1AC Structual violence aff 1NC Court clog DA body cams CP culpability NC case turns
Greenhill
2
Opponent: Loyola DW | Judge: Eric Melin
1AC Natives AC 1NC GBTL K Warming DA Consult CP 1AR Everything
Greenhill
4
Opponent: Strake Jesuit AS | Judge: Megan Nubel
1AC Butler AC 1NC Warming DA Groupings K
Greenhill
6
Opponent: Cypress Woods LC | Judge: Michael OKrent
1AC Floating Reactors AC w warming and Russia advs 1NC T-reactors Security K 1AR K case T 2NR T
Greenhill
Doubles
Opponent: Marlborough LG | Judge: Agarwala, Gandra, Phillips
1AC EU aff about home solidarity 1NC T-countries Borders K 1AR K case T 2NR T
Loyola
1
Opponent: Lynbrook VV | Judge: Michael Fried
1AC Belgium AC with terror and meltdowns advantages 1NC Solvency Advocate theory Warming DA IFNEC CP case turns 1AR Must spec status theory everything 2NR theory
Loyola
4
Opponent: San Marino BK | Judge: David Dosch
1AC Whole Res Indigenous AC 1NC Warming DA Desal DA Consult CP Developing Countries PIC 1AR PIC's bad and condo bad 2NR Theory CP's Case Warming DA
Loyola
6
Opponent: Peninsula IG | Judge: Joseph Barquin
1AC Util AC w prolif and meltdowns advantages 1NC Warming DA Ol Wars DA Thorium PIC 1AR Case PIC DA's 2NR PIC Warming DA
1AC militarism aff 1NC borders K T-countries 1AR T case K 2NR T
Voices RR
2
Opponent: Dougherty Valley CS | Judge: Michael Harris, Nick Steele
1AC Neolib Aff 1NC T-implementation T-prohibit Shift DA case 1AR Case T 2NR T DA
Voices RR
3
Opponent: Lynbrook VV | Judge: Scott Wheeller, Anna-Marie Hwang
1AC Belgium AC with relations and terror advs 1NC T-countries Paris DA Security CP case 1AR Spec status theory everything 2NR T theory
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
Entry
Date
0-Contact Info
Tournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All If you have any questions or just want to talk, FB message or e-mail me. Facebook name: Jong Hak Won e-mail: jonghak.won@gmail.com
9/10/16
NOVDEC - Damus R1 NC
Tournament: Damus | Round: 1 | Opponent: Harker AC | Judge: Michael OKrent
1-off
Judges usually wouldn't rule on the cases prevented by qualified immunity, since there's no stated compensable claim for relief, but ending qualified immunity would force defendents to go to trial—the aff world sees the same net effect after a protracted legal battle, so it clogs the courts for no reason at all.
Putnam and Ferris 92 ~Charles T. Putnam ~Senior Assistant Attorney General, New Hampshire~ and Charles T. Ferris ~JD, Franklin Pierce Law Center~, "Defending a Maligned Defense: The Policy Bases of the Qual- ified Immunity Defense in Actions Under 42 USC 1983," Bridgeport Law Review, Vol. 12, 1992~ National resources are obviously scarce, yet increasing numbers of section 1983 actions are being AND , so they're on the hook for legal fees with no hope of compensation
Limiting QI clogs the courts – empirically confirmed – best study., Noll 8'
Noll, David L. "Qualified Immunity in Limbo: Rights, Procedure, and the Social Costs of Damages Litigation Against Public Officials." NYUL Rev. 83 (2008): 911 In the context of ordinary civil litigation between two private parties, the total ( AND and has undoubtedly affected the development of the modern qualified immunity doctrine.53
All of these impacts are supercharged by the fact that police don't pay legal fees, are unaware of complains and potential liability doesn't alter actions.
De Stefan 16 ~Lindsey de Stefan, ~JD Candidate, Seton Hall University School of Law~, "No Man is Above the Law and No Man is Below It: How Qualified Immunity Reform Could Create Accountability and Curb Widespread Police Misconduct," Seton Hall Law Student Scholarship, July 26, 2016 (2017 Academic Year)~ The Court specifically fears that financial liability, in the form of paying compensatory damages to victims whose constitutional rights an officer has violated, will be a vehicle of overdeterrence.97 But the widespread practice of indemnification means that individual officers are almost never financially responsible for civil judgments against them, practically eliminating any fiscal motivation for avoiding harmful conduct.98 In fact, in many instances, even the police department that employs the officer suffers no direct financial consequences because police litigation costs and damages awards are often paid from a city or insurer's general budget.99 The police department is not financially penalized, and thus has no incentive to discipline the officer or attempt to prevent him from repeating the unconstitutional behavior in the future. And because law enforcement officials are often unaware of the allegations set forth in lawsuits filed against them or their employees, officers' conduct often goes uninvestigated and undisciplined, and allegations of unconstitutional conduct do not affect performance reviews or opportunities for promotion. 100 Finally, although many law enforcement officers claim that the threat of incurring liability deters them from misconduct, studies contrarily indicate that potential liability does not actually alter most officers' on-the-job actions.101
This means the aff needlessly clogs the courts without accessing the net beenfits of the aff. Court clog undermines just enforcement of laws—turns the case by encouraging subjective application
Bannon 13 ~Alicia Bannon (serves as counsel for the Brennan Center's Democracy Program, where her work focuses on judicial selection and promoting fair and impartial courts. Ms. Bannon also previously served as a Liman Fellow and Counsel in the Brennan Center's Justice Program. J.D. from Yale Law School in 2007, where she was a Comments Editor of the Yale Law Journal). "Testimony: More Judges Needed in Federal Courts." Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. September 10, 2013~ The growing workload in district courts around the country negatively impacts judges' ability to effectively AND excluded by federal housing laws, employers seeking recompensation from abusive corporations etc.
2-off
CP Text: The United States Federal Government should mandate that all police officers wear body cameras. Status is .
CP solves material impacts of case—empirics prove body cameras massively reduce violence.
If the resolution is permissible but not obligatory, you negate because ought implies a moral obligation, and obligations are disproven when the action is simply permissible because if not taking the action is also permissible, the action itself can't be obligatory. Substantive reasons for presumption come first because any little bit of offense on the flow means I'm a little bit ahead
Next, the moral judgment of any action requires an assessment of capacity—agents can only be deemed culpable for failing to do something they could have done otherwise .
Streumer ~Bart. Reasons and Impossibility, 2004~ The argument from tables and chairs. There cannot be a reason for a table or a chair to perform an action, because it is impossible for a table or a chair to perform an action. When it is impossible for a person to perform an action, this person is in the sameposition with regard to this action that a table or a chair is in with regard to all actions. Therefore, just as there cannot be a reason for a table or a chair to perform an action, there cannot be a reason for this person to perform this action. And therefore, (R) is true. Thus the standard is consistency with individual capabilities. To clarify, you can only AND immunity would make officers liable for actions they are not morally culpable for.
A. Officer conduct in high-stress situations is instinctive, not based on free will- empirics prove
Ross 13 ~Assessing Lethal Force Liability Decisions and Human Factors Research Darrell L. Ross, PhD, Professor and Department Head, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice, and Director of The Center of Applied Social Sciences, Valdosta State University~ It is well-known that physiological stress can impact perception (Janis and Mann AND , the officer couldn't have known, so he shouldn't be personally liable.
C. Bad decisions result from inadequate training—departments, not officers, are at fault.
Holland 15 ~Joshua Holland, Are We Training Cops to be Hyper-Aggressive Warriors, 2015~ What got less attention is that less than two weeks before the shooting, the AND for using violence, and very little guidance on how to avoid it.
Case
1. Terminal defense on solvency- police don't pay legal fees, are unaware of complains and potential liability doesn't alter actions.
De Stefan 16 ~Lindsey de Stefan, ~JD Candidate, Seton Hall University School of Law~, "No Man is Above the Law and No Man is Below It: How Qualified Immunity Reform Could Create Accountability and Curb Widespread Police Misconduct," Seton Hall Law Student Scholarship, July 26, 2016 (2017 Academic Year)~ The Court specifically fears that financial liability, in the form of paying compensatory damages to victims whose constitutional rights an officer has violated, will be a vehicle of overdeterrence.97 But the widespread practice of indemnification means that individual officers are almost never financially responsible for civil judgments against them, practically eliminating any fiscal motivation for avoiding harmful conduct.98 In fact, in many instances, even the police department that employs the officer suffers no direct financial consequences because police litigation costs and damages awards are often paid from a city or insurer's general budget.99 The police department is not financially penalized, and thus has no incentive to discipline the officer or attempt to prevent him from repeating the unconstitutional behavior in the future. And because law enforcement officials are often unaware of the allegations set forth in lawsuits filed against them or their employees, officers' conduct often goes uninvestigated and undisciplined, and allegations of unconstitutional conduct do not affect performance reviews or opportunities for promotion. 100 Finally, although many law enforcement officers claim that the threat of incurring liability deters them from misconduct, studies contrarily indicate that potential liability does not actually alter most officers' on-the-job actions.101
2. Terminal Defense- The Supreme Court will limit constitutional rights to compensate for removing Qualified Immunity
Fallon 11~Richard H. Fallon, Jr., (The Ralph S. Tyler, Jr. Professor of Law, Harvard Law School). "Asking the Right Questions About Officer Immunity." 80 Fordham L. Rev. 479 (2011). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol80/iss2/3~~ As another possible response to a world without official immunity, the Supreme Court might diminish the scope of at least some substantive constitutional rights. Indeed, I think I can identify cases in which the Court has already trimmed the scope of constitutional rights for the purpose of stemming what it has regarded as an undue flood of suits for damages into federal court. Express- ing concerns that the Due Process Clause should not become a font of tort law, the Court held in Paul v. Davis that a plaintiff whose name and photograph had been included in a police flyer identifying active shoplifters had not alleged an actionable due process violation because mere harm to reputation does not count as a deprivation of constitutionally protected "liberty."49 Paul's ~the~ narrow interpretation of the due process right, which found little support in prior decisions,50 was almost certainly "motivated by concerns about the section 1983 remedy" and the social costs of "the wholesale federalization of tort claims against state and local government officials and the corresponding prospect of massive damages liability."51 The Court further narrowed its interpretation of constitutionally protected due process rights, apparently in response to the same concern, in Parratt v. Taylor,52 which held that random and unauthorized deprivations of liberty and property do not violate the Due Process Clause unless and until a state has failed to provide post-deprivation corrective process.53 46. See Fallon and Meltzer, supra note 10, at 1779–87. Again voicing concerns about the social costs of permitting § 1983 and the Due Process Clause to be- come fonts of tort law, the Court pared back the scope of previously recognized due process rights once more in Daniels v. Williams,54 which held that merely negligent deprivations of liberty and property do not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.55 With the Court having shrunk the scope of the due process guarantee in Paul, Parratt, and Daniels, it is easy to imagine the Justices simi- larly circumscribing other rights if, in the absence of official immunity, they regarded the social costs of damages actions as too high. For example, the Court could plausibly respond to a flood of suits seeking damages for unreasonable searches and seizures by holding that if any reasonable person could think a search reasonable, it is not unreasonable.56 3. Litigation is high now- limiting qualified immunity explodes the amount of cases, chilling police officers and increasing crime. Rosen 05, Michael, Attorney in San Diego, JD Harvard Law, A Qualified Defense: In Support of the Doctrine of Qualified Immunity in Excessive Force Cases, With Some Suggestions for its Improvement, http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1899andcontext=ggulrev This effect dovetails with a growing tendency toward "depolicing" that has become prevalent in several of America's urban cores.60 According to many officers, recent years have seen an increase in lawsuits and informal complaints brought against law enforcement, a correlate tendency in departments to steer officers away from necessarily risky conduct in do-or-die situations, and a concomitant decline in officer morale. 61 In 1981 in the State of California,"2 residents placed 8,686 complaints against peace officers, of which 1,552 or 18 were ultimately sustained.63 In 2000, Californians recorded 23,395 complaints, of which 2,395 or 10 were sustained. 64 This ballooning of claims - in particular unsuccessful ones65 - is as troubling as it is dramatic. The Oakland, California, Citizens Police Review Board ("CPRB") embodies this deterrent effect.66 This board provides an independent forum in which aggrieved citizens can register their complaints about police conduct. 