Algae Biodiesel Aff

Algae Biodiesel WDW 2k8
Algae Aff. Index

Algae Aff. Index.................................................................................................................................. ............1
1AC Observation One: Inherency................................................................................................ ...................2
1AC Advantage One: Global Warming............................................................................................... .............3
1AC Advantage Two: Military Readiness ............................................................................................. ...........8
"You used to hear senior commanders say, 'Look, we're not built to be efficient. We're built to be
effective,'" Pudas says. But now, energy inefficiency is hurting combat effectiveness…"The constant threat
of improvised explosive devices, rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms fire attacks along known
ground lines of communications and the necessity to traverse them to reach our outlying bases, places our
Marines, soldiers and sailors in harm's way each time we send out a convoy," he wrote. By using
renewable energy systems at far-flung bases, the Marines could ensure more reliable communications,
improving battlefield operations; reduce the number of supply convoys and combat troops providing
protection, allowing troops to be used elsewhere on the battlefield; provide key life support functions that
help sustain Marines' combat effectiveness; and save money by reducing the need for petroleum..............9
1AC Observation Two: Solvency ................................................................................................. .................12
Inherency Extensions........................................................................................................................ ...........13
Ext to Oil consumption high now................................................................................... ..............................14
.......................................................................................................................................... .........................14
Extension to Civilian Spillover......................................................................................................... .............14
Aff. Harms Argument: Lives at Risk Due to Oil Dependency.................................................................. .......16
Oil Addiction Causes Terrorism ............................................................................................................ ........17
Oil Impact........................................................................................................................... .........................18
Neg. Evidence: Investment in Algae Biodiesel Happening Now........................................................ ............19
Neg. Problems Persistent with Algae Biodiesel........................................................................................ .....20
Neg. Oil Addiction Doesn’t Cause Terrorism ............................................................................. ...................21
Neg. High Oil Prices Good..................................................................................................... .......................22
www.ksu.edu/debate
1
1AC Observation One: Inherency
U.S. Government -- due to low cost of crude oil – stopped

funding of algae biofuel.
New Scientist 2007

(“Green light for Marine Algae”, accessed online 7 July 2008, pg. 29)
SHELL is to become the first major oil company to produce diesel fuel from marine algae. Algae are a climate-friendly way to
make fuel from carbon dioxide. They produce an oil that can readily be converted to diesel, and can be fed CO2 directly from
smokestacks. Unlike biofuels such as corn, they don't use up soil or water that could otherwise be used to grow food, which
can pump up food prices. The US government abandoned research on algal biofuel in the 1990s because of the low cost of
crude oil. But as oil and food prices began to rise, small algal fuel producers sprang up. Shell plans to begin construction on
a pilot plant in Hawaii immediately, which it expects will produce 15 times as much oil for a given area as other biofuel crops,
thanks to the efficiency of algal photosynthesis.
Energy R&D for the military must be at least doubled if any

advancement in alternate fuels will be seen.
Eggers 2008
(Cmdr. Jeffrey W. Eggers, is an active-duty naval officer serving on the Joint Staff. He recently completed a
tour as a director for combating terrorism at the National Security Council, May 2008, Armed Forces
Journal, “The Fuel Gauge of National Security”, date accessed 7 July 2008,
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/05/3434573/)
The country’s reliance on oil is troubling simply from the economics of diminishing growth in supply and
increasing demand. Introducing the aggravating reliance on belligerent states and the threat of a
disruption in global supply raises the issue to a critical status. Contemplation of the tactical and strategic
national security implications of an oil-based military further escalates the imperative to a crisis level.
Funding for military R&D has always been an investment in national security just as investment and
dedication in innovation has always been a mainstay of global power. With energy security and national
security now so inextricably entwined, investment in military energy R&D must be redoubled, with the
reasonable expectation that the immediate and tactical public benefits of such a flanking maneuver
against our oil dependence will be followed by a strategic shift to tangible and lasting energy security.
Thus, the plan: The United States federal government

should substantially increase alternative energy incentives
in the United States by funding algae biodiesel to supply
all fuel needs of the Department of Defense. We’ll clarify.
www.ksu.edu/debate
2
1AC Advantage One: Global Warming

A. Largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the United
States is the Department of Defense.
Erwin 2007
(Sandra Erwin, serves on the editorial board of National Defense magazine, April 2007, National Defense,
“Defense Seeking $131 Million Dollars for Energy-Saving Projects”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 30)
"The Pentagon has asked Congress for $131 million to develop energy-saving technologies during the next five years. The
proposed budget would fund a mix of fuel cells, generators and engine technologies. The projects were selected based on
Input from the military services, says John Young, director of defense research and engineering. His office oversees the so-
called "Energy security Task Force," which was created to find ways to reduce fossil-fuel consumption. The Defense
Department Is the largest single consumer of fuel In the United States even though It accounts for just 1.2 percent of the
nation's energy use. Nearly 60 percent of the Pentagon's energy consumption is in the form of jet fuel, which powers not only
aircraft, but also tanks and some Navy ships.
40,000 barrels of oil are used every day to fuel our

military’s operations in Iraq alone.
Eggers 2008
A military that operates normally by throwing fuel away and designs systems for speed over fuel efficiency reveals an infrastructure and
a strategy built around oil as if it were a fundamental constant. Yet the military is realizing we can no longer take this lifeblood for
granted, particularly when there are lives are on the line to feed our oil hungry services. A 2006 memo from U.S. leadership in Iraq to
the Pentagon requested that alternative sources of energy be identified to power the American presence in Iraq. The oil expenditures in
Iraq, per soldier, are 16 times what they were in World War II. The entire U.S. footprint in Iraq and Afghanistan is essentially powered
by diesel-fueled generators, requiring 9 gallons of fuel per soldier per day. The war in Iraq alone requires 40,000 barrels of oil per day.
The coalition bases rely on a constant supply of fuel trucked in by military convoys which are vulnerable to attacks given the long hours
on the road. The memo argued that without assistance, U.S. forces would “remain unnecessarily exposed” and would “continue to
accrue preventable ... serious and grave casualties.”
B. Algae Biodiesel will reduce Military Carbon Emissions

