this gap. Consumers of information can signal the kinds of information they need by commissioning studies and collaborating or contracting with scientific organizations. Producers of climate information can rise to the occasion, accept that their work is critical to good governance and invest time and resources into better communication. For this approach to work, however, both producer and consumer institutions will need to change their incentive structures. In short, policy makers and scientists need to build new bridges in order to address climate change. Some degree of separation is healthy for the sake of setting policy priorities and maintaining scientific integrity. But regardless, decision makers at all levels of government have already moved from merely studying climate change to responding to it - both to mitigate the damage from greenhouse gases and to adapt to potentially unavoidable changes over the next 20-30 years. For the nation, and the national security community specifically, to deal with national and international challenges associated with climate change, these two communities will need to work more closely together. Warming is the only existential risk Deibel ’07—Prof IR @ National War College (Terry, “Foreign Affairs Strategy: Logic for American Statecraft,” Conclusion: American Foreign Affairs Strategy Today)

Finally, there is one major existential threat to American security (as well as prosperity) of a nonviolent nature, which, though far in the future, demands urgent action. It is the threat of global warming to the stability of the climate upon which all earthly life depends. Scientists worldwide have been observing the gathering of this threat for three decades now, and what was once a mere possibility has passed through probability to near certainty. Indeed not one of more than 900 articles on climate change published in refereed scientific journals from 1993 to 2003 doubted that anthropogenic warming is occurring. “In legitimate scientific circles,” writes Elizabeth Kolbert, “it is virtually impossible to find evidence of disagreement over the fundamentals of global warming.” Evidence from a vast international scientific monitoring effort accumulates almost weekly, as this sample of newspaper reports shows: an international panel predicts “brutal droughts, floods and violent storms across the planet over the next century”; climate change could “literally alter ocean currents, wipe away huge portions of Alpine Snowcaps and aid the spread of cholera and malaria”; “glaciers in the Antarctic and in Greenland are melting much faster than expected, and…worldwide, plants are blooming several days earlier than a decade ago”; “rising sea temperatures have been accompanied by a significant global increase in the most destructive hurricanes”; “NASA scientists have concluded from direct temperature measurements that 2005 was the hottest year on record, with 1998 a close second”; “Earth’s warming climate is estimated to contribute to more than 150,000 deaths and 5 million illnesses each year” as disease spreads; “widespread bleaching from Texas to Trinidad…killed broad swaths of corals” due to a 2-degree rise in sea temperatures. “The world is slowly disintegrating,” concluded Inuit hunter Noah Metuq, who lives 30 miles from the Arctic Circle. “They call it climate change…but we just call it breaking up.” From the founding of the first cities some 6,000 years ago until the beginning of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere remained relatively constant at about 280 parts per million (ppm). At present they are accelerating toward 400 ppm, and by 2050 they will reach 500 ppm, about double pre-industrial levels. Unfortunately, atmospheric CO2 lasts about a century, so there is no way immediately to reduce levels, only to slow their increase, we are thus in for significant global warming; the only debate is how much and how serous the effects will be. As the newspaper stories quoted above show, we are already experiencing the effects of 1-2 degree warming in more violent storms, spread of disease, mass die offs of plants and animals, species extinction, and threatened inundation of low-lying countries like the Pacific nation of Kiribati and the Netherlands at a warming of 5 degrees or less the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets could disintegrate, leading to a sea level of rise of 20 feet that would cover North Carolina’s outer banks, swamp the southern third of Florida, and inundate Manhattan up to the middle of Greenwich Village. Another catastrophic effect would be the collapse of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation that keeps the winter weather in Europe far warmer than its latitude would otherwise allow. Economist William Cline once estimated the damage to the United States alone from moderate levels of warming at 1-6 percent of GDP annually; severe warming could cost 13-26 percent of GDP. But the most frightening scenario is runaway greenhouse warming, based on positive feedback from the buildup of water vapor in the atmosphere that is both caused by and causes hotter surface temperatures. Past ice age transitions, associated with only 5-10 degree changes in average global temperatures, took place in just decades, even though no one was then pouring ever-increasing amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. Faced with this specter, the best one can conclude is that “humankind’s continuing enhancement of the natural greenhouse effect is akin to playing Russian roulette with the earth’s climate and humanity’s life support system. At worst, says physics professor Marty Hoffert of New York University, “we’re just going to burn everything up; we’re going to heat the atmosphere to the temperature it was in the Cretaceous when there were crocodiles at the poles, and then everything will collapse.” During the Cold War, astronomer Carl Sagan popularized a theory of nuclear winter to describe how a thermonuclear war between the Untied States and the Soviet Union would not only destroy both countries but possibly end life on this planet. Global warming is the post-Cold War era’s equivalent of nuclear winter at least as serious and considerably better supported scientifically. Over the long run it puts dangers from terrorism and traditional military challenges to shame. It is a threat not only to the security and prosperity to the United States, but potentially to the continued existence of life on this planet 2AC Biodiversity Ocean ecosystems are collapsing – only the aff can mobilize international solutions Sherman ‘11 (Kenneth, 2011, “The application of satellite remote sensing for assessing productivity in relation to fisheries yields of the world’s large marine ecosystems,” ICES Journal of Marine Science, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ph.D, Director of U.S. LME Program, Director of the Narragansett Laboratory and Office of Marine Ecosystem Studies at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island) In 1992, world leaders at the historical UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized that the exploitation of resources in coastal oceans was becoming increasingly unsustainable, resulting in an international effort to assess, recover, and manage goods and services of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). More than $3 billion in support to 110 economically developing nations have been dedicated to operationalizing a five-module approach supporting LME assessment and management practices. An important component of this effort focuses on the effects of climate change on fisheries biomass yields of LMEs, using satellite remote sensing and in situ sampling of key indicators of changing ecological conditions . Warming appears to be reducing primary productivity in the lower latitudes, where stratification of the water column has intensified. Fishery biomass yields in the Subpolar LMEs of the Northeast Atlantic are also increasing as zooplankton levels increase with warming. During the current period of climate warming, it is especially important for space agency programmes in Asia, Europe, and the United States to continue to provide satellite-borne radiometry data to the global networks of LME assessment scientists. Overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and climate change are causing serious degradation in the world’s coastal oceans and a downward spiral in economic benefits from marine goods and services. Prompt and large-scale changes in the use of ocean resources are needed to overcome this downward spiral. In 1992, the world community of nations convened the first global conference of world leaders in Rio de Janeiro to address ways and means to improve the degraded condition of the global environment (Robinson et al., 1992). Ten years later (2002), at a follow-up World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg (Sherman, 2006), world leaders agreed to a Plan of Implementation for several marine-related targets including achievement of: (i) “substantial” reductions in land-based sources of pollution by 2006; (ii) introduction of the ecosystems approach to marine resource assessment and management by 2010; (iii) designation of a network of marine protected areas by 2012; and (iv) maintenance and restoration of fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015. More recently, in Copenhagen in 2009, world leaders agreed to non-binding actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to mitigate the effects of global climate change. For the period 2010–2020, the international community of maritime nations is pursuing solutions for recovering depleted marine fish stocks, restoring degraded habitats, controlling pollution, nutrient overenrichment, and ocean acidification, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to climate change. This effort at improving the ecological condition of the world’s 64 large marine ecosystems (LMEs) is global in scope and ecosystems-orientated in approach (Sherman et al., 2005). LMEs are regions of 200 000 km2 or more, encompassing coastal areas from estuaries to the continental slope and the seaward extent of well-defined current systems along coasts lacking continental shelves (Figure 1). They are defined by ecological criteria including bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophically linked populations (Sherman, 1994). The LMEs produce 80% of the world’s marine fisheries yields annually and are growing sinks of coastal pollution and nutrient overenrichment. They also harbour degraded habitats (e.g. corals, seagrasses, mangroves, and oxygen-depleted dead zones). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a financial group located in Washington, DC, supports developing countries committed to the recovery and sustainability of coastal ocean areas, by providing financial and catalytic support to projects that use LMEs as the geographic focus for ecosystem-based strategies to reduce coastal pollution, control nutrient overenrichment, restore damaged habitats, recover depleted fisheries, protect biodiversity, and adapt to climate change (Duda and Sherman, 2002). Accelerating ocean loss causes extinction Alex David Rogers 6/20/11, Ph.D. in marine invertebrate systematics and genetics from the University of Liverpool is a Professor in Conservation Biology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford AND Dan Laffoley, PhD on marine ecology at the University of Exeter, and Senior Advisor, Marine Science and Conservation Global Marine and Polar Programme (IPSO Oxford, “International earth system expert workshop on ocean stresses and impacts”, July 20, 2011, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf) The workshop enabled leading experts to take a global view on how all the different effects we are having on the ocean are compromising its ability to support us. This examination of synergistic threats leads to the conclusion that we have underestimated the overall risks and that the whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts, and that degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted. It is clear that the traditional economic and consumer values that formerly served society well, when coupled with current rates of population increase, are not sustainable. The ocean is the largest ecosystem on Earth, supports us and maintains our world in a habitable condition. To maintain the goods and services it has provided to humankind for millennia demands change in how we view, manage, govern and use marine ecosystems. The scale of the stresses on the ocean means that deferring action will increase costs in the future leading to even greater losses of benefits. The key points needed to drive a common sense rethink are: • Human actions have resulted in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increased hypoxia. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are three symptoms that indicate disturbances of the carbon cycle associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth (e.g. Erwin, 2008; Veron, 2008a,b; Veron et al., 2009; Barnosky et al., 2011). • The speeds of many negative changes to the ocean are near to or are tracking the worstcase scenarios from IPCC and other predictions. Some are as predicted, but many are faster than anticipated, and many are still accelerating. Consequences of current rates of change already matching those predicted under the “worst case scenario” include : the rate of decrease in Arctic Sea Ice (Stroeve et al., 2007; Wang & Overland, 2009) and in the accelerated melting of both the Greenland icesheet (Velicogna, 2009; Khan et al., 2010; Rignot et al., 2011) and Antarctic ice sheets (Chen et al., 2009; Rignot et al., 2008, 2011; Velicogna, 2009 ); sea level rise (Rahmstorf 2007a,b; Rahmstorf et al., 2007; Nicholls et al., 2011); and release of trapped methane from the seabed (Westbrook et al., 2009; Shakova et al., 2010; although not yet globally significant Dlugokencky et al., 2009). The ‘worst case’ effects are compounding other changes more consistent with predictions including: changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand & Reid, 2003; Beaugrand 2004, 2009; Beaugrand et al., 2003; 2010; Cheung et al. 2009, 2010, Reid et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2011; Philippart et al., 2011; Schiel, 2011; Wassmann et al., 2011; Wernberg et al., 2011); changes in primary production (Behrenfeld et al., 2006; Chavez et al., 2011); changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms (Heisler et al., 2008; Bauman et al., 2010); increases in health hazards in the oceans (e.g. ciguatera, pathogens; Van Dolah, 2000; Lipp et al., 2002; Dickey & Plakas, 2009); and loss of both large, longklived and small fish species causing widespread impacts on marine ecosystems , including direct impacts on predator and prey species, the simplification and destabilization of food webs, reduction of resilience to the effects of climate change (e.g. Jackson et al. 2001; Pauly et al., 1998; Worm & Myers, 2003; Baum & Myers, 2004; Rosenberg et al., 2005; Worm et al., 2006; Myers et al., 2007; Jackson, 2008; Baum & Worm, 2009; Ferretti et al., 2010; Hutchings et al., 2010; WardkPaige et al., 2010; Pinskya et al., 2011). • The magnitude of the cumulative impacts on the ocean is greater than previously understood Interactions between different impacts can be negatively synergistic (negative impact greater than sum of individual stressors) or they can be antagonistic (lowering the effects of individual impacts). Examples of such interactions include: combinations of overfishing, physical disturbance, climate change effects, nutrient runoff and introductions of nonknative species leading to explosions of these invasive species, including harmful algal blooms, and dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2001, 2002; Daskalov et al., 2007; Purcell et al., 2007; Boero et al., 2008; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Bauman et al., 2010; VaquerkSunur & Duarte, 2010); increased temperature and acidification increasing the susceptibility of corals to bleaching (Anthony et al., 2008) and acting synergistically to impact the reproduction and development of other marine invertebrates (Parker et al., 2009); changes in the behavior, fate and toxicity of heavy metals with acidification (Millero et al., 2009; Pascal et al., 2010); acidification may reduce the limiting effect of iron availability on primary production in some parts of the ocean (Shi et al., 2010; King et al., 2011); increased uptake of plastics by fauna (Andrady 2011, Hirai & Takada et al. 2011, Murray & Cowie, 2011), and increased bioavailability of pollutants through adsorption onto the surface of microplastic particles (Graham & Thompson 2009, Moore 2008, Thomson, et al., 2009); and feedbacks of climate change impacts on the oceans (temperature rise, sea level rise, loss of ice cover, acidification, increased storm intensity, methane release) on their rate of CO2 uptake and global warming (Lenton et al., 2008; Reid et al 2009). • Timelines for action are shrinking . The longer the delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures. • Resilience of the ocean to climate change impacts is severely compromised by the other stressors from human activities, including fisheries, pollution and habitat destruction. Examples include the overfishing of reef grazers, nutrient runoff, and other forms of pollution (presence of pathogens or endocrine disrupting chemicals (Porte et al., 2006; OSPAR 2010)) reducing the recovery ability of reefs from temperaturekinduced mass coral bleaching (Hoeghk Guldberg et al., 2007; Mumby et al., 2007; Hughes et al., 2010; Jackson, 2010; Mumby & Harborne, 2010) . These multiple stressors promote the phase shift of reef ecosystems from being coralkdominated to algal dominated. The loss of genetic diversity from overfishing reduces ability to adapt to stressors. • Ecosystem collapse is occurring as a result of both current and emerging stressors. Stressors include chemical pollutants, agriculture runkoff, sediment loads and overkextraction of many components of food webs which singly and together severely impair the functioning of ecosystems. Consequences include the potential increase of harmful algal blooms in recent decades (Van Dolah, 2000; Landsberg, 2002; Heisler et al., 2008; Dickey & Plakas, 2009; Wang & Wu, 2009); the spread of oxygen depleted or dead zones (Rabalais et al., 2002; Diaz & Rosenberg, 2008; VaquerkSunyer & Duarte, 2008); the disturbance of the structure and functioning of marine food webs, to the benefit of planktonic organisms of low nutritional value, such as jellyfish or other gelatinousklike organisms (Broduer et al., 1999; Mills, 2001; Pauly et al. 2009; Boero et al., 2008; Moore et al., 2008); dramatic changes in the microbial communities with negative impacts at the ecosystem scale (Dinsdale et al., 2008; Jackson, 2010); and the impact of emerging chemical contaminants in ecosystems (la Farré et al., 2008 ). This impairment damages or eliminates the ability of ecosystems to support humans . • The extinction threat to marine species is rapidly increasing. The main causes of extinctions of marine species to date are overexploitation and habitat loss (Dulvy et al., 2009). However climate change is increasingly adding to this, as evidenced by the recent IUCN Red List Assessment of reforming corals (Carpenter et al., 2008). Some other species ranges have already extended or shifted polekwards and into deeper cooler waters (Reid et al., 2009); this may not be possible for some species to achieve, potentially leading to reduced habitats and more extinctions. Shifts in currents and temperatures will affect the food supply of animals, including at critical early stages, potentially testing their ability to survive. The participants concluded that not only are we already experiencing severe declines in many species to the point of commercial extinction in some cases, and an unparalleled rate of regional extinctions of habitat types (eg mangroves and seagrass meadows), but we now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. Unless action is taken now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, overexploitation, pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean. It is notable that the occurrence of multiple high intensity stressors has been a prerequisite for all the five global extinction events of the past 600 million years (Barnosky et al., 2009). 2AC Overfishing Only ocean observation allows for effective management policies Rosenberg 11 (Dr. Andrew Rosenberg, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform,” http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/) U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform¶ Dr. Andrew Rosenberg¶ At Conservation International, we know that while humans are mostly confined to the quarter of the planet covered by land, we are surrounded — and sustained — by vast oceans.¶ In addition to supporting incredible biodiversity , oceans provide benefits to people in the form of food, energy, recreation, tourism and desirable places to live. They are also a tremendous economic driver, generating an estimated 69 million jobs and over $8 trillion dollars in wages per year in the United States alone. From renewable energy sources like wave and wind power to offshore aquaculture and deep-sea bioprospecting, our oceans and coasts provide new opportunities for technology developers, manufacturers, engineers and others in a vast supply chain to discover, innovate and develop new economic opportunities around the globe. America can lead this global innovation .¶ Unfortunately, the health of our oceans is in serious decline; in too many places, coastal water quality is poor, fisheries are stressed, habitats for ocean life are degraded and endangered marine species are struggling to recover. Disasters such as last year’s BP oil spill have damaged the oceans and their inhabitants, which in turn has stressed the communities and industries that depend on healthy oceans.¶ To turn the tide, our national, state and local leaders must make a commit ment to more coordinated management of ocean resources. Our decisions must be based on sound science, and scientific work must be a funding priority in order for us to gain the benefits the oceans can provide.¶ The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative recently released America’s Ocean Future, a report that calls on leaders to support full and effective implementation of our nation’s first national ocean policy — the National Policy for Stewardship of Ocean, Coasts and Great Lakes — which was established by President Obama in July of 2010. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the national ocean policy has the potential to act as a catalyst for long-awaited and important reforms, including enhanced monitoring, assessment and analysis of the condition of our ocean ecosystems, how they affect and are affected by human activity and whether management strategies are achieving our environmental, social and economic goals. Using these tools to better understand our oceans will help us to more effectively manage these resources and strengthen coastal economies and communities across the country.¶ As a member of the Joint Initiative’s Leadership Council and an advisor to the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, I believe that monitoring what is happening in our oceans is critical to understanding how the physical, biological, chemical and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact . The Joint Initiative report recommends fully supporting an ocean observation system that would integrate data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean , from buoys on the ocean’s surface and from satellites with remote sensing technology high above the Earth.¶ The report also emphasizes the importance of better integrating the study of our planet’s climate and ocean systems. We need to have a better understanding of how climate change affects the health of our oceans and marine life in order to develop strategies to mitigate negative consequences on ocean ecosystems and coastal communities. The report notes that “information about climate impacts will be particularly important for coastal areas with infrastructure that is vulnerable to rising sea levels and strong coastal storms, including communities with naval facilities and transportation and energy infrastructure near the coast.”¶ The development of expanded and improved science, research and education around our oceans is a sound investment in improving our economy. The data and information collected from research activities will be used to inform coastal development , promote sustainable and safe fishing practices, and develop vibrant marine-based recreation and tourism. And promoting the education of our next generation of marine scientists will help us compete in a global economy increasingly driven by scientific and technological innovation.

Fishery management prevents extinction VOA, 10 (Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1, http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Bluefin- Tuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing--111159869.html) Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance of marine life in check . Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller organisms might affect the entire underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far, those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the sale of bluefin tuna. "Scientists tell us that when a top predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if you let these large fish become depleted because they anchor the ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain. Government officials and members of environmental groups met in Paris in mid- November to discuss fishing regulations that may affect all life on Earth. Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says the bluefin is in jeopardy . "The fish is in worse shape than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us to this point. " The quotas are designed to let fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but even within quotas, there's consistent lack of enforcement , fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to near-extinction followed increased Japanese demand for fresh sushi starting in the 1970s and 80s. And fishing practices that target the two primary regions in which blue fin spawn: the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart," said Sue Lieberman. "If you want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light on a bigger problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish it's estimated have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing like that," said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale fishing. Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it." "If countries really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious about enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. " Management of fish species on the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's about the very future of our planet ," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and we can't keep … and governments can't keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen to the fishing industry; we'll worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury." 2AC SCS IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf Abstract— Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical variables to support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government, and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations. Solves SCS fishing disputes Caitlin Werrell 14, and Francesco Femia, Co-Founders & Directors of the Center for Climate and Security, “Fisheries and Conflict Zones: The Critical Role of Satellite Technology,” http://climateandsecurity.org/2014/01/07/fisheries-and-conflict-zones-the-critical-role-of-satellite- technology/ Al-Abdulrazzak continues with an interesting and important point about the utility of satellite technology, especially for collecting data in difficult-to-reach regions:¶ These results, which provide the first example of fisheries catch estimates from space, speak to the potential of satellite technologies for monitoring fisheries remotely, particularly in areas that were once considered too dangerous or expensive for fisheries surveillance and enforcement. For example, we were able to reveal and account for 17 illegal operating traps in Qatar, and suggest that similar methods can be used to expose other illegal marine practices such as monitoring activities in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and assessing the magnitude of oil spills.¶ This utility of satellite technology would also apply to zones of instability and conflict, where fisheries data (and other sorts of data, including water and climate information) are of critical importance for assessing vulnerability and instability, but are difficult- to-impossible to collect due to circumstances on the ground. For example, see NASA’s satellite data on freshwater losses in the Middle East (the Tigris-Euphrates- Western Iran region) – of critical importance in an unstable region where many ground-based data sources sources lay in zones inaccessible to researchers.¶ Satellites may also be crucial, for example , in tracking fisheries dynamics in the contested South China Sea , which because of a warming ocean, is seeing fish stocks gradually moving northwards. Accurate data and monitoring could be crucial in this area, as geopolitical tensions between China, its Asian neighbors, and the United States, over claims to the sea, could be non-trivially affected by such changes (see Will Rogers’ discussion of this in a CNAS report from 2012).¶ In short, satellite technologies are critical in a changing (and unstable) world. We should not allow the pressures of austerity to make us forget this. Those are the most likely scenario for SCS conflict Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt 12, China and Northeast Asia director for the International Crisis Group, former IR fellow at CFR, June 25 2012, “Fish Story,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/06/25/fish_story Consider it a lesson in how a common fishing run-in can turn into a crisis that can bring an entire region to its knees. Despite the overwhelming preoccupation with the potentially abundant energy reserves in the South China Sea, fishing has emerged as a larger potential driver of conflict. Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam rely on the sea as an economic lifeline. And China is the largest consumer and exporter of fish in the world. And as overfishing continues to deplete coastal stocks through Southeast Asia, fishermen are venturing out further into disputed waters.¶ All this is worsening a trend of harassment, confiscation of catch and equipment, detention, and mistreatment of fishermen. Further fueling tensions is the way countries in the region are wielding unilateral fishing bans to assert jurisdiction over disputed waters under the pretext of environmental protection. Worryingly, the claims of sovereignty also serve to justify greater civilian patrols in the sea -- opening up still more possibilities of run- ins with fishing vessels. And when ships go bump in the night, growing nationalist sentiment limits governments' ability to resolve the disputes and sows the seeds for future problems. 2AC Sea Power Oceanographic data is key sea power – information dominance. Titley 2010 RAdm. David W. Titley, Oceanographer and Navigator of the Navy, January 2010 https://www.sea- technology.com/features/2010/0110/naval_oceanography.html

There is a growing recognition within the U.S. Navy that information is evolving from a supporting function to a main battery of 21st century American sea power. In response, the chief of naval operations (CNO) this year reorganized his staff around the creation of an Information Dominance Directorate. As part of this initiative, naval oceanography is joining other information-centric capabilities—including intelligence, information technology, information warfare and the space cadre—in what the CNO has designated as the Information Dominance Corps. Environmental data collection and processing, long a staple of naval oceanography, is a key contributor to decision superiority . For the naval oceanography community, raw data are turned into actionable information using a concept known as “Battlespace on Demand,” a four-tiered construct that begins with the collection of environmental data from an array of remote and in-theater sensors. At the second tier, these data are used to characterize and predict the environment using two supercomputing centers and trained specialists . The third tier is translating the predicted environment into fleet and joint force war-fighting impacts. At the final tier, this information facilitates decision superiority by informing options, courses of action, sensor employment, asset allocation and timing, and the quantification of risk based on environmental considerations. Sensing Technology Information dominance depends on cutting-edge technology, and the naval oceanography community continues to work with national laboratories, research institutions and universities, and the commercial technology community to ensure we maintain that edge. The use of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) for monitoring the marine environment is a subject of continuing interest and investment. This year, the Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command awarded a contract to Teledyne Brown Engineering Inc. (Huntsville, Alabama) to design the littoral battlespace sensing glider (LBS-G). The contract could deliver up to 150 Slocum gliders between fiscal year (FY) 2011 and FY 2015 if all options are exercised. These autonomously operated vehicles are configured to carry an array of sensors for collecting environmental data. The command also released a University of Washington Seaglider from the icebreaker U.S. Coast Guard cutter Healy (WAGB-20) while operating in the Chukchi Sea. Data from the glider will improve the performance and aid in the evaluation of oceanographic computer models for the Arctic. The Naval Oceanographic Office recently took delivery of a Hydroid Inc. (Pocasset, Massachusetts) REMUS 600 AUV to apply multibeam technology to accurate bottom mapping. This system contains an inertial navigation system, a Doppler-aided bottom velocity sonar and acoustic transponder position updates that will greatly improve vehicle positioning capabilities. The oceanographer of the Navy is also investing in a modified version of the T-AGS oceangoing military survey vessel, T-AGS 66, which will include a moon pool for the deployment and retrieval of unmanned vehicles. Numerical Modeling As technological advances increase sensing capabilities, there will be more data available to give us a higher resolution look at environmental parameters, but that also means we need greater capacity with numerical models to enhance our predictive capabilities. This year, 1,300 separate products were produced to support combat forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 40 ports were surveyed to provide a baseline for mine countermeasure efforts and on-demand weather modeling requirements increased by almost 10 percent. A significant advancement this year was the integration of the Navy Data Assimilation System-Accelerated Representer into the Navy’s global atmospheric model to incorporate time variability through previous model runs. This allows the adaptation of observational data into the model run regardless of when the information was sampled and provides the ability to identify trends in the data and get a better initialization before the model starts its run. One challenge of protecting against piracy attacks off the Horn of Africa is the vast amount of sea space that must be covered. To assist in this effort, the Piracy Performance Surface Model was developed to forecast probable concentrations of pirate activity based on weather, sea conditions and the latest analysis from the intelligence community. Hosting the world’s most extensive oceanographic database at the Department of Defense Supercomput-ing Resource Center in Stennis Space Center, Mississippi, the Naval Ocean-ographic Office has expanded its capabilities so that oceanographic numerical modeling is now on par with our ability to model the atmosphere at the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center in Monterey, California. The Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model, jointly developed by the Navy and NOAA, is under final validation and on the verge of becoming operational. This model maintains the high horizontal resolution of the Navy’s global ocean model, which takes into consideration the influence of atmospheric winds on the ocean surface, but also allows for variable vertical resolution to account for coastal, nearshore impacts on the ocean thermal structure. This year has seen progress toward the pursuit of partnerships to enhance the capabilities of environmental modeling. The National Unified Operational Prediction Capability is an integration effort of Navy, U.S. Air Force and NOAA models to support unparalleled global modeling capability that can be adapted by individual agencies for specific applications. Another partnership formed this year was between the Navy, DOER Marine (Alameda, California) and Google Inc. to integrate archived Navy ocean data into the new ocean segment of Google Earth. This will serve to help educate the public on the ocean and expand digital ocean data holdings, enhancing the Navy’s ability to process, create and search oceanographic products in an effort to better maintain the safety of the fleet and enhance war-fighter effectiveness. Climate Change We will need these partnerships to help us develop models that will improve our understanding of the changing conditions in the Arctic and global climate change in general. The Department of Defense is aware of the challenges and opportunities climate change will present in the future. Last May, the CNO created Task Force Climate Change to make recommendations to Navy leadership regarding policy, strategy, force structure and investments relating first to the changing Arctic and subsequently to global climate change. The oceanographer of the Navy was appointed to lead the task force, which includes representatives from various Navy and Coast Guard staffs, program offices and fleet commands, and NOAA. Naval power deters great power wars, reassures allies and facilitates cooperation to solve global problems England et al., former deputy secretary of defense, 2011 (Gordon, “The Necessity of U.S. Naval Power”, 7-11, http://gcaptain.com/necessity-u-s-naval-power? 27784, ldg)

The future security environment underscores two broad security trends. First, international political realities and the internationally agreed-to sovereign rights of nations will increasingly limit the sustained involvement of American permanent land -based, heavy forces to the more extreme crises. This will make offshore options for deterrence and power projection ever more paramount in support of our national interests. Second, the naval dimensions of American power will re-emerge as the primary means for assuring our allies and partners, ensuring prosperity in times of peace, and countering anti-access, area-denial efforts in times of crisis. We do not believe these trends will require the dismantling of land-based forces, as these forces will remain essential reservoirs of power. As the United States has learned time and again, once a crisis becomes a conflict, it is impossible to predict with certainty its depth, duration and cost. That said, the U.S. has been shrinking its overseas land-based installations, so the ability to project power globally will make the forward presence of naval forces an even more essential dimension of American influence. What we do believe is that uniquely responsive Navy-Marine Corps capabilities provide the basis on which our most vital overseas interests are safeguarded. Forward presence and engagement is what allows the U.S. to maintain awareness, to deter aggression, and to quickly respond to threats as they arise. Though we clearly must be prepared for the high-end threats, such preparation should be made in balance with the means necessary to avoid escalation to the high end in the first place. The versatility of maritime forces provides a truly unmatched advantage. The sea remains a vast space that provides nearly unlimited freedom of maneuver. Command of the sea allows for the presence of our naval forces, supported from a network of shore facilities, to be adjusted and scaled with little external restraint. It permits reliance on proven capabilities such as prepositioned ships. Maritime capabilities encourage and enable coop eration with other nations to solve common sea-based problems such as piracy, illegal trafficking, prolif eration of W.M.D ., and a host of other ills, which if unchecked can harm our friends and interests abroad, and our own citizenry at home. The flexibility and responsiveness of naval forces provide our country with a general strategic deterrent in a potentially violent and unstable world. Most importantly, our naval forces project and sustain power at sea and ashore at the time, place, duration, and intensity of our choosing. Given these enduring qualities, tough choices must clearly be made, especially in light of expected tight defense budgets. The administration and the Congress need to balance the resources allocated to missions such as strategic deterrence, ballistic missile defense, and cyber warfare with the more traditional ones of sea control and power projection. The maritime capability and capacity vital to the flexible projection of U.S. power and influence around the globe must surely be preserved, especially in light of available technology. Capabilities such as the Joint Strike Fighter will provide strategic deterrence, in addition to tactical long-range strike, especially when operating from forward-deployed naval vessels. Postured to respond quickly, the Navy - Marine Corps team integrates sea , air, and land power into adaptive force packages spanning the entire spectrum of operations , from everyday cooperative security activities to unwelcome — but not impossible — wars between major powers. This is exactly what we will need to meet the challenges of the future. 2AC Trade IOOS key to maritime trade which is key to overall trade

U.S. IOOS Summer Report 13 (The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is a national-regional partnership working to ¶ provide new tools and forecasts to improve safety, enhance the economy, and protect our environment. August 2013. A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System from the U.S. IOOS Summer Report. http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf July 8, 2014). During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from super-storms, which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship. Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide, because of the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users . We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products . Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after disasters . The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable.