67 At the same time, Detective Jesse H. Grant, who has had personal experience appearing before the CPRB, notes that complaints, more than 80 of which were not sustained in 2002, impose a serious deterrent effect on police conduct. 68 Officers now more than ever think twice and act conservatively - although not necessarily safely - when engaged in violent altercations with or apprehensions of dangerous suspects. 69 Ironically, the presence of entities like the CPRB undermines the justification for excessive force lawsuits to begin with: by providing an avenue for voicing grievances over police conduct, such boards obviate some of the need for civil actions. Moreover, they reflect the deterrent effect that wide-open public access to disciplinary bodies can breed. Thus, there exist significant reasons for the courts to grant some kind of immunity to law enforcement officials in order to ensure the continued quality of their work. By increasing the threat of litigation, frivolous lawsuits can serve to deter officers' reasonable conduct, thus imperiling public safety and upending the delicate balance society seeks between forcefully fighting crime and respectfully treating all citizens. DOJ studies prove that chilling the police causes a huge increase in homicides and crime Felton 16 Et Al, Ryan, Lois Beckett, Jamiles Lartey, 'Ferguson Effect' is a plausible reason for spike in violent US crime, study says, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/15/ferguson-effect-homicide-rates-us-crime-study A new justice department-funded study concludes that a version of the so-called "Ferguson Effect" is a "plausible" explanation for the spike in violent crime seen in most of the country's largest cities in 2015, but cautions that more research is still needed. The study, released by the National Institute of Justice on Wednesday, suggests three possible drivers for the more than 16 spike in homicide from 2014 to 2015 in 56 of the nation's largest cities. But based on the timing of the increase, University of Missouri St Louis criminologist Richard Rosenfeld concluded, there is "stronger support" for some version of the Ferguson Effect hypothesis than its alternatives. "The other explanations have a difficult time … explaining the timing and magnitude of the increase we saw in 2015 and continue to see in some cities in the current year," Rosenfeld said.The new research cuts against months of statements from Obama administration officials denying that there is any evidence for a Ferguson Effect, a suggested link between protests over police killings of black Americans and an increase in crime and murder. "While certainly there might be anecdotal evidence there, as all have noted, there's no data to support it," attorney general Loretta Lynchsaid in November. In early May, the White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, said: "There's not evidence at this point to link that surge in violent crime to the so-called viral video effect, or the Ferguson effect. There's just no evidence to substantiate that." He added: "If there's evidence that materializes to substantiate that claim, then we should figure out something to do about it." Early findings from Rosenfeld's study were first reported by the Guardian in early May. Rosenfeld, whose research on homicide trends in St Louis were used to debunk the Ferguson Effect last year, said that his "views have been altered" after doing a broader national analysis. In interviews with the Guardian, Rosenfeld cautioned that the version of the Ferguson Effect he finds plausible is very different from the one that some leading conservatives have described. The "dominant interpretation" of the Ferguson Effect, he wrote, is that criticism of the police after the killings of unarmed black citizens causes the police "to disengage from vigorous enforcement actions". This outweighs Scope- Police violence is awful, but we have to ask ourselves if we are willing to have tens of thousands of people killed in homicides, and millions more victim to serious crimes in order to save a hundred from police violence. The answer is obviously no. Root Cause- The reason why the police use excessive force is because they believe that crime is rampant and that their life is in danger.
interp: The affirmative must defend countries in general and must not defend that only a single country or some combination of countries prohibits the production of nuclear power. C.
Grammar-the word "countries" in the resolution is a bare plural indicating the resolution is generic. Debois 16, Danny, VBI Topic Analysis Sept-Oct, p.11, 2016 Importantly, "countries" in this resolution is a bare plural—i.e. there's no article or demonstrative in front of adolescents like "the" or "these" indicating which adolescents the resolution is talking about. Bare plurals indicate that the resolution is a generic statement, and consequently, in order to textually affirm, aff advocacies have to be why in general countries have to prohibit nuclear power, not why specific countries should prohibit it. 2. Framers intent- If the framers wanted to discuss (X country) they would have specified that country or would have added a qualifier to the word country. This is empirically proven by past topics that specified only the US. Framers intent is key- words are only meant to communicate the meaning that the author intends. Grammar and framers intent are key to limits—I am more likely to prep for the true interp of how the resolution is read rather than whichever version the aff likes most. Also means the aff is not semantically in line with the way the resolution is written. And semantics outweigh pragmatic a) Semantics is the most non-biased way to determine abuse. Framers of the rez design it to create fair and educational debates. Pragmatic benefits can't be determined as well since we are incentivized to lie about them to win the T debate. b) Semantic justifications have logical priority. A pragmatic approach would say "I'll give you a million dollars if 2+2=5." Even though you want the money, the pragmatic approach only offers a reason to want the statement to be true, not an actual reason for it to be true. 3. Limits- At a base level your interp allows 200 possible aff with every country in the world. That number is exploded because you can defend any permutation of these countries or spec things like types of reactors, putting the number of aff's well into the thousands. Even if we are extremely generous and say your counterinterp limits the number of aff's to less than 30, any number above 10 is ridiculous because we've only had this topic for a month, there is no way I could prep that many specific case negs and also prep for other aspects of the resolution and also live a normal life. Limits are key to fairness because they control if the negative can clash with well-prepped, quality arguments that give us both a chance at winning the round as opposed to scripted topic-independent debates. This also means limits is key to long term clash and topic education. D. Voter:
Fairness is a voter since the ballot asks who the better debater is and you can't make that decision accurately if the round is unfair. 2. Fairness outweighs education Education loss is a reversible harm - I can always read up more on topic lit later, or do rebuttal redos to increase clash and critical thinking skills. But an unfair decision is permanent. 3. Drop the debater a) Recourse- Drop the arg always incentivizes abusive positions because worse case scenario you lose access to the arg but best case you win on an abusive arg. Drop the debater to incentives further checking of abuse and to deter your use of them. b) Drop the arg is severance on T because it shifts their advocacy to whole res in the 1ar. This is unfair because the 1nc strategy was premised on the AC plantext. If you allow them to shift it punishes me for their abuse. 4. Competing Interps a) Reasonability begs the question of what's reasonable, requiring arbitrary intervention for the judge to evaluate the round. Even if you set a brighltine its arbitrary, allowing you to always set a brightline that lets you get away with abuse. Your 1AC brightline proves, ARTICULATE WHY b) Reasonability begs the question of their interp. If I win offense, they are unreasonable. So a. even under reasonability the debater with the most offense wins and b. it collapses to competing interps because the debater has to win their interp / counterinterp first. 5. No RVIs a) RVI's prevent theory from checking abuse. I wouldn't want to initiate a theory debate against an abusive case if my opponent could win the theory debate on an RVI. This is especially bad since they knew what they were defending beforehand but I didn't ensuring a huge prep skew on theory already. b) Reciprocity-Theory is not a nib- you can go for link turns or impact turns- you can impact turn with fairness for who or link turn with arguments for why I violate or use the voters to generate offense on a new shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew.
2-off
First is framing—
The role of the ballot is to question the border assumptions of the 1AC's scholarship prior to the consequence of the plan. Questioning the violence of borders is a forgotten discussion in that needs to be revisisted.
Van Houtum 05 ~Henk Van Houtum, Nijmegen Centre for Border Research, Radboud University, The Netherlands, "The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries," 2005~ JW The second reason why I think it is a shame that we are not discussing AND making when b/ordering ourselves and others? And at what price?
Next is the criticism:
The affirmative reifies the legitimacy of nation states by choosing to defend a specific country pursuing prohibition of nuclear weapons. The aff could have chose to defend the whole resolution with an implementation mechanism that included an international institution such as the UN, uniting the call for global action by all nation-states and deconstructing the unflinching prevalence of the nation state model. Instead, the affirmative chose to orient it's politics around the nation-state which inevitably reproduces violent boundaries and borders. This link is unavoidable and damning.
Walker 9~R.B.J., Walker is a professor in the department of Political Science at the University of Victoria and is the chief editor of the Journal of International Political Sociology, "After the Globe, Before the world", pg. 77 – 80~ The consequence, however, can also be read in relation to all those historical AND the limits of the modern political imagination will necessarily run into irresolvable difficulties.
The affirmative cannot delink—I extended an olive branch in CX and asked if they would be willing to defend that all countries embark on the aff's project and they refused. This link is supercharged because borders are an ontological division of the inside versus the outside which fuels nationalism.
Agnew 08—Department of Geography @ UCLA (John, 2008, Ethics and Global Politics, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 175-191"Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking," rmf) A third connection with political identity is made by those who emphasize the idea of AND project that simply takes place at the border or simply between adjacent states.
The affirmative fuels the creation of a mutual xenophobic otherization of those across the border- this results in cartographical violence that is justified by the perpetually fear of the other. Bornstein 2:
Bornstein 2(Avram Bornstein, professor @ John Jay college anthropology PhD and masters @ Columbia, "Borders and the Utility of Violence State Effects on the 'Superexploitation' of West Bank Palestinians" vol 22, 2002) Heyman (1998a, 1998b, 1999) has argued that militarization of the border AND are more complicated than surplus extraction and that those motivations can have impoverishing consequences
Bornstein 2 is empirically proven by the rise of Donald Trump—he's literally built his platform around building a wall on the southern BORDER of the US and making AMERICA great again and WINNING against other countries and keeping out Muslims from the US. This nativist logic results in real violence, and is depending on something to be native about, i.e. that there is such a thing as a real America and that people who have arbitrarily been deemed Americans have a right to live freely, which also independently justified US foreign policy actions like the Iraq war. 2 implications:
The permutation cannot solve the link without being severance, since the very plan text and advocacy of the aff is the link to the K. Even if affirming would result in some good impacts, its underlying assumptions are intellectually bankrupt. The permutation is akin to the slave master saying they are good because they donate to charity.
The alternative is to critically engage the border and re-evaluate our norms in relation to the violence they create.
Grosfoguel 06 ~Ramon Grosfoguel, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies @ UC Berkeley, "World-Systems Analysis in the Context of Transmodernity, Border Thinking, and Global Coloniality," Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 29, No. 2, From Postcolonial Studies to Decolonial Studies: Decolonizing Postcolonial Studies, 2006~ JW One of many plausible solutions to the Eurocentric versus fun- damentalist dilemma is what AND how to transcend the impe- rial monologue established by the Eurocentered modernity.
Banning nuclear power is a form of imperial paternalism
Jefferies 08 ~Sierra M. Jefferies, J.D. candidate, "ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE SKULL VALLEY GOSHUTE INDIANS' PROPOSAL TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE," Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 2008~ JW Second, opposition to the Band's attempt to make use of its land seems to AND , a casino, two ski lifts, forestry resources and a sawmill m98
Internal colonialism posits the United States as the master while subjugating indigenous people
Byrd 11 ~Jodi A. Byrd, Associate Professor of English, American Indian Studies, and Gender and Women's Studies at U of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, "Introduction: Indigenous Critical Theory and the Diminishing Returns of Civilization," University of Minnesota Press, 2011~ JW In this chapter, I am particularly interested in how the idea of "internal AND make internal once and for all that which is external: native space.