Initial Tests Prove BioFuels Reduce Military’s CO2
Emissions and Can Be Integrated into Air Force
Chandler 2008
(Jerome Chandler, writer and reporter he has been recognized this year with the Royal Aeronautical Society
for journalistic excellence in the field of aviation reporting, he also has 16 years of aviation reporting
experience, January 2008, Air Transport World, “Exotic No More”, date accessed 7 July 2008 pg. 49)
Mere months ago, many experts relegated biofuels for commercial jets to the realm of the quasirealistic-something hovering
just over the horizon. This magazine said as much in our May 2007 story "Fueling the Future" (ATW, 5/07, p. 38). Things have
changed. Predictions that jet biofuels were decades away have become far more proximate. "If you'd asked me that question
12 months ago, I would probably have said a realistic timeframe would be two decades from now," says Nathan Agnew, GM
-strategic development for Air New Zealand. "Now . . . I'd say it's within the next decade, and I'm hoping that if you ask me in
another 12 months I can say it's certain within the next five years."… "Until now," says Agnew, "the problem with alternate
fuel is that at very, very low temperatures [it] doesn't flow as well out of the tank into the engine. The fuel just becomes very,
www.ksu.edu/debate
3
very thick." No longer. "DARPA . . . has completely eliminated that [problem]," contends Doug Kirkpatrick, program manager
for the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Through "multiple processes," the agency has developed a
"completely compliant JP-8 biofuel." JP-8 is the military cognate of Jet A-1, with some additives to improve shelf life and
safety…DARPA's charge: Deliver 100 liters of completely compliant JP-8 fuel from biological feedstocks in configurations
both scalable for medium- to large-scale production and affordable. By "afford-able," Kirkpatrick means "less than $3 per
gallon."Through what he terms "the completely tortuous path the Air Force uses to certify" something as complying to
military specifications, biofuel now is "fit for purpose," just not yet certified as "fit for use." That entails burning the fuel in
engines to make sure nothing untoward happens. The agency appears to be convinced there are no gremlins waiting out on
the wing. "We have done extensive physical/chemical characterization of the fuel," he says, "and we're very comfortable the
fuels being produced will pass any tests applied to JP-8."Green, Green Driving DARPA's development of biofuels, pure and
simple, is the necessity to have an alternative to traditional fossil fuels. ANZ says its program is impelled by environmental
considerations. It's not that biofuels will emit any less CO2 from the exhausts of jet engines, it's that over the lifecycle of
growing feedstocks to produce biofuels those plants absorb more CO2 than they ultimately emit. Enter the so-called "second
genera-tion" of biofuels, things like switch-grass, where the cellulosic option comes into play. "The content of switch-grass
would include everything," says Stanford Seto, a former combustor and augmenter aerodynamic designer with GE who is
now with Belcan and is one of the most respected voices in the propulsion industry. "Everything" includes "the stalks, the
seeds, the whole bit," he says. While seemingly elegant, this solution "is a little tougher to get to because you've got to work
harder to break down the cellulose structure to get it into a form you can use."Fuel From Water Right now, the greenest of
genies waiting to be coaxed from its lamp is algae. "It might be a superior material for generating these types of fuels," says
Seto. Daggett couldn't agree more. "Algae has a lot higher yield per acre than other feedstocks," says the Boeing
environmentalist, who uses decidedly first-generation biofuels to power his car. He says an acre of algae is capable of
producing 10,000 gal. of algae oil, the stuff from which biofuels can be refined. "If you have that same area in soybeans, that
would be something like 60 gallons. Huge difference."Indeed it's so huge, and the allure so great, that algae has become the
sexiest potential feedstock around. Certainly Chevron is paying close attention. In cooperation with the US Dept. of Energy's
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the petroleum giant says it has inked "a collaborative research and development
agreement to study and advance technology to produce liquid transportation fuels using algae."Algae is an enticing
alternative to those who don't want to devote vast swaths of land to fuel crops that could displace food crops. "We're not
actually that interested in feedstocks that come from competing foodstuff issues," says Agnew. "Putting political issues
aside, we think economically those types of fuels are not going to be best."…"I think what we will see as soon as we run a
successful test," he contends, "is that many other airlines around the world will be following hot on our heels."
C. Military Adoption Leads to Civilian Spillover

Innovation into alternate fuels by the military will
encourage others to do the same.
Farrell Jr. 2006
(Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., retired Army Lieutenant General, November 2006, National Defense, “Defense
Leading the Way in Energy Savings”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 4)
Our enormous national appetite for energy at last has emerged as a national security issue. The Pentagon, fortunately, is now
assuming a leadership role in areas spanning energy-saving technologies and alternative fuels. While the Defense
Department - which accounts for about 1 percent of the nations fuel expenditures - alone cannot drive market forces, it is in
fact the single largest consumer of petroleum fuels in the United States. Therefore, it is appropriate it takes the lead in energy-
related initiatives and explores innovative technologies that could eventually transition to civilian society. While it's not a
glamorous subject, energy is critical to success on the battlefield, notes Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., chairman of the House
Armed Services readiness subcommittee. "The Air Force alone sees a $600 million increase in the annual cost of doing
business for every $ 10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil," he points out. Although the majority of energy consumption in
the Defense Department is for transportation, installation energy requirements also must be considered.
Military adoption of alternate energy will lead to civilian