Trade solves war

Boudreaux 06 (Donald J. Boudreaux was the Chairman of the Department of Economics at GMU. Currently he is the Director of the Centerf or the Study of Public Choice. He was recently President of the Foundation for Economic Education. “Want World Peace? Support Free Trade” from The Christian Science Monitor. 10/20/06. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p09s02-coop.html July 8, 2014.) Back in 1748, Baron de Montesquieu observed that "Peace is the natural effect of trade. Two nations who differ with each other become reciprocally dependent; for if one has an interest in buying, the other has an interest in selling; and thus their union is founded on their mutual necessities."¶ ¶ If Mr. Montesquieu is correct that trade promotes peace, then protectionism – a retreat from open trade – raises the chances of war.¶ Plenty of empirical evidence confirms the wisdom of Montesquieu's insight: Trade does indeed promote peace.¶ During the past 30 years, Solomon Polachek, an economist at the State University of New York at Binghamton, has researched the relationship between trade and peace. In his most recent paper on the topic, he and co-author Carlos Seiglie of Rutgers University review the massive amount of research on trade, war, and peace.¶ They find that "the overwhelming evidence indicates that trade reduces conflict." Likewise for foreign investment. The greater the amounts that foreigners invest in the United States, or the more that Americans invest abroad, the lower is the likelihood of war between America and those countries with which it has investment relationships.¶ Professors Polachek and Seiglie conclude that, "The policy implication of our finding is that further international cooperation in reducing barriers to both trade and capital flows can promote a more peaceful world."¶ Columbia University political scientist Erik Gartzke reaches a similar but more general conclusion: Peace is fostered by economic freedom. Economic freedom certainly includes, but is broader than, the freedom of ordinary people to trade internationally. It includes also low and transparent rates of taxation, the easy ability of entrepreneurs to start new businesses, the lightness of regulations on labor, product, and credit markets, ready access to sound money, and other factors that encourage the allocation of resources by markets rather than by government officials. ¶ Professor Gartzke ranks countries on an economic-freedom index from 1 to 10, with 1 being very unfree and 10 being very free. He then examines military conflicts from 1816 through 2000. His findings are powerful: Countries that rank lowest on an economic-freedom index – with scores of 2 or less – are 14 times more likely to be involved in military conflicts than are countries whose people enjoy significant economic freedom (that is, countries with scores of 8 or higher).¶ Also important, the findings of Polachek and Gartzke improve our understanding of the long-recognized reluctance of democratic nations to wage war against one another. These scholars argue that the so-called democratic peace is really the capitalist peace.¶ Democratic institutions are heavily concentrated in countries that also have strong protections for private property rights, openness to foreign commerce, and other features broadly consistent with capitalism. That's why the observation that any two democracies are quite unlikely to go to war against each other might reflect the consequences of capitalism more than democracy.¶ And that's just what the data show. Polachek and Seiglie find that openness to trade is much more effective at encouraging peace than is democracy per se. Similarly, Gartzke discovered that, "When measures of both economic freedom and democracy are included in a statistical study, economic freedom is about 50 times more effective than democracy in diminishing violent conflict."¶ These findings make sense. By promoting prosperity, economic freedom gives ordinary people a large stake in peace.¶ This prosperity is threatened during wartime. War almost always gives government more control over resources and imposes the burdens of higher taxes, higher inflation, and other disruptions of the everyday commercial relationships that support prosperity.¶ When commerce reaches across political borders, the peace-promoting effects of economic freedom intensify. Why? It's bad for the bottom line to shoot your customers or your suppliers, so the more you trade with foreigners the less likely you are to seek, or even to tolerate, harm to these foreigners. Senators-elect Sherrod Brown (D) of Ohio and Jim Webb (D) of Virginia probably don't realize it, but by endorsing trade protection, they actually work against the long-run prospects for peace that they so fervently desire. 2AC Oil Spills

The plan provides spill response French-Mcray 8 [Deborah P. French-McCay, PhD 1, Christopher Mueller1 , James Payne, PhD2 , Eric Terrill, PhD3 , Mark Otero3 , Sung Yong Kim3 , Melissa Carter3 , Walter Nordhausen, PhD4 , Mark Lampinen4 , Brooke Longval1 , Melanie Schroeder1 , Kathy Jayko1 , Carter Ohlmann, PhD5.May 2008, “Dispersed Oil Transport Modeling Calibrated by Field-Collected Data Measuring Fluorescein Dye Dispersion,” http://www.asascience.com/about/publications/pdf/2008/393IOSC_FrenchMcCay_dispers-2007.pdf //jweideman] . New federal regulations regarding response plan oil removal capacity (Caps) requirements for tank vessels and marine transportation-related facilities being developed by the US Coast Guard (USCG, 1999) are expected to result in an increased use of chemical dispersants to treat oil spills in the United States. Othergovernment authorities (US and internationally) are also considering more dispersant use and designating "Pre- Approval Zones" for dispersant application in the event of oil spills. The application of dispersants in those and other areas may reduce the impacts to wildlife (e.g., seabirds, sea otters) and shoreline habitats, with the potential tradeoff that the dispersed oil will cause impacts to water column organisms (French McCay and Payne, 2001; French McCay et al., 2005). Computer simulations (French McCay et al.. 2006) of large dispersed oil slicks (representing the maximum potential volume that could be dispersed in one location, with area — 1.5 square miles) indicate that the resulting plumes may persist for several days with hydrocarbon concentrations at levels toxic to aquatic organisms. However, model inputs for such predictions are uncertain ; in particular the transport and dispersion rates of oil components in the water column that determine exposure and effects on water column biota. Oil-spill fate and transport modeling may be used to evaluate water column hydrocarbon concentrations, potential exposure to organisms (zooplankton), and the impacts of oil spills with and without use of dispersants. A number of such analyses have been performed using SIMAP (French McCay, 2003, 2004), which use s wind data , current data, and transport and weathering algorithms to calculate the mass of oil components in various environmental compartments (water surface, shoreline, water column, atmosphere, sediments, etc.), oil pathways over time (trajectories), surface oil distributions, and concentrations of the oil components in water and sediments. SIMAP's biological efleets model was then used to evaluate exposure, toxicity, and effects on each habitat and species (or species group) in the area of the spill. Often, currents that transport oil components and organisms are estimated by a hydrodynamic model; however, observational current data, such as from high- frequency- radar (HF-Radar) systems, drifters, or current meters, may also be used. The transport models for such analyses are highly sensitive to the current velocities and turbulent dispersion coefficients input to the models, as are further calculations utilizing the transport results. In this study, we evaluate the usefulness of field- collected data from a set of fluorescein dye studies off San Diego, California, to document movement and dispersion of subsurface dissolved components (dye or dissolved hydrocarbons) over time. We analyzed HF Radar and driller measurements of near-surface currents, dispersion coefficients based on dye spreading measurements, modeling of wind-forced surface water drift as a function of wind speed and direction (based on published results of fluid dynamics studies), and water density profiles to determine their efficacy and accuracy as inputs for modeling transport of near-surface constituents (such as dissolved hydrocarbons from naturally entrained or chemically dispersed oil). Details of these studies are in Payne et al. (2007a, b) and French-McCay et al. (2007). Payne et al. (2008, these proceedings) provide an overview of the objectives, methods, and field results.

Spills devastate biodiversity-extinction Ingoldsby 10 [Joseph Emmanuel Ingoldsby writes and exhibits on issues relating to biodiversity. Recent publications include Vanishing Landscapes and Endangered Species, The Science Exhibition: Curation and Design, Museum Press, UK, 2010; Vanishing Landscapes: The Atlantic Salt Marsh, Leonardo Journal, 42-2-2009, MIT Press; and Requiem for a Drowning Landscape, Orion Magazine, 4-2009. Environmental articles are compiled within Joseph Ingoldsby’s blog site, Earth Elegies. 7/21/10, “Silent Summer: How Oil Disaster Impacts Biodiversity,” https://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/21-4 //jweideman]

Residents from the Gulf of Mexico report that schools of fish , manta rays, sharks, dolphins and sea turtles are fleeing the plumes of oil and solvents to the shallow waters off of the coasts of Alabama and Florida. Marine biologists from Duke University state that that the animals sense the change in water chemistry and try to escape the contaminated water dead zones by swimming toward the oxygen rich shallows. Here, they could be trapped between the approaching plumes of oil and the shoreline. Scientists warn of a mass die off. Death comes in the spawning and nesting season within the Gulf of Mexico's bio- diverse ecosystems. We have witnessed the immediate impact of oil on the threatened brown pelican, the egrets, the laughing gulls and other shore and migratory birds, grounded with oiled plumage as they try to rear their spring nestlings. This is also the time when the endangered Kemp Ridley turtles migrate through the Gulf of Mexico to spawn, and when loggerhead turtles drag themselves up on the Gulf sands to lay their eggs. Their hatchlings face an uncertain future as they return to the polluted Gulf of Mexico to begin their life's journey. This is also the time when the endangered manatees leave their winter gathering spots in warm springs to migrate to their summer range along the Gulf coast and the time when Gulf sturgeon congregate in coastal waters for upstream migration exposing them to harm. We do not readily see the impact to the diverse marine fisheries of the Gulf and Atlantic. The Gulf of Mexico is the nursery for a host of marine species, including the embattled western Atlantic blue fin tuna. The Gulf of Mexico is the principal spawning ground of the migratory Western Atlantic tuna. Their spawning coincided with the Horizon oil disaster. The larval and juvenile fish are most vulnerable to the toxic effects of oil and dispersants documented within their spawning ground. Scientific analysis of the viability of the 2010 spawning is necessary to determine the future health of the tuna population. According to the World Wildlife Fund, the Atlantic blue fin tuna population has fallen 90% since the 1970s and the species faces a serious risk of extinction. With the loss of the fisheries and the shrimp and oyster operations, go the fishing communities and a way of life on the bayou. Fishing is often familial and multigenerational. The Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and sinking may have broken the familial transferal of working knowledge between father and son and from son to grandson. No one knows how many years it will take for the Gulf of Mexico to heal from the deadly infusion of oil, methane and toxic dispersants. The tragedy on the Gulf Coast galvanizes public attention as images of the slow demise of brown pelicans, sea turtles, dolphins, sperm whales and sea birds covered in oil flood our television screens. We are looking at the expansion of eutrophic dead zones; the contamination of the entire water column in the Gulf of Mexico- killing deep-water corals and giant squid to the black skimmers feeding on the surface; the tragic loss of species and biodiversity; and the potential disappearance of the fishing cultures of the Gulf. This will be the "Silent Summer" that could last for years. The poisonous mix of oil , methane and dispersants will be the final nail in the coffin of these vanishing landscapes and endangered species . We know from past oil spills that the toxic effects continue decades later . Long time residents of New England may remember the grounding of the oil tanker, Florida, which broke up on the rocky shoals off Old Silver Beach, West Falmouth on 16 September 1969 spewing 189,000 gallons of #2 fuel into Buzzards Bay. Scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution documented the damages to the marine ecosystem and coastline over the ensuing years. Their observations are helpful to codify the environmental damages to sensitive coastal wetlands by oil contamination. To this day, toxic oil remains in the sediment layers of the marshlands ringing the Falmouth shore and oil continues to inhibit growth and colonization of the subsoil by the marsh grass roots, fiddler crabs and other organisms. The vertical burrows of the fiddler crabs veer horizontally avoiding the oil stained layer of soil. The marsh grass roots stop above the oil and spread horizontally, 41 years after the Buzzards Bay oil spill. Retired Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Marine biologist, George Hampson has observed the daily impact of oil on the sensitive estuary since that unprecedented day in 1969. He spoke of animals coming out of the sediments because the oil was saturating the flats and marshlands All of the clams rose to the surface and extended their long necks trying to escape the oil along with invertebrates which floated to the surface. Soon the tide pools were filled with life, where they slowly died. This was called the "Silent Fall" because all of the birds and animals were gone. Now along the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico we see the "Silent Summer" of dead and dying animals trying to escape the poisonous mix of oil and the dispersant Corexit combined with the oxygen depleting methane gas. Video footage documents crabs climbing out of the water as a toxic sheen approaches the shore. In the morning the crabs are float ing belly up in the water. The air is laden with chemicals wafting up from the water, which has become poisonous to marine life and the fumes dangerous to the long term health of those who breath it. According to scientific studies, the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 resulted in profound physiological effects to fish and wildlife. These included reproductive failure, genetic damage, curved spines, lowered growth and body weights, altered feeding habits, reduced egg volume, liver damage, eye tumors, and debilitating brain lesions. Reports document that oil cleanup workers exposed to hot water beach washing of the toxic oil and dispersant mix in 1989 filed compensation claims for respiratory system damage, according to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. Many have debilitating medical complications 21 years later. These ailments include respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders. History repeats itself . The only hope is that this unnatural disaster will galvanize the public's attention and give the President and members of Congress the courage to protect Nature's biodiversity; and to promote and substantively fund alternative energy sources and clean, green technologies for our future. We are at the tipping point of peak oil and technological change. Now is not the time for equivocation. We must embrace the future or be damned by the next generation. 2AC Water Wars Clean water scarcity is increasing- major catalyst for conflict UNFT 12 [The United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT) is an internal United Nations (UN) support mechanism that assists UN Resident Coordinators (RCs) and UN Country Teams (UNCTs) in developing conflict prevention strategies and programmes. 2012, “Renewable Resources and Conﬂict,” http://www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/GN_Renewable_Consultation.pdf //jweideman]

Pressure on limited fresh water resources is mounting , driven by increasing population, economic growth, industrial pollution, and loss of forested watersheds. The predicted effects of climate change are likely to aggravate water scarcity even further in some regions. As demand is increasing, some countries are already reaching the limits of their water resources. As a result, competition for water is intensifying – whether between countries , urban and rural areas, economic sectors, or different livelihood groups. This may make water a n increasingly politicized issue .19 There are an estimated 263 international rivers, covering 45.3 percent of the land-surface of the earth (excluding Antarctica).20 However, fewer than 10 countries possess 60 percent of the world’s available fresh water supply: Brazil, Russia, China, Canada, Indonesia, the United States, India, Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.21 Water use has been growing at more than twice the rate of population increase in the last century. Forexample, while the world’s population tripled, the use of renewable water resources grew six-fold. Over the last 50 years, freshwater withdrawals have tripled. 22 Worldwide agriculture accounts for 70 percent of all water consumption, compared to 20 percent for industry and 10 percent for domestic use.23 Unless agricultural water use is optimized , water demand for agriculture worldwide would increase by 70 to 90 percent by 2050, creating acute problems for countries that are already reaching the limits of their water resources.24 Today, four hundred and fifty million people in twenty-nine countries suffer from water shortages.25 It is predicted that 47 percent of the world population will be living in areas of high water stress by 2030.26 The concept of water stress applies to situations where there is not enough water for all uses, whether agricultural, industrial or domestic. It has been proposed that when annual per capita renewable freshwater availability is less than 1,700 cubic meters, countries begin to experience periodic or regular water stress. Below 1,000 cubic meters, water scarcity begins to hamper economic development as well as human health and well-being.27 Based on these criteria, the UN estimates that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity and two-thirds of the world’s population could be under conditions of water stress. In 2010, access to clean drinking water became an official basic human right. A resolution introduced by Bolivia was adopted by the UN General Assembly without opposition. Although the decision does not make the right to water legally enforceable, it is symbolically important and places more political obligations on national governments. The combination of rising water scarcity due to increases in demand and the potential consequences of climate change make the need for cooperative, equitable and sustainable management of national and transboundary water resources more important than ever. The main sources of conflict over water include : r Competition between different water sectors (agriculture, industrial, domestic); r Competition between different livelihood groups (farming, livestock, fishing);r Degradation ofwater quality caused by pollution (industrial, agriculture, urban); r Reduction of water supply caused by development/infrastructure projects; r Lost access to water supplies and/or exhaustion of supply; r Natural variation in water availability and sudden contraction of sup ply; r Exclusive control of water resources and access; r Conversion from public to private management and changes in pricing structure; r Unclear water use and access rights; and, r Uncoordinated transboundary management.

Plan Solves clean water IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]

A clean, safe water supply is one of our Nation's great natural resource s; maintaining it requires a well- integrated system of monitoring for changes in temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, pathogens, nutrients, and contaminants . Our coastal waters, estuaries, rivers, streams, and Great Lakes are monitored for protection of the environment as well as to ensure their waters are safe for drinking and recreation. Each year. Federal and State Government agencies, industry, academia, and private organizations devote significant time, energy, and money to monitor, protect, manage, and restore water resources and watersheds. U.S. IOOS has identified several important variables related to monitoring water quality in our Nation's waters: temperature, salinity, ocean color, dissolved oxygen, pH, pathogens, dissolved nutrients, optical properties, total suspended matter, colored dissolved organic matter, and contaminants. Abundance and type of plant and animal fauna are also important indicators of water quality conditions. The data collected through monitoring activities can be used to detect trends, identify emerging concerns, and to evaluate effectiveness of pollution control programs. Monitoring water quality can use a variety of methods, such as hand collection or monitoring by in situ sensors deployed on buoys or stationary platforms, and can occur at regular intervals or when a specific need arises. Real-time decisions are often made based on water quality data supplied by U.S. IOOS partners. As an example, Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS), in partnership with NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, is supporting monitoring activities that provide oxygen levels, water temperature, and wave heights. The Cleveland Division of Water tracks the data, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding unsafe drinking water and human health. This information acts as a warning system to allow the utility to avoid drawing in hypoxic (low levels of dissolved oxygen) waters orenable it to treat affected water appropriately. Other municipalities receive similar info rmation from U.S. IOOS partners, which allow them to monitor their drinking water as well .

Scarcity goes nuclear in every region NPR 10 [NPR citing Steven Solomon who has written for The New York Times, BusinessWeek, The Economist, Forbes, and Esquire. He has been a regular commentator on NPR’s Marketplace. 1/3/10, “Will The Next War Be Fought Over Water?” http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122195532 //jweideman]

Just as wars over oil played a major role in 20th-century history, a new book makes a convincing case that many 21st century conflicts will be fought over water. In Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power and Civilization, journalist Steven Solomon argues that water is surpassing oil as the world's scarcest critical resource. Only 2.5 percent of the planet's water supply is fresh, Solomon writes, much of which is locked away in glaciers. World water use in the past century grew twice as fast as world population. "We've now reached the limit where that trajectory can no longer continue," Solomon tells NPR's Mary Louise Kelly. "Suddenly we're going to have to find a way to use the existing water resources in a far, far more productive manner than we ever did before, because there's simply not enough." One issue, Solomon says, is that water's cost doesn't reflect its true economic value. While a society's transition from oil may be painful, water is irreplaceable. Yet water costs far less per gallon — and even less than that for some. "In some cases, where there are large political subsidies, largely in agriculture, it does not [cost very much]," Solomon says. "In many cases, irrigated agriculture is getting its water for free. And we in the cities are paying a lot, and industries are also paying an awful lot. That's unfair. It's inefficient to the allocation of water to the most productive economic ends." At the same time, Solomon says, there's an increasing feeling in the world that everyone has a basic right to a minimum 13 gallons of water a day for basic human health. He doesn't necessarily have an issue with that. "I think there's plenty of water in the world, even in the poorest and most water-famished country, for that 13 gallons to be given for free to individuals — and let them pay beyond that," he says. Solomon says the world is divided into water haves and have-nots. China, Egypt and Pakistan are just a few countries facing critical water issues in the 21st century. In his book he writes, " Consider what will happen in water- distressed, nuclear-armed, terrorist-besieged, overpopulated, heavily irrigation dependent and already politically unstable Pakistan when its single water lifeline , the Indus river, loses a third of its flow from the disappearance from its glacial water source." Solomon notes some good water news, too. The United States has made significant progress in curbing its water use, thanks to market forces and legislation such as the Clean Water Act. "Our water use between 1900 and 1975 actually tripled relative to population growth," he says. "Since 1975 to the present day, it has flat-lined. And we still had a population increase of about 30 percent and our GDP continued to grow. So it's an amazing increase in water productivity." 2AC Port Security/Terrorism Threat of global terrorism increasing-Increase in IOOS integration efforts key to maximize information delivery and port security U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment . Data processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas . The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship. Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical , however, especially if it is used for business decisions or p ublic safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable. Terrorists are committed to detonating a nuclear weapon on American soil – U.S. ports will be the trafficking point Calvan, 2012 (Bobby, Boston Globe Staff and former foreign reporting fellow with the D.C.-based International Center for Journalists, “US to miss target for tighter port security”, Boston Globe, 6/12/12, http://articles.boston.com/2012-06- 12/nation/32176427_1_homeland-security-cargo-containers-nuclear-bomb/3)

The Department of Homeland Security will miss an initial deadline of July 12 to comply with a sweeping federal law meant to thwart terrorist attacks arriving by sea, frustrating border security advocates who worry that the agency has not done enough to prevent dangerous cargo from coming through the country’s ocean gateways, including the Port of Boston.¶ Only a small fraction of all metal cargo containers have been scanned before arriving at US ports, and advocates for tighter port security say all maritime cargo needs to be scanned or manually inspected to prevent terrorists from using ships bound for the United States to deliver a nuclear bomb. ¶ The scenario might be straight out of a Hollywood script, but the threat of terrorism is not limited to airplanes, according to Homeland Security critics, including Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts. Markey accuses the agency of not making a good-faith effort to comply with a 2007 law he coauthored requiring all US-bound maritime shipments to be scanned before departing overseas docks.¶ “We’re not just missing the boat, we could be missing the bomb,’’ the Malden Democrat said. “ The reality is that detonating a nuclear bomb in the United States is at the very top of Al Qaeda’s terrorist targets.’’¶ Only about 5 percent of all cargo containers headed to the United States are screened, according to the government’s own estimate, with some shipments getting only a cursory paperwork review.¶ Homeland Security officials argue that wider screening would be cost-prohibitive, logistically and technologically difficult, and diplomatically challenging. While acknowledging the threat as real, they are exercising their right under the 2007 law to postpone for two years the full implementation of the congressionally mandated scanning program. That would set the new deadline for July 2014.¶ Critics say the consequences of delay could be catastrophic. Terrorists have long sought to obtain uranium or plutonium to construct a nuclear bomb, global security analysts say. Government officials, including President Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush, have worried that terrorist cells could be plotting further devastation in the United States, perhaps through radioactive explosives called “dirty bombs.’’¶ Homeland Security “has concluded that 100 percent scanning of incoming maritime cargo is neither the most efficient nor cost-effective approach to securing our global supply chain,’’ said Matt Chandler, an agency spokesman. Homeland Security “continues to work collaboratively with industry, federal partners, and the international community to expand these programs and our capability to detect, analyze, and report on nuclear and radiological materials,’’ Chandler said, adding that “we are more secure than ever before.’’¶ The agency has used what it calls a “risk-based approach’’ to shipments. As a result, Homeland Security has focused on cargo originating from 58 of the world’s busiest seaports, from Hong Kong to Dubai. Last year, US agents stationed at those ports inspected 45,500 shipments determined to be high risk, according to joint testimony by Homeland Security, Coast Guard, and US Customs officials in February before the House Homeland Security Committee.¶ Republicans have been wary of forcing the agency to comply with the scanning mandate because of the presumed cost, perhaps at least $16 billion - a figure disputed by Markey and others who cite estimates that the program could cost a comparatively modest $200 million.¶ Representative Candice Miller, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House subcommittee on border and maritime security, was more inclined to accept the estimate from Homeland Security officials. In light of the country’s budget troubles, “we have to try and prioritize,’’ she said.¶ Scanning cargo “100 percent would be optimal,’’ she conceded, “but it’s not workable.’’¶ Still, she acknowledged the need to secure the country’s borders, whether by air, land, or sea.¶ There is no dispute that a terrorist attack at a major port could be catastrophic to the global economy. Much of the world’s products - T-shirts sewn in China, designer shoes from Italy, and other foreign-made products - arrives in the United States in large, metal cargo containers.¶ While some countries have voluntarily improved cargo screening, others have not. Large retailers have opposed measures that could increase their costs. Without full scanning compliance, it is often difficult to determine if shipments have been inspected because cargo is sometimes transferred from ship to ship offshore. Nuclear terrorism causes extinction Ayson, 2010 (Robert, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)

But these two nuclear worlds—a non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear exchange—are not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and especially an act of nuclear terrorism, could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive exchange of nuclear weapons between two or more of the states that possess them. In this context, today’s and tomorrow’s terrorist groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new state possessors of small nuclear arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by third parties. These risks were considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1 problem. It may require a considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism could lead to such a massive inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well be wondered just how Russia and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as the most obvious state sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort of terrorist behavior that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example, how might the United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear terrorism had come from Russian stocks,40 and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for nuclear laxity? The correct attribution of that nuclear material to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the observation by Michael May et al. that while the debris resulting from a nuclear explosion would be “spread over a wide area in tiny fragments, its radioactivity makes it detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of the explosion, the materials used and, most important … some indication of where the nuclear material came from.”41 Alternatively, if the act of nuclear terrorism came as a complete surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a terrorist group was fully responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities in Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea, perhaps Iran if its program continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out in this high stakes game of nuclear Cluedo? In particular, if the act of nuclear terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in Washington’s relations with Russia and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would officials and political leaders not be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or if they were confronting each other from a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at the present time. The reverse might well apply too: should a nuclear terrorist attack occur in Russia or China during a period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow and Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible perpetrator or encourager of the attack? 2AC Science Leadership Ocean exploration leads to a large increase in technology output – exploration will become the new target of American innovation Cousteau 2013 Philippe Cousteau, Entrepreneur for environmental conservation, Special correspondent for CNN, 3/13/13, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”, http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/

In July 2011, the space shuttle program that had promised to revolutionize space travel by making it (relatively) affordable and accessible came to an end after 30 years . Those three decades provided numerous technological, scientific and diplomatic firsts. With an estimated price tag of nearly $200 billion, the program had its champions and its detractors. It was, however, a source of pride for the United States, capturing the American spirit of innovation and leadership. With the iconic space program ending, many people have asked, "What’s next? What is the next giant leap in scientific and technological innovation ?" Today a possible answer to that question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean . You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration . After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau" introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy . Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods.

