BHR Wind Bad

Michigan State University Debate Wind Bad
KARAM
WIND BAD FILE INDEX

1NC PIC Wind Counterplan Text – General ............................................................................................................ ........2
1NC PIC Wind Counterplan Text – RPS Specific ................................................................................................... .........3
Bats Turn Shell (1/1).................................................................................................................................................... ........4
Bats Turn Ext............................................................................................................................................................. ..........6
Bat Turn Ext. ............................................................................................................................................. .........................7
Bat Turn Ext. ............................................................................................................................................. .........................8
Bats Turn Ext. ........................................................................................................................................................... ..........9
A2: Bat Turn .................................................................................................................................................. ...................10
Trout Turn Shell (1/2).......................................................................................................................................... ..............11
Trout Turn Shell (2/2)................................................................................................................................................ ........12
Radar Turn (1/4)..................................................................................................................................................... ...........13
Radar Turn (2/4)..................................................................................................................................................... ...........14
Radar Turn (3/4)..................................................................................................................................................... ...........15
Radar Turn (4/4)..................................................................................................................................................... ...........16
2NC Readiness Links.............................................................................................................................. ..........................18
2NC Readiness Links.............................................................................................................................. ..........................19
Radar Turn Ext. .......................................................................................................................................................... ......20
Radar Turn Ext.
.................................................................................................................................................................. ..........................21
Wind BAD - Turbines Fail ........................................................................................................................... ....................22
Wind Bad – Turbines Fail ................................................................................................................................ ................23
Wind Bad – Turbines Fail................................................................................................................................. ................24
Status Quo Solves Wind Energy ........................................................................................................................... ...........25
Wind Bad – Case Turns.................................................................................................................................................... .26
Wind Bad – Case Turns Big Imapcts...................................................................................................... .........................27
Wind energy bad (Generic) ............................................................................................................................................ ..28
Wind Bad – Not Create jobs............................................................................................................................ .................30
Wind Bad – Negative Impacts O/W............................................................................................................ .....................31
Wind Tradeoff With Grandfathering ........................................................................................................................ ......32
Spending Links ............................................................................................................................................... ..................33
Spending Links................................................................................................................................................. .................34
Wind Energy Popular with Public.......................................................................................................... .........................35
Wind Energy Unpopular................................................................................................................................................ ...36
Aff – Positive Impacts O/W Negative of Wind........................................................................................ ........................37
1
“Personally, I believe that birds will fly into just about anything, but on the other hand, you never win a debate against
cute animals” (ICIS ’07)
KARAM
1NC PIC WIND COUNTERPLAN TEXT – GENERAL
REPLACE “RENEWABLE ENERGY” WITH BIOMASS, HYDROPOWER,

GEOTHERMAL, AND SOLAR ENERGY
2
KARAM
1NC PIC WIND COUNTERPLAN TEXT – RPS SPECIFIC
COUNTERPLAN TEXT: THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD REQUIRE
THAT RETAIL POWER PROVIDERS PROVIDE, AT A MINIMUM, 20% OF THEIR NET
ELECTRICITY DEMAND THROUGH QUALIFIED BIOMASS, HYDROPOWER, GEOTHERMAL,
AND SOLAR ENERGY SOURCES BY 2020. A SYSTEM OF BIOMASS, HYDROPOWER,
GEOTHERMAL, AND SOLAR ENERGY CREDITS WILL BE INCLUDED TO FACILITATE
COMPLIANCE. WE CAN CLARIFY.
3
KARAM
BATS TURN SHELL (1/1)
1. Windmill facilities kill bats which are key to the ecosystem

Dodds and Dodds Jr. No Date Given (Pamela C, Ph.D and Arthur W.; HUGE WINDMILL "PLANTS" FAIL
AS "GREEN ENERGY" AND FAIL TO PROVIDE ANY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ELECTRICITY,;
http://www.laurelmountainpreservationassociation.org/laurel_mountain_preservation_association_003.htm )
All bats found in West Virginia and Virginia are insectivores, which are animals that eat only insects. Bats often eat more
than 50% of their body weight in insects each night and nursing female bats eat enough insects to equal their body weight.
This can result in a single bat eating over 4,500 insects in a single night. Because bats eat so many insects, they are a very
important part of our ecosystem. The endangered gray bat [Myotis grisescens] spends the majority of its life inside of
caves. Unfortunately, human disturbance of its cave roosts has led to a severe decline in this species' population and the
gray bat is now declared an endangered species. With protection, the gray bat is making a come back and its numbers are
increasing. This southeastern bat can eat as many as 3,000 insects in a single night (http://www.organcave.com/Bats.htm).
Under Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act, it is unlawful for 'any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to take any [federally listed] species within the United States' (16 U.S.C. Section 1538 (a)(1)(B))." However, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is now working with companies responsible for constructing huge windmill "plants"
in order to develop Habitat Conservation Plans that would provide an Incidental Take Permit of the very same
endangered species they are certain will be killed. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service projected number of 135,000 bat
deaths that would result if the huge windmill "plant" had been constructed on Jack Mountain in Pendleton County, West
Virginia. An Incidental Take Permit would protect the company from being penalized for this enormous amount of killing.
However, the West Virginia Public Service Commission denied the application to build a windmill "plant" on Jack
Mountain.
2. ECOSYSTEM DECLINE LEADS TO HUMAN EXTINCTION

Diner sex edited 94
Military Law Review Winter 1994 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161 LENGTH: 30655 words ARTICLE: THE ARMY
AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHO'S ENDANGERING WHOM? NAME: MAJOR DAVID N.
DINER BIO: Judge Advocate General's Corps, United States Army.
[*173] Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist

species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less
diverse systems. "The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. .
. . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can
resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks
down as a whole." n79 By causing widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified
many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem failure. The
spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States
are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically,
each new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects, could
cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction increases the risk of
disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, n80
[hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.
4
KARAM
5
KARAM
BATS TURN EXT.
The more Turbines results in more bat deaths – the result is enormous
Mountain Communities for Responsible Energy ’05
http://www.wvmcre.org/neg_imapcts/turbineskillbats.htm
As reported by the recent GAO report the Department of Energy is aggressively promoting wind power. They are
proposing that 15 times the current installed capacity be in place by the year 2020. This increase would be equivalent to
62,000 additional turbines added to the existing 16,000 turbines in operation making a total of 78,000 wind turbines. It is
difficult to predict due to the lack of research on the subject what the national average kill rate per tower is for either bats
or birds. However even if you use a fairly low projected estimate the total mortality to bats and birds is enormous.
Turbines kill Thousands of bats

Arnett et al ’04
(Edward B. Arnett, Bat Conservation International Wallace P. Erickson, Western Ecosystems Technology Jason Horn,
Boston University Jessica Kerns, University of Maryland; Relationships between Bats and Wind Turbines in Pennsylvania
and West Virginia: An Assessment of Fatality Search Protocols, Patterns of Fatality, and Behavioral Interactions with
Wind Turbines; http://www.batcon.org/wind/BWEC2004Reportsummary.pdf )
Daily searches at Mountaineer yielded an estimated 38 bats killed per turbine for the 6- week study period (90%
confidence interval = 31–45) and a daily kill rate of 0.90 bats per turbine. The total number of bats estimated to have been
killed by the 44 turbines during this 6-week period was 1,364–1,980. • At Meyersdale, an estimated 25 bats were killed
per turbine based on daily searches during the 6-week study (90% confidence interval = 20–33), yielding a daily kill rate
of 0.6 and a total of 400–660 bats killed by the 20 turbines during the 6-week study. Because of low scavenging rates,
weekly searches at Meyersdale yielded similar results; an estimated 30 bats killed per turbine during the 6-week study
(90% confidence interval = 20–46) and a daily kill rate of 0.71 for a total estimated 400–920 bats killed during the 6-week
study.
Bats are ignored in new wind-energy projects