adoption of alternate energy.
Eggers 2008
www.ksu.edu/debate
4
At first glance, the military’s slice of demand may not be the intuitive place to focus effort. The military’s use of oil constitutes
about 2 percent of total U.S. oil consumption, or about the same as a major U.S. airline. And if there is one sector of
consumption where we should gladly pay a premium for high-octane liquid fuel, it is our national security apparatus. So it is
fair to argue that attention is best placed on the civilian side of usage, where 98 percent of demand lies. There are many near-
term solutions that promise to make a dent in this 98 percent, on the demand and supply sides. Plug-in hybrids, sustainable
bio-fuels, broad-based conservation efforts and general “greenness” are gaining considerable political traction. But none
offers a long-term silver bullet, and each has limitations. In addition to pulling consumption toward “ready” technologies,
work must be done in parallel to advance high-risk and transformative solutions. And one of the most successful models for
doing so is the military wing of research and development. Focusing on the 2 percent of military consumption is important
not only because it safeguards the flow, and mitigates risk, to the 98 percent. The exploration of new sources of energy for
our military fighting machinery will directly sustain future defense readiness and buttress military power and, more
significantly, will indirectly catalyze a revolution in civilian transportation technology and innovation.
www.ksu.edu/debate
5
D. We can’t wait As reliance on fossil fuels increases, our biosphere captures
more CO2, increasing global warming – the trends are already being seen.
Spaulding 3
(Raci Oriona, J.D. @ the U of Iowa College of Law, “Fuel From Vegetables? A Modern Approach to Global
Climate Change”, 13 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 277, Spring, accessed online p. L/N) DMZ
Perhaps the most serious consequence of the ever-increasing global reliance on the products of
industrialized economies is the problem of global climate change. This change in global climate has been
largely attributed to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions - carbon emissions caused by burning fossil fuels
such as oil, gas, and coal. n21 Most available evidence suggests that there [*281] is a detectable human
influence on the global climate. n22 For instance, the U.S. Climate Action Report of 2002, written by the
Environmental Protection Agency, indicated that "greenhouse gases are accumulating in the Earth's
atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing global mean surface air temperature and subsurface
ocean temperatures to rise." n23 Additionally, Christopher Flavin, President of Worldwatch Institute, has
noted that: From the ice cap at the North Pole, which has lost 40 percent of its thickness in the last
decade, to the coral reefs near the Equator, one-quarter of which have been killed by rising ocean
temperatures and other stresses, the Earth is telling us that we are entering an era of dangerous climate
change that is already threatening populations around the world. Already, economic damages from natural
disasters has reached $ 608 billion over the last decade - as much as in the previous four decades
combined. n24 Humans magnify these effects by increasing the global economy's dependence on fossil
fuels. As more fossil fuel is demanded by automobiles, factories, and power plants, more fossil fuel is
burned, thus emitting more carbon dioxide into the Earth's atmosphere and exacerbating global warming.
The effects of global warming, while still somewhat uncertain, are expected to do damage around the
globe by causing excessive droughts in some areas while increasing rainfall in others, exacerbating coastal
damage like erosion, and increasing instances of heat stress and respiratory illness in many nations. n25
Statistics from nations around the world demonstrate the truth of this statement. For instance: Dramatic
examples of the human health impacts from severe flooding can be found in China. In 1996, official
national statistics showed 200 million people affected by flooding. There were more than 3,000 deaths and
363,800 injuries; 3.7 million residences were destroyed, with 18 million damaged. Direct economic loses
exceeded U.S. $ 12 billion. n26Chinese statistics have further shown that "200 million people [were] affected
by flooding, more than 3,000 [were killed], and 4 million homes [were] damaged; direct economic losses
exceeded U.S. $ 20 billion." n27 While Chinese scientists could not prove [*282]
that all of these impacts are directly attributable to human-induced climate change, [they could] say that
the heating of the planet that has already occurred is likely to be at least partially responsible for the
severity of these human health impacts. Moreover, [they could say that] future heating will make such
adverse impacts more probable. n28
And ultimately, this warming will collapse the biosphere, destroying every
living thing on the planet.
Caldwell 3
(Joseph George, “What Oil Can Do to Tiny States – and Big Ones, Too!, Foundation.bw, February 3,
accessed online June 12, 2008, p. L/N) DMZ
What The Economist article fails to point out is that what happens to small states when their national oil
reserves run out is much the same as will happen to big states when global oil reserves run out. By the
year 2050, global oil reserves will be exhausted, and industrial civilization will collapse worldwide. But
there is a very significant – and very tragic – difference between the situation when small states run out of
oil and when the world runs out of oil. When small states run out of oil, the population will simply return to
what they did before, or they will migrate, or they will beg for food from the rest of the world. Life goes on,
for them and the rest of the planet, pretty much as before. When the world runs out of oil, however, global
human population will collapse and, unless a significant intervention occurs, the biosphere will have been
www.ksu.edu/debate
6
destroyed by the petroleum age. As the energy inputs of oil (mechanization, irrigation, insecticides and
other modern high-energy inputs) cease to flow, there will be a massive drop in global food production.
World human population will drop from over six billion people to a few hundred million, since that is all that
the current-solar-energy budget of the planet will support in the long term. The death of more than six
billion people is not the real tragedy, however, since everyone must someday die. The great tragedy is
that oil-fed global industrialization is destroying the biosphere – causing the extinction of an estimated
30,000 species a year. If industrial civilization continues until global oil supplies run out, what will remain
will be a ruined planet, with far less biological diversity than before oil. Because of global warming, the
petroleum age may even cause a greenhouse death of the planet, with the extinction of mankind along
with all other large plant and animal species.
www.ksu.edu/debate
7
1AC Advantage Two: Military Readiness

A. Lack of transition to alternative fuel will lead to military
collapse by; being dependent on oil, losing mobility and
battlefield effectiveness, and making our weapon systems
ineffective.
Disaster awaits our military without alternate energy.
Erwin 2007
(Sandra Erwin, serves on the editorial board of National Defense magazine, April 2007, National Defense,
“Defense Seeking $131 Million Dollars for Energy-Saving Projects”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 30)
The U.S. military is the greatest this planet has ever known, in part because of its easy and reliable access to fossil fuels. Like
the rest of the nation, as that access becomes harder, it begins to strain our military's ability to carry out the important work
for which it is tasked. In World War II, the U.S. Armed Forces consumed roughly one gallon of fuel per Soldier per day to
engage the enemy across the globe. That consumption increased 400 percent during the first Persian Gulf War. Just 15 years
later, U.S. Soldiers were consuming 16 gallons of fuel per day to continue military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Without
question, domestic renewable fuels must be part of the fuel mix to meet this increasing demand. Indeed, the availability of
stable, renewable sources of domestic energy is critical to the continued security of this country and its ability to defend itself
around the globe. Fighting the shadow enemy we face today is a difficult task, and our men and women in uniform deserve
every advantage we can provide them. Together with the unparalleled ability of DoD to develop new technologies and the
willingness of private industry to work with DoD hand in hand, we can begin to ensure that America's fighting forces have the
energy they need to succeed.
Fuel is a major source of energy for military mobility.