Science leadership solves hard and soft power – technology solves hegemony while diplomacy created by science leadership solves for soft power Coletta 2009 Damon Coletta, PhD in political science, September 2009, “Science, Technology, and the Quest for International Influence”, http://www.usafa.edu/df/inss/Research %20Papers/2009/09%20Coletta%20Science%20and%20InfluenceINSS(FINAL).pdf

After the industrial revolution, science leadership has been associated with increased national capability through superior commercial and military technology. With the rising importance of soft power and transnational bargaining, when America‘s hard power cannot be deployed everywhere at once, maintaining leadership in basic science as the quest to know Nature may be key to curbing legitimate resistance and sustaining America‘s influence in the international system. The catch is that American democracy imposes high demands on the relationship between science, state, and society. Case studies of the Office of Naval Research and U.S. science-based relations with respect to Brazil, as telling examples of U.S. Government science policy via the mission agency, reveal how difficult it is for a democratic power to strike the right balance between applied activities and fundamental research that establishes science leadership. To discover sustainable hegemony in an increasingly multipolar world, American policy makers will need more than the Kaysen list of advantages from basic science . Dr. Carl Kaysen served President John Kennedy as deputy national security adviser and over his long career held distinguished professorships in Political Economy at Harvard and MIT. During the 1960s, Kaysen laid out a framework with four important reasons why a great power, the United States in particular, should take a strategic interest in the basic sciences. 1. Scientific discoveries provided the input for applied research, which in turn produced technologies crucial for wielding economic and military power. 2. Scientific activity educated a cadre of operators for leadership in industries relevant to government such as health care and defense. 3. Science proficiency generated the raw elements for mounting focused, applied efforts such as the Manhattan Project during World War II to build the first atomic bomb. 4. Scientific progress built a basic research reserve that when necessary could move quickly to shore up national needs. Primacy ensures peace – deterrence and relations, both hard and soft power are key Posen and Ross 1997 Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science at MIT and director of MIT's Security Studies Program Andrew L. Ross, PhD in political science, International Security, Volume 21, Number 3, Winter 1997, pg. 30, “Competing visions for US Grand Strategy”, http://www.comw.org/pda/14dec/fulltext/97posen.pdf

Primacy, like selective engagement, is motivated by both power and peace. But the particular configuration of power is key: this strategy holds that only a preponderance of U.S. power ensures peace .41 The pre-Cold War practice of aggregating power through coalitions and alliances, which underlies selective engagement, is viewed as insufficient. Peace is the result of an imbalance of power in which U.S. capabilities are sufficient, operating on their own, to cow all potential challengers and to comfort all coalition partners. It is not enough, consequently, to be primus inter pares, a comfortable position for selective engagement. Even the most clever Bismarckian orchestrator of the balance of power will ultimately fall short. One must be primus solus. Therefore, both world order and national security require that the United States maintain the primacy with which it emerged from the Cold War. The collapse of bipolarity cannot be permitted to allow the emergence of multipolarity; unipolarity is best. Primacy would have been the strategy of a Dole administration. Primacy is most concerned with the trajectories of present and possible future great powers . As with selective engagement, Russia, China, Japan, and the most significant members of the European Union (essentially Germany, France, and Britain), matter most. War among the great powers poses the greatest threat to U.S. security for advocates of primacy as well as those of selective engagement. But primacy goes beyond the logic of selective engagement and its focus on managing relations among present and potential future great powers . Advocates of primacy view the rise of a peer competitor from the midst of the great powers to offer the greatest threat to international order and thus the greatest risk of war. The objective for primacy, therefore, is not merely to preserve peace among the great powers, but to preserve U.S. suprem- acy by politically, economically, and militarily outdistancing any global challenger. 2AC Stem Better ocean data attracts new STEM majors Yoder 2012 Jim Yoder has a B.A. in Botany from DePauw University and a M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of Rhode Island in Oceanography, former Director, Division of Ocean Sciences National Science Foundation http://livebettermagazine.com/article/ocean-observing-systems-stimulating-interest-in-stem/ Ocean observing systems and ocean observatories are being developed and deployed in the U.S. and around the world to make sustained and continuous oceanographic measurements and to deliver that information in real-time to research, operational and commercial users. Many also see educational applications from data collected by ocean observing systems, including real-time data. A challenge for the educators is whether data from these systems can help generate student interest in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) and, thus, become an important tool for training the scientific and technical workforce of tomorrow. Real-time data is potentially interesting, even exciting, to students because students will be seeing the data at the same time as scientists and everyone else. This raises the possibility that students and other learners will be active participants in the discovery process. The hope is that this potentially interesting and exciting data from the ocean systems will help stimulate interest in STEM in general and in the ocean environment in particular. For this to occur, however, educators need to package real-time and other data from observing systems in a form and context that can be readily used and interpreted by students. Ocean observing systems are not a new concept, although using the data for educational purposes is comparatively new. The U.S. Navy has had ocean observing systems in place for military purposes for many decades. For example, development of the Navy’s Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) for using acoustic signatures to track Russian submarines was started long ago. ARGO is an example of an international civilian ocean observing program that was started more than a decade ago. ARGO involves international ocean scientists who deploy thousands of profiling floats throughout the global ocean using commercial, oceanographic and other ships of opportunity. The floats move with ocean currents and measure temperature and salinity with depth (profiles) from the surface to 2000m, as well as the average speed of ocean currents. Each float cycles from the surface to 2000m every 10 days and each has an operational lifetime of about 4-5 years. Each float thus has the potential for measuring hundreds of profiles. When the float is at the surface it transmits its data via satellite links back to processing centers in Brest, France, or Monterey, Calif. All ARGO data are publically available in near real-time at no charge. With more than 3,500 floats scattered throughout the global ocean, ARGO temperature, salinity and velocity data can be used to teach basic concepts like temperature patterns of the global ocean, how to read and interpret graphs and illustrate complex ocean phenomena, such as how climate change is affecting the ocean. Given the broad range of possible audiences for learning about ARGO, educators are using several different approaches: materials and lesson plans for classrooms, workshops that target the science community and online resources, such as Google Earth and Wikipedia, which provide the public (free-choice learners) the capability to study the ocean with ARGO data. These approaches are similar to what is now being developed for other observing systems. The U.S. is developing two new ocean observing systems and both include educational applications in their respective portfolios. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is leading the development of an operational system called the “Integrated Ocean Observing System” (IOOS). The purpose of IOOS is to provide information and data to increase understanding of U.S. coastal waters so decision-makers can take action to improve safety, enhance the economy and protect the environment. The National Science Foundation’s Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) is constructing infrastructure to support sensors to measure physical, chemical, geological and biological variables in the ocean and seafloor to support scientific research. The total national investment in both of these systems will likely exceed $500M by 2015, and the costs to operate will likely exceed more than $50M per year. The systems are anticipated to have a major impact on ocean science research and operations. In addition to research and operational users, educational applications for data from IOOS and OOI are being developed, including educational uses of data delivered in near real-time. As mentioned above, the challenge for educators is to package real-time data in a form and context that can be readily used and interpreted by students and their teachers. This is particularly challenging for K-12 audiences because younger students and their teachers lack experience and tools to produce analytical products, such as simple statistics and graphs from raw data streams. Putting data products into an oceanographic context is also difficult when students lack basic knowledge of the ocean environment. For example, a series of graphs showing how ocean water temperature changes with depth, and why those profiles change with season, is not very interesting in itself. Students need the context, e.g. they also need to understand something about mixing between surface and deeper waters as well as how seasonal changes in the amount of solar energy reaching surface ocean waters affects ocean mixing, and why this is important. Younger students likely will need to work with data products produced for them by their teachers or by online educators that display data in very simple ways and then link it to a lesson plan that puts the observations into the right context (example). With the possible exception of advanced high-school students, real-time data streams from ocean observing systems are probably not for K-12 students. Nevertheless, younger students with adequate guidance can still learn about daily and seasonal changes in the ocean and why they occur by looking at a sequence of graphs produced for them. They can also learn about organisms that live in the ocean from video streams associated with ocean observatories, such as Neptune and Venus. Ocean observing data will obviously be most useful if it can be linked to national and state science standards. The process for how K-12 students and teachers can effectively use data from observing systems, including real-time data to better train students to participate in the STEM workforce of the future, was described recently as a process involving four key steps (Hotaling 2007). Step one is the ocean observing data needs to be accessible, which means the data needs to be available, including to schools and classrooms lacking sophisticated computers and fast networks. It also needs to be understandable by non-specialists, i.e. it has to be in context of important and simply described ocean processes. Step two is the data has to be useable, which means it must be engaging and meaningful, fit within STEM curricula and satisfy educational standards. Step three is teachers themselves must be adequately trained so they are comfortable using and discussing ocean observing data in a classroom. This requires effective professional development via online or face-to-face training or a combination thereof. Step four is the importance of preparation at the K-12 level, so students entering four-year or community colleges know something about how to apply observatory data to real-life situations. This would lead to much quicker and effective training of a well-qualified STEM workforce with the skills to manage and utilize data from sensors and sensor networks, whether associated with ocean observations or any other sensor network, including those associated with commercial operations. A top priority for educational uses of data from NSF’s Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) is the focus on special tools and lessons for undergraduates. Undergraduate class projects and senior theses can obviously take better advantage of real-time and other observatory data than K-12 students given that undergrads have better skills and access to better analysis tools as well as more time to analyze and interpret longer records of observations. The expectation is that undergraduate ocean science or other science majors, non-science majors and community college students can work with real-time data, if provided the software tools to simplify data streams and to provide context. The first three steps listed above for K-12 are certainly applicable to undergraduate students and their professors, although college science professors should not need the level of professional development that K-12 teachers will require. Data analysis tools for undergraduates, and perhaps advanced high-school students, need to be scaled to examine relations between, perhaps, just two ocean variables – temperature and salinity, for example. Furthermore, there has to be a web-based framework that puts the data into context for undergraduates. A web interface, for example, could allow an undergraduate interested in undersea earthquakes to examine the real-time record of an undersea seismometer (basically a chart showing the strength of earth movements) while at the time ingesting and then watching video illustrating different types of undersea lava flows. The most sophisticated college users, such as ocean science graduate students and ocean science faculty, will likely use commercially available data analysis packages to study relations between many data sources and from many locations. STEM leadership’s key to the sustainability and legitimacy of hegemony– independently solves extinction Coletta, USAF Professor of Political Science, 09 (Damon, Duke University , Ph.D. in Political Science, December 1999 Harvard University , Master in Public Policy, 1993 Stanford University , Master in Electrical Engineering, 1989 Stanford University , B.S.E.E., 1988, “Science, Technology, and the Quest for International Influence,” http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA536133&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

Less appreciated is how scientific progress facilitates diplomatic strategy in the long run, how it contributes to Joseph Nye‘s soft power, which translates to staying power in the international arena. One possible escape from the geopolitical forces depicted in Thucydides‘ history for all time is for the current hegemon to maintain its lead in science, conceived as a national program and as an enterprise belonging to all mankind. Beyond the new technologies for projecting military or economic power, the scientific ethos conditions the hegemon‘s approach to social-political problems. It effects how the leader organizes itself and other states to address well-springs of discontent—material inequity, religious or ethnic oppression, and environmental degradation. The scientific mantle attracts others‘ admiration, which softens or at least complicates other societies‘ resentment of power disparity. Finally, for certain global problems—nuclear proliferation, climate change, and financial crisis— the scientific lead ensures robust representation in transnational epistemic communities that can shepherd intergovernmental negotiations onto a conservative, or secular, path in terms of preserving international order. In today‘s order, U.S. hegemony is yet in doubt even though military and economic indicators confirm its status as the world‘s lone superpower. America possesses the material wherewithal to maintain its lead in the sciences, but it also desires to bear the standard for freedom and democracy. Unfortunately, patronage of basic science does not automatically flourish with liberal democracy. The free market and the mass public impose demands on science that tend to move research out of the basic and into applied realms. Absent the lead in basic discovery, no country can hope to pioneer humanity‘s quest to know Nature. There is a real danger U.S. state and society could permanently confuse sponsorship of technology with patronage of science, thereby delivering a self-inflicted blow to U.S. leadership among nations. 2AC Oil Production Satellite mapping finds oil- it increases production capabilities Short 11 [Nicholas M. Short, Sr is a geologist who received degrees in that field from St. Louis University (B.S.), Washington University (M.A.), and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Ph.D.); he also spent a year in graduate studies in the geosciences at The Pennsylvania State University. In his early postgraduate career, he worked for Gulf Research & Development Co., the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and the University of Houston. During the 1960s he specialized in the effects of underground nuclear explosions and asteroidal impacts on rocks (shock metamorphism), and was one of the original Principal Investigators of the Apollo 11 and 12 moon rocks. 2011, “Finding Oil and Gas from Space” https://apollomapping.com/wp- content/user_uploads/2011/11/NASA_Remote_Sensing_Tutorial_Oil_and_Gas.pdf //jweideman]

If precious metals are not your forte, then try the petroleum industry. Exploration for oil and gas has always depended on surface maps of rock types and structures that point directly to, or at least hint at, subsurface conditions favorable to accumulating oil and gas. Thus, looking at surfaces from satellites is a practical, cost- effective way to produce appropriate maps. But verifying the presence of hydrocarbons below surface requires two essential steps: 1) doing geophysical surveys; and 2) drilling into the subsurface to actually detect and extract oil or gas or both. This Tutorial website sponsored by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists is a simplified summary of the basics of hydrocarbon exploration. Oil and gas result from the decay of organisms - mostly marine plants (especially microscopic algae and similar free-floating vegetation) and small animals such as fish - that are buried in muds that convert to shale. Heating through burial and pressure from the overlying later sediments help in the process. (Coal forms from decay of buried plants that occur mainly in swamps and lagoons which are eventually buried by younger sediments.). The decaying liquids and gases from petroleum source beds, dominantly shales after muds convert to hard rock, migrate from their sources to become trapped in a variety of structural or stratigraphic conditions shown in this illustration:The oil and gas must migrate from deeper source beds into suitable reservoir rocks. These are usually porous sandstones, but limestones with solution cavities and even fractured igneous or metamorphic rocks can contain openings into which the petroleum products accumulate. An essential condition: the reservoir rocks must be surrounded (at least above) by impermeable (refers to minimal ability to allow flow through any openings - pores or fractures) rock, most commonly shales. The oil and gas, generally confined under some pressure, will escape to the surface - either naturally when the trap is intersected by downward moving erosional surfaces or by being penetrated by a drill. If pressure is high the oil and/or gas moves of its own accord to the surface but if pressure is initially low or drops over time, pumping is required . Exploration for new petroleum sources begins with a search for surface manifestations of suitable traps (but many times these are hidden by burial and other factors govern the decision to explore). Mapping of surface conditions begins with reconnaissance, and if that indicates the presence of hydrocarbons, then detailed mapping begins. Originally, both of these maps required field work. Often, the mapping job became easier by using aerial photos. After the mapping, much of the more intensive exploration depends on geophysical methods (principally, seismic) that can give 3-D constructions of subsurface structural and stratigraphic traps for the hydrocarbons. Then, the potential traps are sampled by exploratory drilling and their properties measured. Remote sensing from satellites or aircraft strives to find one or more indicators of surface anomalies. This diagram sets the framework for the approach used; this is the so-called microseepage model, which leads to specific geochemical anomalies:

Offshore drilling is necessary to curb competition with China over resources DiMicco and Pickens 10 [Dan DiMicco is chairman and chief executive officer of Nucor Corp. T. Boone Pickens is chief executive officer of BP Capital. 7/21/10, “No need to end offshore drilling” Politico) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39977.html]

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has led some people to call for a reversal of the decision to expand offshore drilling in our country, while others now want an end to offshore drilling entirely. We believe this would be a mistake. We need a vigorous examination to determine the cause of the spill and ensure that such a disaster never happens again. But we cannot lose sight of the important role that offshore drilling — along with other domestic energy resources — plays in increasing U.S. energy and economic security. We need to develop traditional energy resources even as we build the necessary infrastructure for alternative energy use. We are both concerned about America’s future prosperity. Our nation seems to be going down a road that puts our energy and economic security at risk. While the recession has cut energy use here, it is growing in many developing countries, particularly China. A global race for energy resources is on — and China is way out front. China’s state-owned oil companies are now maneuvering to control a substantial amount of oil and natural gas in Africa, Asia and South America. China’s energy investments are also in our own backyard . Beijing has invested in five oil sands projects in Alberta, Canada, and signed agreements with Cuba to explore for oil on land and offshore. China could soon be drill ing closer to U.S. shores than we are . China has deals in more than 21 countries, through direct oil and natural gas purchases as well as “loans for energy” — in which China builds energy infrastructure in exchange for the resource. These deals could potentially deliver more than 7.8 billion barrels of oil to China. As with manufacturing, aggressive government intervention fuels China’s growing dominance in energy. Beijing maintains direct ownership of oil companies and finances deals through state-owned banks. Why should we care about China’s energy play? Because the United States is already too dependent on other countries for its energy needs. The United States imports nearly two-thirds of the oil it uses daily — 12 million barrels per day, much of it from nations hostile to our interests. Forty years ago, 85 percent of the world’s oil reserves were open to private investment. Today, only 20 percent are open, with the remaining 80 percent state-owned or controlled. We are nearing a day when oil sales are dictated less by commercial purposes and instead by political or military considerations. While China is aggressively securing energy resources, Washington is paralyzed by a political system unable to address our long-term economic and energy security needs. This is why we are concerned about the political backlash against offshore drilling. Our political system is increasingly short-term in its outlook and driven by the 24-hour news cycle. These factors lead U.S. political leaders to sacrifice long-term planning for short-term political gain. Energy is just one area in which this puts our nation’s future at risk. Fortunately, the American people still take a long-term view. Polls taken after the Gulf oil spill revealed that a majority of Americans say they still support drilling off U.S. coasts. Some people have framed the issue as a choice between offshore drilling and clean shores — implying that we cannot have both. But we can have both. Government and the industry need to learn from this tragedy so that we can develop safer, smarter practices. We have abundant energy resources right here that we have neglected to use. For example, we have a 100-year supply of natural gas from reserves both on land and offshore. Technological advances have opened up new shale areas with large natural gas reserves.

US-China resource competition causes conflict Klare 8 [Michael T, renowned expert on natural resource issues, author of The Race for What's Left, Rising Powers Shrinking. “The end of the world as you know it,” 8, http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174919 //jweideman]

Oil at $110 a barrel. Gasoline at $3.35 (or more) per gallon. Diesel fuel at $4 per gallon. Independent truckers forced off the road. Home heating oil rising to unconscionable price levels. Jet fuel so expensive that three low-cost airlines stopped flying in the past few weeks. This is just a taste of the latest energy news, signaling a profound change in how all of us, in this country and around the world, are going to live -- trends that, so far as anyone can predict, will only become more pronounced as energy supplies dwindle and the global struggle over their allocation intensifies. Energy of all sorts was once hugely abundant, making possible the worldwide economic expansion of the past six decades. This expansion benefited the United States above all -- along with its "First World" allies in Europe and the Pacific. Recently, however, a select group of former "Third World" countries -- China and India in particular -- have sought to participate in this energy bonanza by industrializing their economies and selling a wide range of goods to international markets. This, in turn, has led to an unprecedented spurt in global energy consumption -- a 47% rise in the past 20 years alone, according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE). An increase of this sort would not be a matter of deep anxiety if the world's primary energy suppliers were capable of producing the needed additional fuels. Instead, we face a frightening reality: a marked slowdown in the expansion of global energy supplies just as demand rises precipitously. These supplies are not exactly disappearing -- though that will occur sooner or later -- but they are not growing fast enough to satisfy soaring global demand . The combination of rising demand, the emergence of powerful new energy consumers, and the contraction of the global energy supply is demolishing the energy-abundant world we are familiar with and creating in its place a new world order. Think of it as: rising powers/shrinking planet. This new world order will be characterized by fierce international competition for dwindling stocks of oil , natural gas, coal, and uranium, as well as by a tidal shift in power and wealth from energy-deficit states like China, Japan, and the United States to energy-surplus states like Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. In the process, the lives of everyone will be affected in one way or another -- with poor and middle-class consumers in the energy-deficit states experiencing the harshest effects. That's most of us and our children, in case you hadn't quite taken it in. Here, in a nutshell, are five key forces in this new world order which will change our planet: 1. Intense competition between older and newer economic powers for available supplies of energy: Until very recently, the mature industrial powers of Europe, Asia, and North America consumed the lion's share of energy and left the dregs for the developing world. As recently as 1990, the members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of the world's richest nations, consumed approximately 57% of world energy; the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact bloc, 14% percent; and only 29% was left to the developing world. But that ratio is changing: With strong economic growth in the developing countries, a greater proportion of the world's energy is being consumed by them. By 2010, the developing world's share of energy use is expected to reach 40% and, if current trends persist, 47% by 2030. China plays a critical role in all this . The Chinese alone are projected to consume 17% of world energy by 2015, and 20% by 2025 -- by which time, if trend lines continue, it will have overtaken the United States as the world's leading energy consumer. India, which, in 2004, accounted for 3.4% of world energy use, is projected to reach 4.4% percent by 2025, while consumption in other rapidly industrializing nations like Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Turkey is expected to grow as well. These rising economic dynamos will have to compete with the mature economic powers for access to remaining untapped reserves of exportable energy -- in many cases, bought up long ago by the private energy firms of the mature powers like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP, Total of France, and Royal Dutch Shell . Of necessity, the new contenders have developed a potent strategy for competing with the Western "majors": they've created state-owned companies of their own and fashioned strategic alliances with the national oil companies that now control oil and gas reserves in many of the major energy-producing nations. China's Sinopec, for example, has established a strategic alliance with Saudi Aramco, the nationalized giant once owned by Chevron and Exxon Mobil, to explore for natural gas in Saudi Arabia and market Saudi crude oil in China. Likewise, the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) will collaborate with Gazprom, the massive state-controlled Russian natural gas monopoly, to build pipelines and deliver Russian gas to China. Several of these state-owned firms, including CNPC and India's Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, are now set to collaborate with Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. in developing the extra-heavy crude of the Orinoco belt once controlled by Chevron. In this new stage of energy competition, the advantages long enjoyed by Western energy majors has been eroded by vigorous, state-backed upstarts from the developing world.

Nuclear war Doble 11 [John, has an M.A. in International Affairs from American University and a B.A. in Political Science and History from the University of Wisconsin- Madison. “Maritime Disputes a Likely Source of Future Conflict” http://www.policymic.com/articles/2279/maritime-disputes-a-likely-source-of-future-conflict December]//jweideman

Yesterday, the U.S. and China were involved in a nuclear exchange . The cause of this conflict was a war brought about between China and the Philippines after the Philippines seized several of the Spratly Islands to secure natural resources and the sea lanes traversing the South China seas, both of which it would use to advance itself in the global economy. China refused to accept this action and attacked, and the U.S. was dragged in after the president was pressured by Congress and American allies to honor America’s mutual-defense agreement with the Philippines. The result was disastrous . While this is a hypothetical example, similar scenarios are becoming increasingly probable . Due to increasing economic competition and climate change, a source of future conflict will be the contest for control over the seas. The U.S. must adequately plan for future contingencies to avoid any surprises and to discern what it needs to do to prevent the worst-case scenario from occurring. Economic competition on the seas can be seen most clearly in terms of port construction. As it stands, over 90% of all goods measured by weight or volume are transported by cargo ship, and port construction greatly increase a nation’s access to foreign markets and appeal as a manufacturing center. Conversely, a nation’s investment in ports reduces the amount of goods traveling to other nations, thus damaging their economies. Unlike other forms of infrastructure investment, maritime infrastructure implicitly affects international security. This competition has already created conflict in the Middle East. Bilateral efforts to improve relations between Iraq and Kuwait were scuttled earlier this year after Kuwait announced it was investing heavily in building a new port (the Mubarak Kabeer) only 20 kilometers away from a port Iraq was building (the Grand al-Faw). Rapprochement swiftly ended over Iraqi fears of economic strangulation and calls for eternal brotherhood were replaced by curses. Nowadays, rumors abound that Iraqi and Kuwaiti forces are infiltrating the border areas and Iraqi militants have already launched rockets from Iraq into Kuwait and threatened to kidnap the contractors building the Mubarak Kabeer port. While threatening, this conflict is unlikely to explode as Iraq is in no shape to wage war and labors under a history of belligerence it is trying to expunge. But what if a similar sequence of events occurred in Southeast/East Asia, where GDP is growing an average of 6%-7% a year(with China at 9.1%) and states can operate more freely? The U.S. is investing more resources in the region at the exact moment when growing economic competition make conflict more likely. Secondly, climate change will soon have a massive impact on the world’s coastal areas. Global sea levels are likely to rise between 80 to 200cm at the end of the century and would submerge large tracts of land, displacing millions of people and wiping out urban and agricultural areas. Since they are built on the coast, this would also damage or destroy many ports worldwide and jeopardize international commerce as we know it. These losses would be difficult to replace given the increased environmental pressures Southeast/East Asian states would face as well as the spillover problems that would arise as low-lying countries sink into the sea and collapse. Competition over the ports that survive will be fierce as whoever possesses them would likely dominate the sea lanes and international commerce for some time, leading to regional dominance. Similarly, economic competition and climate change are going to going to cause havoc on the military industrial base supporting naval power in the region. It is expensive to build a competitive navy, and many states will be unable to afford it if they need to constantly adapt to economic and environmental pressure. China and India are already building up their naval forces and will likely be naval powers into the foreseeable future, but the U.S. will gain a lot of allies in the future struggling to get the U.S. involved in every security dispute they have. Like WWI, someone may gamble incorrectly, and a conflict that starts as a minor incident may explode into something much greater. The U.S . consequently needs to utilize all facets of American power, from military to diplomatic to foreign aid, to confront these complex challenges and prevent them from escalating out of control . We need to promote broader acceptance of free trade on the open seas as well as democratic governance to limit the appeal of coercive power and the ability to use that power arbitrarily. We need a way to maintain the strength of our alliances without getting sucked into conflicts we don’t want, besides selling more weapons that only make war increasingly likely. Regardless of the exact policies, policymakers need to start thinking ahead on how it will deal with the implications economic competition and climate change are going to have on maritime power. Intelligent observers of the Middle East knew for years that the authoritarian status quo was unsustainable, yet no plans were made to respond to the collapse of those regimes and our response could have been better. Current trends indicate that the current status quo in Southeast/East Asia is equally untenable . Do we have a plan in place? IOOS Mechanism Inherency SQ Fragmented Status quo observation efforts are fragmented U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

The existing U.S. ocean observing system was built with the support of a wide range of sponsors and users with applications as varied as safe navigation and beach water quality monitoring. Much of the system arose as a "mission-dependent, uncoordinated collection of sensors rather than a carefully designed, multi-sensor, multi-user observing system. We must examine the existing system to identify improvements -- from co-locating more sensors on existing platforms to re-locating existing platforms based on scientific and operational need. In the coming decade it will be important for the U.S. IOOS® program to develop more mature and comprehensive processes for defining and prioritizing requirements and observing system design that integrate across global to local scales. Accurate products and predictions within the U.S. IOOS geographic area require accurate information at its offshore boundary, thus increased interoperability with international GOOS efforts is required. Inputs from terrestrial watersheds into the coasts and Great Lakes must also be integrated, to combine river flooding and coastal storm surge into coastal flooding predictions. Identification of essential capabilities in each of the U.S. IOOS subsystem components can provide common threads for the design. This chapter assesses the progress toward developing a comprehensive design, and highlights steps that need to be taken. SQ not implementing Expanding IOOS implementation key JOCI 2011 Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, AmericA’s OceAn Future Ensuring HEaltHy ocEans to support a vibrant Economy http://www.jointoceancommission.org/resource-center/1-Reports/2011-06- 07_JOCI_Americas_Ocean_Future.pdf

Good ocean science will require consistent and dedicated investment. In this time of fiscal austerity, it may be difficult to find new funds to enhance America's marine science capabilities. But investing in ocean science, research, and education is important to supporting economic as well as environmental well-being. Ocean-related data and information are critical for informed coastal development, efficient marine transportation, safe commercial fishing, and vibrant marine-based recreation and tourism. Communities that rely on these activities—and other goods and services that ocean and coastal ecosystems provide—need to be able to quantify their contribution to the economy so they can make good decisions about their management going forward. Education in ocean and coastal sciences and technology should also be improved as part of the national push to bolster our scientific and technical workforce, so that the U.S. can continue to lead an innovation-based global economy. Supporting a better understanding of our oceans and coasts is a sound economic investment for today and for the future. Ocean Observation, Monitoring, Modeling, and Assessment Successful implementation of the National Ocean Policy and its strategic goals will require coordination and investment in ocean and coastal observing, long-term monitoring, modeling, and ecosystem assessment. These programs are essential for understanding the complex problems our ocean and coastal communities face; knowing whether our policies and management systems are meeting environmental, social, and economic goals; identifying how our policies can be improved; and developing new and innovative solutions. Better decision making and long-term monitoring of the outcomes of those decisions requires a fully developed and supported Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). The IOOS integrates data on what is happening in our oceans—including data from sensors at the bottom of the ocean, from buoys on the ocean's surface, and from satellites with remote- sensing technology high above the Earth. The IOOS allows us to better understand, model, and forecast changes to the planet and its oceans. This in turn allows us to understand how these changes will affect ocean economies and communities that depend on them, improve the safety of marine operations, improve national and homeland security, and mitigate the effects of natural hazards. Unfortunately, these benefits have been limited by insufficient commitment and investment. In one stark example, the federal government was unable to accurately detect, monitor, or forecast the subsurface oil plume from the Gulf of Mexico spill, which resulted in uninformed management decisions, conflicting scientific predictions, and confusing communications with a concerned public. In addition to ocean observation and monitoring efforts, there is a strong need for the development of improved ocean-related models. Better models can help managers understand and forecast conditions under various planning scenarios and management approaches. They can improve our understanding of how the physical, biological, chemical, and human elements of ocean ecosystems interact. This is essential for the more integrated, coordinated, and forward-looking management of ocean resources. Gaining a comprehensive picture of the environmental, cultural, and economic characteristics of ocean and coastal ecosystems will be essential for improving our management of these resources. This includes gaining a better understanding of the contributions that ecosystem services and recreational uses make to our local, state, and national economies. Integrated ecosystem assessments at the regional or sub-regional scales can address this need. These assessments should go beyond a static snapshot and consider ecological, spatial, and temporal variations. They should be coordinated across federal agencies, states, tribes, and academic partners and should be regularly updated to serve as the basis for planning and management actions and a focal point for regional scientific efforts. RECOMMENDATION Congress and the Administration should fund and implement the Integrated Ocean Observing System so that managers can understand how ocean ecosystem changes will affect ocean resources, ocean economies, and the communities that depend on them. They should also support the development of better models for forecasting ocean conditions under various management scenarios. Solvency Data = effective Policy The plan provides effective management IOOS report to congress 13 [Official US IOOS report sent to congress. 2013, “U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS) 2013 Report to Congress,” http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/ioos_report_congress2013.pdf //jweideman]

The IOOC recognizes that U.S. IOOS must be responsive to environmental crises while maintaining the regular long-term ocean observation infrastructure required to support operational oceanography and climate research. As a source of our Nation’s ocean data and products, U.S. IOOS often serves as a resource for the development of targeted applications for a specific location or sector. At the same time, U.S. IOOS organizes data from across regions and sectors to foster the national and international application of local data and products broadly across oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. Events over the last few years, including Hurricane Sandy and the Deep Water Horizon oil spill have awakened U.S. communities to the value and necessity of timely ocean info rmation. IOOC commends U.S. IOOS for responsive and capable support to the Nation in these events in addition to diverse everyday support to the Nation’s maritime economy. We have much more work to do to build and organize the ocean-observing infrastructure of the Nateion and look forward to wrking with congress on this continuing challenge. Full implementation of IOOS is key to effective ocean management Dr. Andrew A. Rosenberg 9, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, and Dr. Paul A. Sandifer, Ph.D. in Marine Science from the University of Virginia, Chief Science Advisor for NOAA’s National Ocean Service, “What Do Managers Need?” Chapter 2 in Ecosystem-Based Management for the Oceans, http://www.pelagicos.net/MARS6910_spring2013/readings/EBM_for_the_Oceans_ch2.pdf One ray of hope is provided by the recently released national Ocean Research Priorities Plan and Implementation Strategy developed by the US Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST 2007). This is the first comprehensive ocean research plan that involves every agency of the US government concerned in any way with ocean research. The overarching goal of the plan is “to provide the guidance to build the scientific foundation to improve society’s stewardship and use of, and interaction with, the ocean.” The plan focuses on three central elements of ocean science and technology: (1) capability to forecast ocean and ocean- influenced processes and phenomena, (2) development of scientific support for EBM, and (3) deployment of an ocean-observing sys-tem. These three--ocean forecasting, EBM, and ocean observing--permeate the entire document and its twenty national research priori-ties organized within six societal themes. The JSOST (2007) further recognized the breadth of scientific support and integration that would be needed to implement EBM, stating that a multi-dimensional, multi- disciplinary effort to enhance current understanding of ecosystem processes, determine which interactions are most critical, and assess the dynamics of the natural and human factors affecting those interactions would be necessary (see also box2.4). Full development and implementation of the Integrated Ocean Observing System(IOOS) and other ocean and coastal observatories will provide a foundation of monitoring data that could enable and enhance manage-ment in many ocean sectors. An IOOS that includes not only high-resolution measurements in time and space of the physical and chemical properties within an ecosystem , but also bio-logical attributes, and that incorporates high-resolution data on human activities within that ecosystem, would open up a n entirely new world of information for management . Such a system and its related information flows would enable forecasting of ocean processes and phenomena, including severe storms, currents, status of fishery stocks and other biological resources, and human health risks. The requi-site tools are rapidly becoming available , with a variety of data collection methods ‰from mea-surements of waves, temperature, currents,and productivity in real time with buoys, satellites, and radar to the monitoring of fishing activity with vessel- monitoring systems, and shipping with automated identification sys-tems (USCOP 2004), and even development of a wide range of biological sensors (JSOST 2007; Sandifer et al. 2007). Using these new tools would allow management to operate on a spatial and temporal resolution that has never before been possible. However, developing new management strategies and tactics that can take advantage of such high-resolution in-formation is an important area for growth and research. Integration Solvency

Data is insufficient-integrated system is key to effective policy U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

Example 4. Data is not enough; it must be integrated The Gulf of Maine buoy array of NERACOOS has provided continuous oceanographic measurements for over a decade. There are now seven buoys in the array sited at coastal shelf depths ranging from 50 to 250 meters and providing temperature measurements at 3 to 7 depths throughout the water column. Analysis of this time series shows statistically significant warming trends at all depths for all locations, providing the first depth-resolved rates of temperature variability for the U.S. East Coast from continuous data. Ecosystem data are lacking, however, so there is no telling what impact this warming condition is having on the ecosystem. User engagement is successful when the data are integrated in new ways to provide new understandings or new information for decision-making. The impact of data is limited without human resources funded for analysis and for making the results available to broader user groups.