Colonialism causes indigenous peoples to be structurally placed in a space of social death where agency is separate from their existence
Byrd 11 ~Jodi A. Byrd, Associate Professor of English, American Indian Studies, and Gender and Women's Studies at U of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, "Introduction: Indigenous Critical Theory and the Diminishing Returns of Civilization," University of Minnesota Press, 2011~ JW But what seems to me to be further disavowed, even in Lowe's important figuration AND they are the transit through which the dialectic of subject and object occurs.
The alternative is to imagine a world in which the U.S. has been removed from all lands originally belonging to the natives
Churchill 96 ~Ward Churchill, professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado Boulder, "From a Native Son: Selected Essays in Indigenism, 1985-1995," South End Press, 1996~ The question which inevitably arises with regard to indigenous land claims, especially in the AND realism." Isn't it time we all went to work on attaining it?
Warming DA
U.S. carbon emissions are getting lower and are on track to meet environmental goals
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
DA turns case: Native Americans are especially vulnerable to climate change
Halpert 12 ~Julie Halpert, author at Yale Climate Connections, "Native Americans and a Changing Climate," Yale Climate Connections, June 21, 2012, http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/06/native-americans-and-a-changing-climate/~~ JW Native Americans are expected to be among the population groups most vulnerable to adverse effects AND 2011, the organization passed a resolution opposing the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
CP
CP Text: Indigenous communities should decide for themselves to ban nuclear power. Mutually exclusive with the aff since tribes that want nuclear power can continue to use it
Gover et al 92 ~Kevin, and Jana L. Walker (Native American Attorneys at Gover, Stetson and Williams). "Escaping Environmental Paternalism: One Tribe's Approach to Developing a Commercial Waste Disposal Project in Indian Country." University of Colorado Law Review 63 (1992): 933. The second and more controversial issue facing tribes involves the use of reservation lands as AND the proposal effectively and, if it's feasible, plan for its development.
The Counterplan solves better than the plan: consultation leads to the best policies for each clan. Thomas 95 EDWARD K. THOMAS, 1995 (PRESIDENT
CENTRAL COUNCIL OF THE TLINGIT AND HAIDA INDIAN TRIBES OF ALASKA, May 18, 1995, http://www.archive.org/stream/biataskforcehear00unit/biataskforcehear00unit_djvu.txt) The opportunity for Tribes to participate in the reorganization process was greatly increased by holding the various meetings close to their Tribal headquarters. Many tribal leaders and Tribal members did attend the meetings and many testified at the times set aside on each agenda for hearing testimony. Witnesses either spoke on the business of the day or on the reorganization plan and the reorganization planning process. Their testimony helped Task Force members in their decision-making. We were better able to understand how they felt on many very important reorganization issues. Their testimony did make a difference in our final product. That is why Tribal consultation is important. Tribes, more than anyone else, know what is best for them. They know better than anyone what policies would be bad for them. NOTE: NON_NATIVES SPECIFIC EVIDENCE (retag Yamamoto to say that certain groups are actually undercut by the AC, and friere Your movement goes against the interests of the oppressed. Yamamoto 99 Yamamoto, Eric (Professor of Law, University of Hawai'i Law School; Visiting Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1999.)., and Jen-L. W. Lyman. "Racializing environmental justice." U. Colo. L. Rev. 72 (2001): 311. The framework, however, at times also undercuts environmental justice struggles by racial and indigenous communities because it tends to foster misassumptions about race, culture, sovereignty, and the importance of distributive justice. Those misassumptions sometimes lead environmental justice scholars and activists to miss what is of central importance to affected communities. The first misassumption is that for all racialized groups in all situations, a hazard-free physical environment is their main, if not only, concern.4 ' Environmental justice advocates foster this notion by placing emphasis on "high quality environments" 4' and the adverse health effects caused by exposure to air pollutants and hazardous waste materials. Not all facility sitings that pose health risks, however, warrant full-scale opposition by host communities. Some communities, on balance, are willing to tolerate these facilities for the economic benefits they confer or in lieu of the cultural or social disruption that might accompany large-scale remedial efforts. Other communities, struggling to deal with joblessness, inadequate education, and housing discrimination, indeed with daily survival, prefer to devote most of their limited time and political capital to those challenges. In these situations, racial and indigenous communities may have pressing needs and long-range goals beyond the re-siting of polluting facilities. For example, as Native communities endeavor to ameliorate conditions of poverty and social dislocation by encouraging the economic development of tribal lands, some increasingly find themselves in conflict with environmentalists, who are sometimes but not always environmental justice advocates. In the mining industry, several Native American tribes are attempting to tap mineral resources on their reservations. ° Urged by the increased emphasis on economic selfdetermination in federal Native American policy in the 1970s, the tribes formed the Council of Energy Resource Tribes to deal with both the siting of new mines on Native American lands and the environmental and the cultural problems that might result.51 Those efforts met stiff opposition from some environmental groups concerned mainly with land degradation and pollution. The environmentalists' seeming lack of understanding of the economic and cultural complexity of the Native American groups' decisions have led some Native Americans to express cynicism about environmentalists who sometimes treat them as mascots for the environmental cause.
Case
Banning nuclear power doesn't solve environmental injustice and prevents Natives from accessing resources on their lands
Jefferies 08 ~Sierra M. Jefferies, J.D. candidate, "ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE SKULL VALLEY GOSHUTE INDIANS' PROPOSAL TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE," Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 2008~ JW This Note considers the application of various understandings of environmental justice to the recent defeat AND , it has evolved to deal with rural and natural resource use disputes.
Natives can't profit off of their own land
Jefferies 08 ~Sierra M. Jefferies, J.D. candidate, "ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE SKULL VALLEY GOSHUTE INDIANS' PROPOSAL TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE," Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 2008~ JW Originally, environmental justice developed to address the pattern of poor and minority communities bearing AND a private agreement "undermines its opportunity to improve its own welfare."92
N/U: Native Americans had already been exposed to a range of unhealthy environmental factors besides nuclear power
Jefferies 08 ~Sierra M. Jefferies, J.D. candidate, "ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE SKULL VALLEY GOSHUTE INDIANS' PROPOSAL TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE," Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 2008~ JW Finally, the most glaring problem with claims that a storage facility would be environmentally AND an economic development bill for Skull Valley but never funded it."98
McKenna 15 ~Phil McKenna, Boston-based reporter for InsideClimate News, master's degree in Science W "Global CO2 Emissions Decline in 2015 After Soaring for a Decade, Study Says," Inside Climate News, December 7, 2015, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris~~ JW The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is AND years but I think it's unlikely in the long run," he said.
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Nuclear power is key to preventing global warming- empirics prove.
Biello 13 –David Biello 13, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/, citing James Hansen of Columbia University, How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming In addition to reducing the risk of nuclear war, U.S. ~ AND , director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, where Hansen works.
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
Global runaway warming causes extinction
Carana 14 – Sam Carana is an environmental analyst whose expertise lies in environmental policy and sustainable energy. He also is a writer and policy developer. "Near-Term Human Extinction",~ http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/04/near-term-human-extinction.html) CR Global Warming and Feedbacks Is there a mechanism that could make humanity go extinct in AND . The poster below, from an earlier post, illustrates the danger.
Ethical uncertainty means we prioritize existential risks.
Bostrom 13 ~Nick Bostrom, Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy @ University of Oxford, "Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority," Global Policy Vol. 4 Issue 1, February 2013~ These reflections on moral uncertainty suggest an alternative, complementary way of looking at existential AND of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe.
Climate change disproportionately affects people of color and causes extinction.
Pellow 12 David Naguib Pellow 12, Ph.D. Professor, Don Martindale Endowed Chair – University of Minnesota, "Climate Disruption in the Global South and in African American Communities: Key Issues, Frameworks, and Possibilities for Climate Justice," February 2012, http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/White_Paper_Climate_Disruption_final.pdf** It is now known unequivocally that significant warming of the atmosphere is occurring, coinciding AND must reduce our emissions and consumption here at home in the global North.
policymaking is the only way to create change.
Coverstone 5 Alan Coverstone (masters in communication from Wake Forest, longtime debate coach) "Acting on Activism: Realizing the Vision of Debate with Pro-social Impact" Paper presented at the National Communication Association Annual Conference November 17th 2005 An important concern emerges when Mitchell describes reflexive fiat as a contest strategy capable of "eschewing the power to directly control external actors" (1998b, p. 20). Describing debates about what our government should do as attempts to control outside actors is debilitating and disempowering. Control of the US government is exactly what an active, participatory citizenry is supposed to be all about. After all, if democracy means anything, it means that citizens not only have the right, they also bear the obligation to discuss and debate what the government should be doing. Absent that discussion and debate, much of the motivation for personal political activism is also lost. Those who have co-opted Mitchell's argument for individual advocacy often quickly respond that nothing we do in a debate round can actually change government policy, and unfortunately, an entire generation of debaters has now swallowed this assertion as an article of faith. The best most will muster is, "Of course not, but you don't either!" The assertion that nothing we do in debate has any impact on government policy is one that carries the potential to undermine Mitchell's entire project. If there is nothing we can do in a debate round to change government policy, then we are left with precious little in the way of pro-social options for addressing problems we face. At best, we can pursue some Pilot-like hand washing that can purify us as individuals through quixotic activism but offer little to society as a whole. It is very important to note that Mitchell (1998b) tries carefully to limit and bound his notion of reflexive fiat by maintaining that because it "views fiat as a concrete course of action, it is bounded by the limits of pragmatism" (p. 20). Pursued properly, the debates that Mitchell would like to see are those in which the relative efficacy of concrete political strategies for pro-social change is debated. In a few noteworthy examples, this approach has been employed successfully, and I must say that I have thoroughly enjoyed judging and coaching those debates. The students in my program have learned to stretch their understanding of their role in the political process because of the experience. Therefore, those who say I am opposed to Mitchell's goals here should take care at such a blanket assertion. However, contest debate teaches students to combine personal experience with the language of political power. Powerful personal narratives unconnected to political power are regularly co-opted by those who do learn the language of power. One need look no further than the annual state of the Union Address where personal story after personal story is used to support the political agenda of those in power. The so-called role-playing that public policy contest debates encourage promotes active learning of the vocabulary and levers of power in America. Imagining the ability to use our own arguments to influence government action is one of the great virtues of academic debate. Gerald Graff (2003) analyzed the decline of argumentation in academic discourse and found a source of student antipathy to public argument in an interesting place. I'm up against…their aversion to the role of public spokesperson that formal writing presupposes. It's as if such students can't imagine any rewards for being a public actor or even imagining themselves in such a role. This lack of interest in the public sphere may in turn reflect a loss of confidence in the possibility that the arguments we make in public will have an effect on the world. Today's students' lack of faith in the power of persuasion reflects the waning of the ideal of civic participation that led educators for centuries to place rhetorical and argumentative training at the center of the school and college curriculum. (Graff, 2003, p. 57) The power to imagine public advocacy that actually makes a difference is one of the great virtues of the traditional notion of fiat that critics deride as mere simulation. Simulation of success in the public realm is far more empowering to students than completely abandoning all notions of personal power in the face of governmental hegemony by teaching students that "nothing they can do in a contest debate can ever make any difference in public policy." Contest debating is well suited to rewarding public activism if it stops accepting as an article of faith that personal agency is somehow undermined by the so-called role playing in debate. Debate is role-playing whether we imagine government action or imagine individual action. Imagining myself starting a socialist revolution in America is no less of a fantasy than imagining myself making a difference on Capitol Hill. Furthermore, both fantasies influenced my personal and political development virtually ensuring a life of active, pro-social, political participation. Neither fantasy reduced the likelihood that I would spend my life trying to make the difference I imagined. One fantasy actually does make a greater difference: the one that speaks the language of political power. The other fantasy disables action by making one a laughingstock to those who wield the language of power. Fantasy motivates and role-playing trains through visualization. Until we can imagine it, we cannot really do it. Role-playing without question teaches students to be comfortable with the language of power, and that language paves the way for genuine and effective political activism. Debates over the relative efficacy of political strategies for pro-social change must confront governmental power at some point. There is a fallacy in arguing that movements represent a better political strategy than voting and person-to-person advocacy. Sure, a full-scale movement would be better than the limited voice I have as a participating citizen going from door to door in a campaign, but so would full-scale government action. Unfortunately, the gap between my individual decision to pursue movement politics and the emergence of a full-scale movement is at least as great as the gap between my vote and democratic change. They both represent utopian fiat. Invocation of Mitchell to support utopian movement fiat is simply not supported by his work, and too often, such invocation discourages the concrete actions he argues for in favor of the personal rejectionism that under girds the political cynicism that is a fundamental cause of voter and participatory abstention in America today.