Farrell Jr. 2006
(Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., retired Army Lieutenant General, November 2006, National Defense, “Defense
Leading the Way in Energy Savings”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 4)
According to its preliminary findings, the task force estimates that the military services have already made significant
advances in energy efficiency and have reduced energy consumption during the past several decades. While the department
currently relies on renewable sources for 9 percent of its electricity, its stated goal is to have 25 percent of its electricity
fueled by renewable sources by 2025.Young also identifies a number of research and engineering efforts to improve the
energy efficiency of tactical vehicles and weapons platforms. Energy for mobility - to power aircraft, ships and vehicles -
accounts for 74 percent of the department's total energy usage. Michael Aimone, Air Force assistant deputy chief of staff for
logistics, installations and mission support, says the Air Force intends to have at least 50 percent of aviation fuel derived
from domestic supplies by 2016. To that end, he cites the recent successful test of a B-52 Stratofbrtress bomber using
synthetic fuel. The test was conducted using a 50/50 blend of crude oil refined jet fuel and a synthetically manufactured
product. "To date, the aircraft has flown over six hours, and combined with over 50 hours of engine tests on the ground, we
have not seen any deleterious effects on the engine, fuel system, or in the ground support equipment," says Aimone.
Battlefield effectiveness hurts because of the military’s

addiction to oil.
Peters 2007
(Katherine McIntire Peters, associate editor of the Government Executive magazine, June 2007,
Government Executive, “Trouble at the Pump”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 47)
www.ksu.edu/debate
8
"You used to hear senior commanders say, 'Look, we're not built to be efficient. We're built to be effective,'" Pudas says. But
now, energy inefficiency is hurting combat effectiveness…"The constant threat of improvised explosive devices, rocket-
propelled grenades and small-arms fire attacks along known ground lines of communications and the necessity to
traverse them to reach our outlying bases, places our Marines, soldiers and sailors in harm's way each time we send
out a convoy," he wrote. By using renewable energy systems at far-flung bases, the Marines could ensure more reliable
communications, improving battlefield operations; reduce the number of supply convoys and combat troops providing
protection, allowing troops to be used elsewhere on the battlefield; provide key life support functions that help sustain
Marines' combat effectiveness; and save money by reducing the need for petroleum.
Failure to move to alternate energy will make every

weapon system ineffective.
Eggers 2008
Oil’s grip on our military is exemplified by the simple fact that we use it for all applications, even where there is a wide
divergence of engineering requirements and alternatives are available. And this has been the case for nearly 80 years. The
Navy’s most modern warship, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, is powered by the same basic engine as Air Force One and
the Air Force’s C-5 transport. A popular photo in Army circles is an M1 Abrams tank firing its gun in midair after “jumping” a
hill at high speed. In pursuit of weight savings and acceleration, the Pentagon revolutionized the M1 to be the only tank in the
world powered by a gas turbine jet engine, yet our flying main battle tank has such poor gas mileage that it has to be trucked
to the front lines. Unlike a normal diesel, these engines burn nearly the same amount of fuel at idle as they do at 30 miles per
hour, thus their fuel consumption is generally measured by gallons per hour instead of miles per gallon, or gallons per mile in
the case of the M1. This thirst for fuel is sometimes cited as the reason that the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division raced into Iraq in
2003 — to make optimal use of the precious fuel they were carrying.
B. MILITARY READINESS IS NECESSARY
Strong military readiness is critical to maintain US hegemony.
Owens 2006
(Mackubin Thomas, Assoc. Dean of Academics and Prof of National Security Affairs @ Naval War College, “A
balanced force structure to achieve a liberal world order”, January 20, accessed July 10, 2008, p. L/N) DMZ
A grand strategy of primacy through US global leadership does not require unilateral US action
everywhere. Realistic primacy depends on the interaction of Churchill’s “two As,” arms and alliances. To
employ a common analogy, the US is not so much the world’s policeman as it is the world’s sheriff who
organizes the posse to maintain order: alliances, coalitions, and the various international institutions that
create, at least in some parts of the world, an international society, the sine qua non of cooperative
security. And it does not mean that all regions of the world are of equal importance to the United States: a
strategy by definition implies priorities. Primacy and the Logic of Force Planning A strategy of primacy
requires a balanced force that can be employed across the spectrum of conflict and prevail under diverse
circumstances against adversaries employing a variety of strategies, including conventional, irregular,
catastrophic, and disruptive approaches. These forces must be able not only to prevail in war, but also
reassure friends and allies and generally influence actors in those parts of the world of the greatest
importance to the US, especially Eurasia. These forces must be capable of operating jointly in all
operational environments: land, sea, air, space, and across the electromagnetic spectrum, both now and in
the future. Accordingly, while remaining of sufficient size and composition both to fight and win major
theater wars and carry out constabulary operations in the present, this force structure must also be flexible
enough to exploit new technologies, doctrine, organization, and operational concepts in order to maintain
www.ksu.edu/debate
9
military preeminence in the future. A military force able to execute the necessary operational concepts and
to overcome likely operational challenges must possess a number of capabilities including the ability to
operate from the global commons-international waters and airspace, space, and cyberspace the ability to
dominate adversaries across the entire spectrum of conflict the ability to conduct information operations in
all environments the ability to execute compressed operational cycles the ability to sustain forces but with
a reduced logistics footprint strategic and tactical mobility the ability to penetrate enemy defenses with
stealthy platforms the ability to strike targets and carry out operations at increased ranges an improved
precision strike capability A military force capable of carrying out the extensive demands of the strategy of
primacy would possess a number of characteristics. Those forces should be joint and highly integrated,
expeditionary, networked to ensure situational awareness in all environments, decentralized, flexible and
adaptable, i.e. modular — capable of “plug and fight,” lethal, able to achieve decision superiority and full-
spectrum dominance with reduced support infrastructure. How much is enough? Having identified the
force characteristics and the mix of necessary capabilities of a future transformed force, it is still necessary
to determine force size. This leads to the second question. What size force is required to execute the war
plans? Throughout the process the planner must constantly evaluate risk. Strategic military risk manifests
itself as 1) operational risk (how well will is the existing force prepared to defeat adversaries-this includes
force performance and force sustainability), force preparation risk (how well do planners anticipate future
military requirements, and do they prepare for the future by transforming or hedging?), and affordability
risk. [4]
www.ksu.edu/debate
10
US hegemony prevents nuclear wars
Khalilzad, RAND Corporation, 1995 [Zalmay, “Losing the Moment?” The Washington Quarterly, Spring, l/n]
Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of
a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term
guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which
the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment
would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of
law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major
problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level
conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the
United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers,
including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability
than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system.
www.ksu.edu/debate
11
1AC Observation Two: Solvency