IOOS needs to increase integration efforts to maximize information delivery-key to a laundry list of economic, security, and environmental threats (in 1AC) U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

During the past decade of U.S. IOOS design and implementation, the world and our nation have experienced significant changes in technology, economy, security, and the environment. Data processing capacity has moved from kilobytes to terabytes to zettabytes, and pocket-sized smart phones are ubiquitous among potential users of ocean data. Despite major economic cycles across most of the world economies, most goods continue to be delivered by sea, in ever larger merchant ships. The increase of global terrorism has brought attention to the relatively open access of ports and potential gaps in security for most of the world's most intensely populated and commerce-filled areas. The awesome power of nature has been seen in devastating tsunamis and widespread damage from super-storms , which have affected trillions of dollars of wealth and commerce. The societal needs that inspired the development of U.S. IOOS ten years ago have largely progressed as anticipated -- except that need has grown far greater and faster than projected. As we envision the needs of U.S. IOOS users in 2022, we must examine, and attempt some predictions about, the drivers of ocean product needs over the next decade. The world population today is 7 billion, projected to increase by another billion over the coming decade, and people continue to move towards coastal areas in the United States and around the globe. The role maritime commerce plays in our national economy is largely underappreciated. The bulk of U.S. foreign trade -- 99% by volume, 62% by value - travels by ship. Beyond shipborne commerce, investments in a wide range of ocean-related services - for petroleum exploitation, fisheries, recreation and tourism, as well as growing areas like wind, wave and tidal power, aquaculture, and reinsurance - will provide new jobs and will increasingly depend on expanded, reliable, more timely, more user-friendly ocean and coastal observation and prediction products. Ocean information will become an increasingly valuable commodity worldwide , because of the role of maritime commerce and new ocean-related investments, vulnerability to ocean-related natural disasters, the need to provide security for coastal populations, and the challenges of providing food and water for more people. Continued advances in information technology and social networking will require significant changes in how we interact with users. We must not only provide U.S. IOOS products on these platforms, and keep up with the technology advances, but we must also develop ways to respond to the fact that these users will increasingly become more active in both providing local data and real-time critiques of U.S. IOOS products. Over the next decade, a number of drivers will affect the budget climate in the U.S. for ocean observation. Public policy will demand greater accountability, with Congress and local jurisdictions asking for measures of effectiveness in safety, security, economic development and general public welfare. U.S. Government budgets will face increasing downward pressures; technology innovations will reduce costs for ocean observations and data dissemination; and private sector investment in U.S. lOOS-related efforts will increase. The U.S. IOOS community will need to resolve numerous policy issues concerning public-private partnership, governance, and shared liability for ocean observations and products. Parallel ongoing revolutions in communications, knowledge processing and transportation are realigning the standing of countries all over the world, including the relative position of the United States among the leading societies and economies of the 21 st century. Indeed, some have characterized the challenge of the future in terms of defining the role of a "Blue Economy" in addressing the key applications of water, food, coastal real estate, and energy (Michael B. Jones, 2012). 3. The Challenge There has been an unprecedented boom in information content providers with increasing numbers of people consuming all types of information, and this data explosion will continue. The accuracy and reliability of the information is critical, however, especially if it is used for business decisions or public safety purposes, and U.S. IOOS must address this issue more fully. People need technology and access to the right information so they can make the best decisions possible, wherever they are and whenever they need it. Most people do not know when they will need critical information, or what kind of information they will need until they get into a situation where critical, even life-saving, decisions need to be made. We must address this problem by delivering clear, user- friendly access to coordinated national, regional and local products—before, during and after disasters. The amount of ocean observations collected today is impressive, and storm and natural disaster forecasting and warnings are improving, but we have yet to understand some fundamental questions about storm intensification. The future U.S. IOOS must offer proactive alerts and messages when certain warning criteria are met, along with local implications of these changes, and the delivery pathways of this information to serve citizens must be improved. In many emergency response situations, where multiple jurisdictions and disciplines interact, rapid information exchange is severely hampered by differences in hardware, software, data formats, and mapping/visualization products. As a result, potentially critical information often does not make it into the hands of the people who need it the most. U.S. IOOS must address this issue by championing data and product standards. Our challenge is to build a system that is operationally reliable, economically sustainable, politically and scientifically defensible, and technologically evolvable. Integration is the lynchpin of successful ocean policy-is a pillar of human survival U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

The ocean is of fundamental importance to the national security and economy of the United States. Decades of focused investment in ocean observing and prediction have produced many examples of substantive societal and economic benefit resulting from improved knowledge of ocean and coastal waters and their behavior. Many complex and difficult questions about the ocean remain, including many that have implications for the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans. Because the ocean provides much of the oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere, provides all of the fresh water on land through a cycle of evaporation-to-clouds-to-rain, and regulates the Earth's climate, the overall state of the global ocean and its changes profoundly affect all Americans, in fact all of humankind. Recognizing this, the United States has embarked on a series of efforts to develop an ocean observing system capable of addressing broad societal needs. This system is known as the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS"). The activities and members of the U.S. IOOS community are broad and complex. There are 18 Federal agencies involved in the U.S. IOOS program, as well as 11 U.S. IOOS Regional Associations that encompass efforts focused in U.S. coastal waters, the Great Lakes, and U.S. territories and their waters in the Pacific and the Caribbean. In addition, there are many Federal and academic scientists representing the U.S. Government in various United Nations-sponsored groups that plan and oversee global ocean observation programs. This diverse community is managed largely through cooperation rather than clear directive or budgetary authority, which has contributed to both the strong growth, and the integration weaknesses, of the U.S. IOOS program. A major focus for the next decade of U.S. IOOS is to develop comprehensive processes that more fully integrate the requirements, technologies, data/product development and dissemination, testing and modeling efforts across the regional, national, and global sectors of the U.S. IOOS program. Integration through IOOS is key to effectiveness---the alternative is uncoordinated research that fails to deliver information to relevant decision-makers David L. Martin 3, PhD in Oceanography from the University of Washington, Associate Director, Applied Physics Laboratory at the University of Washington, former Director of the Operational Oceanography Center at the Naval Oceanographic Office, “The National Oceanographic Partnership Program, Ocean.US, and Real Movement Towards an Integrated and Sustained Ocean Observing System,” Oceanography Vol 6 No 4, http://www.tos.org/oceanography/archive/16-4_martin_d.pdf The oceans are of fundamental importance to our society. They are energy sources and modifiers of our weather, a buffer for the security of our nation, vast reservoirs of living resources, natural laboratories for scientists and educators, highways for national and international commerce and places of recreation for our citizenry. Human population growth and its preferential concentration in coastal regions around the world however is subjecting the oceans , particularly the coastal ecosystems, to increasing pressures and damaging their ability to deliver the goods and services, with those services ranging from the dilution of human effluent to serving as nursery grounds for commercial fisheries, upon which we have come to depend. In order to make rational, scientifically sound decisions about a host of activities that impact the ocean and coastal ecosystems, we must have two fundamental capabilities: first, we must be able, on a comprehensive and cosmopolitan basis, to monitor the present state of the ocean and coastal ecosystems , and second, we must be able to make robust predictions about the future states of these ecosystems. We have neither of these capabilities today. ¶ As a nation, the United States has historically responded to these two grand challenges in an uncoordinated and frequently competitive fashion. Thus, when considering the sum of all ocean monitoring related efforts across the various governmental components of our federalist structure (e.g., federal, tribal, state and local), these programs are frequently duplicative, are inherently inefficient from a resource expenditure standpoint, and, most importantly, they fail to deliver information and knowledge on the causes and consequences of anthropogenic actions and natural variability in a timely enough manner to allow their incorporation into scientifically sound decision making about the ocean and coastal environment. This need not be the case. There has been a convergence of interests and understanding about the importance of developing and maintaining an integrated and sustained ocean observing system (IOOS) in both the international and national arenas over the past decade. Because of this decadal focus on sustained ocean observations and convergence of interests in the political realm that understand the importance of developing this vital national capability, the time has come to close the gap between scientifically sound, long-term ocean observations and the decision making process. The plan is integration- status quo data collection is ineffective and time consuming Signell and Snowden 14 [Richard P. Signell, U.S. Geological Survey, Derrick P. Snowden, U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 3/19/14, “Advances in a Distributed Approach for Ocean Model Data Interoperability” http://testbed.sura.org/sites/default/files/jmse-02-00194.pdf //jweideman]

Ocean modelers typically require many different types of input data for forcing, assimilation and boundary conditions, and routinely produce GB or larger amounts of output data. Depending on which model is used, the horizontal coordinate of the output data may be on a regular, curvilinear, or unstructured (e.g., triangular) grid, while the vertical coordinate may be on a uniform or stretched grid with a number of different possibilities (e.g., sigma, sigma-over-z, s-coordinate, isopycnal). Ocean modelers therefore often spend large amounts of time on mundane data manipulation tasks such as searching and reformatting data from external sources, writing custom readers for specific models so that results between models can be compared and assessed, as well as responding to custom data requests from consumers of their model products. Better tools reduce time spent on these mundane data manipulation tasks, thereby increasing time spent on modeling and analysis work. The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS® ) has been working on better tools to support not only its member organizations, but the entire ocean science community . U.S. IOOS (hereafter referred to simply as IOOS), is a collaboration between Federal, State, Local, Academic and Commercial partners to manage ocean observing and modeling systems to meet the unique needs of each region around the US [1–3]. Federal partners provide the ―National Backbone‖, and 11 IOOS Regional Associations (RAs) build upon the backbone with local assets to create observational and modeling systems designed to be more than the sum of the parts, capable of responding to the societal needs of each individual region (e.g., harmful algal blooms, eutrophication, search and rescue, oil spills, navigation, mariculture) (Figure 1). In 2008, IOOS held a community modeling workshop attended by 57 members spanning federal, research and private sectors, including modelers and stakeholders, and the workshop produced a report with nine specific recommendations to advance the state of ocean modeling in the US [4]. One of recommendations was to ―develop an implementation plan for a distributed, one-stop shopping national data portal and archive system for ocean prediction input and output data‖. The US Geological Survey (USGS) had been working on model data interoperability for their collaborative projects on sediment transport modeling [5–7] and in 2009 agreed to send one of their modelers to the U.S. IOOS Program Office, within the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for a one year detail to lead the effort.

Proliferation of data sources makes use and management impossible- integration solves Blower et al 10 [J.D. Blower, ) Environmental Systems Science Centre. S.C. Hankin, tegrated Science Data Management, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans. , R. Keeley, Integrated Science Data Management, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, S. Pouliquen IFREMER. J. de la Beaujardière, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. E. Vanden Berghe, Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University. G.Reed, Australian Ocean Data Centre Joint Facility. F. Blanc, Space Oceanography Division, M.C. Gregg, U.S. National Oceanographic Data Center, J. Fredericks , Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. , D. Snowden, NOAA/Climate Program Office. 2010, “OCEAN DATA DISSEMINATION: NEW CHALLENGES FOR DATA INTEGRATION” http://www.oceanobs09.net/plenary/files/draft%20papers/FCXNL-09A02b-1864228-1-Oceandatadisseminationplenaryv1.0.pdf //jweideman]

The continuous growth in capacity and availability of the Internet has led to a similar increase in its use for disseminating ocean data. Through the use of Internet and Web technologies, ocean data can be made available to a wide variety of users in a highly flexible manner. Internet-based dissemination systems, from which users “pull” data, provide extra capabilities above those provided by broadcast or “push” systems, such as the ability to monitor usage patterns and customize data feeds on-the-fly for particular users. These technologies will be the focus of this paper, although we acknowledge that other methods remain valuable, particularly for applications in which high-bandwidth Internet access is not readily available, and where high reliability, high data throughput and timeliness are important. Historically, each project or observing platform has maintained its own data management and dissemination system. This has led to a proliferation of online data sources, meaning that users frequently experience difficulties in finding the data they require , or in finding the authoritative copy of a dataset that appears on the Internet many times. Recent trends have focussed on global data assembly centres (e.g. Argo, drifters, and OceanSites) and on ass embling data from various platforms into consolidated collections in support of specific goals , such as the WOCE2 Data Assembly Centres, the Coriolis database of in situ observations3 , the GHRSST4 project for sea surface temperature [4], the AVISO5 project for altimetry data and the U.S. Observing System Monitoring Center6 [5,6] Work still needs to be done in helping the many users of ocean data to discover, evaluate and access the data they need [7]. It is widely agreed that users of ocean data require information to be presented in a consistent manner, irrespective of the source of the data; section 2 of this paper discusses current efforts towards increasing the consistency of data across projects and platforms. Recently, much attention has been given to the adoption of open geospatial standards for the discovery, encoding, visualization and dissemination of data; section 3 examines their strengths and weaknesses for the ocean community. Section 4 describes some recent efforts that employ new technologies to create large “virtual databases” of observations of the ocean and other elements of the earth system. Finally, the paper concludes (section 5) by drawing out the main current challenges in data dissemination and making recommendations for future activities. Laundry List

IOOS critical to responding to all ocean related crisis -disasters -Climate -Energy -Maritime transportation -homeland security U.S. IOOS SUMMIT REPORT 13 A New Decade for the Integrated Ocean Observing System http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/about/governance/summit2012/usioos_summit_report.pdf

UNDERSTANDING OF THE NEED FOR IOOS Recent events underscore the importance of IOOS to the economic, security and environmental interests of the United States. • Ocean, coastal and Great Lakes observations have proven to be e ssential for responding to weather, ocean, and human-mediated disasters on global, regional and local scales; as well as in reducing and mitigating the economic, social, and cultural risks of extreme events. • The increasingly clear understanding of the scope and impacts of environmental changes, including sea level rise, the increase in ocean acidity, and the need to respond, adapt to and manage those changes, calls for a more extensive and sustained monitoring of the oceans and coasts as critical to understanding and predicting the earth's climate systems. • Challenges of maintaining the quality and quantity of food and water for the US population and a rapidly growing global population will require improvements in our ability to predict ocean state conditions , weather, climate and extreme events including drought, harmful algal blooms and other conditions. • Economic development and Job growth in areas experiencing dynamic change, such as the energy sector and maritime transportation, accentuate the need for the public and private sectors in the United States to understand ocean and coastal conditions as they relate to a transforming global economy, and to ensure safe and efficient operations. • A new dynamic of national and homeland security emphasizes that we must enhance our ability to monitor the oceans. • The increasing need for sustained marine ecosystem goods and services requires a robust infrastructure for biological, biogeochemical and ecological observations. • Ocean, coastal and Great Lakes observing leads to the creation of new high quality jobs to provide information supporting improved decision making in industries that depend on the oceans. Now, more than ever, the United States requires a sustained and integrated ocean observing system. Needs Funds Increased funding for IOOS is key---the alternative is a fragmented approach and loss of observational resources due to inadequate funds IOOS Summit Report 12, a report synthesizing outcomes from a meeting attended by 200 representatives and informed by white papers from hundreds of ocean observing experts, “IOOS Summit Report Version 1-3”, September 18, 2012, http://www.iooc.us/wp- content/uploads/2012/09/DRAFT-IOOS-Summit-Report-2012-09-18-V1-3.docx Although U.S. IOOS is a line item in the NOAA budget, it is largely an unfunded federal mandate. Many naysayers continue to question the value of integration , believing that agency programs supported with agency-unique budgets and supporting requirements are adequate. Clearly, this argument does not address the inefficiencies of this fragmented approach , and fails to support U. S. IOOS as a national ocean enterprise. This current state of play makes it difficult for the U.S. IOOS efforts to be taken seriously by Federal partners. Challenge 8 lies at the heart of U.S. IOOS’ ‘ failure to thrive’ . What is needed are users and requirements that can help make the case why improved, coordinated funding must occur to enable an effective, integrated Federal backbone. In an effort to try to emphasize that we all benefit through the contributions of many, the U.S. IOOS has sometimes been called a National Ocean Enterprise. However, the coastal, estuarine and Great Lakes communities can feel excluded by the “ocean” terminology, which makes this branding effort counter effective.¶ By meeting all the previously identified challenges, advocacy will develop naturally if the stakeholders and users are actively engaged and their requirements are being met. However, a proactive advocacy strategy that addresses federal agency, RA, private industry, and NGO roles and limitations is needed. Federal agencies obviously would have a very different role in this strategy than other stakeholders.¶ Recommendation 8A: NFRA should coordinate with private industry, the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and other stakeholders to develop an advocacy strategy. One element of the strategy should be to incorporate advocacy elements into the R2O process recommended for Challenges 4 through 7.¶ Challenge 8B: Lack of proper funding can lead to user alienation and loss of existing observational resources.¶ There is often an awkward interaction between users and the observing community that is trying to develop the U.S. IOOS because the conversations mix discussions about technical needs with those of financial support. The observing community has an earnest desire to define and fill user needs, but often cannot, having inadequate funds to achieve the desired data stream, integrated product, or other informational assets. In this situation, the issue of finances may be brought into the conversation prematurely, before the observing community has created credibility for their products. Such interactions create a perception that the U.S. IOOS entity is more interested in obtaining money than in meeting user needs. At the other end of the interaction spectrum, there are many users that have come to rely on observing system products without providing financial or political support for the system. The observing system community is not adept at culminating that supportive relationship into advocacy or funding even when the timing is appropriate.

New funds are key to effective operational monitoring IOOS association 14 [IOOS official organization, “The U. S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (U.S. IOOS®) A federal/regional program sponsored by NOAA/NOS Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request” 2014, http://www.ioosassociation.org/sites/nfra/files/FY15%20Ask%20One%20Pager%20DRAFT.pdf //jweideman]

No less than $30 million to support the ongoing operation of the national network of regional coastal observing systems. This would increase base funding to $23 million to the national network to provide core data and information and to ensure that systems are operational in the face of the next hurricane or extreme weather event, as well as provide $7 million for the continued operation of the nation’s only high frequency radar network for the collection of real-time surface current observations and to fill critical gaps and to bring all systems to full capacity. • $10 million for marine sensor innovation grants. The marine sensor innovation program was initiated in FY 13 to support the transition of promising sensors from the development to operations to fill critical gaps in monitoring such as biology , harmful algal bloom and ocean acidification. These competitive awards were made to teams of IOOS regions, industry, and Federal partners ensures that IOOS remains state- of-the art and responsive to user needs. IOOS key effective data IOOS is critical to accurate prediction and forecasting of ocean conditions and weather events Lautenbacher 2013 Conrad, Retired Vice Admiral and Board Member of the South East Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Association (SECOORA), House Testimony, http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP19/20130321/100498/HHRG-113-AP19-Wstate-LautenbacherV- 20130321.pdf

Superstorm Sandy was unprecedented in its size and impact on the mid-Atlantic and northeastern regions of our country. We can all hope that this type of storm is not a new normal. Both before and during the storm U.S. IOOS provided critical data that helped emergency managers prepare to protect lives and property, and enabled scientists and weather forecasters to better understand the storm’s track, intensity and the resulting storm surge. However, our understanding and forecasts of hurricane and extratropical storm intensity must be improved. While significant gains have been made in recent years to forecasts of storm tracks, little improvement has been demonstrated over the past 20 years for storm intensity – in large part due to a lack of real-time data along the storm paths. Recent extreme events, including Superstorm Sandy and last year’s Hurricane Irene, tragically reflect the need for enhancement of the nation’s observing and forecasting capabilities to meet the growing demands for accurate predictions of impacts. This FY 14 budget request will provide a small initial investment in extreme event readiness for each of the 11 IOOS Regional Associations. The critical infrastructure that supports the nation’s readiness for the next extreme weather event, whether it’s a hurricane baring down on the east coast, tsunami and flood on the west coast or extreme thunder storms in the Great Lakes region must be operational and ready to deliver. I am suggesting that we begin to make the necessary investment. This request is in addition to funding of S22.5 million that was requested through the Sandy Supplemental Appropriations Process to improve hurricane intensity forecasting in the five IOOS regions along the North Atlantic Storm Pathway. Assuming the funding appropriated by this Congress and initiated by this committee through H.R. 152 (S25 million to improve weather forecasting and hurricane intensity forecasting capabilities, to include data assimilation from ocean observing platforms and satellites) is applied by NOAA in the regions (IOOS Caribbean, IOOS Gulf of Mexico, IOOS Southeast, IOOS Mid-Atlantic, and IOOS Northeast) to address hurricane intensity forecast improvements, then the additional funding we are requesting will begin to fill some of the most critical gaps in our national observing system, repair and upgrade aging systems that have been operating for over 10 years, and harden a portion of our communication systems to bolster reliability during events. Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill IOOS also demonstrated its value during the tragic Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. The IOOS data management system rapidly and efficiently allowed for the seamless integration of data from non-federal sources for use by the Unified Area Command. Prior to this, valuable non- federal information collected by universities, state agencies or private companies was not assessable to federal responders. The IOOS data management system, based on interoperable standards and services, now allows for the integration of data from all relevant sources. In fact, approximately 75% of the data now served by NOAA's National Weather Service through the National Data Buoy Center is from non-federal sources, most of which is directly attributable to the work being done and supported by the Regional Associations. Information on surface currents from regional radars and models were provided to NOAA to assist with their daily projection of the location of the oil slick. Much of the oil from the spill remained subsurface where, despite the availability of technology, we lacked the ability to readily monitor the flow of oil. IOOS, through its regional network, redeployed several underwater gliders from around the country to assist with subsurface monitoring efforts. This unique and flexible capability is one of the hallmarks of the IOOS system.We must learn from these experiences and invest in critical observing assets so that when the next event – a spill, a hurricane, a flood - happens, we are able to provide emergency managers and others with the best possible information. Without this capability, response and recovery operations will be negatively impacted, and federal responders will be forced to deploy people and ships during the event at much higher cost, and with higher risks to lives and property. Real-time Surface Current Information Aids Search and Rescue One of the unique capabilities IOOS funding supports is the nation’s surface current observing network, a system of land-based radars. These radar systems are able to detect the speed and direction of ocean currents regardless of cloud coverage. This information is relayed in real time to the Coast Guard’s environmental data server for use in search and rescue operations. The results of a four1day test in July 2009 showed that when HF radar data were ingested into the Search and Rescue system, the search area was decreased by 66% over a 961hour period. This decrease in search area represents significant savings, both in lives and decreased search and rescue operational cost. A National Surface Current Mapping Plan estimates that $20 million is needed to build out this system nationwide. Our request to maintain current funding levels of $5 million will insure the priority radars currently operating continue to do so. Wise Investment An independent cost estimate of the IOOS system, conducted by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Science and Technology Directorate and submitted to Congress on November 9, 2012, estimates that the fully developed system – federal and regional, including weather and ocean satellites 1 to address key societal needs in next 15 years cost $54 billion. The regional component, as identified in regional build out plans, is estimated at $534 million annually to fulfill needs of users for timely and quality information. At current funding levels for the regional systems near $25 million a year, we are only beginning to build the capacity necessary to meet user demands. Conclusion: IOOS Leads to Innovative Solutions In tight fiscal times, IOOS provides a pathway for bringing forward new solutions, and will play an ever-increasing role in meeting our Nation’s need for coastal ocean data and information. IOOS is a flexible system that can facilitate the transition from research and development to operations. IOOS’s capability to move vital observing assets from research institutions into operations in support of federal response missions has been demonstrated, and will continue to be deployed to address unexpected events around the country. Regional observations are efficiently filling critical gaps not currently being met by our federal partners. IOOS is harnessing the flexibility and innovation of private and academic research and development capability. The networked capability represented by IOOS works, and has repeatedly demonstrated its value. IOOS is unique; IOOS is efficient; and IOOS is the future. US Data Key US key – training ground and international model. Muller-Karger et al 2014 Frank, Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System, January 2, 2014, ieee Geoscience and remote sensing magazine, University of South Florida Oceanography Professor, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf

9. CONCLUSIONS Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data comprise a key element of the IOOS observing system in the US. It is a cornerstone technology for local as well as for large-scale and international environmental assessment, research, and commercial applications. The US IOOS can play a pivotal role in activities such as calibration and validation efforts, developing new research and applications, refining a vision for Earth observation, and distributing science- quality, real-time and archived products and timely information. The IOOS can help create efficiencies in developing a regional infrastructure and capitalize on the human knowledge of each region. It can also help ensure viability of systems during emergencies. Ultimately, the IOOS can learn from international programs and also provide training opportunities to the international community. A number of core remote sensing products are required by a broad range of stakeholders in the industry sector, and in operational and research communities. Basic products include sea surface temperature (SST), chlorophyll, wind speed/direction, salinity, and sea surface height. Newer products to be added include indices of water quality, coastal and marine high spatial resolution habitat maps [status and trends), and biological diversity assessments. Many of these products, however, require the launch of a new generation of satellites. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and to fund, advance, and maintain the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and societies around the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and academic sectors (Universities) will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. This white paper emphasizes the need for IOOS 10 inform operational and research agencies in the United States of the types of observations and observing platforms required, including what types of satellite sensors need to be launched in the future to maintain continuity of observations, and the types of new observations required. Similar requirements of agencies and other stakeholders in other countries may be satisfied through collaboration with the IOOS or similar regional entities. US data is critical – provides more than half of global sensor platforms Levy 2011 Joel, NOAA Climate Program Ofﬁce, Climate Observation Division The Global Ocean Observing Component of IOOS: Implementation of the Initial Global Ocean Observing System for Climate and the Path Forward http://www.plocan.eu/doc/MTS%20Journal_2011_Vol45-No1.pdf

The Observational Subsystems of the In Situ Observing System NOAA is the world leader in implementing the in situ elements of the global ocean observing system for climate. The NOAA Climate Observa- tion Division sponsors the majority of the global components of the U.S. IOOS.7 The Climate Observation Di- vision manages implementation of the global ocean observing system as a set of observational networks Of Rlbsystom Each subsystem brings unique strengths and limitations; together they build die whole system. The subsystems provide stand-alone data sets and analyses but are interdependent and function synergistically, supplying the observational infrastructure that underlies national and international climate research and operational activities (see Figure 1). Currently, over 8,000 observational platforms are deployed throughout the global ocean, with plans to increase that number to bring the system into compliance with the initial GCOS design. NOAA sponsors nearly half of the platforms presently deployed in the global ocean, with over 70 other countries providing the remainder. Implementation of the U.S. observational networks is accomplished by NOAA laboratories and university- based cooperative institutes, working in close partnership with each other under funding from the Climate Obser- vation Division. Satellites also provide critical contributions to global ocean observation, but operation of the satellites does not (all under the mandate of the Climate Observation Division. US leadership is key US Commission on Ocean Policy 2004 http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter29.pdf

The United States has been a leader in ocean science and research since creation of the U.S. Commission on Fish and Fisheries in 1871. Eleven years later, the 234-foot USS Albatross entered service as the first U.S. research vessel built exclusively for fisheries and occanographic research. On land, major centers of activity included the Woods Hole Occanographic Institution, which has attracted scientists from around the world for more than a century, and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, an innovator in marine technology since 1903. Over the last fifty years, dozens of other top-tier U.S. occanographic institutions have developed. If the United States is to maintain its leadership status, it must build on this tradition by strengthening international scientific partnerships for the purpose of deepening the world's understanding of the oceans. International Ocean Science Programs International ocean research is conducted and coordinated by a variety of endues including the U.N. Intergovernmental Occanographic Commission (IOC), which has sponsored conferences and meetings on an array of topics in this field. These programs include efforts to understand EI Nino, the role of the oceans in the global carbon balance, climate variability, and algal blooms. The Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR), an interdisciplinary body of the International Council for Science, focuses on large-scale ocean research projects for long-term, complex activities. SCOR also promotes capacity building in developing countries by including scientists from such countries in its working groups and other activities. Other institutions, including the World Meteorological Organization, the U.N. Environment Program and the International Hydrographic Organization, arc doing valuable work on climate change, coral reefs, and ocean surveys. The United States participates in and contributes to collaborative international ocean research both to fulfill our global obligations and because it is in our national interest to do so. The more we know, the better we can protect our long-term stake in healthy and productive oceans. Recommendation 29—6. The United States should continue to participate in and fund major international ocean science organizations and programs. The Global Ocean Observing System An international effort is underway to gain a better understanding of the current state of the world's oceans, and to revolutionize the ability to predict future ocean conditions. When fully realized, the Global Ocean Observing System will use state-of-the-art technology to integrate data streams from satellites and globally- deployed ocean sensors. These data will then be made available in usable form to resource managers, businesses, and the general public. This initiative is part of a larger international effort to create a system that integrates ocean, atmosphere, and terrestrial observations. The U.S. role in helping to develop a Global Ocean Observing System is closely linked with efforts to improve ocean data collection on a national scale. The U.S. I ntegrated O cean O bserving S ystem will link the global system to regional ocean observing systems in the United States. The value of developing national and global observing systems is discussed in Chapter 26, as arc the needs for continued improvements in scientific and technological infrastructure, and enhanced international cooperation and coordination. Improving international coordination of ocean observations and integrating these observations into the broader suite of atmospheric and terrestrial observations, is a cornerstone of the ongoing effort to strengthen the role of science in international policy-making. Data Collection IOOS is key to protecting the marine environment NOAA 13 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Integrated Ocean Observing System,” Ocean Service NOAA, October 21, 2013, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/programs/ioos.html) The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®) serves as the nation’s eye on our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. IOOS delivers the data and information needed to increase understanding of our coastal waters so decision makers can act to improve safety, enhance the economy, and protect the environment. These data are critical for everyday benefits – including understanding the impacts of climate change, transporting goods in and out of ports safely and efficiently, and protecting people from eating contaminated seafood. IOOS is a federal, regional, private sector, and academic partnership that tracks, predicts, manages, and adapts to changes in our marine environments. There are thousands of tools – from satellites above Earth to sensors below the water – that continuously collect ocean and coastal data. IOOS is the link that connects all these data. IOOS is expanding sources of data and increasing access to existing data to save users time and money. We are adopting and adapting standards and protocols – such as whether temperature is recorded in Celsius or Fahrenheit – in order to make data easier to use. Integrated ocean information is now available in near real time, as well as retrospectively. Easier and better access to this information is improving our ability to do many things, such as: Predicting Severe Weather Forecasting Hazards Improving Search and Rescue Monitoring Water Quality Optimizing Marine Operations Enhancing Oil Spill Response Minimizing Rip Current Deaths Boosting Homeland Security Predicting Human Health Satellites