Bat Conservation Times ’05 (Volume 3, number 3 – March 2005; Wind Energy: A Lethal Crisis;
http://64.92.116.27/news2/scripts/article.asp?articleID=142&newsletterID=7 )
To prevent an environmental crisis, it is essential that local authorities require wind-energy companies to resolve wildlife
concerns during the permitting process. We believe that wind energy can be compatible with bat conservation, but only if
clear, well-researched safeguards are enacted. We strongly encourage research and development of efficient, wildlife-safe
wind technology. But we cannot support the current rush to development without first finding solutions to prevent bat kills
that could have devastating cumulative impacts across North America.
It is imperative that those of us committed to maintaining healthy ecosystems make our voices heard. Some of America’s
largest, most ecologically and economically important bat populations could be reduced to endangered status, or even
eliminated, if we do not act now. And, as always, we urge that greater energy conservation – by far our most powerful tool
available for dealing with worldwide energy shortages – be encouraged and implemented much more aggressively
throughout society. You can make a difference by sharing your concerns in your community and with conservation
organizations you support. Contact local companies, permitting officials and state and federal legislators to insist that
wildlife problems are not ignored in new wind-energy projects.
6
KARAM
BAT TURN EXT.
Bats are key to environment, corn, cotton, and disease spread

Blum ’05 (Justin; Washington Post Staff Writer; January 1, 2005; Researchers Alarmed by Bat Deaths from Wind
Turbines; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39941-2004Dec31.html )
Bats serve an important role in nature, and their populations are believed to be in decline, scientists said. The
bats getting killed in Appalachia devour insects that pose grave threats to crops such as corn and cotton. They
also feast on pests that can spread disease, such as mosquitoes.
On Backbone Mountain, at a facility called Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, the first dead bats were found in
2003, soon after the project's 44 turbines came online. Conservationists and the wind industry hoped the deaths
were a fluke.
Bats are a keystone species

Smith ’02 (Susan Ray; Research for Penn State; January 2002; Volume 23 issue 1 Online Research Penn State;
http://www.rps.psu.edu/0201/bats.html )
"Whoa," a student says. He'd felt the breeze in his hair from the bat that flew just inches above it. Gannon
continues, noting that the bats can hear him speak, but are not afraid because people are watching this church all
the time. Bats are a keystone species, he says. A keystone is the stone at the top of an arch that holds the
structure together. Remove just that one stone, and the arch will collapse.
"In ecology, a keystone species supports a lot of other things in the environment," he says. "If you remove the
keystone species, the ecosystem changes dramatically.
"From talking to local farmers we know that they use less pesticides than other farmers growing the same
amount and type of crop in other areas of the state," he says. "The bats eat millions and billions of insects over
the summer. Now, think what happens when you tear this building down. Then those insects can multiply and
damage crops. Think of the economic impact." Loss of habitat is the major threat to bats. If they had lost the
church, they might have moved to human homes, where they would most likely have been exterminated.
Bat’s food is in open fields where turbines are

Blum ’05 (Justin; Washington Post Staff Writer; January 1, 2005; Researchers Alarmed by Bat Deaths from Wind
Turbines; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39941-2004Dec31.html )
In West Virginia and Pennsylvania, the turbines are positioned on wide paths cleared amid maple, oak and other
hardwood trees. And that may have something to do with the bat deaths. Bats appear to be attracted to the open
areas cleared by the wind developers because they can more easily find insects there, researchers said. But they
are unsure why the bats hit the blades of the turbines -- whether they're attracted or accidentally fly into them.
Some of the bats are migrating south and others live near the wind farms, researchers said. Most of the deaths
occurred between July and September, which includes the months of peak migration. The two sites where
researchers have found a large number of bat deaths are operated by FPL Energy of Juno Beach, Fla., the largest
U.S. generator of wind power.
7
KARAM
BAT TURN EXT.
1 Turbine kills approximately 50 bats

Mountaineer Wind Energy Center ’04 (Tucker County, West Virginia: Annual Report for 2003; February 14,
2004; A study of Bird and Bat collision Fatalities; http://www.wvhighlands.org/Birds/MountaineerFinalAvianRpt-%203-
15-04PKJK.pdf )
Estimates of total bat fatalities were calculated in a similar fashion to avian estimates. The estimated total
number of bats killed at the site during the study period was 2092 bats (47.53 bats/turbine). Strict interpretation
of these estimates is tentative, as the rates of detection and scavenging for bat carcasses may not be the same as
rates for bird carcasses. The unique coloration of bats and their location closer to the turbine base may increase
their likelihood of detection by searchers. Based on the observed patterns of decomposition and decay of
carcasses at this study site, we believe that bats are not scavenged as quickly as birds.
Wind generation facilities kill bats – the more turbines the more deaths
Bat fatalities at wind generation facilities has been documented world wide in all sorts of habitats. Although the studies to
date are incomplete, there appears to be a correlation between eastern wooded sites especially on high ridges and higher
than usual bat moralities. Below are the resulting estimates for the three eastern sites where bats were studied. Researchers
point out that actual numbers are likely to be much higher.
Mountaineer, WV 2003 (44 turbines) 47.53 2090 total
Mountaineer, WV 2004 (44 turbines) 38.0 1672 total
Buffalo Mt. Tennessee (3 turbines) 20.8 62 total
Meyersdale, Pa. 2005 (20 turbines) 23.0 460 total
Bats key to the environment and safeguard human life

Bats are an essential element in the environment. As predators of disease-carrying insects like mosquitoes they safeguard
human life. They also consume large quantities of moths that damage plant life and transmit tree diseases. A bat can
consume an impressive quantity of insects, as many as 3000 mosquitoes in a night.
Contrary to popular belief, bats are not flying mice. Mice are capable of having many litters with multiple offspring. Bats
however typically have only one or two offspring per year. Bats compensate for low reproductive rates by having longer
life spans. Many populations of bats are already showing declines. Twenty five percent of all bat species worldwide are
considered threatened. By the introduction of wind turbines as an additional cause of mortality bat populations will have
an even harder time surviving.
8
KARAM
BATS TURN EXT.
HABITAT DESTRUCTION OUTWEIGHS NUCLEAR WAR

Tobin in 90
The Expendable Future, p. 14
“From the standpoint of permanent despoliation of the planet,” Norman Myers observes, no other
form of environmental degradation “is anywhere so significant as the fallout of species.”
Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson is less modest in assessing the relative consequences of
human-caused extinctions. To Wilson, the worst thing that will happen to earth is not economic
collapse, the depletion of energy supplies, or even nuclear war. As frightful as these events
might be, Wilson reasons that they can “be repaired within a few generations. The one process
ongoing…that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by
destruction of natural habitats.”
9
KARAM
A2: BAT TURN
Studies are flawed – barely any US facilities kill bats

Most mortality studies at wind generating facilities have been designed to track mortality of birds. Estimates for bats have
been less precise or incidental. Overall there is just not much quality information on bat mortality resulting from wind
turbines. Bat Conservation International publication states that only 12 of the 200 U.S. turbine facilities (with a
nationwide total of 16,000 turbines) had been examined for bat kills- and only six of those attempted to estimate total bat
mortality. The post-construction mortality study at the Mountaineer project in Tucker County WV did look specifically at
bat mortality at the urging of WV DNR biologist. Is the outcome of that study, high mortality of bats, the result of its
focus being the mortality of bats as well as birds? An important factor in these studies is whether scavenger removal rates
and searcher efficiency rates are incorporated. The mountaineer study did address these contingencies while in many other
studies on record they were overlooked. When these factors are overlooked or underestimated, numbers for both birds and
bats appear lower than they actually are. Finally it must be noted that most studies to date are conducted by and for wind
generating companies with little or no peer review. The resulting bias is inevitable. There is a definite need for more
thorough studies that are long term, ongoing and properly peer reviewed.
10
KARAM
TROUT TURN SHELL (1/2)
1. Wind turbine facilities kill trout