Algae biodiesel can be grown on marginal land, cuts CO2,
and produces ten times more fuel than any other biofuel.
Herro 2008
(Alana Herro, writer at Worldwatch Institute based in D.C. they are a non-profit organization who inform
policymakers of complex links of global economics and environment. February 2008, World Watch, “Better
than Corn?”, accessed on 7 July 2008, pg. 4)
Forget corn, sugar cane, and even switchgrass. Some experts believe that algae are set to eclipse all other biofuel feedstocks
as the cheapest, easiest, and most environmentally friendly way to produce liquid fuel, reports Kiplinger's Biofuels Market
Alert. The inputs for algae are simple: the single-celled organisms need only sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide to grow.
They can quadruple in biomass in just one day, and they help remove carbon from the air and nitrogen from waste-water.
Some types of algae comprise more than 50 percent oil, and an average hectare of algae grown today for pharmaceutical
industries can produce 47,000 liters of biodiesel each year. By comparison, an average hectare of corn produces 3,950 liters
of ethanol per year, and a hectare of soybeans yields just 655 liters of biodiesel per year. Douglas Henston, CEO of Solix
Biofuels, has estimated that replacing all current U.S. diesel fuel use with algae biodiesel would require using only about one
half of 1 percent of the farmland in production today. Algae can also grow on marginal lands, such as desert areas where the
groundwater is saline… In the near term, algae production for fuel is likely to be economical only in cases where the
organisms are grown near power plants, where they can also help soak up pollution.
Algae fuel is the wonder crop of tomorrow because it cuts

CO2 emissions, produces energy, and generates a source
of protein for animal feed.
Jenner 2008
(Mark Jenner, PhD, Professor at University of York, he studies environmental regulation and advises
businesses on the application of emerging technologies and has 25 years of biomass utilization expertise,
June 2008, BioCycle, “Algae- The Wonder Crop of Tomorrow”, accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 44)
There are no silver bullet solutions to cheap energy, but algae could come close. Algae has the capacity to remediate carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions, produce energy, generate a source of protein for animal feed and even provide dietary and
medicinal supplements for humans. Algae technology developers are racing toward commercial production of algae based on
decades of existing research, such as from the Department of Energy (DOE).In nature, algal blooms and red tides generally
indicate unnatural nutrient laden waters. These unintended eruptions out-compete the steady-state aquatic life and take over.
The new cultivated algae take advantage of the rapid growth attributes of "wild, free range" algae and reduce the human
carbon footprint at the same time… Algae production changes the debate from "Food vs. Fuel" to "Food and Fuel." None of
the benefits mentioned here were discussed merely three years ago in the biofuels benchmark 2005, U.S. DOE "Billion Ton"
report. While there is no such thing as a silver bullet biofuels technology, I'll settle for calling algae the Wonder Crop of
Tomorrow.
www.ksu.edu/debate
12
Inherency Extensions
Algae research funding was stopped because of its
competitive cost against oil.
ScienceDaily 2008
(ScienceDaily, 19 January 2008, “Renewed Interest in Turing Algae into Fuel Generated”, date accessed 7
July 2008, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080115132840.htm)
"We would be there now if people then hadn't been so short-sighted," Cooksey said. Cooksey is one of many U.S. scientists
who studied the feasibility of turning algal oil into biodiesel in the 1980s. The U.S. Department of Energy, through its Aquatics
Species program, funded their research. Cooksey's lab made a number of discoveries. Scientific journals published his
findings. Funding dried up, however, and the scientists went on to other things."Rumor had it that big oil got in the way,"
Cooksey said. "They didn't want competition so the project was dropped."Cooksey "sort of" retired as a research professor in
2003. He now directs the Department of Defense's EPSCoR program for Montana. A few months ago, however, Cooksey
started getting phone calls and e-mails from researchers and others who read about his algal work on the Internet or had
seen it referenced in scientific journals. Companies tried to hire him as a consultant. He was invited to attend conferences. He
ran into several scientists who had been his friendly competitors in the old days. They all said, "If only."
www.ksu.edu/debate
13
Ext to Oil consumption high now