Satellites provide physical, chemical, and biological data Zhang et al 11 [RONG-HUA ZHANG= researcher at State Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment Dynamics, Second Institute of Oceanography, State Oceanic Administration, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China, and Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland , DAKE CHEN and GUIHUA WANG=researchers at State Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment Dynamics, Second Institute of Oceanography, State Oceanic Administration, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China , “Using Satellite Ocean Color Data to Derive an Empirical Model for the Penetration Depth of Solar Radiation (Hp) in the Tropical Pacific Ocean”, July 2011, JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC TECHNOLOGY vol. 28, pg 944-946//jweideman]

Ocean biology–induced heating effects and bio climate coupling in the tropical Pacific have been of much recent interest because of their potential for the modulation of ENSO. Physically, its effects on heating in the upper ocean can be represented by the penetration depth of solar radiation (Hp). While interannual variability in the physical system (e.g., SST) is well understood, simulated, and even predictable about 6 months or more in advance (e.g., Zhang et al. 2005), studies on biological processes and their feedback effects on physics in the ocean are still in the early stage . At present, ocean models have considerable difficulty in accurately representing biogeochemical variability. For example, current comprehensive ocean biogeochemistry models still cannot realistically depict interannual Hp anomalies during ENSO cycles. As a result, most global climate models have not adequately taken into account the effects of interannual Hp variability. In particular, the effects have not been included in all of the coupled models currently used for real-time ENSO predictions. The advent of space-based satellite observations has provided an unprecedented basin wide data of not only physical fields, but also biological parameters in the ocean . Now, interannual Hp variability can be routinely derived from remotely sensed Chl data. Previously, derived spatially and seasonally varying Hp fields have been utilized in ocean and coupled ocean–atmosphere model simulations; the large effects are found on ocean and climate simulations in the tropical Pacific, with strikingly modeldependent and even conflicting results. Squo data collection methods including sattelites fail- new missions Sandwell et al 01 [David T. Sandwell, prf. University of southern California, has been chief scientist on several seafloor mapping expeditions to remote areas of the South Pacific. In conjunction with colleagues, Sandwell developed the most detailed map to date of the global sea floor, providing scientists with the first uniform resolution view of 70 percent of the earth and opening up new areas of research in marine geology and geophysics. Walter Smith is a Geophysicist in

NOAA's Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry and Chair of the scientific and technical sub-committee ofGEBCO , the international and intergovernmental committee for the General Bathymetric Charts of the Oceans. Smith earned a B.Sc. at the University of Southern California, sarah gille, earned a BS in physics at Yale and a PhD in physical oceanography from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Steven Jayne, Woods hole observation institute. Khalid Soofi is a Geoscience Fellow at ConocoPhillips, Bernard Coakley, Geophysical Institute Tectonics & Sedimentation Research Group. 6/28/01, “Bathymetry from Space: White paper in support of a high-resolution, ocean altimeter mission,” PDF Draft version //jweideman]

This comprehensive data set, a uniform survey of the continental margins, has not been obtained during previous altimetric missions, could not be collected from a ship and will not be collected by any of the geopotential satellite missions planned by either NASA or the ESA. Previous and future altimetric missions have and will collect relatively lower resolution data. The increase in resolution with the new mission will greatly increase our ability to image crustal scale structures of scientific and commercial interest. Shipboard surveys, which can collect high-resolution data, are expensive and particularly difficult to execute in the shallow waters that would be sampled during a high-resolution altimeter survey. The altimetric gravity anomaly data set will be unique and immensely valuable for science and exploration; • A complete data set which will facilitate comparisons between continental margins. • An exploration tool which will direct oil and gas exploration and permit extrapolation of known structures from well-surveyed areas. • A uniform, high-resolution data set continuous from the deep ocean to the shallow shelf which will make it possible to follow fracture zones out of the ocean basin into antecedent continental structures, to define and compare segmentation of margins along strike and identify the position of the continent-ocean boundary. Conversely the continuity of geological features on land can be traced on to the Continental Margin. • An image of the gravity field useful for the study of mass anomalies (eg sediment type and distribution) and isostatic compensation at continental margins. Climate Advantage 1AC 1AC Warming Advantage Advantage ___ is Warming:

Scientific models prove human induced warming is real Farley 14 (John W. Farley, American nuclear physicist and a professor of physics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, as well as the Southern Nevada district's representative to the American Association of Physics Teachers, “The Scientific Case for Modern Anthropogenic Global Warming,” Monthly Review, July 6, 2014, http://monthlyreview.org/2008/07/01/the-scientific-case-for-modern-anthropogenic-global- warming) When sunlight strikes the earth, infrared radiation is emitted by the earth. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere absorb this radiation, which results in a warming of the earth. The greenhouse effect is a very large effect: without greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the earth’s surface would likely be below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere has been increasing since the Industrial Revolution began, due primarily to the burning of fossil fuels and to deforestation. This increase in greenhouse gases causes an enhanced greenhouse effect, which warms the earth. A straightforward calculation reveals that when the CO2 in the atmosphere reaches twice the pre-industrial level, the enhanced greenhouse effect alone (i.e., neglecting any response by the earth to the enhanced greenhouse effect) will warm the earth by 1.2 to 1.3˚C. There is no significant controversy among scientists about this part of global warming. The earth will in fact respond to the increased temperature. This is called “feedback.” There is controversy about the magnitude of the feedback. Analysis that takes feedback into account predicts global warming in the range of 1.5 to 4.5˚C (as indicated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]). Controversies among climate scientists concern the magnitude of the warming, not whether or not it is occurring. Climate is controlled by a number of factors, including changes in the earth’s orbit, possibly solar variability, possibly volcanoes, and the greenhouse effect. All but the last factor are entirely natural. Human activities are not the only contribution to the greenhouse effect. Until the last two centuries, humanity had a negligible effect on climate, and all climate change was naturally occurring. Some climate changes in the distant past have been very large (e.g., ice ages) and were not caused by humans. None of these statements refute the proposition that human activities (particularly burning fossil fuels) are an important contribution to the global warming that is occurring right now. Part 2: Summary of Alexander Cockburn’s Contrarian Arguments In his articles in The Nation and on the CounterPunch Web site, Alexander Cockburn makes six arguments against anthropogenic global warming: During the Great Depression of the 1930s, the burning of fossil fuels plunged by 30 percent, but the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere did not decrease. Therefore, he contends, increased atmospheric CO2 does not come from the burning of fossil fuels. Water vapor, not CO2, is the main greenhouse gas, and the portion of global warming attributable to CO2 is therefore tiny. When the earth emerged from the most recent ice age some 10,000 years ago, the global temperature and the concentration of atmospheric CO2 both rose, but the temperature rise preceded a rise in atmospheric CO2. Therefore it was the warming that caused the rise in CO2 and not vice-versa. The warming was caused by a Milankovitch cycle, a small change in the earth’s motion. The increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is caused by CO2 coming out of the oceans, not by the burning of fossil fuels. Hence the increase in atmospheric CO2 is natural, not anthropogenic. The residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is only a year or two before it dissolves in the ocean. This turns out to be important in supporting point 4 above. The forecasts of anthropogenic global warming are entirely dependent on the results of large-scale computer models, which can be easily manipulated by the computer modelers to get any result they want by tweaking the variables in the computer models. Based on these scientific arguments, Cockburn goes on to argue that the computer modelers proclaim their unjustified doomsday forecasts in order to keep their grant funds flowing. He also argues that the nuclear power industry is supporting global warming hysteria in order to promote nuclear power. Part 3: Global Warming in More Depth The greenhouse effect warms the earth. The warming power of the sun is mostly in the visible and ultraviolet region of the spectrum. The surface of the earth re-radiates solar energy back toward space in the form of infrared light. Because of greenhouse gases in it, the atmosphere is transparent to the visible light coming from the sun, but opaque at many wavelengths in the infrared band, resulting in the trapping of thermal energy and the warming of the earth. This is the so- called greenhouse effect, which has been known for two centuries.4 The first scientist to realize that the atmosphere warms the earth may have been the French mathematician and physicist Joseph Fourier in the 1820s (who should not be confused with the journalist and utopian socialist Charles Fourier). The primary greenhouse gases are water vapor, CO2, and methane (natural gas, CH4). I don’t know any scientist who doubts that the greenhouse effect is a real effect. Too many people fail to appreciate how large the greenhouse effect really is. A simple calculation based on the Stefan-Boltzmann law shows that if there were no greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (and if nothing else about the earth changed as a result of removing the greenhouse gases), the average surface temperature of the earth would be –18˚C (–1˚F), which is below the freezing point of water.5 The actual observed average surface temperature of the earth is 15˚C (59˚F). Thus the greenhouse effect raises the earth’s surface temperature by 33˚C (60˚F). In this sense, global warming has already happened! Not only is the greenhouse effect a real effect, it is a large effect. The greenhouse effect is intensifying as a result of the greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere due primarily to CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) and deforestation. Accurate data by direct experimental measurement was not available until 1959, when the geochemist C. D. Keeling started taking data at Mauna Loa, Hawaii. That measurement program has continued up to the present.6 Chart 1 shows the data from 1959 to the present. The data show a seasonal cycle that matches the growing season in the Northern Hemisphere, with a maximum in May and a minimum in October.7 Most significant is a long-term upward trend: from 315 ppm in 1958 to 387 ppm in 2008. While other aspects of global warming have been controversial, nobody has ever doubted the data from this measurement program. The data are rock solid. Several research teams have measured the atmospheric CO2 concentrations and the data from the different researchers are in agreement. Although the earliest data from direct measurement of CO2 in the atmosphere are from 1958, it is possible to extend the data earlier by examining air bubbles trapped in ice in Antarctica and Greenland. Data on the long-term CO2 trend show that the CO2 level remained stable around 280 ppm during the last 10,000 years.8 Then CO2 began to rise around the time of the Industrial Revolution, and is now 38 percent higher than pre-industrial levels. Climate scientists attribute the pre-industrial level of CO2 (280 ppm) to natural causes, and the rise since then to human activity, primarily due to the aforementioned causes. We are reaching the tipping point. Need to act now Sparks 12 (Donald L. Sparks, S. Hallock du Pont Chair in the Department of Plant and Soil Sciences and director of the Delaware Environmental Institute, “Tipping Point,” Huffington Post, May 13, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/donald-l- sparks/rio20_b_1593195.html?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=World) This group of biologists, ecologists, geologists, paleontologists and complex-system theoreticians from the United States, Canada, South America, and Europe have spent a year and half reviewing evidence that Earth may be approaching a state shift, a "tipping point" at which the global ecosystem may shift abruptly and irreversibly from one state to another. If this happens, the world as we know it may not be recoverable, and these scientists conclude that this outcome is looking more and more likely. An article by Paul Basken in last week's Chronicle of Higher Education explains the scientists' findings in layman's terms. According to Basken, the report centers on a measure of how much of the Earth's surface has been altered by people, "from forests and prairies to uses such as cornfields and parking lots." Human beings now number more than 7 billion, and we have transformed 43 percent of the land we live on from its natural state to something else. That figure is expected to top 50 percent by 2025, when the world's population reaches 8 billion. At that point, environmental damage such as species extinctions, climate change, and chemical contamination may have accumulated to such an extent as to be catastrophic. IOOS data is crucial – and its modeled internationally Culver and Scholz 08 (Mary Culver, program manager of Costal Management Services Division for the NOAA, Paul Scholz, division chief of Coastal Management Services for the NOAA, “INTEGRATED OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM STRATEGIC PLAN,” IOOC, June 2008, http://www.iooc.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Integrated-Ocean-Observing-System-Strategic-Plan.pdf) Over the past decades, billions of dollars have been invested in observing and predicting global and coastal ocean processes, as well as associated atmospheric processes, to produce the information required for planning, forecasts, warnings, watches, climate assessments, and regulatory policies. These observing and information systems reside in dozens of federal and state agencies, universities, and private industries and are tailored to the individual missions of those who fund them. By continuing on this course of developing isolated, individual systems instead of an integrated system, the nation over the next 20 years could unnecessarily spend billions of dollars on ocean observations because of the multiplied costs of development, operations, and maintenance. About two decades ago, officials and scientists realized that the nation had to integrate the assets of its many ocean and coastal observing systems and focus them on providing solutions to societal needs—solutions that address the missions of several agencies and organizations. Catastrophic weather events, coastal pollution, dead zones, harmful algal blooms, declines in living marine resources, climate change—all these underscore the importance of creating a more integrated approach to providing data and information needed to manage and mitigate the impacts of human activities, natural disasters, and climate change on goods and services provided by the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. While the nation has developed some of the most sophisticated and comprehensive Great Lakes, estuarine, and marine monitoring programs in the world, these individual programs are not as robust, effective, or comprehensive as they could be in protecting the societal and economic security of the nation, and therefore in providing the quality of life our citizens expect. In addition, operating separate, largely independent systems is inefficient both logistically and fiscally. The expectation for integrating ocean observations is that the data, information, products, and services from individual systems have numerous opportunities for synergistic value beyond their original purpose. For a modest investment, existing individual assets and monitoring programs can be connected in a comprehensive ocean- observing framework to realize the full potential of the combined assets, enabling a variety of users to discover, utilize, and exploit existing oceanographic data and information to generate value for our citizens and economy. An integrated system enables not only better decision-making for issues impacting the safety and well-being of citizens (e.g., disaster mitigation and warning, water resource management, and marine transportation), but also supports a value-added market similar to what has emerged from weather and climate services. This integrated system also builds capacity to enable participation without the need to invest a tremendous amount on infrastructure or resources. Put simply, the existing data provided by the observing systems operated by a range of federal, state, local, academic, and private entities could be much more useful and timely if it were linked, conveyed, and made available for analyses in an integrated, standardized way. This would allow for the development of improved products tailored to meet the current and future needs for ocean information that are being expressed by the user communities. Recent major advances in observation, modeling, and information technology now provide the means to help the nation accomplish such an objective. Benefits of the Integrated Ocean Observing System IOOS will provide data and information products needed to significantly improve the nation's ability to achieve these seven interrelated societal benefits: 1. Improve predictions of climate change and weather and their effects on coastal communities and the nation; 2. Improve the safety and efficiency of maritime operations; 3. Mitigate the effects of natural hazards more effectively; 4. Improve national and homeland security; 5. Reduce public health risks; 6. Protect and restore healthy coastal ecosystems more effectively; and 7. Enable the sustained use of ocean and coastal resources. These benefits will be accomplished by efficiently linking observations to modeling via data management and communications to provide services, products, and decision-support tools needed to achieve these goals. Some example "outcome/benefit vignettes" for IOOS are highlighted in Box 1. To maximize the societal benefits, IOOS must focus development efforts on ready assets and the greatest opportunities for valuable, synergistic uses. IOOS is a complex system of systems that is best implemented in stages. Phased implementation requires the prioritization of existing assets that monitor variables that are essential and common to more than one societal benefit. The highest priority assets measure these core variables, using both in situ and remote sensing platforms, to provide new or existing products that can be improved by integrating data from more than one program, institution, or agency. Four criteria were used to prioritize existing federally operated or federally supported observing subsystem assets for integration into the initial phase of IOOS: • Data streams produced by existing monitoring assets must be well-documented, sustainable, reliable, and quality-controlled. • Data integration must lead to products for more accurate and timely assessments of environmental conditions and predictions of changes in conditions that have major socioeconomic consequences. • Assessment and prediction products must inform decision- makers working in two or more of the seven societal goal areas. • Data integration resulting in new or improved products and services must be feasible within a short time frame (e.g., 2 years). Data gathering is key to resolve climate change Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf) National security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a matter of national security and may even be a denning security challenge of the 21st century. Nonetheless, some national security professionals have yet to full)' conceptualize how climate change could impact their areas of responsibility, or whether they need to analyze potential implications at all. What is more, they currently lack the "actionable- data necessary to generate requirements, plans, strategies, training and materiel to prepare for future challenges, 'though the scope and quality of available scientific information has improved in recent years, this information docs not always reach - or is not presented in a form that is useful to - the decision makers who need it. Closing this gap between national security policy makers who consume information and the scientists who produce it is essential for the nation to effectively deal with the national security implications of climate change. Today, a thin thread of climate information links producer and consumer communities, but different needs, priorities, processes and cultures separate them - in addition to a divisive political debate surrounding the validity of climate science. As new public policies, regulations and laws come into effect and the consequences of climate change become more obvious, the demand for information is likely to surge. Multiple barriers impede improved communication, the producer community tends to be stove- piped. Even though consumers often need interdisciplinary science and analysis. Consumers, who may also be stove-piped in various agencies or subject areas, may lack familiarity with or access to these separate communities, as well as the tools or time to navigate scientific information and disciplines. Indeed, the immediate needs of consumers do not align well with the longer timelines Involved in scientific inquiry, and consumer communities have not signaled the kinds of actionable data they require in order to make decisions. Broadly speaking, scientists do not commonly serve public policy goals, at least not directly. And the academic community does not necessarily value communication with non-scientific constituencies. To make matters worse, there is a clear shortage of "translators" who can interpret climate science into actionable information for policy makers. Finally, a two-way conversation about such information requires trusting relationships, which, for a variety of reasons, may not always exist between the scientific and national security policy communities. Scientists and national security professionals can bridge this gap. Consumers of information can signal the kinds of information they need by commissioning studies and collaborating or contracting with scientific organizations. Producers of climate information can rise to the occasion, accept that their work is critical to good governance and invest time and resources into better communication. For this approach to work, however, both producer and consumer institutions will need to change their incentive structures. In short, policy makers and scientists need to build new bridges in order to address climate change. Some degree of separation is healthy for the sake of setting policy priorities and maintaining scientific integrity. But regardless, decision makers at all levels of government have already moved from merely studying climate change to responding to it - both to mitigate the damage from greenhouse gases and to adapt to potentially unavoidable changes over the next 20-30 years. For the nation, and the national security community specifically, to deal with national and international challenges associated with climate change, these two communities will need to work more closely together. Warming causes a laundry list of impacts Elliot 09 (Dr. Lorraine Elliott, Senior Fellow in International Relations The Australian National University, “Climate change, threat multiplier and internal conflicts in Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia ,” RSIS, August 2009, http://www.rsis.edu.sg/nts/Events/climate_change/session4/concept%20paper-Lorraine%20Elliot%20Session%20IV.pdf) Food insecurity : Food insecurity refers to both a shortage of food and to vulnerability to high food prices which puts staples out of reach of the poorest. It is a product of land degradation and loss of soil fertility caused by deforestation, overuse of chemicals, inefficient irrigation and waterlogging as well as drought and desertification; diversion of food crops into biofuels; market failure manifest in rising food prices and an ineffective and unfair distribution of food; over- capitalisation of the global fishing industry and the over-exploitation of many of the world’s fish stocks; coastal and river pollution from development that destroys breeding grounds. Food insecurities can turn food exporting countries in the region into net food importers, increasing their vulnerability to global markets and their reliance on the security of trade routes, heightening poverty, and potentially intensifying domestic grievances and social disruptions. Up to an extra 130 million people are anticipated to be at risk of hunger in the Asia Pacific as a result of climate change. The State Meteorological Administration in China has calculated that global warming could cause that country’s grain harvest to fall by 5 to 10 percent, with a food shortfall of 100 million metric tons by 2030, a serious problem in a country which is already losing farmland to deserts and which has little capacity to increase arable land.31 The unpredictability of wet and dry seasons is already having an impact on agriculture in Southeast Asia, with harvests being disrupted, rural incomes dropping, and hunger and malnutrition increasing, especially among children. Water stress: Most parts of the Asia Pacific are also projected to experience increased water resource stress. ESCAP estimates that up to 650 million people in Asia and the Pacific do not have sustainable access to safe water supplies.32 Vulnerability to water stress and increased drought is anticipated to trigger distributional conflicts and ‘fuel existing conflicts over depleting resources, especially where access to those resources is politicised’33 and where there are limited or weak institutional frameworks for the ‘adaptation of water and crisis management systems’.34 International Alert identifies China as a country already affected by conflict over water rights.35 Other reports point to the Mekong River as one area where water shortages already create tension. 36 The UK Department of Defence anticipates that ‘large-scale farmers [will] … benefit at the expense of smaller [farmers], and there will be disruption of fisheries in river delta regions, particularly the Mekong, where there is also likely to be increased tension over water resources’.37 Climate migration and climate refugees The potential for large-scale migrations of people – both within countries and across borders – has been described as ‘perhaps the most worrisome problems associated with rising temperatures and sea levels … [which could] could easily trigger major security concerns and spike regional tension.’38 The Report of IPCC Working Group II suggests that as well as disruptions of human populations within states and across national borders in the region, sudden sharp spikes in rural to urban migration is likely in some countries, and the exacerbation of shortfalls in food production, rural poverty and urban unrest in others.39 The numbers of climate refugees should nevertheless be questioned. Preston et al suggest, for example, that ‘although it is likely that climate change will ultimately force the displacement of some populations within the Asia/Pacific region, considerable uncertainty persists regarding the number of individuals that will be displaced, whether those displacements will drive internal or external migration, the extent to which human adaptation can reduce displacement’.40 Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia were not among the regions singled out as being of most concern in terms of the geopolitical challenges of climate-induced migration by the CSIS report.41 On the other hand, IISS reports that ‘the Chinese military expects to have to … face refugee flows from Indonesia and the rest of Southeast Asia’.42 And the UK Department of Defence indicated, in its 2007 Strategic Trends analysis, that climate- related population displacement was a distinct possibility in the major East Asian archipelagos.43 Not too late. Every reduction key. Bornstein 07 (Seth Bornstein, Science Writer, The Associated Press & Adjunct Professor at New York University, “Global Warming Unstoppable, Report Says,” Washington Post, February 2, 2007, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2007/02/02/AR2007020201093.html) Global warming is so severe that it will "continue for centuries," leading to a far different planet in 100 years, warned a grim landmark report from the world's leading climate scientists and government officials. Yet, many of the experts are hopeful that nations will now take action to avoid the worst scenarios. They tried to warn of dire risks without scaring people so much they'd do nothing _ inaction that would lead to the worst possible scenarios. " It's not too late ," said Australian scientist Nathaniel Bindoff, a co-author of the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report issued Friday. The worst can be prevented by acting quickly to curb greenhouse gas emissions, he said. The worst could mean more than 1 million dead and hundreds of billions of dollars in costs by 2100, said Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, one of many study co-authors. He said that adapting will mean living with more extreme weather such as severe droughts, more hurricanes and wildfires. "It's later than we think," said panel co-chair Susan Solomon, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist who helped push through the document's strong language. Solomon, who remains optimistic about the future, said it's close to too late to alter the future for her children _ but maybe it's not too late for her grandchildren. The report was the first of four to be released this year by the panel, which was created by the United Nations in 1988. It found: _Global warming is "very likely" caused by man, meaning more than 90 percent certain. That's the strongest expression of certainty to date from the panel. _If nothing is done to change current emissions patterns of greenhouse gases, global temperature could increase as much as 11 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. _But if the world does get greenhouse gas emissions under control _ something scientists say they hope can be done _ the best estimate is about 3 degrees Fahrenheit. _Sea levels are projected to rise 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century. Add another 4 to 8 inches if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues. Sea level rise could get worse after that. By 2100, if nothing is done to curb emissions, the melting of Greenland's ice sheet would be inevitable and the world's seas would eventually rise by more than 20 feet, Bindoff said.