In the Appalachian mountains extending through West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania, extensive areas
are cleared for wind turbine placement. As more mountain ridges are cleared, the negative impacts become cumulative.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined in its report, "WIND POWER: Impacts on Wildlife and
Government Responsibilities for Regulating Development and Protecting Wildlife", at the request of Representative
Mollohan and Representative Rahall, that "no one is considering the impacts of wind power on a regional or 'ecosystem'
scale" and that state and local officials have no guidelines for considering the negative environmental impacts caused by
wind turbine facilities" (www.gao.gov/new.items/d05906.pdf).
This equates to cumulative impacts on a watershed, such as the Potomac River watershed which extends from headwaters
in the mountains of Virginia and West Virginia to the Chesapeake Bay. The watershed headwaters are so important
because they create habitats where the food chain begins. The overhead trees intercept rainfall so that it gently penetrates
the ground as groundwater rather than flowing overland as runoff or being captured as storm drainage directed into
streams. Increased storm drainage results in habitat destruction within streams and the consequent death of aquatic
organisms, including trout. Additional threats to trout occur because of decreased groundwater recharge: groundwater
accumulates calcium ions where it flows through limestone or shale. Trout require the calcium ion in water to flow over
their gills for proper digestion. Where the calcium ion is not present in adequate quantities, or where the pH is too low, the
trout die. It is essential for the calcium ions and the correct pH to be present in streams where there are naturally
reproducing trout.
2. Trout is a keystone Species risking ecosystem collapse

Payton, Fenner, and Lee ’02 (Ian J., Michael, William G.; Keyston species: the concept and its relevance for
conservation management in New Zeland; Science for Conservation 203;
http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/SFC203.pdf )
The decline of much of the native fauna has been linked to introduced predators such as feral cats, rats (including kiore)
and stoats (Holdaway 1999; Innes et al. 1999; Lloyd & Powlesland 1994). However, for the predators to be considered
keystones the removal of the prey species needs to affect dominant components of the ecosystem, and to date few such
links have been clearly demon- strated. In freshwater ecosystems, exotic fish species such as brown trout (Salmo trutta)
and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) are credited with the decline of native fish (Galaxias spp. and Gobiomorphus
spp.), crayfish (Paranephrops spp.) and insect populations (Cadwallader 1975; McDowall 1968, 1987; Townsend & Crowl
1991), and may be a factor in the decline of the blue duck (Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos) (Towers 1996). Trout
species may warrant keystone status where their presence has a disproportionate effect on the abundance or biomass of
the freshwater biota. However, because the impact of adjoining land use tends to dominate stream ecology, demonstrating
a keystone role for trout may not be a straightforward process.
11
KARAM
TROUT TURN SHELL (2/2)
ECOSYSTEM DECLINE LEADS TO HUMAN EXTINCTION

Diner sex edited 94
Military Law Review Winter 1994 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161 LENGTH: 30655 words ARTICLE: THE ARMY
AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHO'S ENDANGERING WHOM? NAME: MAJOR DAVID N.
DINER BIO: Judge Advocate General's Corps, United States Army.
[*173] Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist

species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less
diverse systems. "The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. .
. . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can
resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks
down as a whole." n79 By causing widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified
many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem failure. The
spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States
are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically,
each new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects, could
cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction increases the risk of
disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, n80
[hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.
12
KARAM
RADAR TURN (1/4)
Wind turbines disturb radar stations and radio signals

Wind turbines can cause disturbance on radar images. That is why wind turbines shouldn’t be placed in the neighbourhood
of radar stations. There is an investigation going on about the possibility to provide the rotor of wind turbines with a radar-
radiation-absorbing layer (like stealth airplanes) and to the possibility to equip the radar stations with software which
doesn’t show the wind turbines.
Hurting radar stations and radio signals, Wind turbines destroy US readiness
Office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering ’06 (Report to the Congressional
Defense Committees; The effect of windmill farms on military readiness 2006;
http://www.windaction.org/documents/5439 )
Although wind turbines located in radar line of sight of air defense radars can adversely impact the ability of those units to
detect and track, by primary radar return, any aircraft or other aerial object, the magnitude of the impact will depend upon
the number and locations of the wind turbines. Should the impact prove sufficient to degrade the ability of the radar to
unambiguously detect and track objects of interest by primary radar alone this will negatively impact the readiness of U.S.
forces to perform the air defense mission.
The mitigations that exist at present to completely preclude any adverse impacts on air defense radars are limited to those
methods that avoid locating the wind turbines in radar line of sight of such radars. These mitigations may be achieved by
distance, terrain masking, or terrain relief and requires case-by-case analysis.
• The Department has initiated efforts to develop additional mitigation approaches. These require further development and
validation before they can be employed.
• The analysis that had been performed for the early warning radar at Cape Cod Air Force Station was overly simplified
and technically flawed. A more comprehensive analysis followed by development of appropriate offset criteria for fixed-
site missile early warning radars should be performed on an expedited basis.
• Wind turbines in close proximity to military training, testing, and development sites and ranges can adversely impact the
“train and equip” mission of the Department. Existing processes to include engagement with local and regional planning
boards and development approval authorities should be employed to mitigate such potential impacts.
Military Readiness is key to hegemony