2-off
The 1AC misdiagnoses the problem- you simplify racism to a question of bodily characteristics and overall goals, which ignores the social context of oppression.
Yamamoto 2 Yamamoto, Eric (Professor of Law, University of Hawai'i Law School; Visiting Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1999.)., and Jen-L. W. Lyman. "Racializing environmental justice." U. Colo. L. Rev. 72 (2001): 311. Finally, the established framework tends to assume that all racial and indigenous groups, AND courts and environmental justice scholars make this simplifying assumption about race and culture.
Trying to articulate your solvency advocate as a reason that you meet the wishes of the oppressed is another link- this allows the 1AC to paper over other individuals and enforce a hierarchy that privileges the dominant voices.
McDonald and Coleman 99 Peter McDonald and Mikki Coleman, Deconstructing hierarchies of oppression and adopting a 'multiple model' approach to anti-oppressive practice. Social Work Education serial online. March 1999;18(1):19. "By definition, the privileged group within a hierarchy tends to have the maximum access to necessary commodities, as well as political power and social status. Those at the lower levels of the pyramid must either conform to the rules and desires of those at the highest point, in exchange for a given share of the society's resources; or else those at the lower levels must engage in a constant struggle with those at the very base of the pyramid for whatever resources are left in society after the privileged group have taken the majority share. In fact, it is in the interests of those at the top of the hierarchy to allow (or actively to encourage) a certain amount of social conflict between those at the lower levels, and those at the base. While the mass of people below can be encouraged to fight amongst themselves, rather than uniting for a common cause, the privileged group can more easily maintain their position at the top of the hierarchy, as Freire asserted under a heading specifically entitled 'Divide and Rule': This is another fundamental dimension of the theory of oppressive action which is as old as oppression itself. As the oppressor minority subordinates and dominates the majority, it must divide it and keep it divided in order to remain in power. The minority cannot permit itself the luxury of tolerating the unification of the people, which would undoubtedly signify a serious threat to their own hegemony. Accordingly, the oppressors halt by any means (including violence) any action which in even incipient fashion could awaken the oppressed to the need for unity. Concepts such as unity, organization and struggle arc immediately labelled as dangerous. In fact, of course, these concepts are dangerous—to the oppressors—for their realization is necessary to actions of liberation. It is in the interest of the oppressor to weaken the oppressed still further, to isolate them, to create and deepen rifts among them. This is done by varied means, from the repressive methods of the government bureaucracy, to the forms of cultural action with which they manipulate the people by giving them the impression that they arc being helped. (Freire, 1996, p. 122)"
This ignores the actual voices of the oppressed- applying blanket statements to all just re-affirms dominant power structures.
Yamamoto 99 Yamamoto, Eric (Professor of Law, University of Hawai'i Law School; Visiting Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1999.)., and Jen-L. W. Lyman. "Racializing environmental justice." U. Colo. L. Rev. 72 (2001): 311. The framework, however, at times also undercuts environmental justice struggles by racial and AND cynicism about environmentalists who sometimes treat them as mascots for the environmental cause.
This means your movement just harms traditional groups, such as indigenous people- turns case and no solvency
Yamamoto 01, Eric (Professor of Law, University of Hawai'i Law School; Visiting Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1999.)., and Jen-L. W. Lyman. "Racializing environmental justice." U. Colo. L. Rev. 72 (2001): 311. James Huffman also criticizes the traditional environmental justice framework, but from the perspective of AND society, will suffer at the altar of environmentalism worshipped in their name."
Thus, the alternative: communities should individually decide for themselves whether they want to prohibit the production of nuclear power in their area. Mutually exclusive: they decide for themselves, so they don't actually necessarily ban. The perm is severance.
Alt solves best- you cannot make rulings over the needs of the oppressed without reifying their oppression. Friere 68 PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED Paulo Freire. 1968.
It is essential for the oppressed to realize that when they accept the struggle for humanization they also accept, from that moment, their total responsibility for the struggle. They must realize that they are fighting not merely for freedom from hunger, but for freedom to create and to construct, to wonder and to ven ture. Such freedom requires that the individual be active and responsible, not a slave or a well-fed cog in the machine. . . . It is not enough that men are not slaves; if social conditions further the existence of automatons, the result will not be love of life, but love of death. The oppressed, who have been shaped by the death-affirming cli mate of oppression, must find through their struggle the way to life- affirming humanization, which does not lie simply in having more to eat (although it does involve having more to eat and cannot fail to include this aspect). The oppressed have been destroyed precisely because their situation has reduced them to things. In order to regain their humanity they must cease to be things and fight as men and women. This is a radical requirement. They cannot enter the struggle as objects in order later to become human beings. The struggle begins with men's recognition that they have been destroyed. Propaganda, management, manipulation—all arms of domination—cannot be the instruments of their rehumanization. The only effective instrument is a humanizing pedagogy in which the revolutionary leadership establishes a permanent relationship of dialogue with the oppressed. In a humanizing pedagogy the method ceases to be an instrument by which the teachers (in this instance, the revolutionary leadership) can manipulate the students (in this instance, the oppressed), because it expresses the consciousness of the students themselves. The method is, in fact, the external form of consciousness manifest in acts, which takes on the fundamental property of consciousness—its intentionality. The essence of consciousness is being with the world, and this behavior is permanent and unavoidable. Accordingly, consciousness is in essence a way to wards something apart from itself, outside itself, which surrounds it and which it apprehends by means of its ideational capacity. Consciousness is thus by definition a method, in the most general sense of the word. A revolutionary leadership must accordingly practice co-inten- tional education. Teachers and students (leadership and people), co- intent on reality, are both Subjects, not only in the task of unveiling that reality, and thereby coming to know it critically, but in the task of re-creating that knowledge. As they attain this knowledge of real ity through common reflection and action, they discover themselves as it£ permanent re-creators. In this way, the presence of the op pressed in the struggle for their liberation will be what it should be: not pseudo-participation, but committed involvement.
Interp: The affirmative must defend a prohibition on all types of nuclear power. They may not defend a prohibition on only (X) reactors. They do
Ground- defending a ban on only certain reactors denies the neg key DA ground. Key generics like the warming DA are solved because you still allow nuclear reactors, just not the bad versions. That is awful ground because I am forced defending bad nuclear reactors while the aff gets to defend a shift to good reactors. The aff can cherry pick which reactor they choose so they will always defend the best reactor screwing over the neg. Ground is key to fairness since equal acess to args controls equal acess to the ballot. 2. Limits Your interp moots neg prep. It changes the debate from nuke power good/bad to which types of reactors are good/bad. Thus almost all of my prep is not applicable to this aff, making it nearly impossible to win. There are way too many types of different nuclear reactors. You can spec any reactor or permutation of reactors. Given that you can also spec which country you want or which implementation to use, that explodes the amount of aff's I have to be prepping for. I will always be behind on the prep issue because I have to split my time between all the different aff's whereas you can just frontline your aff. Wikipedia incidcates there are way too many reactors for me to research: ~Wikipedia, "Nuclear reactor," Accessed Sept. 18, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor~~#Reactor_types~~ JW Classifications~edit~ Nuclear Reactors are classified by several methods; a brief outline of these classification methods is provided. Classification by type of nuclear reaction~edit~ Nuclear fission~edit~ All commercial power reactors are based on nuclear fission. They generally use uranium and its product plutonium as nuclear fuel, though a thorium fuel cycle is also possible. Fission reactors can be divided roughly into two classes, depending on the energy of the neutrons that sustain the fission chain reaction: Thermal reactors (the most common type of nuclear reactor) use slowed or thermal neutrons to keep up the fission of their fuel. Almost all current reactors are of this type. These contain neutron moderator materials that slow neutrons until their neutron temperature is thermalized, that is, until their kinetic energy approaches the average kinetic energy of the surrounding particles. Thermal neutrons have a far higher cross-section (probability) of fissioning the fissile nuclei uranium-235, plutonium-239, and plutonium-241, and a relatively lower probability of neutron capture by uranium-238 (U-238) compared to the faster neutrons that originally result from fission, allowing use of low-enriched uranium or even natural uranium fuel. The moderator is often also the coolant, usually water under high pressure to increase the boiling point. These are surrounded by a reactor vessel, instrumentation to monitor and control the reactor, radiation shielding, and a containment building. Fast neutron reactors use fast neutrons to cause fission in their fuel. They do not have a neutron moderator, and use less-moderating coolants. Maintaining a chain reaction requires the fuel to be more highly enriched in fissile material (about 20 or more) due to the relatively lower probability of fission versus capture by U-238. Fast reactors have the potential to produce less transuranic waste because all actinides are fissionable with fast neutrons,~19~ but they are more difficult to build and more expensive to operate. Overall, fast reactors are less common than thermal reactors in most applications. Some early power stations were fast reactors, as are some Russian naval propulsion units. Construction of prototypes is continuing (see fast breeder or generation IV reactors). Nuclear fusion~edit~ Fusion power is an experimental technology, generally with hydrogen as fuel. While not suitable for power production, Farnsworth-Hirsch fusors are used to produce neutron radiation. Classification by moderator material~edit~ Used by thermal reactors: Graphite-moderated reactors Water moderated reactors Heavy-water reactors (Used in Canada, India, Argentina, China, Pakistan, Romania and South Korea).~20~) Light-water-moderated reactors (LWRs). Light-water reactors (the most common type of thermal reactor) use ordinary water to moderate and cool the reactors. When at operating temperature, if the temperature of the water increases, its density drops, and fewer neutrons passing through it are slowed enough to trigger further reactions. That negative feedback stabilizes the reaction rate. Graphite and heavy-water reactors tend to be more thoroughly thermalized than light water reactors. Due to the extra thermalization, these types can use natural uranium/unenriched fuel. Light-element-moderated reactors. Molten salt reactors (MSRs) are moderated by light elements such as lithium or beryllium, which are constituents of the coolant/fuel matrix salts LiF and BeF2. Liquid metal cooled reactors, such as those whose coolant is a mixture of lead and bismuth, may use BeO as a moderator. Organically moderated reactors (OMR) use biphenyl and terphenyl as moderator and coolant. Water cooled reactor. There are 104 operating reactors in the United States. Of these, 69 are pressurized water reactors (PWR), and 35 are boiling water reactors (BWR).