No adaptation – increased CO2 levels destroys the agriculture industry which independently causes extinction Roberts 13 (David Roberts, citing the World Bank Review’s compilation of climate studies, “If you aren’t alarmed about climate, you aren’t paying attention,” grist, January 10, 2013, http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-alarmism-the-idea-is-surreal/) We know we’ve raised global average temperatures around 0.8 degrees C so far. We know that 2 degrees C is where most scientists predict catastrophic and irreversible impacts. And we know that we are currently on a trajectory that will push temperatures up 4 degrees or more by the end of the century. What would 4 degrees look like? A recent World Bank review of the science reminds us. First, it’ll get hot: Projections for a 4°C world show a dramatic increase in the intensity and frequency of high-temperature extremes. Recent extreme heat waves such as in Russia in 2010 are likely to become the new normal summer in a 4°C world. Tropical South America, central Africa, and all tropical islands in the Pacific are likely to regularly experience heat waves of unprecedented magnitude and duration. In this new high-temperature climate regime, the coolest months are likely to be substantially warmer than the warmest months at the end of the 20th century. In regions such as the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and the Tibetan plateau, almost all summer months are likely to be warmer than the most extreme heat waves presently experienced. For example, the warmest July in the Mediterranean region could be 9°C warmer than today’s warmest July. Extreme heat waves in recent years have had severe impacts, causing heat-related deaths, forest fires, and harvest losses. The impacts of the extreme heat waves projected for a 4°C world have not been evaluated, but they could be expected to vastly exceed the consequences experienced to date and potentially exceed the adaptive capacities of many societies and natural systems. [my emphasis] Warming to 4 degrees would also lead to “an increase of about 150 percent in acidity of the ocean,” leading to levels of acidity “unparalleled in Earth’s history.” That’s bad news for, say, coral reefs: The combination of thermally induced bleaching events, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise threatens large fractions of coral reefs even at 1.5°C global warming. The regional extinction of entire coral reef ecosystems, which could occur well before 4°C is reached, would have profound consequences for their dependent species and for the people who depend on them for food, income, tourism, and shoreline protection. It will also “likely lead to a sea-level rise of 0.5 to 1 meter, and possibly more, by 2100, with several meters more to be realized in the coming centuries.” That rise won’t be spread evenly, even within regions and countries — regions close to the equator will see even higher seas. There are also indications that it would “significantly exacerbate existing water scarcity in many regions, particularly northern and eastern Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia, while additional countries in Africa would be newly confronted with water scarcity on a national scale due to population growth.” Also, more extreme weather events: Ecosystems will be affected by more frequent extreme weather events, such as forest loss due to droughts and wildfire exacerbated by land use and agricultural expansion. In Amazonia, forest fires could as much as double by 2050 with warming of approximately 1.5°C to 2°C above preindustrial levels. Changes would be expected to be even more severe in a 4°C world. Also loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services: In a 4°C world, climate change seems likely to become the dominant driver of ecosystem shifts, surpassing habitat destruction as the greatest threat to biodiversity. Recent research suggests that large-scale loss of biodiversity is likely to occur in a 4°C world, with climate change and high CO2 concentration driving a transition of the Earth’s ecosystems into a state unknown in human experience. Ecosystem damage would be expected to dramatically reduce the provision of ecosystem services on which society depends (for example, fisheries and protection of coastline afforded by coral reefs and mangroves.) New research also indicates a “rapidly rising risk of crop yield reductions as the world warms.” So food will be tough. All this will add up to “large-scale displacement of populations and have adverse consequences for human security and economic and trade systems.” Given the uncertainties and long-tail risks involved, “there is no certainty that adaptation to a 4°C world is possible.” There’s a small but non-trivial chance of advanced civilization breaking down entirely. Now ponder the fact that some scenarios show us going up to 6 degrees by the end of the century, a level of devastation we have not studied and barely know how to conceive. Ponder the fact that somewhere along the line, though we don’t know exactly where, enough self-reinforcing feedback loops will be running to make climate change unstoppable and irreversible for centuries to come. That would mean handing our grandchildren and their grandchildren not only a burned, chaotic, denuded world, but a world that is inexorably more inhospitable with every passing decade. YES WARMING Real-General Warming is real and anthropogenic – IPCC studies prove GGW 14 (Global Greenhouse Warming, “Anthropogenic Climate Change,” global greenhouse warming, 2014, http://www.global- greenhouse-warming.com/anthropogenic-climate-change.html) The IPCC, Fourth Report released in 2007 stated that, multiple lines of evidence confirms that the post-industrial rise in greenhouse gases does not stem from natural mechanisms. In other words this is anthropogenic climate change , and the significant increases in the atmosphere of these potent greenhouse gases are a result of human activity. The most potent of the greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N20). Alarmingly, these are a result of anthropogenic climate change, and the gases are at the highest levels for over 650,000 years. The IPCC Fourth Report confirms that over the past 8,000 years, and just before Industrialization in 1750 , carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere increased by a mere 20 parts per million (ppm). The concentration of atmospheric CO2 in 1750 was 280ppm, and increased to 379 ppm in 2005. That is a whopping increase of 100 ppm in 250 years. For comparison and at the end of the most recent ice age there was approximately an 80ppm rise in CO2 concentration. This rise took over 5,000 years, and higher values than at present have only occurred many millions of years ago. Since 1750, it is estimated that about two thirds of anthropogenic climate change CO2 emissions have come from fossil fuel burning (coal and petroleum) and about one third from land use change (mainly deforestation and agricultural). About 45% of this CO2 has remained in the atmosphere, while about 30% has been taken up by the oceans and the remainder has been taken up by the trees and plants. About half of a CO2 going into the atmosphere is removed over a time scale of 30 years; a further 30% is removed within a few centuries; and the remaining 20% will typically stay in the atmosphere for many thousands of years. In recent decades, carbon emissions have continued to increase. Global annual fossil emissions increased from an average of 6.4 GtC yr (one giga tonne of carbon per year) in the 1990s to 7.2 GtC yr in the period 2000 to 2005. Fossil fuel use is not the only human contribution to carbon dioxide levels, and at least another 1.6GtC should be added for emissions from land use. To gain some idea of figures we are talking about here, 1 GtC is equal to 1,000,000,000 metric tonnes, that is one billion tonnes. While you think about these numbers, it should be pointed out that when using the emission factors above, 1 GtC (carbon) corresponds to 3.67 GtCO2 (carbon dioxide). The box above shows why 1GtC = 3.67GCO2, and we will now work out how Many Gt of CO2 are emitted every year (and still rising). Firstly, we can add fossil fuel emissions 7.2 to land use, 1.6 to come up with a total of 8.8GtC annually. Secondly, we multiply 8.8 x 3.67 and so we have a total of 32.29GtCO2 being emitted to the atmosphere each year! In addition to escalating coal use after the Industrial Revolution, came the widespread use of another fossil fuel; petroleum for transport. At the beginning of the 20th century, annual global oil output was about 150 million barrels of oil, now, that amount is extracted globally in just two days. Anthropogenic There is an overwhelming consensus that warming is caused exclusively by humans Cook 13 (John Cook, Climate Communication Research Fellow at the Global Change Institute, University of Queensland, “We have consensus; The 97%climate consensus is robust; 4 atomic bombs since '98,” National Post, September 26, 2013, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/) Human fingerprints are being observed all over our climate. Satellites measure less heat escaping to space at the exact wavelengths that greenhouse gases trap energy. Surface measurements confirm more heat returning to the Earth's surface. The result of the increased greenhouse effect is that since 1998, our planet has been building up heat at a rate equivalent to four Hiroshima atomic bomb detonations every second. Other patterns of human activity have also been measured, ruling out other possible causes of recent global warming. The upper atmosphere is cooling while the lower atmosphere warms, a distinct fingerprint of greenhouse warming. This rules out the sun as the driver of global warming, as does the fact that winters are warming faster than summers. The internal consistency of evidence across disciplines amounts to a "consensus of evidence." The inevitable consequence of a consensus of evidence is a consensus of scientists, manifesting in a multitude of ways. Among actively publishing climate scientists, several studies have found 97% agreement that humans are causing global warming. National Academies of Science from 80 different countries endorse the consensus, as well as leading scientific organizations such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society. Earlier this year, I was part of a team that published research in the journal Environmental Research Letters, measuring the level of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming across 21 years of peer-reviewed climate papers. We identified over 4,000 papers stating a position on human-caused global warming in their abstract. Among those abstracts, 97.1% endorsed the consensus view. To independently confirm our results, we went to the foremost experts - the very scientists who authored the papers. We invited scientists to rate the level of endorsement of their own papers. Over 2,000 papers were rated by 1,200 scientists. The result obtained from the scientists was strikingly consistent with both our results and previous studies: 97.2% consensus. As different papers expressed endorsement of consensus in different ways, we adopted three precisely defined expressions of consensus. A paper either explicitly quantified how much humans had contributed to warming, explicitly endorsed human-caused global warming without quantification or implied the consensus without an explicit endorsement. No matter which definition was used, or if all three were included together, the same result was obtained: overwhelming consensus. For example, one definition of consensus specified that humans are causing more than half of global warming, with rejection of consensus specifying that humans are causing less than half. Looking at the scientists' ratings of their own papers with this definition, we found 96.2% consensus. For over two decades, opponents of climate action have sought to manufacture doubt about the scientific consensus. As far back as 1991, Western Fuels Association spent over half a million dollars on a campaign to "reposition global warming as theory (not fact)". The infamous "Luntz memo," leaked in 2002, revealed the strategy of reducing support for climate mitigation policies not by proposing alternative policies but by attacking scientific consensus. It came as no surprise when our research, finding an overwhelming and strengthening scientific consensus, came under intense attack. Most attacks involved misrepresentation of our research. For example, Andrew Montford argued in The Financial Post ("Meaningless consensus on climate change," Sept. 19) that apart from papers quantifying the human contribution towards global warming, only "a few" climate papers give a qualitative endorsement. In Montford's opinion, over 3,800 papers equals "a few," an extraordinary example of cognitive bias. Montford argues that a "vast majority" of papers claim no position on human- caused warming, ignoring the fact that according to the scientists who wrote the papers, the majority of climate papers accept human-caused global warming. In fact, Montford gives the consensus found by the scientists who authored the papers a wide berth. This is because independent confirmation from the actual authors of the climate papers falsifies all of his criticisms in one fell swoop. The consensus is robust. It's found in the abstracts of the papers. It's found in the full papers as rated by the papers' actual authors. It's found using a number of definitions of consensus. Why does the 97%consensus keep reappearing, in our results and in previous studies? The answer is simply that the proportion of climate scientists dissenting from the consensus is vanishingly small. Out of the 29,286 scientists we found publishing climate papers over the 21-year period, less than half a percent (0.4%) published papers rejecting the consensus. Whether you look at it front-on, sideways or upside-down, you'll find overwhelming agreement among climate scientists that humans are causing global warming. This consensus of scientists is the result of the overwhelming consensus of evidence. Warming is real and anthropogenic. Only government action solve Lieberman 12 (Bruce Lieberman, freelance writer covering science and environmental topics, “Scientific Consensus Stronger than Scientists Thought?” YALE Climate Connections, May 2, 2012, http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/05/scientific-concensus-stronger- than-scientists-though/) More than two decades after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began publishing the latest scientific consensus on the globe’s changing climate, widespread doubts persist in the U.S. over whether there really is widespread agreement among scientists. It’s the primary argument of those who deny basic scientific foundations of warming. But new and innovative survey results suggest the consensus among scientists might actually be stronger than the scientists themselves had thought. The battles to define and debunk scientific consensus over climate change science have been fought for years. In 2004, University of California San Diego science historian Naomi Oreskes wrote about a broad consensus she found after studying 928 scientific papers published between 1993 and 2003. Meanwhile, the blow-up over climate researchers’ hacked e-mails in 2009 fueled speculation among skeptics that “consensus” actually is the closely guarded creation of a small cabal of scientists determined to silence opposing views, accusations now widely dismissed as unsubstantiated. That perspective has been largely debunked, but the beat goes on. On the heels of a January 26 skeptics letter (“No Need to Panic About Global Warming“) in The Wall Street Journal, there have been several follow-up commentaries. They include a vigorous rebuttal on March 22 in the New York Review of Books by Yale University economist William D. Nordhaus; a follow-up response in the April 26 edition of same journal by climate change skeptics Roger W. Cohen, William Happer and Richard Lindzen; and a second response by Nordhaus. Now, from Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment, comes a fresh study on the question of scientific consensus. Its findings offer something new: scientists appear actually to underestimate the extent to which they, as a group, agree on key questions related to climate change science. In sum, the newly released poll results identified surprisingly common points of agreement among climate scientists; and yet for each point, those scientists underestimated the amount of agreement among their colleagues. The results: Human activity has been the primary cause of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures in the last 250 years. (About 90 percent of respondents agreed with this characterization, but those respondents estimated that less than 80 percent of their scientist colleagues held that view.) If governmental policies do not change, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will exceed 550 parts per million between 2050 and 2059. (More than 30 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 20 percent of their peers held that view.) If and when atmospheric CO2 concentrations reach 550 ppm, the increase in global average surface temperature relative to the year 2000 will be 2-3 degrees Celsius, or 3.2-4.8 F. (More than 40 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that less than 30 percent held that view.) If governmental policies do not change, in the year 2050, the increase in global average surface temperature relative to the year 2000 will be 1.5-2 degrees Celsius, or 2.4-3.2 F). (More than 35 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 30 percent held that view.) The likelihood that global average sea level will rise more during this century than the highest level given in the 2007 assessment of the IPCC (0.59 meters, 23.2 inches) is more than 90 percent. (More than 30 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that less than 20 percent held that view.) Since 1851, the U.S. has experienced an average of six major hurricane landfalls (> 111 mph) per decade. The total number of major hurricane landfalls in the U.S. from 2011-2020 will be seven to eight. (Nearly 60 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 30 percent held that view.) The total number of major hurricane landfalls in the U.S. from 2041 to 2050 will be seven to eight. (About 35 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that less than 30 percent held that view.) Given increasing levels of human activity, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere can be kept below 550 ppm with current technology — but only with changes in government policy. (Nearly 70 percent agreed, but those respondents estimated that just over 50 percent held that view.) Consensus IPCC concludes warming is existent Appleyard 13 (David Appleyard, senior editor for the Renewable Energy World, “IPCC Concludes Anthropogenic Warming is Real,” Real Energy World, September 27, 2013, http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/09/ipcc-concludes-anthropogenic- warming-is-real) A new report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that human impact on the climate system is clear and evident in most regions of the globe. It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century, the analysis states, adding that the evidence for this warming is unequivocal. “Observations of changes in the climate system are based on multiple lines of independent evidence. Our assessment of the science finds that the atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amount of snow and ice has diminished, the global mean sea level has risen and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased,” said Qin Dahe, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group I, which developed the report titled Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis. Thomas Stocker, the other Co-Chair, added: "Continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all components of the climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions." Stocker concluded: “As a result of our past, present and expected future emissions of CO2, we are committed to climate change, and effects will persist for many centuries even if emissions of CO2 stop.” IPCC proves warming is on the rise Muller 11 (Richard A. Muller, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of California Berkley, “The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism,” The Wall Street Journal, October 21, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket&mg=reno64- wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052970204422404576594872796327348.html%3Fmod %3DWSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket) Using data from all these poor stations, the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates an average global 0. 64ºC temperature rise in the past 50 years, "most" of which the IPCC says is due to human s. Yet the margin of error for the stations is at least three times larger than the estimated warming. We know that cities show anomalous warming, caused by energy use and building materials; asphalt, for instance, absorbs more sunlight than do trees. Tokyo's temperature rose about 2ºC in the last 50 years. Could that rise, and increases in other urban areas, have been unreasonably included in the global estimates? That warming may be real, but it has nothing to do with the greenhouse effect and can't be addressed by carbon dioxide reduction. Moreover, the three major temperature analysis groups (the U.S.'s NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.K.'s Met Office and Climatic Research Unit) analyze only a small fraction of the available data, primarily from stations that have long records. There's a logic to that practice, but it could lead to selection bias. For instance, older stations were often built outside of cities but today are surrounded by buildings. These groups today use data from about 2,000 stations, down from roughly 6,000 in 1970, raising even more questions about their selections. On top of that, stations have moved, instruments have changed and local environments have evolved. Analysis groups try to compensate for all this by homogenizing the data, though there are plenty of arguments to be had over how best to homogenize long-running data taken from around the world in varying conditions. These adjustments often result in corrections of several tenths of one degree Celsius, significant fractions of the warming attributed to humans. IPCC records indicate that warming is real and anthropogenic IPCC 07 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Observed changes in climate and their effects,” IPCC, 2007, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms1.html) Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level (Figure SPM.1). {1.1} Eleven of the last twelve years (1995-2006) rank among the twelve warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850). The 100-year linear trend (1906-2005) of 0.74 [0.56 to 0.92]°C[1] is larger than the corresponding trend of 0.6 [0.4 to 0.8]°C (1901-2000) given in the Third Assessment Report (TAR) (Figure SPM.1). The temperature increase is widespread over the globe and is greater at higher northern latitudes. Land regions have warmed faster than the oceans (Figures SPM.2, SPM.4). {1.1, 1.2} Rising sea level is consistent with warming (Figure SPM.1). Global average sea level has risen since 1961 at an average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm/yr and since 1993 at 3.1 [2.4 to 3.8] mm/yr, with contributions from thermal expansion, melting glaciers and ice caps, and the polar ice sheets. Whether the faster rate for 1993 to 2003 reflects decadal variation or an increase in the longer-term trend is unclear. {1.1} Observed decreases in snow and ice extent are also consistent with warming (Figure SPM.1). Satellite data since 1978 show that annual average Arctic sea ice extent has shrunk by 2.7 [2.1 to 3.3]% per decade, with larger decreases in summer of 7.4 [5.0 to 9.8]% per decade. Mountain glaciers and snow cover on average have declined in both hemispheres. {1.1} From 1900 to 2005, precipitation increased significantly in eastern parts of North and South America, northern Europe and northern and central Asia but declined in the Sahel, the Mediterranean, southern Africa and parts of southern Asia. Globally, the area affected by drought has likely[2] increased since the 1970s. {1.1} It is very likely that over the past 50 years: cold days, cold nights and frosts have become less frequent over most land areas, and hot days and hot nights have become more frequent. It is likely that: heat waves have become more frequent over most land areas, the frequency of heavy precipitation events has increased over most areas, and since 1975 the incidence of extreme high sea level[3] has increased worldwide. {1.1} There is observational evidence of an increase in intense tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic since about 1970, with limited evidence of increases elsewhere. There is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones. It is difficult to ascertain longer-term trends in cyclone activity, particularly prior to 1970. {1.1} Average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely the highest in at least the past 1300 years. {1.1} Observational evidence[4] from all continents and most oceans shows that many natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases. {1.2} Changes in snow, ice and frozen ground have with high confidence increased the number and size of glacial lakes, increased ground instability in mountain and other permafrost regions and led to changes in some Arctic and Antarctic ecosystems. {1.2} There is high confidence that some hydrological systems have also been affected through increased runoff and earlier spring peak discharge in many glacier- and snow-fed rivers and through effects on thermal structure and water quality of warming rivers and lakes. {1.2} In terrestrial ecosystems, earlier timing of spring events and poleward and upward shifts in plant and animal ranges are with very high confidence linked to recent warming. In some marine and freshwater systems, shifts in ranges and changes in algal, plankton and fish abundance are with high confidence associated with rising water temperatures, as well as related changes in ice cover, salinity, oxygen levels and circulation. {1.2} Of the more than 29,000 observational data series, from 75 studies, that show significant change in many physical and biological systems, more than 89% are consistent with the direction of change expected as a response to warming (Figure SPM.2). However, there is a notable lack of geographic balance in data and literature on observed changes, with marked scarcity in developing countries. {1.2, 1.3} There is medium confidence that other effects of regional climate change on natural and human environments are emerging, although many are difficult to discern due to adaptation and non-climatic drivers. {1.2} They include effects of temperature increases on: {1.2} agricultural and forestry management at Northern Hemisphere higher latitudes, such as earlier spring planting of crops, and alterations in disturbance regimes of forests due to fires and pests some aspects of human health, such as heat-related mortality in Europe, changes in infectious disease vectors in some areas, and allergenic pollen in Northern Hemisphere high and mid-latitudes some human activities in the Arctic (e.g. hunting and travel over snow and ice) and in lower-elevation alpine areas (such as mountain sports). Data proves Science records prove warming is real Levy 12 (Dawn Levy, writer for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, “Carbon Dioxide Caused Global Warming at Ice Age’s End, Pioneering Simulation Shows,” Oak Ridge National Library, April 4, 2012, https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/2012/04/04/carbon-dioxide-caused-global-warming- at-ice-ages-end-pioneering-simulation-shows/) Climate science has an equivalent to the “what came first—the chicken or the egg?” question: What came first, greenhouse gases or global warming? A multi-institutional team led by researchers at Harvard, Oregon State University, and the University of Wisconsin used a global dataset of paleoclimate records and the Jaguar supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to find the answer (spoiler alert: carbon dioxide drives warming). The results, published in the April 5 issue of Nature, analyze 15,000 years of climate history. Scientists hope amassing knowledge of the causes of natural global climate change will aid understanding of human-caused climate change. “We constructed the first-ever record of global temperature spanning the end of the last ice age based on 80 proxy temperature records from around the world,” said Jeremy Shakun, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate and Global Change postdoctoral fellow at Harvard and Columbia Universities and first author of the paper. “It’s no small task to get at global mean temperature. Even for studies of the present day you need lots of locations, quality-controlled data, careful statistics. For the past 21,000 years, it’s even harder. But because the data set is large enough, these proxy data provide a reasonable estimate of global mean temperature.” Proxy records from around the world—derived from ice cores and ocean and lake sediments—provide estimates of local surface temperature throughout history, and carbon-14 dating indicates when those temperatures occurred. For example, water molecules harboring the oxygen-18 isotope rain out faster than those containing oxygen-16 as an air mass cools, so the ratio of these isotopes in glacial ice layers tells scientists how cold it was when the snow fell. Likewise, the amount of magnesium incorporated into the shells of marine plankton depends on the temperature of the water they live in, and these shells get preserved on the seafloor when they die. The authors combined these local temperature records to produce a reconstruction of global mean temperature. Additionally, samples of ancient atmosphere are trapped as air bubbles in glaciers, providing a direct measure of carbon dioxide levels through time that could be compared to the global temperature record. Being the first to reconstruct global mean temperatures throughout this time interval allowed the researchers to show what many suspected but none could yet prove: “This is the first paper to definitively show the role carbon dioxide played in helping to end the last ice age,” said Shakun, who co-wrote the paper with Peter Clark of Oregon State University. “We found that global temperature mirrored and generally lagged behind rising carbon dioxide during the last deglaciation, which points to carbon dioxide as the major driver of global warming.” Prior results based on Antarctic ice cores had indicated that local temperatures in Antarctica started warming before carbon dioxide began rising, which implied that carbon dioxide was a feedback to some other leading driver of warming. The delay of global temperature behind carbon dioxide found in this study, however, shows that the ice-core perspective does not apply to the globe as a whole and instead suggests that carbon dioxide was the primary driver of worldwide warming. While the geologic record showed a remarkable correlation between carbon dioxide and global temperature, the researchers also turned to state-of-the-art model simulations to further pin down the direction of causation suggested by the temperature lag. Jaguar recently ran approximately 14 million processor hours to simulate the most recent 21,000 years of Earth’s climate. Feng He of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, a postdoctoral researcher, plugged the main forcings driving global climate over this time interval into an (IPCC)–class model called the Community Climate System Model version 3, a global climate model that couples interactions between atmosphere, oceans, lands, and sea ice. The climate science community developed the model with support from the (NSF), (DOE), and and used many codes developed by university researchers. “Our model results are the first IPCC-class Coupled General Circulation Model (CGCM) simulation of such a long duration (15,000 years),” said He, who conducted the modeling with Zhengyu Liu of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Bette Otto-Bliesner of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “This is of particular significance to the climate community because it shows, for the first time, that at least one of the CGCMs used to predict future climate is capable of reproducing both the timing and amplitude of climate evolution seen in the past under realistic climate forcing.” Artic Proves Arctic melting shows a clear sign of increasing surface temperature Morello 11 (Lauren Morello, senior science writer for Climate Central, “Polar Ice Sheets Melting Faster Than Predicted,” Scientific American, March 9, 2011, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/polar-ice-sheets-melting-faster-than-predicted/) Ice loss from the massive ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating, according to a new study. If the trend continues, ice sheets could become the dominant contributor to sea level rise sooner than scientists had predicted, concludes the research, which will be published this month in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. "The traditional view of the loss of land ice on Earth has been that mountain glaciers and ice caps are the dominant contributors, and ice sheets are following behind," said study co-author Eric Rignot, a glaciologist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the University of California, Irvine. "In this study, we are showing that ice sheets, mountain glaciers and ice caps are neck-and-neck." But that could soon change, Rignot said, because the rate at which ice sheets are losing mass is increasing three times faster than the rate of ice loss from mountain glaciers and ice caps. "I don't think we expected ice sheets to run neck-and-neck with mountain glaciers, which basically sit in a warmer climate, this soon," he said. "At the same time, the mass loss on the ice sheet is not very large compared to how much mass they store." Rignot was part of a research team that also included scientists from Utrecht University in the Netherlands and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. The researchers based their analysis on a comparison of two different methods to measure ice loss. Sea level rise estimates likely to increase One source was NASA's twin GRACE satellites, which orbit the Earth about 200 kilometers apart from each other. Small changes in the planet's gravity field can push the satellites together, ever so slightly, or pull them apart -- variations that scientists use to interpret the terrain below. The second method combined different satellite data that measure the speed at which the ice sheets flow to the ocean, airborne measurements of the ice sheets' thickness and a regional climate model. Combining the speed and thickness measurements allowed the scientists to determine how much ice was flowing into the ocean, while the climate model allowed them to estimate how much snow was falling on the ice sheet. Subtracting one from the other produced a "mass-balance" picture of net ice loss or growth for each ice sheet. The two data sets overlapped for an eight-year period, from 2002 to 2010, and showed similar results. Based on that close agreement between the two measurement methods, the scientists had confidence that the full 18-year record produced by the mass-balance method was generally accurate. Rignot said the results are "probably going to provide more incentive for the next [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report] to revise sea level prediction a little bit upwards." He cautioned that it's hard to extrapolate his new results to the end of the century, because "18 years of data is not too much." In its last major report, released in 2007, the IPCC predicted seas would rise between 7 and 23 inches by 2100 -- but couched that estimate with a giant caveat. The IPCC cautioned that an additional rise could come from rapid and unpredictable melting in Greenland and Antarctica, which it didn't attempt to estimate. Since that report was released, scientists have worked hard to improve their understanding of ice sheet behavior and improve estimates of future sea level rise. Many researchers now believe the sea could rise an average of 3 to 6 feet by the end of the century, with the more likely amount at the low end of that range. Warming Fast

Warming is increasing at an exponential rate – it’s try or die Kiehl 11 (Jeffery Kiehl, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research where he heads the Climate Change Research Section, “EARTH’S HOT PAST COULD BE PROLOGUE TO FUTURE CLIMATE,” UCAR, January 13, 2011, https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/3628/earth-s-hot-past-could-be-prologue-future-climate) The magnitude of climate change during Earth’s deep past suggests that future temperatures may eventually rise far more than projected if society continues its pace of emitting greenhouse gases, a new analysis concludes. The study, by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jeffrey Kiehl, will appear as a “Perspectives” piece in this week’s issue of the journal Science. Building on recent research, the study examines the relationship between global temperatures and high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere tens of millions of years ago. It warns that, if carbon dioxide emissions continue at their current rate through the end of this century, atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gas will reach levels that last existed about 30 million to 100 million years ago, when global temperatures averaged about 29 degrees Fahrenheit (16 degrees Celsius) above pre-industrial levels. Kiehl said that global temperatures may gradually rise over the next several centuries or millennia in response to the carbon dioxide. Elevated levels of the greenhouse gas may remain in the atmosphere for tens of thousands of years, according to recent computer model studies of geochemical processes that the study cites. The study also indicates that the planet’s climate system, over long periods of times, may be at least twice as sensitive to carbon dioxide than currently projected by computer models, which have generally focused on shorter-term warming trends. This is largely because even sophisticated computer models have not yet been able to incorporate critical processes, such as the loss of ice sheets, that take place over centuries or millennia and amplify the initial warming effects of carbon dioxide. “If we don’t start seriously working toward a reduction of carbon emissions, we are putting our planet on a trajectory that the human species has never experienced,” says Kiehl, a climate scientist who specializes in studying global climate in Earth’s geologic past. “We will have committed human civilization to living in a different world for multiple generations.” The Perspectives article pulls together several recent studies that look at various aspects of the climate system, while adding a mathematical approach by Kiehl to estimate average global temperatures in the distant past. Its analysis of the climate system’s response to elevated levels of carbon dioxide is supported by previous studies that Kiehl cites. The work was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor. Tipping Point/Reversible We are at the tipping point, but it is not too late PE 14 (Planet Extinction, blog from scientist about preventing global warming, “Tipping Points - the Facts,” Planet Extinction, 2014, http://www.planetextinction.com/planet_extinction_tipping_points.htm) When the temperature gets high enough to cause forests to give up their CO2 rather than sequest it, then every tonne of gas given up to the air increases the temperature and causes even more gas to be given up. This is a tipping point - an irreversible moment when the dreaded feedback loop begins. This is now the central issue for the scientific community: have humans already have gone too far, and may we now be helpless to stop abrupt and runaway global warming. These ten major tipping points are are right at this moment being triggered. Melting glaciers will raise sea levels so that less heat is reflected out to space Decline of the flow of fresh water from the Arctic will collapse the Gulf Stream Forests will no longer absorb carbon, but become a source. Methane clathrates held in the mud under the sea begin to burp Melting permafrost releases vast quantities of methane Drought kills the Amazon forest and its carbon sink is released The benefits of being shielded by global dimming ceases Bush fires increase the carbon load and reduce the storage capacity of forests As oceans warm the seas absorb less carbon All the above plus disastrous weather and coral bleaching and acidification of the oceans disrupt food production Triggering any one of these ten carbon sinks would cause runaway greenhouse warming. The triggering of any one of them would start off the others. The earth has over eons stored greenhouse gasses in forests, the soil and in the oceans. Recent scientific research has shown that small rises in temperature can trigger these sinks into becoming sources, and thus tip the scales against our survival. Only now, in the past five years, has the scientific community begun to pat serious attention to them. We do not know if they will be triggered today or in decades, It seems there is a ten percent possibility that feedback loops from glacial-meltdown, permafrost methane burping and/or rainforest collapse will commence within the next few years. Only intense and immediate action beyond anything the world has ever done can stop this. If all the good intentions from the Kyoto and Montreal meetings were to be executed in full and immediately, they would not alter the outcome. Like Munich, these agreements were set by politicians playing for time. This is discussed in Footprints #2. The graph shows the range of temperatures possible by the end of the century from computer modeling. The latest IPCC meeting added 50% to these figures. Taken together, concentrations of CO2 and methane have passed the threshold of 400ppm set as the upper limit of safety by the International Conference on Climate Change. This is of the most enormous significance. It means we have actually entered the era of dangerous climate change. We have already reached the point where our children can no longer count on a safe environment. The Earth is about to be trapped in a vicious cycle of positive feedback, which is why the issue is so serious and urgent. Any extra heat from any source (especially human activity) is amplified, and as it is added this sets off other processes so that heating is accelerating. It is the self-regulating mechanism of Gaia itself that, perversely, will make it hard to master global warming - because the system contains feedback mechanisms that in the past have acted in concert to keep the Earth much cooler than it otherwise would be. Now, however, they could easily combine to amplify the warming being caused by our activities. It is NOT too late to minimise the risks - read what YOU can do Personally and Politically Tragically, there are no large negative feedbacks that would reverse the heating process – save the weathering of rocks and occasional fierce tropical storms. Neither can compete. Global warming can be stopped – 10 warrants NUFM no date (Northwestern University Faculty Management, “10 Ways to Stop Global Warming,” http://www.northwestern.edu/fm/sustainability/environmental-education/10-ways-to-stop-global-warming.html) Want to help stop global warming? Here are 10 simple things you can do and how much carbon dioxide you'll save doing them. Change a light Replacing one regular light bulb with a compact flourescent light buld will save 150 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. Drive less Walk, bike, carpool or take mass transit more often. You'll save one pound of carbon dioxide for every mile you don't drive! Recycle more You can save 2,400 pounds of carbon dioxide per year by recycling just half of your household waste. Check your tires Keeping your tires inflated properly can improve your gas mileage by more than 3 percent. Every gallon of gasoline saved keeps 20 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Use less hot water It takes a lot of energy to heat water. Use less hot water by taking shorter and cooler showers and washing your clothes in cold or warm instead of hot water (more than 500 pounds of CO2 saved per year). Avoid products with a lot of packaging You can save 1,200 pounds of carbon dioxide if you reduce your garbage by 10 percent. Adjust your thermostat Moving your thermostat down just 2 degrees in winter and up 2 degrees in summer could save about 2,000 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. Plant a tree A single tree will absorb one ton of carbon dioxide over its lifetime. Turn off electronic devices Simply turning off your television, DVD player, stereo and computer when you're not using them will save you thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide a year. AT: Adaptation No Adapt Cannot adapt to an increase in warming Reilly 14 (John Reilly, co-director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, “Why We Can’t Just Adapt to Climate Change,” MIT Technology Review, April 3, 2014, http://www.technologyreview.com/view/526116/why-we-cant-just-adapt-to-climate- change/) The report does conclude with high confidence risks to low-lying coastal areas: emergencies during extreme weather, mortality from heat, food insecurity, loss of livelihood in rural areas due to water shortage and temperature increases, loss of coastal ecosystems and livelihoods that depend on them, and loss of freshwater ecosystems. But again, this high confidence comes with an absence of quantification of how many/much and the degree of risk. Will extreme weather double, triple, or quadruple the number of extreme emergency weather- related events of a given magnitude (dollars or lives lost)? Will it increase these incidences by 10 percent, or will some areas face increased risk while other areas face reduced risk? In the end, the report is a compendium of things that might happen or are likely to happen to someone or something, somewhere. But what does this actually mean for me, or anyone who might read the report? I would avoid beachfront property. If my livelihood depended on a coastal resource, I would try to find a different job, or at least urge my children to pursue another line of work. That is where a measure of wealth brings some resilience—I have those options, others do not. The report “quantifies” in some sense by establishing an element of “relative risk,” concluding that the poor and marginalized in society are more vulnerable because they do not have the means to adapt. Beyond this, it is not clear that climate prediction is at a high enough level to offer information that I can use to take concrete actions for most day-to-day decisions and investments. What the report does provide is some documentation of adaptation in action—what different regions, cities, sectors, and groups are doing to adapt—concluding that there is a growing body of experience from which to learn. However, perhaps the greatest truth in the report is in the following statement: “Adaptation is place and context specific, with no single approach for reducing risks appropriate across all settings (high confidence). Effective risk reduction and adaptation strategies consider the dynamics of vulnerability and exposure and their linkages with socioeconomic processes, sustainable development, and climate change.” Hence, while it’s possible to learn from others’ adaptation experiences, in the end, the specifics of climate change in my place, given my circumstances, and the socio-economic environment in which I live will present me with very different climate outcomes and opportunities to adapt than you will have where you live. This fact alone raises the cost of adaptation, because to some degree each recipe needs to be invented anew. What worked in the past likely won’t work in the future—or at least, not as well. And we need to process a lot of highly uncertain climate projections in developing the new recipe.