Oil is up 47 percent in the past year – military knows it’s
time to adjust.
Eggers 2008
Attention to these vulnerabilities has been mounting since before the invasion of Iraq. The 2001 DSB report found that
“although significant war fighting, logistics and cost benefits occur when weapons systems are made more fuel-efficient,
these benefits are not valued or emphasized.” The report made key recommendations to re-emphasize the importance of fuel
efficiency that were not fully implemented by the Pentagon. With fuel costs up 47 percent in the last year, memos requesting
alternative energy from Iraq and a persistent beating of the national security drum, there are signs that the calls for reform are
becoming heard. A February 2008 DSB report on energy strategy applauds several Pentagon initiatives in the last two years to
bring energy usage into the mainstream and shed the cultural dogma, as stated by the chair of the 2001 report and a former
head of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, that “fuel efficiency is for sissies.” Principally, the most recent DSB report
finds that the Pentagon has taken steps, not yet fully institutionalized, to make fuel efficiency a “key performance parameter”
and to establish a “fully burdened cost of fuel” for acquisition programs. In March, the Air Force hosted a major conference
on Energy Security for the 21st Century, illuminating many of the dark corners of cutting-edge technologies and research.
These are encouraging steps forward. It is now time to convert this awareness to action.
Extension to Civilian Spillover

Investment into alternate fuels by the military will lead to
greater steps in the private sector to do the same.
www.ksu.edu/debate
14
Eggers 2008
Not only is it in the financial and tactical interest of the U.S. to shift the military away from a majority reliance on oil, it is now
in the greater strategic interest of the country that the military’s extensive technological research enterprises focus on the
development of alternatives. Our instruments of national power that safeguard the flow of energy resources should not
themselves be powered by those same resources. The strategic risk of doing so is now rising with the fiscal expense. And as
with other enterprises and initiatives, the military’s investment in energy innovation will result in more than military hardware
advances — such innovation will accelerate invaluable development and commercialization by the private sector. Given the
current political environmental consensus growing with regard to climate change, viable replacements for transportation
power will require the dual C’s: low cost and low carbon.
www.ksu.edu/debate
15
Aff. Harms Argument: Lives at Risk Due to

Oil Dependency
Oil addiction causes soldiers’ deaths.
Peters 2007
(Katherine McIntire Peters, associate editor of the Government Executive magazine, June 2007,
Government Executive, “Trouble at the Pump”, date accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 47)
And if those reasons aren't compelling enough, "Without this solution... continued casualty accumulation exhibits potential to
jeopardize mission success," Zilmer noted. In other words, more troops would be killed and maimed as they protect and
deliver fuel for the troops. And there's a lot to protect: About 80 percent of the materiel hauled on the battlefield is fuel.
According to the LMI study, the Defense Department uses about 57,000 barrels of oil a day in Iraq and Afghanistan, about 16
gallons per soldier per day. Use is up considerably from 2005, when the consumption rate was nine gallons per soldier; and
up exponentially from the rate of four gallons per soldier per day during the first Persian Gulf War. Increasingly, U.S. military
strategy requires that forces be deployed in remote locations to counter and deter a range of potential threats, a trend that
only intensifies the energy demands of the military. "To carry out these activities, the U.S. military will have to be even more
energy intense, locate in more regions of the world, employ new technologies and manage a more complex logistics system.
Considering the trend in operational fuel consumption and future capability needs, this 'new' force employment construct will
likely demand more energy/fuel in the deployed setting. Simply put, more miles will be traveled, both by combat units and the
supply units that sustain them, which will result in increased energy consumption" and costs, the LMI study found.
www.ksu.edu/debate
16
Oil Addiction Causes Terrorism
Our addiction to oil has caused the catalyzing of
international terrorism.
Eggers 2008
Since the arrival of 2008, the implications of our “addiction” to oil have been palpably underscored by at least four major
events. First, oil made history by hitting the $100-a-barrel milestone on Jan. 2. Second, and just three days later, Iranian
gunboats harassed U.S. Navy warships in the Straits of Hormuz, without incident, but with considerable fanfare. Third, on
Jan. 8, the Government Accountability Office warned that energy commodity tankers, 25 percent of which flow through the
Straits of Hormuz, were vulnerable to terrorist attack. Finally, not one week later, President Bush was in Riyadh seeking lower
oil prices from the Saudis and OPEC, without success. The events of January highlight a national security cycle that is now
fully closed and rapidly tightening. The pattern has been evolving for nearly a century as Western powers, reliant upon Middle
Eastern oil to power their warships and economies, developed a persisting interest in the region. That interest evolved into a
major presence and, fueled by past resentment and a war in Afghanistan, drove the eventual creation of al-Qaida to expel the
“infidels” from the holy land. The ensuing war against al-Qaida has increased America’s footprint in the Middle East,
concerns of instability are growing and oil prices are on the rise. As Saudi revenues grow, more money is funneled to
Wahhabi madrasas, another generation is taught to resist the West and the cycle of deterioration continues, clearly
underscoring an imperative for change. Conservatively stated, our reliance on Middle Eastern oil has severely distorted and
crippled our foreign policy options abroad. More squarely, oil has become a catalyst for terrorism.
www.ksu.edu/debate
17
Oil Impact
Terrorism, economic destruction, and war are the result of
American fossil fuel addiction.
Dinneen 2008
(Bob Dinneen, former naval engineer, January 2008, The Officer, “Energizing American Security”, date
accessed 7 July 2008, pg. 12)
The President's Council of Advisors for Science and Technology (PCAST) concluded in 1999: "A plausible argument can be
made that the security of the United States is at least as likely to be imperiled in the first half of the next century by the
consequences of inadequacies in the energy options available to the world as by inadequacies in the capabilities of U.S.
weapons system."Eight years later, our country is at war and our energy future is looking far less secure. The increasingly
precarious situation we find ourselves in can be explained succinctly: America has a dangerous addiction to oil. For more
than 100 years, America has grown increasingly dependent on oil to power this country forward. To be sure, oil has been a
valuable natural resource that provided the energy to make America the most prosperous, successful, and stable country in
history. Today, with increasingly convincing evidence, America's reliance upon oil, particularly from unstable regions of the
world, is putting our nation at risk. Every day, America imports more than 10 million barrels of oil, the majority of which is
used to produce the gasoline, diesel, and other fuels required to keep America moving. More than half those imports come
from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), a number of whose members seek to do America harm. As a
result, according to a Department of Defense (DoD) report, we spend $44 billion a year to protect the flow of oil from the
Persian Gulf and put our young men and women directly in the line of fire. Moreover, according to military and national
intelligence experts such as former Central Intelligence Agency Director R. James Woolsey, the United States sends billions
of dollars to these same nations for their oil, dollars that are then directly funneled into the schools and camps that are
training the next generation of would-be-terrorists who want to do harm to Americans, both at home and abroad. Add to the
equation that demand for energy in both America and around the world is expected to increase 50 percent by 2030 and that
more than two-thirds of the world's known oil reserves lie under the sands of these nations, it becomes crystal clear why
America must make a U-turn with respect to its dependence on foreign sources of oil.
www.ksu.edu/debate
18
Neg. Evidence: Investment in Algae