Donnelly, 2003---Resident Scholar at AEI (Thomas, Resident Scholar at AEI, 2/1. ttp://www.aei.org/publications
/pubID.15845/pub_detail.asp)
The preservation of today's Pax Americana rests upon both actual military strength and the perception of strength. The variety
of victories scored by U.S. forces since the end of the cold war is testament to both the futility of directly challenging the United
States and the desire of its enemies to keep poking and prodding to find a weakness in the American global order. Convincing
would-be great powers, rogue states, and terrorists to accept the liberal democratic order--and the challenge to autocratic forms of
rule that come with it--requires not only an overwhelming response when the peace is broken, but a willingness to step in when
the danger is imminent. The message of the Bush Doctrine--"Don't even think about it!"--rests in part on a logic of preemption that
underlies the logic of primacy.
13
KARAM
RADAR TURN (2/4)
Hegemony prevents multiple scenarios for nuclear conflict between nationalist regional
hegemons – a multipolar or offshore balancing role is a fantasy. These Impacts turn case
and outweigh all impacts – heg solves all other impacts
Robert Kagan, 2007 senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace [“End of Dreams, Return of History”,
7/19, web)
This is a good thing, and it should continue to be a primary goal of American foreign policy to perpetuate this relatively benign
international configuration of power. The unipolar order with the United States as the predominant power is unavoidably riddled
with flaws and contradictions. It inspires fears and jealousies. The United States is not immune to error, like all other nations, and
because of its size and importance in the international system those errors are magnified and take on greater significance than the
errors of less powerful nations. Compared to the ideal Kantian international order, in which all the world ’s powers would be
peace-loving equals, conducting themselves wisely, prudently, and in strict obeisance to international law, the unipolar system is
both dangerous and unjust. Compared to any plausible alternative in the real world, however, it is relatively stable and less likely
to produce a major war between great powers. It is also comparatively benevolent, from a liberal perspective, for it is more
conducive to the principles of economic and political liberalism that Americans and many others value.
American predominance does not stand in the way of progress toward a better world, therefore. It stands in the way of regression
toward a more dangerous world. The choice is not between an American-dominated order and a world that looks like the European
Union. The future international order will be shaped by those who have the power to shape it. The leaders of a post-American
world will not meet in Brussels but in Beijing, Moscow, and Washington.
The return of great powers and great games
If the world is marked by the persistence of unipolarity, it is nevertheless also being shaped by the reemergence of competitive
national ambitions of the kind that have shaped human affairs from time immemorial. During the Cold War, this historical
tendency of great powers to jostle with one another for status and influence as well as for wealth and power was largely suppressed
by the two superpowers and their rigid bipolar order. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has not been powerful
enough, and probably could never be powerful enough, to suppress by itself the normal ambitions of nations. This does not mean
the world has returned to multipolarity, since none of the large powers is in range of competing with the superpower for global
influence. Nevertheless, several large powers are now competing for regional predominance, both with the United States and with
each other.
National ambition drives China’s foreign policy today, and although it is tempered by prudence and the desire to appear as
unthreatening as possible to the rest of the world, the Chinese are powerfully motivated to return their nation to what they regard
as its traditional position as the preeminent power in East Asia. They do not share a European, postmodern view that power is pass
é; hence their now two-decades-long military buildup and modernization. Like the Americans, they believe power, including
military power, is a good thing to have and that it is better to have more of it than less. Perhaps more significant is the Chinese
perception, also shared by Americans, that status and honor, and not just wealth and security, are important for a nation.
The Chinese do not share the view that power is passé; hence their now twodecades- long military buildup.
Japan, meanwhile, which in the past could have been counted as an aspiring postmodern power — with its pacifist constitution and
low defense spending — now appears embarked on a more traditional national course. Partly this is in reaction to the rising power
of China and concerns about North Korea ’s nuclear weapons. But it is also driven by Japan’s own national ambition to be a leader
in East Asia or at least not to play second fiddle or “little brother” to China. China and Japan are now in a competitive quest with
each trying to augment its own status and power and to prevent the other ’s rise to predominance, and this competition has a
military and strategic as well as an economic and political component. Their competition is such that a nation like South Korea,
with a long unhappy history as a pawn between the two powers, is once again worrying both about a “greater China” and about the
return of Japanese nationalism. As Aaron Friedberg commented, the East Asian future looks more like Europe ’s past than its
present. But it also looks like Asia’s past.
14
KARAM
Russian foreign policy, too, looks more like something from the nineteenth century. It is being driven by a typical, and typically
Russian, blend of national resentment and ambition. A postmodern Russia simply seeking integration into the new European order,
the Russia of Andrei Kozyrev, would not be troubled by the eastward enlargement of the eu and nato, would not insist on
RADAR TURN (3/4)
predominant influence over its “near abroad,” and would not use its natural resources as means of gaining geopolitical leverage
and enhancing Russia ’s international status in an attempt to regain the lost glories of the Soviet empire and Peter the Great. But
Russia, like China and Japan, is moved by more traditional great-power considerations, including the pursuit of those valuable if
intangible national interests: honor and respect. Although Russian leaders complain about threats to their security from nato and
the United States, the Russian sense of insecurity has more to do with resentment and national identity than with plausible external
military threats. 16 Russia’s complaint today is not with this or that weapons system. It is the entire post-Cold War settlement of
the 1990s that Russia resents and wants to revise. But that does not make insecurity less a factor in Russia ’s relations with the
world; indeed, it makes finding compromise with the Russians all the more difficult.
One could add others to this list of great powers with traditional rather than postmodern aspirations. India ’s regional ambitions are
more muted, or are focused most intently on Pakistan, but it is clearly engaged in competition with China for dominance in the
Indian Ocean and sees itself, correctly, as an emerging great power on the world scene. In the Middle East there is Iran, which
mingles religious fervor with a historical sense of superiority and leadership in its region. 17 Its nuclear program is as much about
the desire for regional hegemony as about defending Iranian territory from attack by the United States.
Even the European Union, in its way, expresses a pan-European national ambition to play a significant role in the world, and it has
become the vehicle for channeling German, French, and British ambitions in what Europeans regard as a safe supranational
direction. Europeans seek honor and respect, too, but of a postmodern variety. The honor they seek is to occupy the moral high
ground in the world, to exercise moral authority, to wield political and economic influence as an antidote to militarism, to be the
keeper of the global conscience, and to be recognized and admired by others for playing this role.
Islam is not a nation, but many Muslims express a kind of religious nationalism, and the leaders of radical Islam, including al
Qaeda, do seek to establish a theocratic nation or confederation of nations that would encompass a wide swath of the Middle East
and beyond. Like national movements elsewhere, Islamists have a yearning for respect, including self-respect, and a desire for
honor. Their national identity has been molded in defiance against stronger and often oppressive outside powers, and also by
memories of ancient superiority over those same powers. China had its “century of humiliation.” Islamists have more than a
century of humiliation to look back on, a humiliation of which Israel has become the living symbol, which is partly why even
Muslims who are neither radical nor fundamentalist proffer their sympathy and even their support to violent extremists who can
turn the tables on the dominant liberal West, and particularly on a dominant America which implanted and still feeds the Israeli
cancer in their midst.
Islamists have more than a century of humiliation to look back on. Israel has become its living symbol.
Finally, there is the United States itself. As a matter of national policy stretching back across numerous administrations,
Democratic and Republican, liberal and conservative, Americans have insisted on preserving regional predominance in East Asia;
the Middle East; the Western Hemisphere; until recently, Europe; and now, increasingly, Central Asia. This was its goal after the
Second World War, and since the end of the Cold War, beginning with the first Bush administration and continuing through the
Clinton years, the United States did not retract but expanded its influence eastward across Europe and into the Middle East, Central
Asia, and the Caucasus. Even as it maintains its position as the predominant global power, it is also engaged in hegemonic
competitions in these regions with China in East and Central Asia, with Iran in the Middle East and Central Asia, and with Russia
in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. The United States, too, is more of a traditional than a postmodern power, and
though Americans are loath to acknowledge it, they generally prefer their global place as “No. 1” and are equally loath to
relinquish it. Once having entered a region, whether for practical or idealistic reasons, they are remarkably slow to withdraw from
it until they believe they have substantially transformed it in their own image. They profess indifference to the world and claim
they just want to be left alone even as they seek daily to shape the behavior of billions of people around the globe.
The jostling for status and influence among these ambitious nations and would-be nations is a second defining feature of the new
post-Cold War international system. Nationalism in all its forms is back, if it ever went away, and so is international competition
for power, influence, honor, and status. American predominance prevents these rivalries from intensifying — its regional as well
as its global predominance. Were the United States to diminish its influence in the regions where it is currently the strongest
power, the other nations would settle disputes as great and lesser powers have done in the past: sometimes through diplomacy and
15
KARAM
accommodation but often through confrontation and wars of varying scope, intensity, and destructiveness. One novel aspect of
such a multipolar world is that most of these powers would possess nuclear weapons. That could make wars between them less
likely, or it could simply make them more catastrophic.
RADAR TURN (4/4)

It is easy but also dangerous to underestimate the role the United States plays in providing a measure of stability in the world even
as it also disrupts stability. For instance, the United States is the dominant naval power everywhere, such that other nations cannot
compete with it even in their home waters. They either happily or grudgingly allow the United States Navy to be the guarantor of
international waterways and trade routes, of international access to markets and raw materials such as oil. Even when the United
States engages in a war, it is able to play its role as guardian of the waterways. In a more genuinely multipolar world, however, it
would not. Nations would compete for naval dominance at least in their own regions and possibly beyond. Conflict between
nations would involve struggles on the oceans as well as on land. Armed embargos, of the kind used in World War i and other
major conflicts, would disrupt trade flows in a way that is now impossible.
Such order as exists in the world rests not only on the goodwill of peoples but also on American power.
Such order as exists in the world rests not merely on the goodwill of peoples but on a foundation provided by American power.
Even the European Union, that great geopolitical miracle, owes its founding to American power, for without it the European
nations after World War ii would never have felt secure enough to reintegrate Germany. Most Europeans recoil at the thought, but
even today Europe ’s stability depends on the guarantee, however distant and one hopes unnecessary, that the United States could
step in to check any dangerous development on the continent. In a genuinely multipolar world, that would not be possible without
renewing the danger of world war.
People who believe greater equality among nations would be preferable to the present American predominance often succumb to a basic logical
fallacy. They believe the order the world enjoys today exists independently of American power. They imagine that in a world where American
power was diminished, the aspects of international order that they like would remain in place. But that ’s not the way it works. International order
does not rest on ideas and institutions. It is shaped by configurations of power. The international order we know today reflects the distribution of
power in the world since World War ii, and especially since the end of the Cold War. A different configuration of power, a multipolar world in
which the poles were Russia, China, the United States, India, and Europe, would produce its own kind of order, with different rules and norms
reflecting the interests of the powerful states that would have a hand in shaping it. Would that international order be an improvement? Perhaps for
Beijing and Moscow it would. But it is doubtful that it would suit the tastes of enlightenment liberals in the United States and Europe.
The current order, of course, is not only far from perfect but also offers no guarantee against major conflict among the world ’s
great powers. Even under the umbrella of unipolarity, regional conflicts involving the large powers may erupt. War could erupt
between China and Taiwan and draw in both the United States and Japan. War could erupt between Russia and Georgia, forcing the
United States and its European allies to decide whether to intervene or suffer the consequences of a Russian victory. Conflict
between India and Pakistan remains possible, as does conflict between Iran and Israel or other Middle Eastern states. These, too,
could draw in other great powers, including the United States.
Such conflicts may be unavoidable no matter what policies the United States pursues. But they are more likely to erupt if the
United States weakens or withdraws from its positions of regional dominance. This is especially true in East Asia, where most
nations agree that a reliable American power has a stabilizing and pacific effect on the region. That is certainly the view of most of
China ’s neighbors. But even China, which seeks gradually to supplant the United States as the dominant power in the region, faces
the dilemma that an American withdrawal could unleash an ambitious, independent, nationalist Japan.
Conflicts are more likely to erupt if the United States withdraws from its positions of regional dominance.
In Europe, too, the departure of the United States from the scene — even if it remained the world’s most powerful nation — could
be destabilizing. It could tempt Russia to an even more overbearing and potentially forceful approach to unruly nations on its
periphery. Although some realist theorists seem to imagine that the disappearance of the Soviet Union put an end to the possibility
of confrontation between Russia and the West, and therefore to the need for a permanent American role in Europe, history
suggests that conflicts in Europe involving Russia are possible even without Soviet communism. If the United States withdrew
from Europe — if it adopted what some call a strategy of “offshore balancing” — this could in time increase the likelihood of
conflict involving Russia and its near neighbors, which could in turn draw the United States back in under unfavorable
circumstances.
It is also optimistic to imagine that a retrenchment of the American position in the Middle East and the assumption of a more
passive, “offshore” role would lead to greater stability there. The vital interest the United States has in access to oil and the role it
16
KARAM
plays in keeping access open to other nations in Europe and Asia make it unlikely that American leaders could or would stand back
and hope for the best while the powers in the region battle it out. Nor would a more “even-handed” policy toward Israel, which
some see as the magic key to unlocking peace, stability, and comity in the Middle East, obviate the need to come to Israel ’s aid if
its security became threatened. That commitment, paired with the American commitment to protect strategic oil supplies for most
of the world, practically ensures a heavy American military presence in the region, both on the seas and on the ground.
17
KARAM
2NC READINESS LINKS
Readiness has 4 major devastating impacts