Accelerated warming ensures no adaptation UNEP 06 (United National Environment Program, ‘Why Can't Ecosystems Just Adapt?,” U.S. Global Change Research Information Office, May 24, 2006, http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search? q=cache:JkHanlYQI94J:www.gcrio.org/ipcc/qa/11.html+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) Climate change has the potential to alter many of the Earth's natural ecosystems over the next century. Yet, climate change is not a new influence on the biosphere, so why can't ecosystems just adapt without significant effects on their form or productivity? There are three basic reasons. First, the rate of global climate change is projected to be more rapid than any to have occurred in the last 10,000 years. Second, humans have altered the structure of many of the world's ecosystems. They have cut down forests, plowed soils, used rangelands to graze their domesticated animals, introduced non-native species to many regions, intensively fished lakes, rivers and oceans, and constructed dams. These relatively recent changes in the structure of the world's ecosystems have made them less resilient to further changes. Third, pollution, as well as other indirect effects of the utilization of natural resources, has also increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Consequently, it is likely that many ecosystems will not be able to adapt to the additional stress of climate change without losing some of the species they contain or the services they provide, such as supplying sufficient clean water to drink, food to eat, suitable soils in which to grow crops, and wood to use as fuel or in construction. For millions of years, species have been shifting where they grow and reproduce in response to changing climate conditions. Over the next century, global warming could result in approximately one-third of the Earth's forested area undergoing major transitions in species composition. From the fossil record we have an indication of the maximum rate at which various plant species have migrated to more suitable areas; from 0.04 km/yr (about 0.03 miles/yr) for the slowest to 2 km/yr (about 1.3 miles/yr) for the fastest. However, the projected rate of surface temperature change in many parts of the world could require plant species to migrate at faster rates (1.5 to 5.5 km/yr or about 1 to 3.5 miles/yr). Thus, many species may not be able to move rapidly enough to prosper. These changes in vegetation and ecosystem structure may in turn give rise to additional releases of carbon into the atmosphere, further accelerating climate change. Moreover, as the old vegetation dies in areas most affected by climate change, such as forests in northern latitudes, it is likely to be replaced by fast growing, often non-native species. These species commonly yield less timber, provide lower quality forage for domesticated animals, supply less food for wild animals, and furnish poorer habitat for many native animals. The prevalence of pest species, such as weeds, rats, and cockroaches, may also increase. Humans actively and productively use and manipulate large portions of the land surface of the Earth, whether it be for agriculture, housing, energy, or forestry. These practices have created a mosaic of different land uses and ecosystem types, resulting in fewer remaining large and contiguous areas of a single type of habitat than existed in the past. Therefore it will often be difficult for plants and animals to move to a location with a more suitable climate even if a species was able to migrate quickly enough. This was not the case thousands of years ago, when ecosystems last experienced rapid climate change. Now, many of the world's ecosystems are essentially trapped on small islands, cut off from one another, only capable of travel over a limited and shrinking number of bridges. As this increasingly occurs, more species are likely to be stranded in an environment in which they cannot survive and/or reproduce. Further complicating the response of many of the Earth's terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to climate change is the prevalence of stress from other disturbances associated with resource use. In the case of trees, for example, many species are already weakened by air pollution. Increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will raise the photosynthetic capacity of many plants, but the net effect on ecosystem productivity is unclear, particularly when combined with higher air temperatures or where soil nutrients are limiting. Among the ecosystems that are most likely to experience the most severe effects from climate change are those that are at higher latitudes, such as far northern (Boreal) forests or tundra, as well as those where different habitat types converge, such as where grasslands meet forests, or forests give way to alpine vegetation. Coastal ecosystems are also at risk, particularly saltwater marshes, mangrove forests, coastal wetlands, coral reefs, and river deltas. Many of these ecosystems, already under stress from human activities, may be significantly altered or diminished in terms of their extent and productivity as a result of future climate change. AT: Turns AT: Ice Age There won’t be any ice age for 15,000 years. New ice data demonstrates current stability. New Scientist Online 04 (News Scientist Online, “Record ice core gives fair forecast,” News Scientist, June 4, 2004, http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn5094) As long as humans do not mess it up, the Earth's climate is set at fair for the next 15,000 years. That is according to information extracted from the oldest ice core ever drilled. The Antarctic core is the first to reach as far back as a warm period with characteristics similar to our own interglacial. So it should help make more accurate predictions about when to expect the next deep freeze. The ice core, drilled from a feature in central Antarctica called Dome C, is around 3 kilometres long and 10 centimetres wide. Changes in the relative proportions of hydrogen isotopes in the ice layers allow scientists to compile a complete record of Antarctic temperatures going back 740,000 years. The core shows the waxing and waning of eight ice ages. Most critically for making predictions about our climate, it is the first core to record a period known as Termination V, around 430,000 years ago.

Next Ice Age is 50,000 years away Brock 11 (Chris Brock, Staff writer for Watertown Daily Times, “Taking long, long view on climate change,” Watertown Daily Times, March 19, 2011, http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20110319/CURR04/303199998/?loc=interstitialskip) Mr. Stager writes that most climate models predict another ice age at the year 50,000. Humans, he said, have stopped that "in its tracks" because of carbon dioxide emissions. The next ice age will arrive around the year 130,000. But not if "we burn through all our remaining coal reserves during the next century or so," Mr. Stager writes. If we do that, he said, the next ice age won't hit for the next half million years.

There is no chance of an ice age anytime soon Skeptical Science 14 (Skeptical Science, “Are we heading into a new Ice Age?,” Skeptical Science, 2014, http://www.skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age.htm) According to ice cores from Antarctica, the past 400,000 years have been dominated by glacials, also known as ice ages, that last about 100,000. These glacials have been punctuated by interglacials, short warm periods which typically last 11,500 years. Figure 1 below shows how temperatures in Antarctica changed over this period. Because our current interglacial (the Holocene) has already lasted approximately 12,000 years, it has led some to claim that a new ice age is imminent. Is this a valid claim? To answer this question, it is necessary to understand what has caused the shifts between ice ages and interglacials during this period. The cycle appears to be a response to changes in the Earth’s orbit and tilt, which affect the amount of summer sunlight reaching the northern hemisphere. When this amount declines, the rate of summer melt declines and the ice sheets begin to grow. In turn, this increases the amount of sunlight reflected back into space, increasing (or amplifying) the cooling trend. Eventually a new ice age emerges and lasts for about 100,000 years. So what are today’s conditions like? Changes in both the orbit and tilt of the Earth do indeed indicate that the Earth should be cooling. However, two reasons explain why an ice age is unlikely: These two factors, orbit and tilt, are weak and are not acting within the same timescale – they are out of phase by about 10,000 years. This means that their combined effect would probably be too weak to trigger an ice age. You have to go back 430,000 years to find an interglacial with similar conditions, and this interglacial lasted about 30,000 years. The warming effect from CO2 and other greenhouse gases is greater than the cooling effect expected from natural factors. Without human interference, the Earth’s orbit and tilt, a slight decline in solar output since the 1950s and volcanic activity would have led to global cooling. Yet global temperatures are definitely on the rise. It can therefore be concluded that with CO2 concentrations set to continue to rise, a return to ice age conditions seems very unlikely. Instead, temperatures are increasing and this increase may come at a considerable cost with few or no benefits. AT: CO2 Good C02 stops photosynthesis Brown 08 (Lester Brown, Director and Founder of the global institute of Environment in the U.S., “Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization,” 2008, http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB3/PB3ch3_ss3.htm) Higher temperatures can reduce or even halt photosynthesis, prevent pollination, and lead to crop dehydration. Although the elevated concentrations of atmospheric C02 that raise temperature can also raise crop yields, the detrimental effect of higher temperatures on yields overrides the C02 fertilization effect for the major crops. In a study of local ecosystem sustainability, Mohan Wali and his colleagues at Ohio State University noted that as temperature rises, photosynthetic activity in plants increases until the temperature reaches 20 degrees Celsius (68 degrees Fahrenheit). The rate of photosynthesis then plateaus until the temperature hits 35 degrees Celsius (95 degrees Fahrenheit), whereupon it begins to decline, until at 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit), photosynthesis ceases entirely '? The most vulnerable part of a plant's life cycle is the pollination period. Of the world's three food staples-rice, wheat, and corn-corn is particularly vulnerable. In order for corn to reproduce, pollen must fall from the tassel to the strands of silk that emerge from the end of each ear of corn. Each of these silk strands is attached to a kernel site on the cob. If the kernel is to develop, a grain of pollen must fall on the silk strand and then journey to the kernel site. When temperatures are uncommonly high, the silk strands quickly dry out and turn brown, unable to play their role in the fertilization process. The effects of temperature on rice pollination have been studied in detail in the Philippines. Scientists there report that the pollination of rice falls from 100 percent at 34 degrees Celsius to near zero at 40 degrees Celsius, leading to crop failure.IR ''

Costs of C02 outweigh the benefits – we have comparative evidence EDF 09 (Environmental Defense Fund, a US-based nonprofit environmental advocacy group, “Global Warming Myths and Facts,” 2009, http://mrgreenbiz.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/global-warming-myths-and-facts-2/) Although water vapor traps more heat than CO2, because of the relationships among CO2, water vapor and climate, to fight global warming nations must focus on controlling CO2. Atmospheric levels of CO2 are determined by how much coal, natural gas and oil we burn and how many trees we cut down, as well as by natural processes like plant growth. Atmospheric levels of water vapor, on the other hand, cannot be directly controlled by people; rather, they are determined by temperatures. The warmer the atmosphere, the more water vapor it can hold. As a result, water vapor is part of an amplifying effect. Greenhouse gases like CO2 warm the air, which in turn adds to the stock of water vapor, which in turn traps more heat and accelerates warming. Scientists know this because of satellite measurements documenting a rise in water vapor concentrations as the globe has warmed. The best way to lower temperature and thus reduce water vapor levels is to reduce CO2 emissions. MYTH Global warming and extra CO2 will actually be beneficial — they reduce cold- related deaths and stimulate crop growth. FACT Any beneficial effects will be far outweighed by damage and disruption. Even a warming in just the middle range of scientific projections would have devastating impacts on many sectors of the economy. Rising seas would inundate coastal communities, contaminate water supplies with salt and increase the risk of flooding by storm surge, affecting tens of millions of people globally. Moreover, extreme weather events, including heat waves, droughts and floods, are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity, causing loss of lives and property and throwing agriculture into turmoil. Even though higher levels of CO2 can act as a plant fertilizer under some conditions, scientists now think that the "CO2 fertilization" effect on crops has been overstated; in natural ecosystems, the fertilization effect can diminish after a few years as plants acclimate. Furthermore, increased CO2 may benefit undesirable, weedy species more than desirable species. Higher levels of CO2 have already caused ocean acidification, and scientists are warning of potentially devastating effects on marine life and fisheries. Moreover, higher levels of regional ozone (smog), a result of warmer temperatures, could worsen respiratory illnesses. CO2 benefits weeds and isn’t a fertilizer Weart 2003 (Spencer, Ph.D. in Physics and Astrophysics at the University of Colorado, Boulder, former fellow of the Mt. Wilson and Palomar Observatories The Discovery of Global Warming, 2003, p 179-180) Some scientists stuck by the old view that biological feedbacks were reassuring rather than alarming. They held that fertilization from the increased CO2 in the atmosphere would benefit agriculture and forestry so much that it would make up for any possible damage from climate change. Studies found that for the planet as a whole, biomass was indeed absorbing more CO2 overall than in earlier decades. However, the consequences were not straightforward. For example, under some circumstances the extra CO2 might benefit weeds and insect pests more than desirable crops. In any case, as the level of the gas continued to rise, plants would reach a point (nobody could predict how soon) where they would be unable to use more carbon fertilizer. There was a good chance that more warmth would eventually foster decay, with a net emission of greenhouse gases. Meanwhile new evidence showed that the biology of the oceans too could vary markedly. The drifting plankton, as complex as a rain forest but scarcely explored by biologists, interacted strongly with the uptake or emission of CO2. All this had to be incorporated in models. Impacts WARMING => EXTINCTION Human induced global warming is a real threat to human extinction Brimelow 09 (Julian Brimelow, writer for Freelance, “Human-induced global warming: past, present and future,” Edmonton Journal, March 22, 2009, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/) Scientists from a wide range of disciplines have amassed overwhelming peer-reviewed research that supports the theory of human-induced global warming. Regardless, there continues to be a misconception that there is widespread debate in the scientific community about its validity. This misinformation is spread by people who believe global warming is a hoax. In their zeal, skeptics often attempt to discredit and undermine the scientific process and portray scientists as alarmist. Actually, scientists are required to be prudent and conservative when describing their findings. In contrast, skeptics' arguments are typically not held to the same rigorous standards. The result is that the reputation of the sciences is tarnished and the layperson is left confused, overwhelmed and conflicted. This need not be so. Humans have embarked on a radical and dangerous experiment with the Earth's climate system. Each year we spew seven gigatonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and, in a short time, have increased the concentration of CO2 to its highest level in at least 850,000 years. CO2 and other greenhouse gases, such as methane, play a critical role in ensuring that the mean global surface air temperature is near +14 C rather than -18 C. Another powerful greenhouse gas is water vapour. As the atmosphere warms it can retain more moisture, thereby further increasing temperature. However, clouds can act to either increase or decrease global temperatures, and work is continuing to improve our understanding of the net contribution of water vapour. Numerous independent observational data, such as glacier and sea ice records, together with multi- disciplinary peer-reviewed scientific studies, show an overwhelming consensus that humans have played a significant role in increasing global temperatures. Research has also found that the warming from dramatic increases in greenhouse gases exceeds the impact of variations in natural drivers, such as solar activity, acting on the same time scale. Absent reduction in CO2 emissions, extinction is inevitable Mazo 10 (Jeffrey Mazo – PhD in Paleoclimatology from UCLA, Managing Editor, Survival and Research Fellow for Environmental Security and Science Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, 3-2010, “Climate Conflict: How global warming threatens security and what to do about it,” pg. 122) 0 The best estimates for global warming to the end of the century range from 2.5- 4. C above pre-industrial levels, depending on the scenario. Even in the best-case scenario, the low end of the likely range is 1.goC, and in the worst 'business as usual' projections, which actual emissions have been matching, the range of likely warming runs from 3.1--7.1°C. Even keeping emissions at constant 2000 levels (which have already been exceeded), global temperature would still be expected to reach 1.2°C (O'9""1.5°C)above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century." Without early and severe reductions in emissions, the effects of climate change in the second half of the twenty-first century are likely to be catastrophic for the stability and security of countries in the developing world - not to mention the associated human tragedy. Climate change could even undermine the strength and stability of emerging and advanced economies, beyond the knock- on effects on security of widespread state failure and collapse in developing countries.' And although they have been condemned as melodramatic and alarmist, many informed observers believe that unmitigated climate change beyond the end of the century could pose an existential threat to civilisation." What is certain is that there is no precedent in human experience for such rapid change or such climatic conditions, and even in the best case adaptation to these extremes would mean profound social, cultural and political changes.

Species are already dying. It’s now or never for the AFF Hoag 06 (Hannah Hoag, reporter for the National Geographic, “Global Warming Already Causing Extinctions, Scientists Say,” National Geographic, November 28, 2006, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061128-global-warming.html) No matter where they look, scientists are finding that global warming is already killing species—and at a much faster rate than had originally been predicted. "What surprises me most is that it has happened so soon," said biologist Camille Parmesan of the University of Texas, Austin, lead author of a new study of global warming's effects. Parmesan and most other scientists hadn't expected to see species extinctions from global warming until 2020. But populations of frogs, butterflies, ocean corals, and polar birds have already gone extinct because of climate change, Parmesan said. Scientists were right about which species would suffer first—plants and animals that live only in narrow temperature ranges and those living in cold climates such as Earth's Poles or mountaintops. "The species dependent on sea ice—polar bear, ring seal, emperor penguin, Adélie penguin—and the cloud forest frogs are showing massive extinctions," Parmesan said. Her review compiles 866 scientific studies on the effects of climate change on terrestrial, marine, and freshwater species. The study appears in the December issue of the Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. Global Phenomenon Bill Fraser is a wildlife ecologist with the Polar Oceans Research Group in Sheridan, Montana. "There is no longer a question of whether one species or ecosystem is experiencing climate change. [Parmesan's] paper makes it evident that it is almost global," he said. "The scale now is so vast that you cannot continue to ignore climate change," added Fraser, who began studying penguins in the Antarctic more than 30 years ago. "It is going to have some severe consequences." Every living organism is threatened by global warming Blakemore 05 (Bill Blakemore, correspondent for ABC News, “Is Global Warming Leading to Extinction?,” ABC News, July 18, 2005, http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=942506&page=1) All over the planet, hundreds of scientists are finding plants and animals suddenly scattering, withering or outright disappearing as our world approaches sustained temperatures higher than today's species ever evolved to be able to survive in. The new heat wave is attacking in many ways -- from melting the sea-ice that polar bears need for hunting to bringing tropical rains two months too early, so plants blossom too soon to feed the animals that depend on them. Three separate scientific survey studies, which pull together hundreds of field studies from around the world, add to the same picture. The increase in the average global temperature is causing havoc in many ecosystems -- and on a scale that's hard, at first, even to imagine. One study by 19 established scientists on five continents, predicts "on the basis of mid-range climate warming scenarios, for 2050, that 15 [percent] to 37 percent of species in our sample will be committed to extinction." "Do we want to destroy the creation? That's the question," says Edward O. Wilson, professor and curator of entomology at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University. "That's what we're doing -- and at an accelerating rate." For half a century, Wilson has uncovered the cohesive complexity of all life on Earth and focused on how its rich biodiversity is being destroyed by human attacks, ranging from spreading pesticides to wiping out wildlife habitats. He's found it painful to assess how global warming is now piling its assaults on top of all the others. "I'm optimistic by nature, but I have to admit it's getting scary," says Wilson. "Most people who've analyzed the situation believe that we could -- again, if the situation is unabated -- could lose half the species of plants and animals in the world by the end of the 21st century. We're simply plinking them out of existence -- in many cases without even knowing what they are." Nobody meant for this to happen. And as hard news about global warming has become visible -- glaciers melting fast around the world, more frequent spikes in heat-driven weather -- there's been emotional debate. Some who deny it's even happening are accused by others of just being in denial. It's not surprising there's been such disagreement and confusion about global warming because, in one sense, it's quite simply the biggest problem we've ever faced. It's affecting the entire planet -- and all at once. And since the warming atmosphere envelops all life forms in its blanket, this is also the most complex story ever. Many millions of species with their intricate patterns of inter-dependence are each disrupted differently. So to begin to understand it, we need people who are not afraid of complexity, who even enjoy it -- such as the scientists we sought out for this report.

Unchecked warming will certainly lead to extinction – IPCC proves Walsh 13 (Bryan Walsh, senior writer for TIME magazine, covering energy and the environment, “Why a Hotter World Will Mean More Extinctions,” TIME, May 13, 2013, http://science.time.com/2013/05/13/why-a-hotter-world-will-mean-more-extinctions/) The end of last week saw the carbon concentrations in the atmosphere finally pass the 400-part-per- million threshold. That means carbon levels are higher now than they’ve been for at least 800,000 years, and most likely far longer. There’s nothing special per se about 400 parts per million — other than giving all of us a change to note it in article like this one — but it’s a reminder that we are headed very fast into a very uncertain future. Parts per million and global temperature change, though, are just numbers. What matters is the effect they will have on life — ours, of course, but also everything else that lives on the planet earth. I’ve written before that while I certainly worry and fear the impact that unchecked climate change will have on humanity, I also feel relatively — relatively — confident that we will, in some ways, muddle through. Human beings have already proved that they are extremely adaptable, living — with various degrees of success — from the hottest desert to the coldest corner of the Arctic. I don’t think a future where temperatures are 4˚F or 5˚F or 6˚F warmer on average will be an optimal one for humanity, to say the least. But I don’t think it will be the end of our species either. (I’ve always favored asteroids for that.) But the plants and animals that share this planet with us are a different story. Even before climate change has really kicked in, human expansion had led to the destruction of habitat on land and in the sea, as we crowd out other species. By some estimates we’re already in the midst of the sixth great extinction wave, one that’s largely human caused, with extinction rates that are 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the background rate of species loss. So what will happen to those plants and animals if and when the climate really starts warming? According to a new study in Nature Climate Change, the answer is pretty simple: they will run out of habitable space, and many of them will die. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that 20% to 30% of species would be at increasingly high risk of extinction if global temperatures rise more than 2˚C to 3˚C above preindustrial levels. Given that temperatures have already gone up by nearly 1˚C, and carbon continues to pile up in the atmosphere, that amount of warming is almost a certainty. But Rachel Warren and her colleagues at the University of East Anglia (UEA), in England, wanted to know more precisely how that extinction risk intensifies with warming — and whether we might be able to save some species by mitigating climate change. In the Nature Climate Change paper, they found that almost two-thirds of common plants and half of animals could lose more than half their climatic range by 2080 if global warming continues unchecked, with temperatures increasing 4˚C above preindustrial levels by the end of the century. Unsurprisingly, the biggest effects will be felt near the equator, in areas like Central America, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Amazon and Australia, but biodiversity will suffer across the board. Oceans

Marine biodiversity is at risk of going extinct Van Woesik 12 (Dr. Robert van Woesik, Director of the Institute for Research on Global Climate Change at Florida Institute of Technology, “Coral survival's past is key to its future,” Science Daily, February 14, 2012, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120214215507.htm) Florida Institute of Technology researchers are taking an historical approach to predict the extinction risk of reef-building corals. Led by Robert van Woesik, professor of biological sciences, the scientists are examining past events to gain insight into how these corals today may fare through climate change. "We found strong relationships between past regional extinction events and modern coral vulnerability, suggesting that extinction events are not merely chance events but depend on the biological characteristics of the coral species. Our historical approach improves the accuracy of extinction- risk assessment," said van Woesik. Corals are highly sensitive to climate change. Their risk of extinction is increasing at an unprecedented rate as the oceans continue to warm. Assessing this danger, however, is difficult because of limited data. Van Woesik's team looked at Caribbean extinction during the Plio-Pleistocene era and extinction risk as determined by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Through the Plio-Pleistocene era, the Caribbean supported more diverse coral reefs than today and shared considerable overlap with contemporary Indo-Pacific reefs. Regional extinction in the past and vulnerability in the present suggest that Pocillopora, Stylophora, and foliose Pavona are among the most susceptible to local and regional isolation. These were among the most abundant corals in the Caribbean Pliocene. Therefore, a widespread distribution did not equate with immunity to regional extinction. The strong relationship between past and present vulnerability suggests that regional extinction events are trait-based and not merely random episodes. FAMINE/AG Leads to resource wars Broder 11 (John M. Broder, reports on energy and environment issues for the Washington bureau of The New York Times, “Climate Change Drives Instability, U.N. Official Warns,” New York Times, February 15, 2011, http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/climate- change-drives-instability-u-n-official-warns/) The United Nations' top climate change official said on Tuesday that food shortages and rising prices caused by climate disruptions were among the chief contributors to the civil unrest coursing through North Africa and the Middle East. In a speech to Spanish lawmakers and military leaders, Christiana Figueres. executive secretary of the United Nations climate office, said that climate change-driven drought, falling crop yields and competition for water were fueling conflict throughout Africa and elsewhere in the developing world. She warned that unless nations took aggressive action to reduce emissions causing global warming such conflicts would spread, toppling governments and driving up military spending around the world. It is alarming to admit that 11 the community of nations is unable to fully stabilize climate change, it will threaten where we can live, where and how we grow food and where we can find water," said Ms. Figueres, a veteran Costa Rican diplomat and environmental advocate. "In other words, it will threaten the basic foundation - the very stability on which humanity has built its existence." Rising food prices were a factor in the January riots that unseated Tunisia's longtime president, Zine el- Abidine Ben Ali, although decades of repression and high unemployment also fed the revolution. The link between food and resource shortages and Egypt's revolution is less clear. But Ms. Figueres said that long-term trends in arid regions did not look promising unless the world took decisive action on climate change. She said that a third of all Africans now lived in drought- prone regions and that by 2050 as many as 600 million Africans would face water shortages. "On a global level, increasingly unpredictable weather patterns will lead to falling agricultural production and higher food prices, leading to food insecurity," she said in her address. "In Africa, crop yields could decline by as much as 50 percent by 2020. Recent experiences around the world clearly show how such situations can cause political instability and undermine the performance of already fragile states." She said that rising sea levels, more frequent and severe natural disasters, pandemics, heat waves and widespread drought could lead to extensive migrations with ithin countries and across national borders. Military leaders around the world, including those in the United States, have warned that such effects of a changing climate can serve as "threat multipliers." adding stresses to nations and regions that already face heavy burdens of poverty and social insecurity. "All these factors taken together," Ms. Figueres concluded, "mean that climate change, especially if left unabated, threatens to increase poverty and overwhelm the capacity of governments to meet the basic needs of their people, which could well contribute to the emergence, spread and longevity of conflict." Left unchecked, global warming eliminates all agricultural land Mendelsohn 94 (Robert Mendelsohn, American environmental economist. He is currently the Edwin Weyerhaeuser Davis Professor of the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University, Professor of Economics in Economics Department at Yale University and Professor in the School of Management at Yale University. Professor Mendelsohn is a major figure in the economics of global warming, being for example a contributor to the first Copenhagen Consensus report. Mendelsohn received a BA in economics from Harvard University in 1973 and obtained his Ph.D. in economics from Yale University in 1978, The Impact of Global Warming on Agriculture: A Ricardian Analysis, Vol. 84 No. 4, The American Economic Review, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2118029?seq=1) Over the last decade, scientists have extensively studied the greenhouse effect, which holds that the accumulation of carbon dioxide (C02) and other greenhouse gases (GHG's) is expected to produce global warming and other significant climatic changes over the next century. Numerous studies indicate major impacts on agriculture, especially if there is significant mid-continental drying and warming in the U.S. heartland.1 Virtually every estimate of economic impacts relies on a technique we denote the production-function approach. This study compares the traditional production-function approach to estimating the impacts of climate change with a new "Ricardian" approach that examines the impact of climate and other variables on land values and farm revenues. The traditional approach to estimating the impact of climate change relies upon empirical or experimental production functions to predict environmental damage (hence its label in this study as the production-function approach).2 This approach takes an underlying production function and estimates impacts by varying one or a few input variables, such as temperature, precipitation, and carbon dioxide levels. The estimates might rely on extremely carefully calibrated crop-yield models (such as CERES or SOY- GRO) to determine the impact upon yields; the results often predict severe yield reductions as a result of global warming.

The agriculture industry is getting threatened by global warming Cline 07 (William R. Cline, American economist. He graduated from Princeton University in 1963 and received a PhD in 1969 from Yale. Cline was deputy director of development and trade research at the office of the assistant secretary for international affairs at the United States Department of the Treasury, “Global Warming and Agriculture Impact Estimates by Country,” Peterson Institute, July 2007, http://www.iie.com/publications/briefs/cline4037.pdf) Unabated global warming will reduce global agricultural capacity at least modestly by late in this century, contrary to some estimates that it will benefit global agriculture over that period. The damages will be the most severe and begin the soonest where they can least be afforded: in the developing countries. The losses will be much larger if carbon fertilization benefits fail to materialize, especially if water scarcity limits irrigation. Temperatures in developing countries, which are predominantly located in lower latitudes, are already closer to or beyond thresholds at which further warming will reduce rather than increase agricultural capacity, and these countries tend to have less capacity to adapt. Moreover, agriculture accounts for a much larger share of GDP in developing countries than in industrial countries, so a given percentage loss in agricultural potential would impose a larger income loss in a developing country than in an industrial country. This study starkly confirms the asymmetry between potentially severe agricultural damages in many poor countries and milder effects in rich countries.

And its modeled globally – gets countries like China and India on board Cline 07 (William R. Cline, American economist. He graduated from Princeton University in 1963 and received a PhD in 1969 from Yale. Cline was deputy director of development and trade research at the office of the assistant secretary for international affairs at the United States Department of the Treasury, “Global Warming and Agriculture Impact Estimates by Country,” Peterson Institute, July 2007, http://www.iie.com/publications/briefs/cline4037.pdf) He estimates global agricultural output capacity (including carbon fertilization) to decline by about 3 percent by the 2080s. But if the carbon fertilization effect did not materialize, the losses would be at about 16 percent.4 These losses would be disproportionately concentrated in poor countries. On average, developing countries would suffer losses of 9 percent. Damages would be severe in Africa (17 percent average loss), Latin America (13 percent average loss), and South Asia (30 percent average loss in India and 20 percent in Pakistan). The losses would be much larger if the benefits from carbon fertilization did not materialize (averaging about 21 percent for all developing countries, 28 percent for Africa, and 24 percent for Latin America). This study is particularly important for the cases of China and India . China is already the second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide (after the United States but ahead of the European Union), and its cooperation will surely be crucial to effective action against global warming. Although this study finds China a modest gainer in agriculture under business as usual warming (increase in agricultural capacity by about 7 percent with carbon fertilization), the estimate turns to a loss (7 percent reduction in agricultural capacity) if carbon fertilization effects do not materialize or arc offset by excluded damages. For India, prospective losses arc massive (as large as about 40 percent in the absence of carbon fertilization). For Australia, one of the two steadfast opponents of the Kyoto Protocol, the principal international initiative against global warming, the study suggests that a more positive position on global warming abatement would be in its long-term interests. The estimates for Australia indicate losses of around 16 percent even with carbon fertilization (with much larger losses suggested by the Ricardian estimates). As for the United States, the other principal opponent, although the estimates show an aggregate gain of 8 percent in the case with carbon fertilization, the)' indicate a comparable loss (6 percent) if carbon fertilization is excluded. Moreover, regional losses arc pronounced: by about 30 to 35 percent in the Southeast and in the Southwest Plains, if carbon fertilization is excluded (and about 20 to 25 percent even if it is included). The findings of this study strongly suggest that policymakers in both industrial and developing countries should ensure that international action begins in earnest to curb global warming from its "business as usual" path. Moreover, illustrative summary calculations suggest it would be a serious mistake to downplay the risks of future agricultural losses from global warming on grounds that technological change, for example in new seed varieties, will swamp any negative climate effects. The pace of global agricultural yield increases already decelerated from 1961—83 to 1984—2005, and a sizable portion of agricultural land will likely be diverted to the production of ethanol for fuel by late in this century.

And leads to an increase in food prices Southgate 11 (Douglas Southgate, specializes in the study of natural resource issues in the United States and around the world. He has written numerous books, chapters and journal articles on public policies contributing to tropical deforestation, hydrocarbon development, the economics of watershed management, and related topics, “Weathering Global Warming in Agriculture,” Reason, November 2011, http://reason.org/files/weathering_global_warming_agriculture_food_population.pdf) This study investigates the potential consequences of climate change for global agricultural output and identifies policies that would reduce any negative impacts. Some researchers have estimated that climate change resulting from manmade global warming could reduce agricultural output significantly (compared to baseline assumptions), especially in tropical countries. As a result, food prices would rise and malnutrition worsen. However, these estimates assume minimal or no adaptation to changes in the climate. In particular, they assume that farmers will fail to switch crops, modify their use of water and other inputs, and adopt new technology. This view is unrealistic: faced with changing conditions, farmers will adapt – unless prohibited.