Biodiesel Happening Now.
Businesses, investors, and scientists are flocking to algae

biodiesel.
Edmondson 2007
(Gail Edmondson, senior economic correspondent in BussinessWeek’s Frankfurt bureau, Dec. 7 2007
“Here Comes Pond Scum Power” date accessed 7 July 2008 pg. 65)
In a world spooked by global warming and thirsty for nonpolluting fuel, lowly algae hold a potent appeal. The plants sop up
large quantities of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, and produce tiny globules of fat that can be collected and turned into
biodiesel fuel for trucks, cars, and trains. The oils might even be processed into aircraft fuel. One of algae's great virtues is
that the plant has so little in common with other sources of fuel. Unlike cornfields that are harvested to produce ethanol,
algae farms don't require huge volumes of freshwater, nor do they tie up land that could be used for food crops. Algae
flourish in saltwater or even wastewater and grow up to 40 times faster than other plants. Compared with current energy
crops, algae have "the potential to deliver 10 or 100 times more energy per acre," says Ron C. Pate, a technical expert at
Sandia National Labs. That's why industrial giants ranging from Chevron to Honeywell to Boeing are starting up algae
business units. "In the past two years, we have changed from algae skeptics to proponents," says Dave Daggett, Boeing's
technology leader for energy and emissions…In the U.S., demand for such plant-based oils is quickly outstripping supplies.
That and algae's mystique have attracted the attention of energy entrepreneurs such as Martin Tobias, CEO of Imperium
Renewables in Seattle, which is armed with $145 million in venture capital and private equity funding. Imperium buys
practically every drop of oil U.S. algae startups are producing. So far it has sold just a few hundred gallons of finished fuel.
But Tobias has dedicated a 5 million-gallon refinery to algae oil, and by 2011 he expects startups to be making 100 million
gallons a year. At that point, Tobias reckons, the price per gallon will fall to $1.70, from as much as $20 today. "The only thing
missing is the farms," he says. "I prefer not to operate a large-scale farm myself, but I may have to do it."…Despite the
misadventure, though, the market proved forgiving. GreenFuel raised an additional $5.5 million to pursue a lower-cost
approach. It expects to announce new commercial trials in the next few weeks.
Defense Department already researching algae biodiesel.

Stipp 2008
(David Stipp, former senior writer for Fortune magazine, now freelance writer for science articles, April 22, 2008, Fortune,
“The Next Big Thing in Energy”, date accessed 10 July 2008)
In a move that galvanized biofuels entrepreneurs, the federal Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in
November launched a major research program to enable the cost-competitive production of military jet fuel from both
cellulosic and algal feedstocks. The director of the program, Douglas Kirkpatrick, says he thinks major questions about algal
fuels' technical feasibility will be answered in "the next three to five years." That sounds about right: Algae-energy research is
bubbling with new ideas and talent and is beginning to get backing from venture capital. "In the past the money in this area
went only to academics," says Matt Caspari, CEO of Aurora BioFuels in Alameda, Calif. "Now it's reaching entrepreneurs who
are applying technologies that didn't exist ten or 15 years ago."
Gallon of Algae is $20 dollars. Truly Green Gold…

Karnowski 2007
(Steve Karnowski, reporter at Washington Post, December 23, 2007, Washington Post, “Algae is fueling a boom in energy
research”, date accessed 10 July 2008)
www.ksu.edu/debate
19
Some varieties of algae are as much as 50 percent oil, and that oil can be converted into biodiesel or jet fuel. The biggest
challenge is slashing the cost of production, which by one Defense Department estimate is running more than $20 a gallon.
"If you can get algae oils down below $2 a gallon, then you'll be where you need to be. And there's a lot of people who think
you can," said Jennifer Holmgren, director of the renewable fuels unit of UOP LLC, an energy subsidiary of Honeywell
International Inc.
Neg. Problems Persistent with Algae

Biodiesel
Algae sounds good, but look at what they aren’t telling you – it
relies on unreliable production methods and the biodiesel it
creates hasn’t even be tested.
Newman 2008
(Newman, Stefani. "How Algae Biodiesel Works." 18 June 2008. HowStuffWorks.com.
<http://science.howstuffworks.com/algae-biodiesel.htm> 10 July 2008)
It all sounds perfect, right? An abundant, plantlike material is grown, squeezed, chemically altered and blended into a cleaner,
efficient biodiesel. It may sound ideal, but there are some cons, the critics of algae biodiesel like to point out. For one, open
pond growing is extremely risky -- the water has to be an exact temperature. Carbon dioxide has to be pumped into the
ponds, and there is a high risk of contamination. However, many algae biodiesel labs are solving this problem by using the
closed bioreactor system to counteract these issues. Another problem is that there hasn't been any real testing done with yet
algae biodiesel and actual cars. Companies worldwide are making big deals with large oil companies to test and produce the
pond scum. Right now, they're still in the test phases. As far as we know, there's just one algae biodiesel car on the streets. In
January 2008, a company used algae biodiesel to fuel a Mercedes Benz E320 diesel to cruise the streets of Park City, Utah
during the Sundance Film Festival. However, no statistics were released on the car's gas mileage or what kind of emissions it
produced.
Fuel of the Future; most defiantly not of the present.