The potential impacts to readiness are generally categorized into the following areas: 1) Overflight and Obstruction, 2)
Security, 3) Signature, and 4) Environment. Potential impacts to flying safety are considered in the area of overflight
where obstructions are introduced. Potential security issues during and after development are addressed near
installations or where the Department conducts operations. Potential impacts related to the electromagnetic signature
associated with wind turbines are evaluated. Finally, possible impacts related to the responsibilities of the Department
with regard to environmental stewardship are discussed.
Overflight and Obstruction hurt all of US readiness

The potential overflight obstruction hazard impact to readiness is a shared potential impact to all aviation users including
the Department, commercial, business, and general aviation users. As with other large vertical construction projects, such
as telecommunication towers, the Department considers the potential impacts of wind farm development on flight safety
from obstructions introduced near Department airfields and in other areas used for military flight operations.
The potential impact of any tall vertical development near Department airfields is virtually identical to the risks associated
with development near civilian airports such as potential interference with flight operations during take off, departure,
approach and landing. In relation to flight operations away from airfields, excessive development of wind turbines in,
under or adjacent to airspace, test ranges and training ranges where low-flying operations are conducted may adversely
affect the altitude at which operations can be conducted. There is a potential increased risk due to the increased likelihood
of encountering tall vertical structures during low altitude flight operations. The nearby location of overhead transmission
lines to connect the wind turbines to the local power grid can also present a flight hazard to low altitude flight operations.
The individual evaluation of any proposal considers such impacts of any specific development on a specific section of
airspace. Further, the Department must consider the potential for wind farm development to obstruct or restrict military
surface missions, ground maneuver operations; sea surface and sub-surface operations.
Effective management procedures already are in place to deal with questions that may arise from potential obstruction of
airspace due to the proposed construction of wind turbines. As a general rule, specific Department installations are
assigned management responsibilities for a section of airspace. If a proposed wind turbine is to extend more than 199 ft
above local elevation, a notification of proposed construction should come through the FAA’s Obstruction Evaluation /
Airport, Airspace, Analysis (OE/AAA) process. The FAA will notify the managers of any affected military flying routes.
The affected Services evaluate the proposal for any possible detrimental impacts to operations.
18
KARAM
2NC READINESS LINKS
Wind Farms hurt US security and thus readiness

In some circumstances, wind farm developments near Department facilities and sites may pose temporary or long-term
security risks of various degrees. Similar to other large construction projects near Department installations, the increased
level of personnel and activity during construction requires increased monitoring for security purposes. Additionally,
similar to other tall vertical development, wind turbines can provide increased visual and sensor access to sensitive
Department areas and activities.
The Department, as part of its normal practices, adapts its security measures in such situations. Thus wind farm
development is not anticipated to create any special challenges in this regard.
Wind Farms hurt radar activities hurting readiness

As discussed in other sections of this report, a wind turbine has a unique electromagnetic “signature” that can vary based
on environmental conditions. The specific signature characteristics of a given development may have potential impact on
certain types of Department systems. Examples of the areas of potential impact include, among others, systems
specifically designed to operate in or influence the electromagnetic spectrum such as electronic warfare activity for
communications, surveillance, threat, and radar systems. Further, the Department must determine potential impacts to
space launch activities and telemetry operations. The potential impact of the signature may be increased in areas where the
Department conducts high fidelity developmental testing and evaluation in the electromagnetic spectrum.
50
Additionally, the electromagnetic signature of a given development either created by the wind turbine itself or as a result
of reflection from other sources should be evaluated for potential electromagnetic interference with electronic systems
routinely employed in military missions. The potential impact could be on Department installations or in areas where the
Department conducts operations. This includes systems under development as well as those already fielded.
Wind turbines hurt military operations through the environment

Military installations, testing and training facilities expend considerable effort to ensure adequate measures are being
taken to conserve and protect the nation’s environment and natural resources. Under the Readiness and Environmental
Protection Initiative (REPI), 10 USC 2684a, many Department installations have, or are developing, encroachment and
conservation buffer partnerships on lands in the vicinity of, or ecologically related to, a military installation or
training/testing area. These partnerships are aimed at relieving encroachment pressure from either incompatible
development and/or loss of natural habitat, which could adversely impact military operations. This program applies to
installations, airspace, and coastal waters within the United States and its territories.
Where such encroachment and conservation buffer partnerships exist or are in development, proposals to develop wind
farms in or adjacent to those areas should be carefully evaluated to ensure compatibility with such partnerships and related
activities.
19
KARAM
RADAR TURN EXT.
Windmills are mistaken for airplanes – hurts the military’s ability to defend an area
The turbine blades are large, aerodynamically shaped structures that operate on the same principle as the wing of an
airplane. In accordance with Bernoulli’s Law, the flow of air over the surface of the turbine blade creates a pressure
differential due to differences in flow path length. This pressure differential creates a net force which, in the case of the
turbine blades, causes them to rotate. In SOA turbines, the blade angle of attack is usually computer controlled to
maximize power production while maintaining blade rotation rates within a relatively narrow range. Typical SOA turbine
blades are fabricated using GRP and can include surface-mounted metal inserts and internal wiring for lightning
protection as well as internal damping systems to control blade vibration. Again, due to the partial transparency of GRP,
the internal elements within the blade can serve as secondary reflection sources for radar waves. Most SOA turbines,
including those tested at Fenner, NY, are “upwind” designs. In this arrangement, the nacelle rotates so that the blades
always remain on the windward side of the tower, thus providing the blades an undisturbed flow of air. As indicated in
Table 1, blade rotation rates generally fall within a speed range of approximately 10 to 20 rpm. For the two GE systems
listed in Table 1, tip velocities fall in the range of 40 to 80 m/s (78 to 158 knots). Faster rotation rates, and thus tip
velocities, are generally avoided to limit centripetal acceleration forces and to minimize generation of acoustic noise. The
significant physical size of the turbine blades results in a substantial RCS target irrespective of whether the blades are
viewed face on or edge on by a radar. The tip velocities for these blades fall within a speed range applicable to aircraft.
Consequently, the turbine blades will appear to a radar as a “moving” target of significant size if they are within the radar
line of sight. The following section provides specific technical data on the RCS and Doppler characteristics for a 1.5 MW
wind turbine based on field testing conducted at Fenner, NY, in May 2006.
Radars have to detect everything – key to US safety