~21~ Pressurized water reactor (PWR) Pressurized water reactors constitute the large majority of all Western nuclear power plants. A primary characteristic of PWRs is a pressurizer, a specialized pressure vessel. Most commercial PWRs and naval reactors use pressurizers. During normal operation, a pressurizer is partially filled with water, and a steam bubble is maintained above it by heating the water with submerged heaters. During normal operation, the pressurizer is connected to the primary reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and the pressurizer "bubble" provides an expansion space for changes in water volume in the reactor. This arrangement also provides a means of pressure control for the reactor by increasing or decreasing the steam pressure in the pressurizer using the pressurizer heaters. Pressurised heavy water reactors are a subset of pressurized water reactors, sharing the use of a pressurized, isolated heat transport loop, but using heavy water as coolant and moderator for the greater neutron economies it offers. Boiling water reactor (BWR) BWRs are characterized by boiling water around the fuel rods in the lower portion of a primary reactor pressure vessel. A boiling water reactor uses 235U, enriched as uranium dioxide, as its fuel. The fuel is assembled into rods housed in a steel vessel that is submerged in water. The nuclear fission causes the water to boil, generating steam. This steam flows through pipes into turbines. The turbines are driven by the steam, and this process generates electricity.~22~ During normal operation, pressure is controlled by the amount of steam flowing from the reactor pressure vessel to the turbine. Pool-type reactor Liquid metal cooled reactor. Since water is a moderator, it cannot be used as a coolant in a fast reactor. Liquid metal coolants have included sodium, NaK, lead, lead-bismuth eutectic, and in early reactors, mercury. Sodium-cooled fast reactor Lead-cooled fast reactor Gas cooled reactors are cooled by a circulating inert gas, often helium in high-temperature designs, while carbon dioxide has been used in past British and French nuclear power plants. Nitrogen has also been used.~citation needed~ Utilization of the heat varies, depending on the reactor. Some reactors run hot enough that the gas can directly power a gas turbine. Older designs usually run the gas through a heat exchanger to make steam for a steam turbine. Molten salt reactors (MSRs) are cooled by circulating a molten salt, typically a eutectic mixture of fluoride salts, such as FLiBe. In a typical MSR, the coolant is also used as a matrix in which the fissile material is dissolved. Classification by generation~edit~ Generation I reactor (early prototypes, research reactors, non-commercial power producing reactors) Generation II reactor (most current nuclear power plants 1965–1996) Generation III reactor (evolutionary improvements of existing designs 1996-now) Generation IV reactor (technologies still under development unknown start date, possibly 2030) In 2003, the French Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique (CEA) was the first to refer to "Gen II" types in Nucleonics Week.~23~ The first mentioning of "Gen III" was in 2000, in conjunction with the launch of the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) plans. "Gen IV" was named in 2000, by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) for developing new plant types.~24~ Classification by phase of fuel~edit~ Solid fueled Fluid fueled Aqueous homogeneous reactor Molten salt reactor Gas fueled (theoretical) Classification by use~edit~ Electricity Nuclear power plants including small modular reactors Propulsion, see nuclear propulsion Nuclear marine propulsion Various proposed forms of rocket propulsion Other uses of heat Desalination Heat for domestic and industrial heating Hydrogen production for use in a hydrogen economy Production reactors for transmutation of elements Breeder reactors are capable of producing more fissile material than they consume during the fission chain reaction (by converting fertile U-238 to Pu-239, or Th-232 to U-233). Thus, a uranium breeder reactor, once running, can be re-fueled with natural or even depleted uranium, and a thorium breeder reactor can be re-fueled with thorium; however, an initial stock of fissile material is required.~25~ Creating various radioactive isotopes, such as americium for use in smoke detectors, and cobalt-60, molybdenum-99 and others, used for imaging and medical treatment. Production of materials for nuclear weapons such as weapons-grade plutonium Providing a source of neutron radiation (for example with the pulsed Godiva device) and positron radiation~clarification needed~ (e.g. neutron activation analysis and potassium-argon dating~clarification needed~) Research reactor: Typically reactors used for research and training, materials testing, or the production of radioisotopes for medicine and industry. These are much smaller than power reactors or those propelling ships, and many are on university campuses. There are about 280 such reactors operating, in 56 countries. Some operate with high-enriched uranium fuel, and international efforts are underway to substitute low-enriched fuel.~26~ 3. Topical version of the aff solves. You can just read generic nuclear power and have specific advantages about specific reactors. D. 1. Fairness is a voter since the ballot asks who the better debater is and you can't make that decision accurately if the round is unfair. 2. Fairness outweighs education Education loss is a reversible harm - I can always read up more on topic lit later, or do rebuttal redos to increase clash and critical thinking skills. But an unfair decision is permanent. 3. Drop the debater a) Recourse- Drop the arg always incentivizes abusive positions because worse case scenario you lose access to the arg but best case you win on an abusive arg. Drop the debater to incentives further checking of abuse and to deter your use of them. b) Drop the arg is severance on T because it shifts their advocacy to whole res in the 1ar. This is unfair because the 1nc strategy was premised on the AC plantext. If you allow them to shift it punishes me for their abuse. 4. Competing Interps a) Reasonability begs the question of what's reasonable, requiring arbitrary intervention for the judge to evaluate the round. Even if you set a brighltine its arbitrary, allowing you to always set a brightline that lets you get away with abuse. Your 1AC brightline proves, ARTICULATE WHY b) Reasonability begs the question of their interp. If I win offense, they are unreasonable. So a. even under reasonability the debater with the most offense wins and b. it collapses to competing interps because the debater has to win their interp / counterinterp first. 5. No RVIs a) RVI's prevent theory from checking abuse. I wouldn't want to initiate a theory debate against an abusive case if my opponent could win the theory debate on an RVI. This is especially bad since they knew what they were defending beforehand but I didn't ensuring a huge prep skew on theory already. b) Reciprocity-Theory is not a nib- you can go for link turns or impact turns- you can impact turn with fairness for who or link turn with arguments for why I violate or use the voters to generate offense on a new shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew. 6. T outweighs 1AR theory: a) Non topical affs force me to be abusive because I am debating off my prep and need to compensate for 1AC advantages, means T outweighs because it occurred first and framed any other theory violations; b) T is the most severe impact because it gives the aff a monopoly on prep; c) T outweighs because it's the only codified rule – theory interps are just made up by debaters but the only thing that we have going into the round is the topic.
2-off
The 1AC is addicted to the bomb—evoking images of atomic destruction legitimizes the use of nuclear weapons on a broader scale and condones any "lesser" form of violence
Lamarre 08 (Thomas Lamarre, 08, "Born of Trauma: Akira and Capitalist Modes of Destruction," positions, vol. 16 no. 1) Images of atomic destruction and nuclear apocalypse abound in popular culture, familiar mushroom clouds AND is as much and maybe more of a danger today than ever before.
This fixation on national interests and apocalyptic scenarios justifies endless violence, totalitarianism, and nuclear war
Shapiro 10, Iraq vs. U.S.: Total War Meets Pure War, http://www.alan-shapiro.com/iraq-vs-u-s-total-war-meets-pure-war/ Since at least the beginning of the Reagan years, the U.S. AND politics sometimes means not leaving everything up to the politicians and their institutions.
Specifically their truth claims are a self-fulfilling prophecy
Davis 06 – assistant prof. of English at Gordon College (Doug, Future-War Storytelling: National Security and Popular Film, ReThinking Global Security, ed by Andrew Martin and Patrice Petro, pg 16, 2006) Strategic Fiction and the History of the Future Fictions of nuclear terrorism have become AND represent are a license to act, to arm, and to war.
Security is self-defeating – security creates fear and insecurity – justifies endless conflict
Lifton, 03 – Prof. of Psychiatry @ Harvard U Med. School (Robert Jay, Superpower Syndrome: America's Apocalyptic Confrontation with the World, Pg. 112-116) That kind of apocalyptic impulse in war-making has hardly proved conducive to a AND be said to partner with and act in concert of the Islamic apocalyptic.
Security imposes a calculative logic that perpetuates structural violence and destroys Value-To-Life.
Dillon 96 (Michael, Professor of Politics – University of Lancaster, Politics of Security, p. 26) Everything, for example, has now become possible. But what human being seems AND for example, through strategic discourse- even if the details have changed.
The alternative is to reject the aff's securitization to solve violent security imaginations
Neocleous 08 ~Mark Neocleous, Professor of the Critique of Political Economy @ Brunel University, London, "Critique of Security," Edinburgh University Press, 2008~ JW Anyone well versed in history or with experience of university life will know about the AND state; it requires us to be brave enough to return the gift.
The role of the ballot is to critically examine the 1AC's securitization politics and discourse.
A. Interpretation: The affirmative must defend countries in general and must not defend that only a single country or combination of any countries prohibits production of nuclear power. B. Violation: They defend only Belgium. Confirmed in CX. C. Standards
Textuality- this aff is definitely not textual. The new norm in LD where everyone acts like 1 man policy debaters makes no sense since LD resolutions aren't written with plan focus in mind. 3 independent warrants, I can extend any of these in the 2NR to access this standard: A. Bare plurals-The word "countries" in the resolution are a generic bare plural. This evidence is about government's but the same logic applies to countries: Nebel 14, Jake, AB in philosophy at Princeton and the BPhil at Oxford, NYU,20 14, http://vbriefly.com/2014/12/19/jake-nebel-on-specifying-just-governments/ I believe that debaters shouldn't specify a government on the living wage topic. The standard argument for this is simple: "just governments" is a plural noun phrase, so it refers to more than one just government. Most debaters will stop there. But there is much more to say. (Some seem not to care about the plural construction. I plan to address this view in a later article about the parametric conception of topicality.) Some noun phrases include articles like "the," demonstratives like "these," possessives like "my," or quantifiers like "some" or "all." These words are called determiners. Bare plurals, including "just governments," lack determiners. There's no article, demonstrative, possessive, or quantifier in front of the noun to tell you how many or which governments are being discussed. We use bare plurals for two main purposes. Consider some examples: Debaters are here. Debaters are smart. In (1), "debaters" seems equivalent to "some debaters." It is true just in case there is more than one debater around. If I enter a restaurant and utter (1), I speak truly if there are a couple of debaters at a table. This is an existential use of the bare plural, because it just says that there exist things of the relevant class (debaters) that meet the relevant description (being here). In (2), though, "debaters" seems to refer to debaters in general. This use of the bare plural is generic. Some say that generics refer to kinds of things, rather than particular members of their kinds, or that they refer to typical cases. There is a large literature on understanding generics. Here my aim is not to figure out the truth conditions for the generic reading of the resolution; I shall simply work with our pre-theoretical grip on the contrast between sentences like (1) and (2). This distinction bears importantly on the resolution. If "just governments" is a generic bare plural, then the debate is about whether just governments in general ought to require that employers pay a living wage. If it is an existential bare plural, then the debate is about whether some just governments—i.e., more than one—ought to require that employers pay a living wage. Only the second interpretation allows one to affirm by specifying a few governments. B. Google defines "countries" as the plural version of country plural noun: countries
This means for the aff to be topical, even if countries don't refer to a bare plural, the aff has to defend 2 countries banning nuclear power.
C. Framers intent- If the framers wanted to discuss Belgium they would have specified that country or would have added a qualifier to the word country. Framers intent is key- words are only meant to communicate the meaning that the author intends. There are 4 impacts to textuality: Little a is predictability- I am AND you can talk about that in-dpeth education for the entire round.
2-off
The terrorist discourse creates binary identities of "us" vs. "the other".