Addison 2007
(Keith Addison, 41 years of journalistic experience, 27 years freelance, “Oil Yields and Characteristics”, 2007,
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html, 10 July 2008)
Algae yield is not included in the yield tables because, in spite of all the hype about yields of up to 100,000 gallons of oil per
acre and so on, biodiesel from algae is something of the future, not of the present. As of mid-2008, there is no biodiesel from
algae apart from a few laboratory samples. There are some hopeful signs, but technical obstacles remain, pilot projects are
not yet feasible for production purposes, and the claims made for high yields have never been demonstrated. No doubt that
will change, but it's been "just around the corner" for years. When it does emerge, it's likely to be in the form of high-tech
solutions, for industry, not for backyarders or farms or villages.
Affirmative is lying through their teeth as algae most certainly is

not a useable source of fuel and one of the very project leaders of
algae biodiesel says the claims of high yields are “totally absurd!”
Addison 2007
(Keith Addison, 41 years of journalistic experience, 27 years freelance, “Oil Yields and Characteristics”, 2007,
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html, 10 July 2008)
www.ksu.edu/debate
20
Yet many people believe that making biodiesel from algae is an existing option for them now, a ready-to-use technology. We
receive many enquiries asking why our website doesn't provide full instructions and plans for making biodiesel from algae.
The answer is that we provide information you can use, and there isn't any on making biodiesel from algae, it doesn't yet
exist. But that's not the impression you get from the large amount of sheer hype flying around about algal biodiesel. Dr John
Benemann, who literally wrote the book on biodiesel from algae, has called some of the claims being made for the technology
and yields "bizarre" and "totally absurd". In a critique of algal biodiesel developments in The Oil Drum in May 2007 Dr
Benemann wrote: "Microalgae biofuels generally, and algae biodiesel production specifically, is still a long-term Research and
Development goal (likely about 10 years), that will require at least as much funding as the ASP, if not more, and success is, as
for any R&D effort, rather uncertain." The ASP was the U.S. Dept of Energy Aquatic Species Program, and it cost $100 million.
Dr Benemann was the Principal Investigator and the main author of the ASP Close-Out Report.
Neg. Oil Addiction Doesn’t Cause Terrorism

Terrorism has been around since our existence and ending oil will
not stop that; anyways terrorism is funded through drugs and
crime- not oil.
Bryce 2008
(Robert Bryce, writer at Washington Post, Washington Post, “5 Myths of Oil Addiction”, January 13, 2008, date accessed
10 July 2008, pg. B03)
Remember, the two largest suppliers of crude to the U.S. market are Canada and Mexico -- neither exactly known as a
belligerent terrorist haven. Moreover, terrorism is an ancient tactic that predates the oil era. It does not depend on
petrodollars. And even small amounts of money can underwrite spectacular plots; as the 9/11 Commission Report noted, "The
9/11 plotters eventually spent somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 to plan and conduct their attack." G.I. Wilson, a
retired Marine Corps colonel who has fought in Iraq and written extensively on terrorism and asymmetric warfare, calls the
conflation of oil and terrorism a "contrivance." Support for terrorism "doesn't come from oil," he says. "It comes from drugs,
crime, human trafficking and the weapons trade."
www.ksu.edu/debate
21
Neg. High Oil Prices Good

Higher oil prices have forced us to adapt, and we have shown we
can.
Macleans 2008
(Macleans, June 30, 2008, “The Upside of Oil”, accessed 10 July 2008)
There's a silver lining to today's soaring gas prices: they've forced us to reconsider our lavish use of fossil fuels. Half of
Canadians are already cutting back on their driving, and over 80 per cent say they plan to buy a more fuel-efficient vehicle,
according to a poll by Investors Group. In the United States, oil use has dropped three per cent thanks to high fuel prices,
says TD Economics. And Air Canada's decision to lay off 2,000, tough as that is, reflects falling demand for air travel. People
are proving to be smart and adaptable. Oil prices hit nearly $140 a barrel this week, and that has done what an army of
environmentalists never could. It hasn't been a pleasant ride, but we'll be better off for it.
www.ksu.edu/debate
22

Algae Biodiesel Aff

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

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

Algae Biodiesel Aff

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Algae Biodiesel WDW 2k8

Algae Aff. Index

1AC Observation One: Inherency

U.S. Government -- due to low cost of crude oil – stopped

New Scientist 2007

Energy R&D for the military must be at least doubled if any

Thus, the plan: The United States federal government

1AC Advantage One: Global Warming

40,000 barrels of oil are used every day to fuel our

B. Algae Biodiesel will reduce Military Carbon Emissions

C. Military Adoption Leads to Civilian Spillover

Military adoption of alternate energy will lead to civilian

1AC Advantage Two: Military Readiness

Fuel is a major source of energy for military mobility.

Battlefield effectiveness hurts because of the military’s

Failure to move to alternate energy will make every

B. MILITARY READINESS IS NECESSARY

Strong military readiness is critical to maintain US hegemony.

1AC Observation Two: Solvency

Algae fuel is the wonder crop of tomorrow because it cuts

Ext to Oil consumption high now

Extension to Civilian Spillover

Aff. Harms Argument: Lives at Risk Due to

Neg. Evidence: Investment in Algae

Businesses, investors, and scientists are flocking to algae

Defense Department already researching algae biodiesel.

Gallon of Algae is $20 dollars. Truly Green Gold…

Neg. Problems Persistent with Algae

Fuel of the Future; most defiantly not of the present.

Affirmative is lying through their teeth as algae most certainly is

Neg. Oil Addiction Doesn’t Cause Terrorism

Neg. High Oil Prices Good

S-ar putea să vă placă și