Air defense and missile warning radars must be able to unamtrack all objects of interest by primary radar alone. Thus,
these detect capabilities must be maintained whether or not the object being observed is “cooperative” in sense of
providing SSR signals. This requirement is distinctly different than the primary radar tracking capability that may be
required for an ATC radar. ATC primary radars are only one element of a system employed to ensure safe use of the U.S.
air Other elements of this system include use of SSR, flight rules, and published approach and departure procedures, to
name a few.
20
KARAM
RADAR TURN EXT.
Radars hurt military rediness

The Department must carry out its national security missions effectively with careful attention to the safety of the general
public and Department personnel. The presence of wind turbines in the vicinity where these military missions occur has
the potential to impact the effectiveness of such missions and thus military readiness.
21
KARAM
WIND BAD - TURBINES FAIL
Turbines will Fail do to structural Failure

Caithness Windfarm Information Forum ’08 (Summary of Wind Turbine Accident data to June 30th
2008; http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/page4.htm )
From the data obtained, this is the third most common accident cause, with 58 instances found. “Structural failure” is
assumed to be major component failure under conditions which components should be designed to withstand. This mainly
concerns storm damage to turbines and tower collapse. However, poor quality control, lack of maintenance and
component failure can also be responsible.
Turbines will fail do to blade failure

By far the biggest number of incidents found were due to blade failure. “Blade failure” can arise from a number of
possible sources, and results in either whole blades or pieces of blade being thrown from the turbine. A total of 130
separate incidences were found: Pieces of blade are documented as travelling over 400m, typically from much smaller
turbines than those proposed for use today. In Germany, blade pieces have gone through the roofs and walls of nearby
buildings. This is why CWIF believe that there should be a minimum distance of at least 1km between turbines and
occupied housing – and preferably at least 2km in line with other European countries in order to address other problems
such as noise.
Turbines will fail do to fires

Fire is the second most common accident cause in incidents found. Fire can arise from a number of sources - and some
turbine types seem more prone to fire than others. A total of 106 fire incidents were found: The biggest problem with
turbine fires is that, because of the turbine height, the fire brigade can do little but watch it burn itself out. While this may
be acceptable in reasonably still conditions, in a storm it means burning debris being scattered over a wide area, with
obvious consequences. In dry weather there is obviously a wider-area fire risk, especially for those constructed in or close
to forest areas and/or close to housing.
Wind energy is unreliable

Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects and National Research
Council ’07 (Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects; Publication year: 2007; page 34)
The reliability of wind forecasts declines rapidly with time, and a variety of techniques are being investigated to improve
medium- and long-range forecasts (e.g., Brundage et al. 2001; Gow 2003). As a result, if electricity derived from wind
energy is to be incorporated into a dispatch system, a certain amount of backup or reserve power is required. In addition,
the marginal cost of electricity generation by different kinds of power plants is more or less dependent on the plant type.
Finally, some power plants can be ramped up and down faster and more efficiently than others.
22
KARAM
WIND BAD – TURBINES FAIL
High winds destroy turbines

Rosenbloom ’06 (Eric; Science editor and writer in Vermont; September 2006; A Probolem with Wind Power;
http://www.aweo.org/ProblemWithWind.html )
In high winds, ironically, the turbines must be stopped because they are easily damaged. Build-
up of dead bugs has been shown to halve the maximum power generated by a wind turbine,
reducing the average power generated by 25% and more. Build-up of salt on off-shore turbine
blades similarly has been shown to reduce the power generated by 20%-30%.
Conditions have to be perfect for wind energy to work effectively

Eon Netz, the grid manager for about a third of Germany, discusses the technical problems of connecting large numbers of
wind turbines [click here]: Electricity generation from wind fluctuates greatly, requiring additional reserves of
"conventional" capacity to compensate; high-demand periods of cold and heat correspond to periods of low wind; only
limited forecasting is possible for wind power; wind power needs a corresponding expansion of the high-voltage and
extra-high-voltage grid infrastructure; and expansion of wind power makes the grid more unstable.
It is a big IF for wind energy to solve in the US

The DOE says there are 18,000 square miles of good wind sites in the U.S., which with current technology could produce
20% of the country's electricity. This rosy plan, based on the wind industry's sales brochures, as well as on a claim of
electricity use that is only three-quarters of the actual use in 2002, would require "only" 142,060 1.5-MW towers. They
also explain, "If the wind resource is well matched to peak loads, wind energy can effectively contribute to system
capacity." That's a big if -- counting on the wind to blow exactly when demand rises -- especially if you expect the wind to
cover 20% (or even 5%) of that demand. As in Denmark and Germany, you would quickly learn that the prudent thing to
do is to look elsewhere first in meeting the load demand. And we'd be stuck with a lot of generally unhelpful hardware
covering every windy spot in the U.S., while the developers would be looking to put up yet more to make up for and deny
their failings
23
KARAM
WIND BAD – TURBINES FAIL
Windmills fail – multiple reasons

Huge windmills use electricity from the electric grid system, referred to as "parasitic" loads. Such parasitic loads include
electricity from the grid for the electric pitch system yaw motors, oil heaters, oil pumps for bearings and gearbox, cooling
fan for the generator and turbine controller. Unfortunately, if electricity is not supplied for these components, disasters can
occur, such as ice throws when the blades are not heated during winter and total destruction of the blades if the brake does
not work to stop the turbine during wind speeds exceeding 57 miles per hour.
24
KARAM
STATUS QUO SOLVES WIND ENERGY
Status Quo Solves – Indestructible Micro Vortex Wind Turbines – 7 reasons

Eco-Nex No Date Given (Wind-Energy-Ultra Modern-"Vortex" Micro Wind Turbines;
http://www.eco-nex.com/32.html)
At eco-nex we can provide you with a range of high-spec almost indestructable Vortex wind turbines, through to specially
designed Urban Turbines for flat roofs. The Vortex Wind Turbines are dubbed by the eco-press as the next revolution for
inner cities, and can provide banks of turbines to power entire tower blocks. Combines with a solar dish, GSHP and a
stirling engine, these devices can provide economical and ecological energy. The Vortex Turbine is set to provide the
Sustainable energy revolution of the 21st Century. Facilities Managers in Urban Environments are no longer excluded
from utilising wind energy to complement the existing National Energy Grid.
Key Features of this technology:

1) Vertical installations on poles/masts/towers can be designed in striking modern shapes and colours to complement
modern buildings.
2) Horizontal installations can be stacked in cages on flat rooftops such as tower blocks. Inner city buildings can utilise
high-low turbulent winds.
3) On-building installations are made possible via virtually zero vibration and virtually zero noise.
4) Conservation Friendly - No effect upon wildlife such as birds and bats.
5) Lower but consistent electrical output as this style functions at high-low and turbulent wind conditions.
6) Small footprint either vertically or horizontally mounted due to virtually zero noise/vibration.
7) Utilised in conjunction with an eco-nex solar-dish array, the Vortex Turbine can provide complete building energy
needs for Urban installations.
25
KARAM
WIND BAD – CASE TURNS
Turbines increase greenhouse gasses