Talbot 08 (Steven, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Sociological Research Online 13(1)17 'Us' and 'Them': Terrorism, Conflict and (O)ther Discursive Formations, http://www.socresonline.org.uk/13/1/17.html) Sociology of the enemy examines the social process of constructing enemies, and within the AND 'Rest' has the effect of silencing dissenting voices residing within both camps.
Terrorist rhetoric generates more violence and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy – 4 warrants, turns case.
Kapitan and Schulte 2 (Tomis and Erich, Thomas – Prof of Philosophy @ N Illinois U, and Erich – , Journal of Political and Military Sociology Vol. 30 Issue 1, 2002, pp. 172+, Questia) JPG The 'terrorist' rhetoric typified in Netanyahu's book actually increases terrorism in four distinct ways. AND violence against civilians.19 Let us now examine evidence for these points.
The alternative is to reject the discourse and not construct them as the "OTHER." Break down the binaries and reject the urgent call to action.
Enns 04 (Diane, Philosophy Department at the University of Toronto, John Hopkins University Press, Bare Life and the Occupied Body http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/v007/7.3enns.html) Foucault persists in being optimistic. The claim that "at the very heart of AND unnecessary, it is worse to say that it is the only option.
Role of the judge key—must examine the discourse of the 1AC
Edwards 10 (Brian, American Literary History, http://alh.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/22/2/360, date accessed: 7/7/2010) AJK In addressing the popular fascination with Private Jessica Lynch, taken captive by Iraqi forces AND handing of the crisis in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina).
And discourse is particularly relevant to deconstructing power relations. Bleiker writes
Discourse and Human Agency Roland Bleiker1 School of Political Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QID 4072, Australia. E-mail: bleiker@mailbox.ug.edu.an Contemporary Political Theory, 2003, 2, (25–47) r 2003 Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 1470-8914/03 $15.00 'It is within discourse,' one of Foucault's much rehearsed passages ( AND saturated with reason that their emergence out of unreason thereby becomes improbable.'
Case
9/12/16
SEPTOCT - Loyola Quarters NC
Tournament: Loyola | Round: Quarters | Opponent: La Canada AZ | Judge: Steele, Tan, Bistagne
1-off
A. Interpretation: The affirmative must defend countries in general and must not defend that only a single country or combination of any countries prohibits production of nuclear power. B. Violation: They defend only Egypt. Confirmed in CX. C. Standards
Textuality- this aff is definitely not textual. The new norm in LD where everyone acts like 1 man policy debaters makes no sense since LD resolutions aren't written with plan focus in mind. 3 independent warrants, I can extend any of these in the 2NR to access this standard: A. Bare plurals-The word "countries" in the resolution are a generic bare plural. This evidence is about government's but the same logic applies to countries: Nebel 14, Jake, AB in philosophy at Princeton and the BPhil at Oxford, NYU,20 14, http://vbriefly.com/2014/12/19/jake-nebel-on-specifying-just-governments/ I believe that debaters shouldn't specify a government on the living wage topic. The standard argument for this is simple: "just governments" is a plural noun phrase, so it refers to more than one just government. Most debaters will stop there. But there is much more to say. (Some seem not to care about the plural construction. I plan to address this view in a later article about the parametric conception of topicality.) Some noun phrases include articles like "the," demonstratives like "these," possessives like "my," or quantifiers like "some" or "all." These words are called determiners. Bare plurals, including "just governments," lack determiners. There's no article, demonstrative, possessive, or quantifier in front of the noun to tell you how many or which governments are being discussed. We use bare plurals for two main purposes. Consider some examples: Debaters are here. Debaters are smart. In (1), "debaters" seems equivalent to "some debaters." It is true just in case there is more than one debater around. If I enter a restaurant and utter (1), I speak truly if there are a couple of debaters at a table. This is an existential use of the bare plural, because it just says that there exist things of the relevant class (debaters) that meet the relevant description (being here). In (2), though, "debaters" seems to refer to debaters in general. This use of the bare plural is generic. Some say that generics refer to kinds of things, rather than particular members of their kinds, or that they refer to typical cases. There is a large literature on understanding generics. Here my aim is not to figure out the truth conditions for the generic reading of the resolution; I shall simply work with our pre-theoretical grip on the contrast between sentences like (1) and (2). This distinction bears importantly on the resolution. If "just governments" is a generic bare plural, then the debate is about whether just governments in general ought to require that employers pay a living wage. If it is an existential bare plural, then the debate is about whether some just governments—i.e., more than one—ought to require that employers pay a living wage. Only the second interpretation allows one to affirm by specifying a few governments. B. Google defines "countries" as the plural version of country plural noun: countries
This means for the aff to be topical, even if countries don't refer to a bare plural, the aff has to defend 2 countries banning nuclear power.
C. Framers intent- If the framers wanted to discuss Belgium they would have specified that country or would have added a qualifier to the word country. Framers intent is key- words are only meant to communicate the meaning that the author intends. There are 4 impacts to textuality: Little a is predictability- I am AND shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew.
2-off
CP Text: Egypt will ban the production of nuclear power with the exception of energy produced by thorium reactors.
Thorium reactors are the most promising form of energy production in the future
Schaffer 13 ~Marvin Baker Schaffer, researcher for RAND corporation with expertise in Accelerator Physics, Medical Physics, Nuclear Physics, "Abundant thorium as an alternative nuclear fuel: Important waste disposal and weapon proliferation advantages," Energy Policy Vol 60, September 13, 2013~ JW The principal arguments for thorium rather than uranium as fuel for nuclear reactors are the AND amplifier approach warrants support provided affordable energetic proton accelerators are developed and demonstrated.
Mutually exclusive with the aff: the aff bans all nuclear energy production which would include thorium reactors
Thorium reactors are extremely resilient to proliferation. Solves prolif and terror
Schaffer 13 ~Marvin Baker Schaffer, researcher for RAND corporation with expertise in Accelerator Physics, Medical Physics, Nuclear Physics, "Abundant thorium as an alternative nuclear fuel: Important waste disposal and weapon proliferation advantages," Energy Policy Vol 60, September 13, 2013~ JW Uranium-233 as transmuted in the thorium fuel cycle is typically contaminated with uranium AND uranium-233 can be denatured and made non-critical through dilution.
Thorium reactors are also way safer than traditional nuclear plants
Jacoby 15 ~Mitch Jacoby, senior correspondent at Civil and Engineering News, "Trying to Unleash the Power of Uranium," Civil and Engineering News, July 6, 2015, http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i27/Trying-Unleash-Power-Thorium.html~~ JW Finally, thorium comes with safety benefits, its proponents claim. So-called AND prevent the spread of radioactive material without the need for plant operator intervention.
Banning all nuclear power kills 55 thousand people per country, scientific expected value analysis proves
Brook et al 15, Barry and Staffan Qvist, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Sweden Faculty of Science, Engineering and Technology, University of Tasmania, Australia, Environmental and health impacts of a policy to phase out nuclear power in Sweden, 2015, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515001731Nuclear power faces an uncertain future in Sweden. Major political parties, including the Green party of the coalition-government have recently strongly advocated for a policy to decommission the Swedish nuclear ~power~ fleet prematurely. Here we examine the environmental, health and (to a lesser extent) economic impacts of implementing such a plan. The process has already been started through the early shutdown of the Barsebäck plant. We estimate that the political decision to shut down Barsebäck has resulted in $2400 avoidable energy-production-related deaths and an increase in global CO2 emissions of 95 mil- lion tonnes to date (October 2014). The Swedish reactor fleet as a whole has reached just past its halfway point of production, and has a remaining potential production of up to 2100 TWh. The reactors have the potential of preventing 1.9–2.1 gigatonnes of future CO2-emissions if allowed to operate their full life- spans. The potential for future prevention of energy-related-deaths is 50,000–60,000. We estimate an 800 billion SEK ( ~and~ 120 billion USD) lower-bound estimate for the lost tax revenue from an early phase-out policy. In sum, the evidence shows that implementing a 'nuclear-free' policy for Sweden (or countries in a similar situation) would constitute a highly retrograde step for climate, health and economic protec- tion.
AC
Middle Eastern Relations
2. Banning nuclear power doesn't solve: the Russia-Egypt deal has already given Russia more influence even if they're forced to withdraw.
3. Turn: having Egypt do something that's against what they want antagonizes the relations between U.S. and Egypt
4. Turn: banning nuclear power just means that Russia will export other forms of energy production to Egypt. Double-Bind either
a) Russia wants to expand influence so it will continue to displace the U.S.
b) Russia is not interested in expanding Middle Eastern influence and will thus practically not displace the U.S.
5. Advantage is non-unique: Russia already has Egypt's preference because of Obama's hesitance to endorse Putin
A. Interpretation: All plans must have solvency advocates - an author that advocates the entirety of the aff plan.
B. Violation: they don't have a solvency advocate
C. Standards:
Limits: This topic contains a ton of different plans with different authors. Each has different forms of specification and enforcement. Without a solvency advocate, I can't know how the plan works. Limits are key to fairness since: a) Defined limits are key to making clash on substance that you can't shift AND education because generic arguments lead to non-productive and non-unique discussions
D. Voters:
Fairness is key to deciding the better debater, since it can't be done if one has an unfair advantage. Education is key since it's the end goal and why school's fund debate.
Drop the debater since the round's already skewed and scratching args off the flow harms us equally but not in proportion to your violation.
And use competing interps since I don't know what you think is reasonable and I'd always have a risk of offense.
And No RVI's since 1. We have a reciprocal burden to be fair in every round, don't vote them up for being fair if I was being fair too, and 2. Deters illegit args, else they'd get good at theoretically defending their position and winning back on the RVI.
2-off – IFNEC CP
Text: Belgium should join the International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation.
It creates networks for nuclear power without having to establish domestic facilities, educates countries on the safe and proper use of nuclear power—solves prolif and warming.
McKenna 15 ~Phil McKenna, Boston-based reporter for InsideClimate News, master's degree in Science W "Global CO2 Emissions Decline in 2015 After Soaring for a Decade, Study Says," Inside Climate News, December 7, 2015, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris~~ JW The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is AND years but I think it's unlikely in the long run," he said.
Nuclear power is key to preventing global warming- empirics prove.
Biello 13 –David Biello 13, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/, citing James Hansen of Columbia University, How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming In addition to reducing the risk of nuclear war, U.S. ~ AND , director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, where Hansen works.
Squo solves. Nuke energy is orders of magnitude better for emissions
Pedraza 12 Jorge Morales Pedraza, consultant on international affairs, ambassador to the IAEA for 26 yrs, degree in math and economy sciences, former professor, Energy Science, Engineering and Technology : Nuclear Power: Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation : Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation, New York. Nuclear energy produces very few emissions of CO 2 to the atmosphere. If the AND of the fossil fuel power plants currently in operation all over the world.
IMPX – 2 Degrees Celsius
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
IMPX – Extinction
High probability risk of extinction from climate change
Meyer 4/29 ~Robinson Meyer, associate editor at The Atlantic, where he covers technology, "Human Extinction Isn't That Unlikely," The Atlantic, April 29, 2016, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/04/a-human-extinction-isnt-that-unlikely/480444/~~ JW Nuclear war. Climate change. Pandemics that kill tens of millions. These are AND climate scientists agree that the same phenomenon would follow any major nuclear exchange.)
Global runaway warming causes extinction
Carana 14 – Sam Carana is an environmental analyst whose expertise lies in environmental policy and sustainable energy. He also is a writer and policy developer. "Near-Term Human Extinction",~ http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/04/near-term-human-extinction.html) CR Global Warming and Feedbacks Is there a mechanism that could make humanity go extinct in AND . The poster below, from an earlier post, illustrates the danger.