Even a 20C change in climate will have serious effects on the agriculture industry Southgate 11 (Douglas Southgate, specializes in the study of natural resource issues in the United States and around the world. He has written numerous books, chapters and journal articles on public policies contributing to tropical deforestation, hydrocarbon development, the economics of watershed management, and related topics, “Weathering Global Warming in Agriculture,” Reason, November 2011, http://reason.org/files/weathering_global_warming_agriculture_food_population.pdf) The consequences of higher global temperatures, which the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) anticipates will come about because of increased atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses, have been the subject of much investigation. These consequences defy precise measurement due to the difficulties of predicting what the climate will be in the future as well as the impacts on agricultural yields of changing temperatures, shifting patterns of precipitation, increased carbon-fertilization (which as a rule accelerates plant growth) and sea-level rise. Moreover, economic evaluation requires factoring in adaptation, which in the agricultural sector involves changing from one crop to another, combining inputs in different ways, and developing and using new technology. The earliest assessments of the impacts of climate change on crop and livestock production focused largely on affluent and temperate settings, such as the United States. 10 One reason for this emphasis is that breadbaskets in temperate latitudes—including the American Midwest, the Ukrainian countryside, and the Argentine Pampas— produce much of the world’s grain (aside from rice) and are the source of most cereals traded in international markets. Furthermore, higher temperatures might create drier conditions in the interiors of North America and the Eurasian landmass, thereby reducing harvests. 11 To assess the agricultural impacts of climate change, in temperate latitudes and elsewhere, many economists have concentrated on rural land values, since these ought to rise if farmers adapt successfully to environmental flux and fall if agricultural productivity suffers. In one study, modest warming was projected to have limited effects on the prices of agricultural real estate in the United States. 12 A more recent study focused on the eastern two-thirds of the U.S., where agriculture is mainly rain-fed. Schlenker et al. determined that rural land values would be lower in most of the region, given that rain-fed yields would decline and that commodity prices would not be greatly affected by global climate change.13 The IPCC, which has assessed impacts on the food economy as well, expects temperature increases in the range of 1 to 3°C later this century to have small yet beneficial effects on agricultural productivity and crop yields in temperate settings as well as the high latitudes, including Canada and Siberia. But closer to the equator, especially in dry areas, productivity and yields are expected to fall even if temperatures increase by just 1 to 2°C in a few decades. 14 This is consistent with the observation made by Kane et al. that, due to elevated evapotranspiration, substantial crop-stress can result in the tropics and subtropics from a minor rise in temperatures.15 Other investigators agree that global warming will probably do more harm in the low latitudes than in settings farther from the equator. In one recent assessment, yields of various crops in different parts of the developing world have been estimated for 2050, assuming that warming occurs and also based on different projections of precipitation and carbon-fertilization (Table 1). In East Asia and Latin America, where wheat is raised mainly in temperate environments with adequate rainfall, per-hectare output of that crop is expected to rise. In contrast, global warming will reduce wheat yields in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, as well as south of the Sahara. In addition, rice and corn yields are expected to fall due to climate change throughout the developing world, dramatically so in some regions.

Global warming is causing famine is many parts of the world PSR 12 (Physicians for Social Responsibility, “Climate Change and Famine,” PSR, August 30, 2012, http://www.psr.org/environment-and- health/climate-change/climate-change-and-famine.pdf) Climate change is already threatening the Earth’s ability to produce food. These effects are expected to worsen as climate change worsens. Estimates vary, but for every 1.8°F increase in global average surface temperature, we can expect about a 10% decline in yields of the world’s major grain crops— corn, soybean, rice and wheat1,2 Climate experts predict that global temperature may rise as much as 5.4°F to 9°F if we continue burning fossil fuels at our current rate.3 This could lead to 30% to 50% declines in crop production.1 Already, one in seven people, including many living in the U.S., is hungry every day.4 Most models only consider the effect of rising temperatures and carbon dioxide (CO2) levels on crop growth, and thus represent relatively conservative scenarios. Climate change will disrupt food production and distribution in other ways that are hard to quantify and include in prediction models, such as: More droughts causing large-scale crop loss Increasing frequent, severe, and longer-lasting heat waves killing crops Thriving plant pests and diseases destroying crops Heavy rains and storms flooding fields, eroding soils and washing away crops Melting glaciers and changing river flows reducing water availability for irrigation Rising sea levels and storm surges flooding crops and salting soils, Higher ozone levels damaging plants and reducing crop yields

Warming affects the marine environment and agriculture industries in the status quo Rodgers 14 (Paul Rodgers, contributor of general sciences for Forbes, “Climate Change: We Can Adapt, Says IPCC,” Forbes, March 31, 2014, http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrodgers/2014/03/31/climate-change-is-real-but-its-not-the-end-of-the-world-says-ipcc/) It predicts that the seas will become more acidic, killing coral reefs and damaging shellfish, and that many sea creatures will move as temperatures rise. In Antarctica and some tropical waters, catches could be halved. Yields for corn, rice and wheat will decline between now and 2050, with the worst projections showing them falling by a quarter. “Going into the future, the risks only increase, and these are about people, the impacts on crops, on the availability of water and particularly, the extreme events on people’s lives and livelihoods,” said Professor Neil Adger of the University of Exeter. “People are going to become more vulnerable to sinking deeper into poverty,” said Dr Maggie Opondo of the University of Nairobi. ECON Climate change devastates the economy Ross 11 (Lindsey Ross, Professor at Institute of Aquaculture University of Stirling Scotland, “The Economics of Climate Change,” American Security Project, April 19, 2011, http://www.americansecurityproject.org/the-economics-of-climate-change/)

Climate change is real, it is happening, and it will be costly. If we do nothing to mitigate the effects of climate change there will be costs to our economy, security, competitiveness, and public health. That’s what a new study, Pay Now, Pay Later (PNPL), out today from the American Security Project has found. Severe weather events, rising sea levels, and increasingly frequent and harsh wildfires – to name a few – will hamper American economic activity. Our water security is already jeopardized by receding lake levels, and less snowfall will further impact our access to drinking and irrigation water. The American shipping industry will suffer as the Great Lake levels fall and increasingly severe storms harm our ports. And warmer temperatures and higher pollution levels threaten to increase morbidity – especially in urban America – and contaminate the fresh waters of our lakes, rivers, and streams. Inaction on climate change outweighs the cost of transforming our old energy economy into a green one. For example: In western Kansas, higher temperatures and less rainfall could cost over $300 million and hundreds of jobs as a result of crop losses by 2035. Lake Mead could dry up as early as 2021, leaving 12-36 million people across the Southwest without a dependable water supply. Illinois’ manufacturing industry, which employs 680,000 people, is threatened by falling water levels and necessitated dredging along the Great Lakes- St. Lawrence shipping route. By 2030, costs are expected to reach $92 – 154 million each year. And in Michigan, a 25% reduction in Great Lakes system connectivity could cost over $4 billion in import and export losses within the next few decades. Some states could realize benefits – warmer temperatures, more precipitation, and higher atmospheric carbon mean Pennsylvania could see increased productivity in wooded areas. But research shows, many positives are likely to be hindered – or negated completely – by other climate change effects. The Pennsylvanian forestry industry could suffer as a result of higher ozone levels coupled with warmer temperatures. There are inevitable changes occurring in our environment that will have costly effects on our state and national economies. We can either pay it now to invest in transforming our energy economy (one Congressional Budget Office study priced a climate legislation proposal at $175/household by 2020), or we can pay significantly higher economic and social costs in the future, as we play catch-up and try to adapt to the impacts of climate change. PROLIF Global warming is existent Schwartz and Randall 03 (Peter Schwartz, Senior Vice President for Global Government Relations and Strategic Planning, Doug Randall, Research Analyst in the Finance and Private Sector Development Team of the Development Economics Research Group, “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” Kelber, October 2003, http://www.ulrich- kelber.de/medien/doks/Pentagon-Studie%20Klimawandel.pdf) The research suggests that once temperature rises above some threshold, adverse weather conditions could develop relatively abruptly, with persistent changes in the atmospheric circulation causing drops in some regions of 5-10 degrees Fahrenheit in a single decade. Paleoclimatic evidence suggests that altered climatic patterns could last for as much as a century, as they did when the ocean conveyor collapsed 8,200 years ago, or, at the extreme, could last as long as 1,000 years as they did during the Younger Dryas, which began about 12,700 years ago. In this report, as an alternative to the scenarios of gradual climatic warming that are so common, we outline an abrupt climate change scenario patterned after the 100-year event that occurred about 8,200 years ago. This abrupt change scenario is characterized by the following conditions: Annual average temperatures drop by up to 5 degrees Fahrenheit over Asia and North America and 6 degrees Fahrenheit in northern Europe Annual average temperatures increase by up to 4 degrees Fahrenheit in key areas throughout Australia, South America, and southern Africa. Drought persists for most of the decade in critical agricultural regions and in the water resource regions for major population centers in Europe and eastern North America. Winter storms and winds intensify, amplifying the impacts of the changes. Western Europe and the North Pacific experience enhanced winds.

Warming leads to nuclear proliferation Schwartz and Randall 03 (Peter Schwartz, Senior Vice President for Global Government Relations and Strategic Planning, Doug Randall, Research Analyst in the Finance and Private Sector Development Team of the Development Economics Research Group, “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” Kelber, October 2003, http://www.ulrich- kelber.de/medien/doks/Pentagon-Studie%20Klimawandel.pdf) As global and local carrying capacities are reduced, tensions could mount around the world, leading to two fundamental strategies: defensive and offensive. Nations with the resources to do so may build virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves. Less fortunate nations especially those with ancient enmities with their neighbors, may initiate in struggles for access to food, clean water, or energy. Unlikely alliances could be formed as defense priorities shift and the goal is resources for survival rather than religion, ideology, or national honor. This scenario poses new challenges for the United States, and suggests several steps to be taken: Improve predictive climate models to allow investigation of a wider range of scenarios and to anticipate how and where changes could occur Assemble comprehensive predictive models of the potential impacts of abrupt climate change to improve projections of how climate could influence food, water, and energy Create vulnerability metrics to anticipate which countries are most vulnerable to climate change and therefore, could contribute materially to an increasingly disorderly and potentially violent world. Identify no-regrets strategies such as enhancing capabilities for water management Rehearse adaptive responses Explore local implications Explore geo-engineering options that control the climate. MIDDLE EAST WAR Leads to Middle East conflict over resources Broder 11 (John M. Broder, reports on energy and environment issues for the Washington bureau of The New York Times, “Climate Change Drives Instability, U.N. Official Warns,” New York Times, February 15, 2011, http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/climate- change-drives-instability-u-n-official-warns/) The United Nations' top climate change official said on Tuesday that food shortages and rising prices caused by climate disruptions were among the chief contributors to the civil unrest coursing through North Africa and the Middle East. In a speech to Spanish lawmakers and military leaders, Christiana Figueres. executive secretary of the United Nations climate office, said that climate change-driven drought, falling crop yields and competition for water were fueling conflict throughout Africa and elsewhere in the developing world. She warned that unless nations took aggressive action to reduce emissions causing global warming such conflicts would spread, toppling governments and driving up military spending around the world. It is alarming to admit that 11 the community of nations is unable to fully stabilize climate change, it will threaten where we can live, where and how we grow food and where we can find water," said Ms. Figueres, a veteran Costa Rican diplomat and environmental advocate. "In other words, it will threaten the basic foundation - the very stability on which humanity has built its existence." Rising food prices were a factor in the January riots that unseated Tunisia's longtime president, Zine el- Abidine Ben Ali, although decades of repression and high unemployment also fed the revolution. The link between food and resource shortages and Egypt's revolution is less clear. But Ms. Figueres said that long-term trends in arid regions did not look promising unless the world took decisive action on climate change. She said that a third of all Africans now lived in drought- prone regions and that by 2050 as many as 600 million Africans would face water shortages. "On a global level, increasingly unpredictable weather patterns will lead to falling agricultural production and higher food prices, leading to food insecurity," she said in her address. "In Africa, crop yields could decline by as much as 50 percent by 2020. Recent experiences around the world clearly show how such situations can cause political instability and undermine the performance of already fragile states." She said that rising sea levels, more frequent and severe natural disasters, pandemics, heat waves and widespread drought could lead to extensive migrations with ithin countries and across national borders. Military leaders around the world, including those in the United States, have warned that such effects of a changing climate can serve as "threat multipliers." adding stresses to nations and regions that already face heavy burdens of poverty and social insecurity. "All these factors taken together," Ms. Figueres concluded, "mean that climate change, especially if left unabated, threatens to increase poverty and overwhelm the capacity of governments to meet the basic needs of their people, which could well contribute to the emergence, spread and longevity of conflict." ASIA WAR Effects of global warming devastate the Asian countries. Star this card and flow the warrants. Elliot 09 (Dr. Lorraine Elliot, Senior Fellow in International Relations, “Climate change, threat multiplier and internal conflicts in Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia,” RSIS (S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies), August 2009, http://www.rsis.edu.sg/nts/Events/climate_change/session4/concept%20paper-Lorraine%20Elliot%20Session%20IV.pdf) No part of the world will be unaffected by climate change.19 The specific impacts of climate change in the region will be explored in other presentations at this conference. Suffice it to say here that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports a worrying litany of likely climate change impacts for the Asia Pacific region : a decline in crop yield, an increase in climate-induced disease, an increased risk of hunger and water resource scarcity, an increase in the number and severity of glacier melt-related floods, significant loss of coastal ecosystems, many millions of people in coastal communities at high risk from flooding, and an increased risk of extinction for many species of fauna and flora. As noted above, the expectation is that climate triggers are more likely to lead to conflict and instability in those parts of the world that are already ecologically stressed, economically vulnerable and characterised by weak or stretched state capacity. Many countries in the region fit this ‘profile’ that allegedly makes them more vulnerable to internal conflict and unrest sparked by the environmental, economic and social impacts of climate change – low levels of economic development, social disparities of various kinds, and an existing history of internal conflict and dispute between identity-groups or between competing users of resources. International Alert suggests that there are 46 countries – home to 2.7 billion people – in which ‘the effects of climate change interacting with economic, social and political problems will create a high risk of violent conflict’ and another 56 countries (home to 1.2 billion people) where ‘the institutions of government will have great difficulty taking the strain of climate change on top of all their other current challenges’. In this latter group, they argue, ‘the risk of armed conflict As shown in Figure 3, a significant number of countries in the region are thought to fall into these vulnerabilities categories. The first category – those countries within which there is a high risk of armed conflict – includes Burma, Indonesia and the Philippines. Those with a high risk of political instability include Cambodia, Laos, North Korea, Thailand and Timor-Leste. Even then, there are some quite notable differences of opinion. While China, for example, is not identified in this particular report by International Alert as a country in which climate-related conflict is likely, the UK Department of Defence suggested in its 2007 Strategic Trends that along with a range of other social and economic factors, ‘changing patterns of land use, the failure to deliver per capita prosperity and environmental stresses caused by climate change and pollution, 21 Smith and Vivekananda, A climate of conflict, p. 3. 22 Source: Smith and Vivekananda, A climate of conflict: the links between climate change, peace and war (International Alert, 2007). INDIA-PAKISTAN WAR Water scarcity leads to India-Pakistan war Wheeler 11 (William Wheeler, reporter for National Geographic, “India and Pakistan at Odds Over Shrinking Indus River,” National Geographic, October 12, 2011, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/10/111012-india-pakistan-indus-river-water/) Nearly 30 percent of the world's cotton supply comes from India and Pakistan, much of that from the Indus River Valley. On average, about 737 billion gallons are withdrawn from the Indus River annually to grow cotton—enough to provide Delhi residents with household water for more than two years. (See a map of the region.) "Pakistan's entire economy is driven by the textile industry," said Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "The problem with Pakistan's economy is that most of the major industries use a ton of water—textiles, sugar, wheat—and there's a tremendous amount of water that's not only used, but wasted," he added. The same is true for India. That impact is an important part of a complex water equation in countries already under strain from booming populations. More people means more demand for water to irrigate crops, cool machinery, and power cities. The Indus River, which begins in Indian-controlled Kashmir and flows through Pakistan on its way to the sea, is Pakistan's primary freshwater source—on which 90 percent of its agriculture depends—and a critical outlet of hydropower generation for both countries. (Related: "See the Global Water Footprint of Key Crops") Downstream provinces are already feeling the strain, with some dried-out areas being abandoned by fishermen and farmers forced to move to cities. That increases competition between urban and rural communities for water. "In areas where you used to have raging rivers, you have, essentially, streams or even puddles and not much else," said Kugelman. In years past, the coastal districts that lost their shares of the Indus' flows have become "economically orphaned," the poorest districts in the country, according to Pakistani water activist Mustafa Talpur. Because Pakistani civil society is weak, he says, corruption and deteriorating water distribution tend to go hand in hand. In the port city of Karachi, which depends for its water on the Indus, water theft—in which public water is stolen from the pipes and sold from tankers in slums and around the city—may be a $500-million annual industry. In the balance is the fate not only of people, but important aquatic species like the Indus River dolphin, which is now threatened to extinction by agricultural pollution and dams, among other pressures. Scientists estimate that fewer than 100 individuals remain. Threat to Peace? One of the potentially catastrophic consequences of the region's fragile water balance is the effect on political tensions. In India, competition for water has a history of provoking conflict between communities. In Pakistan, water shortages have triggered food and energy crises that ignited riots and protests in some cities. Most troubling, Islamabad's diversions of water to upstream communities with ties to the government are inflaming sectarian loyalties and stoking unrest in the lower downstream region of Sindh. But the issue also threatens the fragile peace that holds between the nations of India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed rivals. Water has long been seen as a core strategic interest in the dispute over the Kashmir region, home to the Indus' headwaters. Since 1960, a delicate political accord called the Indus Waters Treaty has governed the sharing of the river's resources. But dwindling river flows will be harder to share as the populations in both countries grow and the per- capita water supply plummets. Some growth models predict that by 2025, India's population will grow to triple what it was—and Pakistan's population to six times what it was—when the Indus treaty was signed. Lurking in the background are fears that climate change is speeding up the melting of the glaciers that feed the river. Mountain glaciers in Kashmir play a central role in regulating the river's flows, acting as a natural water storage tank that freezes precipitation in winter and releases it as meltwater in the summer. The Indus is dependent on glacial melting for as much as half of its flow. So its fate is uniquely tied to the health of the Himalayas. In the short term, higher glacial melt is expected to bring more intense flooding, like last year's devastating deluge. Both countries are also racing to complete large hydroelectric dams along their respective stretches of the Kashmir river system, elevating tensions. India's projects are of a size and scope that many Pakistanis fear could be used to disrupt their hydropower efforts, as well as the timing of the flows on which Pakistani crops rely. (Related: "Seven Simple Ways to Save Water") "Many in Pakistan are worried that, being in control of upstream waters, India can easily run Pakistan dry either by diverting the flow of water by building storage dams or using up all the water through hydroelectric power schemes," said Pakistani security analyst Rifaat Hussain. For years, Pakistani politicians have claimed India is responsible for Pakistan's water troubles. More recently, militant groups have picked up their rhetoric. Hafiz Saeed, the founder of the Pakistani militant group allegedly responsible for the 2008 terror attack in Mumbai, even accused India of "water terrorism." Solvency Integration Solvency The only way to solve warming is by gathering more information-Integration key Gulledge and Rogers 10 (Jay Gulledge, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and is the Senior Scientist and Science and Impacts Program Director at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Will Rogers, a Research Assistant at the Center for a New American Security, “Lost in Translation: Closing the Gap Between Climate Science and National Security Policy,” Center for a New American Security, April 2010, http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/Lost%20in%20Translation_Code406_Web_0.pdf) Many national security leaders now recognize that global climate change is a national security challenge, perhaps even a defining security challenge of the 21st century. Climate change could dramatically reshape the future security environment by driving migration, undermining community development and weakening state governance. America's political leaders are just beginning to grapple with the implications of climate change for U.S. policy, including how the nation can best reduce or mitigate future greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for or adapt to climate changes that unfold in the United States and abroad. Despite this recognition, national security leaders do not yet have the scientific information they need to make the best possible policy decisions about climate change - policy decisions that will entail large financial commitments to address a range of potential national security risks. "From an intelligence perspective, the present level of scientific understanding of future climate change lacks the resolution and specificity we would like for detailed analysis at the (country] level." said Dr. Thomas Fingar, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council (NIC).' 'though there has been a significant improvement in the scope and quality of scientific information available in recent years, a gap persists between available scientific information and decision makers' needs. It is unclear, however, to what degree this gap is caused by a true lack of usable information (i.e.. data that policy makers can understand and base decisions on) or to what degree it is caused by a lack of communication and understanding between climate change analysts and decision makers. Regardless, closing the gap between the policy makers who need information and the scientists who produce it is essential for the nation to deal effectively with the challenges of global climate change. IOOS Key IOOS key to climate data gathering IOOC 11 (Interagency Ocean Observation Committee, “Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IOOC, 2011, http://www.iooc.us/ocean- observations/integrated-ocean-observing-system/) The U.S. IOOS is a coordinated national and international network of observations with associated data transmission, data management and communications (DMAC), and data analyses and modeling that acquires information on past, present and future states of the oceans and U.S. coastal waters to the head of tide. “Coastal” includes the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and territorial sea, Great Lakes, and semi-enclosed bodies of water and tidal wetlands connected to the coastal ocean.[1] U. S. IOOS is a “user driven” system that is a collaborative project between academia, federal agencies, industry, local and state governments and non-profits working to address the following seven societal goals: (1) Improve predictions of climate change and weather and their effects on coastal communities and the nation; (2) Improve the safety and efficiency of maritime operations; (3) More effectively mitigate the effects of natural hazards; (4) Improve national and homeland security (5) Reduce public health risks (6) More effectively protect and restore healthy coastal ecosystems; and (7) Enable the sustained use of ocean and coastal resources[1] Ocean Mapping Ocean mapping fill in key gaps Cowen 95 (Robert C. Cowen, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor, “Mapping Ocean's Surface Yields Data on Global Warming,” Christian Science Monitor, January 31, 1995, http://www.lexisnexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/? verb=sr&csi=7945&sr=HEADLINE(Mapping+ocean%27s+surface+yields+data+on+global+warming)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B1995) FOR the past 2-1/2 years, a radar-ranging satellite has performed a minor miracle for oceanographers. For the first time in the history of their science, they have a continuing global overview of the ocean's surface. It's hard to chart the bumps and hollows in the sea surface caused by winds and currents using data from ships and instrumented buoys. And tide gauges are an uncertain guide to rising sea level. Now oceanographers can follow what happens to the ocean surface over most of the world as it changes from season to season and from year to year. Among other things, this gives them a handle on how fast sea level is rising -- a key question in the debate over whether or not man-made global warming is already changing the climate. It also reveals circulation patterns that may threaten offshore installations. Effective mapping lets us find carbon storage tanks underwater Smith 13 (K. Annabelle Smith, freelance writer based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, where she covers all things interesting and strange for Smithsonian.com’s “Food and Think” blog, “A Temporary Solution to Global Warming,” Outside, December 5, 2013, http://www.outsideonline.com/news-from-the-field/A-Temporary-Solution-to-Global-Warming.html) Like deep-water gas detectives, researchers from the University of Southampton were able to pinpoint parts of the ocean crust where a boat-load of carbon dioxide might be stored. If their calculations are correct, fossil fuels found in this amount—many centuries worth— might forestall further increases in global warming, Science Recorder reports. But wait, how? According to the University of Southampton, the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas has resulted in dramatic increases in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere which cause climate change and ocean acidification. If the newly-discovered pieces of the ocean crust actually exist, scientists hope they might capture CO2 and put it there for, um, safe keeping. The study, which was originally published in Geophysical Research Letters found five potential locations beneath the ocean's crust ranging in size from 2,000 square miles to nearly 1.5 million square miles. But how do they know it might be there? Chiara Marieni, a PhD student based at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton figured out that in high pressures and low temperatures like those found in the darkest depths of the big blue, CO2 is denser and heavier than seawater and exists in liquid form. The basalt rock which makes up a large portion of the Earth's crust, may also react with CO2, effectively trapping the gas into a solid calcium carbonate beneath the surface and preventing the carbon dioxide's release into the oceans or atmosphere. With this new understanding of the properties of CO2, Marieni and her colleagues were able to generate a global map of the Earth’s ocean floor that otherwise wouldn’t have been made. That’s some deep research.

NOAA scientists prove that we can fight warming through underwater sonar waves NOAA no date (NOAA, “Teaching Activity: Using Sound Waves to Study Climate Change,” NOAA, http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/infodata/lesson_plans/Using%20Sound%20Waves%20to%20Study%20Climate%20Change.pdf) Climatologists and oceanographers know that if global warming actually happens, the warming effect in the Arctic region will probably be 2-4 times greater than at lower latitudes. This would cause the polar ice packs to melt, adding water to the ocean basins and raising global sea levels significantly. One way to estimate if and how much global warming is actually occurring is to monitor the temperature in the northern ocean. The basic idea is simple and based on the fact that sound travels faster in warm water than in cold water. The travel time of a sound signal from a ship to a land based receiver will decrease if the ocean water in between warms up, and increase if the ocean cools down. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists have designed and implemented an acoustic monitoring scheme between the Atlantic Ocean and the Arctic Ocean through the From Strait, where about 80% of the heat flux into the Arctic Ocean occurs. Fram Strait is located in the North Atlantic between the coast of Greenland and Spitzbergen Island. Low frequency, "whale safe" sound is transmitted across the Strait to measure the average temperature of ocean water to a depth of about 3.5 m. The travel time is a direct measure of the average temperature between the source and the receiver. It is hoped that measurements of this region of the ocean will provide important information for reducing the uncertainty in global climate models and answers to many questions, especially those regarding global warming as a result of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Global warming can be effectively combated by studying the ocean floor Radford 13 (Tim Radford, freelance journalist. He worked for The Guardian for 32 years, becoming - among other things - letters editor, arts editor, literary editor and science editor, “Deep ocean could hold key to global warming,” RTCC, December 2, 2013, http://www.rtcc.org/2013/12/02/deep-ocean-could-hold-key-to-global-warming/) U.S. and British researchers may have identified the fingerprint of global warming in one of the darkest, coldest, most mysterious places on the planet. Four thousand metres below the sea surface, at the bottom of the north-east Pacific abyss, they have found changes in the food supply to some of the planet’s least known creatures. And these changes track changes to temperatures at the surface. Kenneth Smith of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute and colleagues from the University of Southampton in the UK, and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on a 24-year exploration of one of life’s deepfest puzzles. The research is important because it provides yet another indicator of the carbon cycle at work; it is important because it provides another level of understanding of the climate system; and because it provides yet another way to check on global warming.

Studies prove mapping can help Curran 07 (Peggy Curran, writer for the Montreal Gazette, “On the front line of global warming; Scientists will spend 15 months aboard icebreaker studying changes in Arctic,” Edmonton Journal, September 16, 2007, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/) One deck below, engineer Ian Church is impressed by what he sees. As the vessel moves, dazzling topographical images morph across his computer screen from the bottom-mapping experiment here at the outer edge of the continental shelf between Labrador and Greenland. The sonar casts light beams to 135 depth positions on the seabed 1,800 to 2,500 metres below, uncovering an unknown Canadian landscape. Ancient river channels, valleys and hills that soar 300 metres high and stretch kilometres long lie on the floor of these previously uncharted waters. "I had no idea this stuff existed out here. I thought it would just be all flat," says Church, a geomatic engineer with the Ocean Mapping Group at the University of New Brunswick. "There is so much going on down there, it is unbelievable." Shedding fresh light on Canada's great northern frontier -- its contours, resources, wildlife and people -- is high on the agenda as the ArcticNet 2007 expedition embarks on a 15- month mission aboard the coast guard's Amundsen, the country's premier floating science laboratory. Fuelled and funded by International Polar Year, dozens of scientists have begun their journey up the rugged coasts of Quebec and Labrador, into Hudson Bay and up to Foxe Basin and Baffin Island, before heading west, bound for the Beaufort Sea next month, in quest of a better understanding of this mystical, foreboding, treacherous -- and now perhaps endangered -- world. Researchers aboard the 98-metre Amundsen, refitted as a science vessel in 2004 at a cost of $27 million, are seeking clues to the implications of global warming on land, water and sky. Everything from the tiniest algae particles to the thickness of the ice to the health and welfare of northern communities already battered and bruised by decades of upheaval will come under their microscopes or be stored in their -80 C freezers. Over the past few years, devastating floods and searing heat waves have pushed climate change to the top of the world's to-do list. Polar regions are widely seen as extremely vulnerable -- and integral to the struggle to gauge the extent of the damage and put a finger in the dike. The stakes are huge. Arctic and sub-Arctic terrain -- the three northern territories as well as other regions north of the tree line -- make up more than half of Canada's land mass. Hudson Bay alone supplies more than 40 per cent of the fresh water that flows from Canada into the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans. "Climate change is affecting the bay itself, so the sea- ice cycle in the bay is changing. And hydroelectric development around the bay has been altering the distribution of fresh water into the bay," said David Barber, chief scientist aboard the Amundsen. Biodiversity Advantage 1AC 1AC Environment IOOS is key to effective ocean satellite data collection Frank Muller-Karger 13, Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, PhD in Marine and Estuarine Sciences from the University of Maryland; Mitchell Roffer, Roffer’s Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service, Inc.;Nan Walker, Louisiana State University; Matt oliver, University of Delaware; Oscar Schofield, Rutgers; Mark Abbott, Oregon State University; Hans Graber, University of Miami, Florida; Robert Leben, University of Colorado, Boulder; Gustavo Goni, NOAA; “Satellite Remote Sensing in Support of an Integrated Ocean Observing System,” IEEE Geoscience and remote Sensing Magazine, December 2013, https://marine.rutgers.edu/pubs/private/FMK_et_al_IEEE_GRSM2013.pdf Abstract— Earth observing satellites represent some of the most valued components of the international Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), both part of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). In the United States, such satellites are a cornerstone of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), required to carry out advanced coastal and ocean research, and to implement and sustain sensible resource management policies based on science. Satellite imagery and satellite-derived data are required for mapping vital coastal and marine resources, improving m aritime d omain a wareness, and to better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions. These data are critical to the strategic planning of in situ observing components and are critical to improving forecasting and numerical modeling. Specifically, there are several stakeholder communities that require periodic, frequent, and sustained synoptic observations. Of particular importance are indicators of ecosystem structure (habitat and species inventories), ecosystem states (health and change) and observations about physical and biogeochemical variables to support the operational and research communities, and industry sectors including mining, fisheries , and transportation. IOOS requires a strategy to coordinate the human capacity, and fund , advance, and maintain the infrastructure that provides improved remote sensing observations and support for the nation and the globe. A partnership between the private, government, and education sectors will enhance remote sensing support and product development for critical coastal and deep-water regions based on infrared, ocean color, and microwave satellite sensors. These partnerships need to include international research, government, and industry sectors in order to facilitate open data access, understanding of calibration and algorithm strategies, and fill gaps in coverage. Such partnerships will define the types of observations required to sustain vibrant coastal economies and to improve the health of our marine and coastal ecosystems. They are required to plan, fund, launch and operate the types of satellite sensors needed in the very near future to maintain continuity of observations. Ocean observation causes effective management policies Dr. Andrew Rosenberg 11, Ph.D. in Biology from Dalhousie University, Prof of Natural Resources at the University of New Hampshire, former Deputy Director of the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, June 8 2011, “U.S. Ocean Policy Should Lead the Way for Global Reform,” http://blog.conservation.org/2011/06/u-s-ocean-policy-should-lead-the-way-for-global-reform/