Denmark (population 5.3 million) has over 6,000 turbines that produced electricity equal to 19%
of what the country used in 2002. Yet no conventional power plant has been shut down. Because
of the intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants must be kept running
at full capacity to meet the actual demand for electricity. Most cannot simply be turned on and
off as the wind dies and rises, and the quick ramping up and down of those that can be would
actually increase their output of pollution and carbon dioxide (the primary "greenhouse" gas). So
when the wind is blowing just right for the turbines, the power they generate is usually a surplus
and sold to other countries at an extremely discounted price, or the turbines are simply shut off.
Wind programs have to cut down trees and destroy the environment up to 60 acres per
turbine – this turns case
The destructive impact that such construction would have, for example, on a wild mountain top,
is obvious. Erosion, disruption of water flow, and destruction of wild habitat and plant life would
continue with the presence of access roads, power lines, transformers, and the tower sites
themselves. For better wind efficiency, each tower requires trees to be cleared. Vegetation would
be kept down with herbicides, further poisoning the soil and water. Each tower should be at least
5-10 times the rotor diameter from neighboring towers and trees for optimal performance. For a
tower with 35-meter rotors, that is 1,200-2,400 feet, a quarter to a half of a mile. A site on a
forested ridge would require clearing 45-90 acres per tower to operate optimally (although only
4-6 acres of clearance per tower, the towers spaced every 500-1,000 feet, is typical, making
them almost useless when the wind is not a perfect crosswind). The Danish grid operator Eltra
has found that a turbine can decrease the production of another turbine 5 kilometers (3.1 miles)
away. The proposed 45-square-mile facility on the Scottish island of Lewis represents 50 acres for
each megawatt of rated capacity. FPL Energy says it requires 40 acres per installed megawatt,
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says 60 acres is likely. Facilities worldwide
generally use 30-70 acres per megawatt, i.e., about 120-280 acres for every megawatt of likely
average output (25% capacity factor)
26
KARAM
WIND BAD – CASE TURNS BIG IMAPCTS
The negative impacts of windmill plants violates 3 laws and causes the death of animals,
birds, fish, aquatic life, plants, and all wildlife
West Virginia laws and Virginia laws were developed to protect our environment, but have not
been enforced regarding negative impacts of huge windmill "plants": the Water Pollution Control
Act is "declared to be the public policy of the state of West Virginia to maintain reasonable
standards of purity and quality of the water of the state consistent with (1) public health and
public enjoyment thereof, (2) the propagation and protection of animal, bird, fish, aquatic and
plant life…" and includes "setting standards of water quality applicable to both the surface
waters and groundwaters of this state; the Groundwater Protection Act; the Natural Streams
Preservation Act, which is to "secure for the citizens of West Virginia of present and future
generations the benefits of an enduring resource of free-flowing streams possessing outstanding
scenic, recreational, geological, fish and wildlife, botanical, historical, archeological or other
scientific or cultural values."; and the State Natural Resources Law, which assigns protection and
"ownership of and title to all wild animals, wild birds, both migratory and resident, and all fish,
amphibians, and all forms of aquatic life in the state of West Virginia", such that it is illegal to
"kill, destroy,… wound or injure any wildlife".
27
KARAM
WIND ENERGY BAD (GENERIC)
Wind energy is not the solution to Alternative sources of energy

Many alternative sources of energy, as well as dramatic improvements in the use of current
sources, are in development. But wind turbines exist, so they are presented by their
manufacturers and managers as the solution. Every effort is made to maintain the illusion that
they are in fact a solution when a few simple questions reveal they are not.
Wind energy is unreliable

Wind energy is unreliable because huge windmills (that is, those greater than 400 feet in height)
can only produce electricity when the wind attains a speed of 8 miles per hour. Huge windmills
are not designed to store energy, so any electricity produced by the windmills must enter the
regional electrical grid system to be used immediately; otherwise, the electricity is unused. Also,
wind velocities are not synchronized with peak "load" times. Wind velocities are too low in the
summer peak electrical usage times to provide meaningful electricity
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/ online/ccd/avgwind.html). In order to compensate for this
variability of electrical production, the Regional Transmission Organization must maintain a
capacity margin (also referred to as reserve generating capacity, reserve margin, and spinning
reserve or synchronized reserve) which requires excess electricity to be produced at all times.
The U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA) provides annual
reports, the most recent of which showed a capacity margin as of October, 2005, of 15.4% for
the contiguous U.S. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat3p2.html). Effectively,
then, any electricity produced by huge windmills is absorbed in the envelope of excess
electricity, which must always be maintained.
HUGE WINDMILLS WILL NOT CAUSE ANY COAL-FIRED PLANT TO GO OUT OF

SERVICE AND THEREFORE WILL NOT REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES
Given that an excess electricity margin of approximately 15.4% is constantly maintained,

consider the amount of carbon dioxide produced by the required excess electricity produced by
coal-fired plants. Because electricity produced by huge windmills is absorbed in this excess
electricity envelope, this wind energy cannot reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Huge windmills
actually cause more carbon dioxide emissions because there must be enough electricity
28
KARAM
produced by coal-fired plants to serve as a backup for the unreliable amount of electricity
produced by huge windmills.
29
KARAM
WIND BAD – NOT CREATE JOBS
Wind programs do not create jobs

Despite the energy industry's claim that wind farms create jobs ("revitalize struggling rural
communities," says Enxco), the fact is that, after the few months of construction -- much of it
handled by imported labor from the turbine company -- a typical large wind facility requires just
one maintenance worker. Of the 200 workers involved in construction of the 89-turbine Top of
Iowa facility, only 20 were local; seven permanent jobs were created. The average nationwide is
1-2 jobs per 20 MW installed capacity.
30
KARAM
WIND BAD – NEGATIVE IMPACTS O/W
The Negative Impacts Outweigh the benefits of towers – the plan is ineffective
All of these negative aspects will only become worse if even a small part of the
industry's plans for hundreds of thousands of towers becomes reality. At every level,
however, the negative impacts must of course be weighed against the benefits. It is
wise to diversify the sources of our energy. But the money and legislative effort
invested in large-scale wind generation could be spent much more effectively to
achieve the goal of reducing our use of fossil and nuclear fuels.
Benefits are outstripped by the huge negative impacts

On a small scale, where a turbine directly supplies the users and the fluctuating production can
be stored, wind can contribute to a home, school, factory, office building, or even small village's
electricity. But this simply does not work on a large scale to supply the grid. Even the small
benefits claimed by their promoters are far outstripped by the huge negative impacts.
31
KARAM
WIND TRADEOFF WITH GRANDFATHERING
Increasing Wind Energy trades-off with companies on the power grid

Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects and National Research
Council ’07 (Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects; Publication year: 2007; page 34-35)
Typically, a new power source is added to the grid by system operators in order of increasing operating costs, or the
closely related but not identical “bid prices.” Thus any new power source, including wind, displaces generation that costs
more than it does, in the dispatch order. More-expensive power sources that are on the margins (for example, at peak
demand times) would be displaced by less-expensive sources, depending, of course, on when the new power sources
become available. As an example, the wind in the eastern United States averages lower speeds during summer afternoons
—the normal times of highest peak demand for electricity there—than it does in winter, when peak demands are typically
lower. Thus, to understand the extent to which any power source, including wind, would replace other generation sources,
information is needed on demand and availability of the power source throughout the year at fairly small time increments.
However, sometimes transmission constraints cause dispatch to be out of economic merit order (Keith et al. 2004). In
addition, multiple years of data are examined to account for year-to-year variation. The committee cannot do much more
here than to summarize the complexities of the electric-power production, distribution, and dispatching system. To quote
DeCarolis and Keith (2006): “Intermittency can affect system operation on three timescales [minute-to-minute, intrahour,
and hour- to day-ahead scheduling], but the impact depends on the transmission and generation infrastructure, and the
resulting costs are not well understood in cases where wind serves more than a small fraction of demand. While Denmark
and parts of Germany have wind serving more than 20% of demand, their experience does little to resolve uncertainties
about the costs imposed by intermittent wind resources for at least two reasons. First, both countries are connected to large
power pools that serve as capacity reserve for wind. Second, the multiplicity of wind-energy subsidies and absence of
efficient markets . . . makes it difficult to disentangle costs.” The authors emphasize that the cost of intermittency (in
terms of back-up or reserve requirements) will be less if the generation mix is dominated by power plants with fast ramp
rates (gas, hydropower) than if it is dominated by coal or nuclear plants, which have high capital costs and slow ramp
rates.
32
KARAM
SPENDING LINKS
Wind Energy Policies Cost billions of dollars