Waldman 15 - Susanne, PhD in Risk Communication at Carleton University ("Why we Need Nuclear Power to Save the Environment" http://energyforhumanity.org/climate-energy/need-nuclear-power-save-environment/) CR What about safety? The accident at Fukushima after the Japanese tsunami in 2011 has AND -free power for keeping our world safe from biodiversity and climate impacts.
9/10/16
SEPTOCT - Loyola R4 NC
Tournament: Loyola | Round: 4 | Opponent: San Marino BK | Judge: David Dosch
1-off
Global carbon emissions are way down
McKenna 15 ~Phil McKenna, Boston-based reporter for InsideClimate News, master's degree in Science W "Global CO2 Emissions Decline in 2015 After Soaring for a Decade, Study Says," Inside Climate News, December 7, 2015, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris~~ JW The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is AND years but I think it's unlikely in the long run," he said.
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Nuclear power is key to preventing global warming- empirics prove.
Biello 13 –David Biello 13, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/, citing James Hansen of Columbia University, How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming In addition to reducing the risk of nuclear war, U.S. ~ AND , director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, where Hansen works.
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
Global runaway warming causes extinction
Carana 14 – Sam Carana is an environmental analyst whose expertise lies in environmental policy and sustainable energy. He also is a writer and policy developer. "Near-Term Human Extinction",~ http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/04/near-term-human-extinction.html) CR Global Warming and Feedbacks Is there a mechanism that could make humanity go extinct in AND . The poster below, from an earlier post, illustrates the danger.
Ethical uncertainty means we prioritize existential risks.
Bostrom 13 ~Nick Bostrom, Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy @ University of Oxford, "Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority," Global Policy Vol. 4 Issue 1, February 2013~ These reflections on moral uncertainty suggest an alternative, complementary way of looking at existential AND of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe.
2-off
Nuclear power is the only way to generate sufficient energy for large-scale desalination
IAEA 15 ~— widely known as the world's "Atoms for Peace" organization within the United Nations family. Set up in 1957 as the world's centre for cooperation in the nuclear field, the Agency works with its Member States and multiple partners worldwide to promote the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies, "New Technologies for Seawater Desalination Using Nuclear Energy," IEAE TecDoc Series, 2015~ It is anticipated that by 2025, 33 of the world population, AND for coupling nuclear reactors and desalination systems for specific sites in the Mediterranean region
Water crises cause escalating global conflict.
Rasmussen 11 ~(Erik, CEO, Monday Morning; Founder, Green Growth Leaders) "Prepare for the Next Conflict: Water Wars" HuffPo 4/12~ For years experts have set out warnings of how the earth will be affected by AND and "business as usual" prevails, then water wars will accelerate.
That goes nuclear
Zahoor 12 (Musharaf, Researcher at Department of Nuclear Politics – National Defense University, Water Crisis can Trigger Nuclear War in South Asia, http://www.siasat.pk) Water is an ambient source, which unlike human beings does not respect boundaries. AND being faced by Pakistan, which can only be resolved through political will.
3-off
CP Text: Indigenous communities should decide for themselves to ban nuclear power. Mutually exclusive with the aff since tribes that want nuclear power can continue to use it
Gover et al 92 ~Kevin, and Jana L. Walker (Native American Attorneys at Gover, Stetson and Williams). "Escaping Environmental Paternalism: One Tribe's Approach to Developing a Commercial Waste Disposal Project in Indian Country." University of Colorado Law Review 63 (1992): 933. The second and more controversial issue facing tribes involves the use of reservation lands as AND individual examples or authors is a reason why the CP solves the aff.
Banning nuclear power is a form of imperial paternalism
Jefferies 08 ~Sierra M. Jefferies, J.D. candidate, "ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE SKULL VALLEY GOSHUTE INDIANS' PROPOSAL TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE," Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 2008~ JW Second, opposition to the Band's attempt to make use of its land seems to AND , a casino, two ski lifts, forestry resources and a sawmill m98
4-off
1NC – Generic
CP Text: All countries except developing countries should ban the production of nuclear power
Nuclear energy, not renewables, is the best source of energy for developing countries. Solves intermittency problem and provides energy security.
Chowdhury 12 ~Navid Chowdhury, "Nuclear Energy For Developing Countries," Submitted as coursework for PH241, Stanford University, Winter 2012, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/chowdhury1/~~ JW Introduction Access to energy is regarded as the basic requirement for economic growth. And AND dependence on fossil fuel would remove Bangladesh from such obligations set by IMF.
McKenna 15 ~Phil McKenna, Boston-based reporter for InsideClimate News, master's degree in Science W "Global CO2 Emissions Decline in 2015 After Soaring for a Decade, Study Says," Inside Climate News, December 7, 2015, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris~~ JW The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is AND years but I think it's unlikely in the long run," he said.
Link – Carbon Shift
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Nuclear power is key to preventing global warming- empirics prove.
Biello 13 –David Biello 13, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/, citing James Hansen of Columbia University, How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming In addition to reducing the risk of nuclear war, U.S. ~ AND , director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, where Hansen works.
IMPX – 2 Degrees Celsius
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
IMPX – Extinction
High probability risk of extinction from climate change
Meyer 4/29 ~Robinson Meyer, associate editor at The Atlantic, where he covers technology, "Human Extinction Isn't That Unlikely," The Atlantic, April 29, 2016, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/04/a-human-extinction-isnt-that-unlikely/480444/~~ JW Nuclear war. Climate change. Pandemics that kill tens of millions. These are AND climate scientists agree that the same phenomenon would follow any major nuclear exchange.)
Ethical uncertainty means we prioritize existential risks.
Bostrom 13 ~Nick Bostrom, Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy @ University of Oxford, "Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority," Global Policy Vol. 4 Issue 1, February 2013~ These reflections on moral uncertainty suggest an alternative, complementary way of looking at existential AND of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe.
2-off – Oil Wars DA
UQ
Nuclear energy makes a significant portion of the world energy supply
NEI 16 ~Nuclear Energy Institute, "Nuclear Energy Around the World," 2016, http://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/World-Statistics~~ As of May 2016, 30 countries worldwide are operating 444 nuclear reactors for electricity AND nuclear energy to supply at least one-quarter of their total electricity.
Link
Japan proves that nuclear power reductions leads to more oil demand
Patrick 15 ~Hugh Patrick, Columbia Business School, "Japan's post-Fukushima energy challenge," East Asia Forum, November 23, 2015, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2015/11/23/japans-post-fukushima-energy-challenge/~~ JW Fossil fuels are the predominant energy sources for Japan. Japan has to import essentially AND cent before all of Japan's nuclear plants were closed following the Fukushima disaster).
IMPX – Oil Wars
This causes Western powers to become more aggressive in the protection of oil interests to keep prices stable and keep the flow of oil steady.
Jones 12 ~Toby Craig Jones, associate professor of Middle East history at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, "America, Oil, and War in the Middle East," Journal of American History (2012) 99 (1): 208-218~ Middle Eastern oil has enchanted global powers and global capital since the early twentieth century AND .3 Oil and war have become increasingly interconnected in the Middle East.
This causes oil wars and imperialist oppression by western nations.
Jones 12 ~Toby Craig Jones, associate professor of Middle East history at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, "America, Oil, and War in the Middle East," Journal of American History (2012) 99 (1): 208-218~ Indeed, that relationship has become a seemingly permanent one. This outcome was not AND American regimes in power were central to U.S. strategic policy.
3-off – Thorium PIC
CP Text: All relevant aff actors will ban the production of nuclear power with the exception of energy produced by thorium reactors.
Thorium reactors are the most promising form of energy production in the future
Schaffer 13 ~Marvin Baker Schaffer, researcher for RAND corporation with expertise in Accelerator Physics, Medical Physics, Nuclear Physics, "Abundant thorium as an alternative nuclear fuel: Important waste disposal and weapon proliferation advantages," Energy Policy Vol 60, September 13, 2013~ JW The principal arguments for thorium rather than uranium as fuel for nuclear reactors are the AND amplifier approach warrants support provided affordable energetic proton accelerators are developed and demonstrated.
Mutually exclusive with the aff: the aff bans all nuclear energy production which would include thorium reactors
Thorium reactors are extremely resilient to proliferation. Solves prolif
Schaffer 13 ~Marvin Baker Schaffer, researcher for RAND corporation with expertise in Accelerator Physics, Medical Physics, Nuclear Physics, "Abundant thorium as an alternative nuclear fuel: Important waste disposal and weapon proliferation advantages," Energy Policy Vol 60, September 13, 2013~ JW Uranium-233 as transmuted in the thorium fuel cycle is typically contaminated with uranium AND uranium-233 can be denatured and made non-critical through dilution.
Thorium reactors are also way safer than traditional nuclear plants
Jacoby 15 ~Mitch Jacoby, senior correspondent at Civil and Engineering News, "Trying to Unleash the Power of Uranium," Civil and Engineering News, July 6, 2015, http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i27/Trying-Unleash-Power-Thorium.html~~ JW Finally, thorium comes with safety benefits, its proponents claim. So-called AND prevent the spread of radioactive material without the need for plant operator intervention.
Waldman 15 - Susanne, PhD in Risk Communication at Carleton University ("Why we Need Nuclear Power to Save the Environment" http://energyforhumanity.org/climate-energy/need-nuclear-power-save-environment/) CR What about safety? The accident at Fukushima after the Japanese tsunami in 2011 has AND -free power for keeping our world safe from biodiversity and climate impacts.
Interpretation: If the affirmative chooses to specify an actor that bans the production of nuclear power, they must specify a minimum of two countries with a carded solvency advocate that specifies all the countries involved in the aff plan text.
Standards: Grammar- "countries" is a plural noun, which AND shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew.
2-off
First is framing—
The role of the ballot is to question the border assumptions of the 1AC's scholarship prior to the consequence of the plan. Questioning the violence of borders is a forgotten discussion in that needs to be revisisted.
Van Houtum 05 ~Henk Van Houtum, Nijmegen Centre for Border Research, Radboud University, The Netherlands, "The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries," 2005~ JW The second reason why I think it is a shame that we are not discussing AND making when b/ordering ourselves and others? And at what price?
Next is the criticism:
The affirmative reifies the legitimacy of nation states by choosing to defend a specific country pursuing prohibition of nuclear weapons. The affirmative chose to orient it's politics around the nation-state which inevitably reproduces violent boundaries and borders. This link is unavoidable and damning.
Walker 9~R.B.J., Walker is a professor in the department of Political Science at the University of Victoria and is the chief editor of the Journal of International Political Sociology, "After the Globe, Before the world", pg. 77 – 80~ The consequence, however, can also be read in relation to all those historical AND the limits of the modern political imagination will necessarily run into irresolvable difficulties.
The affirmative cannot delink. This link is supercharged because borders are an ontological division of the inside versus the outside which fuels nationalism.
Agnew 08—Department of Geography @ UCLA (John, 2008, Ethics and Global Politics, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 175-191"Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking," rmf) A third connection with political identity is made by those who emphasize the idea of AND project that simply takes place at the border or simply between adjacent states.
The affirmative fuels the creation of a mutual xenophobic otherization of those across the border- this results in cartographical violence that is justified by the perpetually fear of the other. Bornstein 2:
Bornstein 2(Avram Bornstein, professor @ John Jay college anthropology PhD and masters @ Columbia, "Borders and the Utility of Violence State Effects on the 'Superexploitation' of West Bank Palestinians" vol 22, 2002) Heyman (1998a, 1998b, 1999) has argued that militarization of the border AND are more complicated than surplus extraction and that those motivations can have impoverishing consequences
The permutation cannot solve the link without being severance, since the very plan text and advocacy of the aff is the link to the K. Even if affirming would result in some good impacts, its underlying assumptions are intellectually bankrupt. The permutation is akin to the slave master saying they are good because they donate to charity.