Ryser and Carr ’08 (Jeff and Housley; Electric Utility Week; June 2, 2008; Texas PUC to convene hearings on
spending up to $6.38 billion to bring wind to local centers; Lexis)
This executive said power providers throughout the state are becoming increasingly aware of the need to do something to
reduce congestion in ERCOT's western zones, where wind prices are often negatives. He notes that what has come to be
called "the wind event" of February 26, when the wind stopped blowing in West Texas and auxillary units were not turned
on fast enough to avoid a short outage, has made power providers in the state far more conscious of the importance of
protecting wind assets.
"New transmission will be built," this executive said. "The only debate is over how much?"
The April 2 study that the PUC will hold hearings on starting June 11 vetted scenarios that range from 1,435 to 2,634
miles of new 345-kV right-of-way costing between an estimated $2.95 billion and $6.38 billion.
Wind energy is expensive

The Sunday Times ’08 (Richard Woods; pg. 17; The wind farmer; July 6, 2008; lexis)
Turbines still suffer from being at the mercy of whether the wind blows or not. And wind-generated electricity relies on
government subsidy to be competitive
DOES HE HAVE AN ANSWER?
Technological advances now enable turbines to operate in a wider range of conditions, thus lowering costs. However,
wind energy remains more expensive than electricity from gas or coal
Wind energy is too expensive – other forms of alternative energy are better
The Jerusalem Post ’08 (Judy Siegel-Itzkovich; pg. 8; Turning over an old leaf; June 15, 2008; Lexis)
The current high prices of agricultural products he continues can partially be explained as an artificial bump. The price of
rice has gone up, even though rice yields this year are supposed to be the highest ever. But the people of China, India and
Indonesia are getting richer; they can afford to buy more food, and due to the US banking crisis, investors looking for
alternatives are buying grain futures. There isn't a global shortage of corn or soybeans. I think it's a necessary first step to
build the infrastructure for biofuels, but since such crops are often subsidized by governments, in the longer term we
should go to alternative sources. In the US, we must find large-scale and sustainable alternatives for national security, and
solar or wind energy is still too expensive, insists Arntzen.
33
KARAM
SPENDING LINKS
Increasing Wind energy is expensive

Buisness Week ’08 (Steve Hamm; WIND. THE POWER. THE PROMISE. THE BUSINESS.; A partial answer to
America's energy crisis is springing up. But the struggle to harness the winds of Kansas shows the difficulty in building an
industry that threatens the status quo; July 7, 2008; Lexis)
Such a transformation won't come easily. While much of America's wind energy is in the Midwest, demand for electricity
is on the coasts. And the electrical grid, designed decades ago, can't move large quantities of electricity thousands of
miles. There's plenty of wind off the coasts, but it's both expensive to harness and controversial; not-in-my-backyard
sentiment has slowed some of the most high-profile projects
Wind energy is 2.5 times more expensive than other forms of energy
Jamieson ’08 (Bill; The Scotsman; Don't insult us with call for a national debate on wind farms; June 27, 2008;
Lexis)
If the government is to meet its renewables target, then the amount of electricity to be generated by wind farms will have
to increase more than twenty-fold. The Royal Academy of Engineering has calculated that wind energy is two and a half
times more expensive than other forms of electricity generation in the UK.
34
KARAM
WIND ENERGY POPULAR WITH PUBLIC
Public Opinion matters – wind popular with pubic

Gipe ’03 (Paul; Wind-Works.org; Tilting at Windmills: Public Opinion towards wind energy; http://www.wind-
works.org/articles/tilting.html )
The likelihood of such opponents delaying or preventing projects from proceeding concerns both policy makers and the
investment community. Developers have to acknowledge the importance of public opinion, says Markus Christen, a vice
president of Credit Suisse in New York, because the public can forge the regulatory and political process. "This has to
concern any investor in a particular industry." Craig Reynolds, senior vice president for energy project finance at GE
Capitol, concurs. "Whether we're doing a wind farm or a coal plant, local sentiment is a check point," Reynolds says.
Fortunately a spate of new opinion surveys show broad public support for wind energy. This bodes well for an industry
poised for a resurgence in Britain and North America.
35
KARAM
WIND ENERGY UNPOPULAR
Wind energy opinion is changing – no support

Nation Master Online Encyclopedia ’05 (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Wind-energy )
Denmark, Germany, Spain, India, and the USA have large installations of wind power, with principally Europe leading the
way with quiet, efficient and modern machinery. Opposition to the use of wind power is growing slowly, and research
into possible negative impacts of its use has become more common. For example, one study by geophysicists at Princeton
University in the USA [1] modelled effects of large scale wind farms on local climate and potential long-term negative
impact on climate due to their presence. This has some basis in that wind turbines do slow the wind down in order to
extract kinetic energy; however, making global climate predictions based on this effect is extremely challenging.
However, there has been some discussion from those in the industry that those opposed to the use of wind energy will use
studies like this to further opposition to the widespread use of wind energy [2].
36
KARAM
AFF – POSITIVE IMPACTS O/W NEGATIVE OF WIND
The Positive Impacts of Wind Energy Outweigh the Negative Impacts

Donnelly ’07 (John; The Boston Globe; Two oil giants plunge into the wind business Shell, BP intend to play major
role; pg. A1; March 2, 2007; Lexis)
Tom Natan, research director of the National Environmental Trust, a Washington-based advocacy group, said he believes
that wind power's benefits outweigh the negatives and that the involvement of heavyweights such as BP and Shell -
regardless of their motives - is necessary to accelerate development of wind power.
37

BHR Wind Bad

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

BHR Wind Bad

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Michigan State University Debate Wind Bad

WIND BAD FILE INDEX

REPLACE “RENEWABLE ENERGY” WITH BIOMASS, HYDROPOWER,

BATS TURN SHELL (1/1)

1. Windmill facilities kill bats which are key to the ecosystem

2. ECOSYSTEM DECLINE LEADS TO HUMAN EXTINCTION

[*173] Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist

Turbines kill Thousands of bats

Bats are ignored in new wind-energy projects

Bats are key to environment, corn, cotton, and disease spread

Bats are a keystone species

Bat’s food is in open fields where turbines are

1 Turbine kills approximately 50 bats

Bats key to the environment and safeguard human life

HABITAT DESTRUCTION OUTWEIGHS NUCLEAR WAR

Studies are flawed – barely any US facilities kill bats

1. Wind turbine facilities kill trout

2. Trout is a keystone Species risking ecosystem collapse

ECOSYSTEM DECLINE LEADS TO HUMAN EXTINCTION

[*173] Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist

Wind turbines disturb radar stations and radio signals

Military Readiness is key to hegemony

The return of great powers and great games

RADAR TURN (4/4)

Readiness has 4 major devastating impacts

Overflight and Obstruction hurt all of US readiness

Wind Farms hurt US security and thus readiness

Wind Farms hurt radar activities hurting readiness

Wind turbines hurt military operations through the environment

RADAR TURN EXT.

Radars have to detect everything – key to US safety

Radars hurt military rediness

Turbines will Fail do to structural Failure

Turbines will fail do to blade failure

Turbines will fail do to fires

Wind energy is unreliable

High winds destroy turbines

Conditions have to be perfect for wind energy to work effectively

It is a big IF for wind energy to solve in the US

Windmills fail – multiple reasons

Status Quo Solves – Indestructible Micro Vortex Wind Turbines – 7 reasons

Key Features of this technology:

Turbines increase greenhouse gasses

Wind energy is not the solution to Alternative sources of energy

Wind energy is unreliable

HUGE WINDMILLS WILL NOT CAUSE ANY COAL-FIRED PLANT TO GO OUT OF

Given that an excess electricity margin of approximately 15.4% is constantly maintained,

Wind programs do not create jobs

Benefits are outstripped by the huge negative impacts

Increasing Wind Energy trades-off with companies on the power grid

Wind Energy Policies Cost billions of dollars

Wind energy is expensive

DOES HE HAVE AN ANSWER?

Increasing Wind energy is expensive

Public Opinion matters – wind popular with pubic

Wind energy opinion is changing – no support

The Positive Impacts of Wind Energy Outweigh the Negative Impacts

S-ar putea să vă placă și