The K turns case—best case scenario the aff results in a ruse of solvency where they cause some small net decrease in militarism but do nothing to address the underlying root cause of modernized violence, i.e. the nation-state's constant race for global supremacy. Energy policy is just one instantiation of this race—you can substitute nuclear energy for renewables but you'll still end up with the same violence
3. The K link turns the militarism aff. The bifurcation of borders is what drives militaristic ideologies to begin with. The only reason we believe we need to be militarily ready is because we conceptualize those across the border as our enemies.
The alternative is to critically engage the border and re-evaluate our norms in relation to the violence they create.
Grosfoguel 06 ~Ramon Grosfoguel, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies @ UC Berkeley, "World-Systems Analysis in the Context of Transmodernity, Border Thinking, and Global Coloniality," Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 29, No. 2, From Postcolonial Studies to Decolonial Studies: Decolonizing Postcolonial Studies, 2006~ JW One of many plausible solutions to the Eurocentric versus fun- damentalist dilemma is what AND how to transcend the impe- rial monologue established by the Eurocentered modernity.
Case
No reverse causality: 2. Huge amounts of alt cause 3. Turn: nuclear power is a peaceful extension of our development of the atom
10/11/16
SEPTOCT - Voices R1 NC
Tournament: Voices | Round: 1 | Opponent: San Marino ED | Judge: Jack Coyle
1-off
1NC
ROB/Framing
The Role of the Judge is to be a critical educator focusing on the liberation of the oppressed
Giroux 06 ~Henry Giroux, American scholar and cultural critic, "America on the Edge: Henry Giro ux on Politics, Culture, and Education," Springer, March 31, 2006~ JW Educators at all levels need to challenge the assumption that politics is dead, or AND that severely limit the creative, ethical, and liberatory potential of education.
The Role of the Ballot is to endorse the best methodology to liberate oppressed groups
Debate should deal with questions of real-world consequences—ideal theories ignore the concrete nature of the world and legitimize oppression
Curry 14 ~Tommy J. Curry, Professor of Philosophy @ Texas AandM, "The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21st Century," 2014~ Despite the pronouncement of debate as an activity and intellectual exercise pointing to the real AND economic structures which necessitate tangible policies and reorienting changes in our value orientations.
Link – Developing Countries
Nuclear energy, not renewables, is the best source of energy for developing countries. Solves intermittency problem and provides energy security and sovereignty.
Chowdhury 12 ~Navid Chowdhury, "Nuclear Energy For Developing Countries," Submitted as coursework for PH241, Stanford University, Winter 2012, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/chowdhury1/~~ JW Introduction Access to energy is regarded as the basic requirement for economic growth. And AND dependence on fossil fuel would remove Bangladesh from such obligations set by IMF.
Big energy companies explicitly target developing countries in their marketing and expansions. Expanding use of fossil fuels will have devastating consequences for these countries
Klare 14 ~Michael Klare, professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College, "Big Oil Won't Let the Developing World Kick the Habit," Mother Jones, May 27, 2014, http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/05/big-energy-developing-country-oil-exxon-coal~~ JW The fossil fuel companies—producers of oil, coal, and natural gas— AND rise... This demand increase is expected to be concentrated in developing countries."
Link – Emission Goals
Nuclear power is key for developing countries to meet emissions goals
To deny these countries the ability to pursue energy to meet growing demands and meet climate change goals is to affirm the self-serving logic that permits affluent lives in the developed world and destitute lives in the developing one
Imperialism is the root cause of global capitalist exploitation – imperialism makes exploitation by global elites inevitable.
Lotta '13 Raymond Lotta - revolutionary intellectual who takes as his foundation Bob Avakian's new synthesis on revolution and communism. He has written extensively on China during and after the Cultural Revolution. "On the "Driving Force of Anarchy" and the Dynamics of Change A Sharp Debate and Urgent Polemic: The Struggle for a Radically Different World and the Struggle for a Scientific Approach to Reality." Revolution Newspaper. November 4, 2013. http://revcom.us/a/322/on-the-driving-force-of-anarchy-and-the-dynamics-of-change-en.html The understanding of the primacy of the "driving force of anarchy" was further AND human society into classes, and to create a world community of humanity.
Alt – Policy
The alternative is to allow free will in pursuing nuclear energy and implementing an international nuclear fuel bank. New reactor designs solve cost and the fuel bank solves prolif concerns.
Pontin 7 ~Mark Williams Pontin, "Nuclear Energy for the Developing World," MIT Technology Review, February 27, 2007, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/407373/nuclear-energy-for-the-developing-world/~~ JW In fact, gen-III reactors like the ESBWR do seem to possess the AND reprocessing capabilities. I'm particularly concerned about centrifuge enrichment as a proliferation challenge."
2-off
Nuclear power is resolving emissions now- models show it prevents almost half of the CO2 necessary to stop runaway warming.
Kharecha and Hansen 13, Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, "Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power," American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, 2013 We calculate that world nuclear power generation prevented an average of 64 gigatonnes of CO2 AND efficiency improvements and renewables, in the near-term global energy supply.
Climate change disproportionately affects people of color and causes extinction.
Pellow 12 David Naguib Pellow 12, Ph.D. Professor, Don Martindale Endowed Chair – University of Minnesota, "Climate Disruption in the Global South and in African American Communities: Key Issues, Frameworks, and Possibilities for Climate Justice," February 2012, http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/White_Paper_Climate_Disruption_final.pdf** It is now known unequivocally that significant warming of the atmosphere is occurring, coinciding AND must reduce our emissions and consumption here at home in the global North.
3-off
CP Text: All relevant aff actors should dismantle their nuclear weapon arsenals
Solves the entirety of the aff: we resolve the root cause of militarism by getting rid of all nuclear weapons. Also our strength of link to the culture of militarism is stronger since we establish a moral order that unequivocally condemns the tools of militarism.
Case
Impact Turns
T/ Allowing democratic nations to have access to nuclear weapons is key to checking back other rogue states that are already in the process of becoming nuclear powers
Carpenter 04 ~Ted Galen Carpenter, senior fellow for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, "Not All Forms of Nuclear Proliferation Are Equally Bad," CATO Institute, November 21, 2004, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/not-all-forms-nuclear-proliferation-are-equally-bad~~ JW That attitude misconstrues the probl em. A threat to the peace may exist if AND delay, not prevent, such states from joining the nuclear weapons club.
10/9/16
SEPTOCT - Voices R4 NC
Tournament: Voices | Round: 4 | Opponent: Mission San Jose JP | Judge: Kris Kaya
1-off
Nuclear power is resolving emissions now- models show it prevents almost half of the CO2 necessary to stop runaway warming.
Kharecha and Hansen 13, Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, "Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power," American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, 2013 We calculate that world nuclear power generation prevented an average of 64 gigatonnes of CO2 AND efficiency improvements and renewables, in the near-term global energy supply.
That solves 1.84 million air pollution deaths
Kharecha and Hansen 13, Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, "Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power," American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, 2013 In the aftermath of the March 2011 accident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant AND climate problem and would cause far more deaths than expansion of nuclear power.
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Only nuclear power solves – alternative energy growth is unaffected by phase-out but rather by state requirements and is statistically insufficient to replacing nuclear energy
Brintone and Freede 15, Samuel Brinton Master's degree program at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in nuclear engineering and the technology and policy program and Josh Freed Vice President at GMMB, a social marketing and advocacy firm, where he advised the senior leadership of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; regularly advises senior federal and state policymakers, and his work has been featured in The Washington Post, NPR, National Journal, POLITICO, The Los Angeles Times and Wired., "When Nuclear Ends: How Nuclear Retirements Might Undermine Clean Power Plan Progress," Third Way, 8-19-2015, http://www.thirdway.org/report/when-nuclear-ends-how-nuclear-retirements-might-undermine-clean-power-plan-progress, Unfortunately, our models found that renewable electricity sources grow primarily to satisfy state RPS AND and natural gas plants than our existing fleet of carbon-free nuclear.
Climate change disproportionately affects people of color and causes extinction.
Pellow 12 David Naguib Pellow 12, Ph.D. Professor, Don Martindale Endowed Chair – University of Minnesota, "Climate Disruption in the Global South and in African American Communities: Key Issues, Frameworks, and Possibilities for Climate Justice," February 2012, http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/White_Paper_Climate_Disruption_final.pdf** It is now known unequivocally that significant warming of the atmosphere is occurring, coinciding AND must reduce our emissions and consumption here at home in the global North.
DA turns case: Native Americans are especially vulnerable to climate change
Halpert 12 ~Julie Halpert, author at Yale Climate Connections, "Native Americans and a Changing Climate," Yale Climate Connections, June 21, 2012, http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/06/native-americans-and-a-changing-climate/~~ JW Native Americans are expected to be among the population groups most vulnerable to adverse effects AND 2011, the organization passed a resolution opposing the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
2-off
Nuclear power is the only way to generate sufficient energy for large-scale desalination
IAEA 15 ~— widely known as the world's "Atoms for Peace" organization within the United Nations family. Set up in 1957 as the world's centre for cooperation in the nuclear field, the Agency works with its Member States and multiple partners worldwide to promote the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies, "New Technologies for Seawater Desalination Using Nuclear Energy," IEAE TecDoc Series, 2015~ It is anticipated that by 2025, 33 of the world population, AND for coupling nuclear reactors and desalination systems for specific sites in the Mediterranean region
Desalination is coming and saves millions of lives- water shortages specifically harms poorer countries
Panlilio 13: Panlilio, Rafael Contributor, The Borgen Project "How Desalination Can Prevent a World Water Crisis." The Borgen Project, March 2013 A study from NASA and the University of California – Irvine shows that the Middle AND looking into System of Rice Intensification (SRI) to reap record breaking harvests
Water crises cause escalating global conflict.
Rasmussen 11 ~(Erik, CEO, Monday Morning; Founder, Green Growth Leaders) "Prepare for the Next Conflict: Water Wars" HuffPo 4/12~ For years experts have set out warnings of how the earth will be affected by AND and "business as usual" prevails, then water wars will accelerate.
That goes nuclear
Zahoor 12 (Musharaf, Researcher at Department of Nuclear Politics – National Defense University, Water Crisis can Trigger Nuclear War in South Asia, http://www.siasat.pk) Water is an ambient source, which unlike human beings does not respect boundaries. AND being faced by Pakistan, which can only be resolved through political will.
3-off
CP Text: All countries already or considering developing nuclear power should join the International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation.
It creates networks for nuclear power without having to establish domestic facilities, educates countries on the safe and proper use of nuclear power—solves prolif and warming.
Even if terrorists steal nuclear fuel, the process of converting that to a bomb is impossible. Neushaser 16:
Neuhauser, Alan. "How Real Is the Dirty Bomb Threat?" US News. U.S.News and World Report, 24 Mar. 2016. Web. 06 Aug. 2016. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-24/how-real-is-the-dirty-bomb-threat. "People have a view of there being all this nuclear material just floating around AND to get their hands on spent nuclear fuel is very, very unlikely."
Spent fuel in a nuclear plant is harder for terrorists to use
Murray 8/16 Murray, Iain. "Nuclear Power? Yes Please." The National Review. 06-16-2008. Web. August 16, 2016. http://www.unz.org/Pub/NationalRev-2008jun16-00032. To be effective in a weapon, a given volume of plutonium must contain no AND in the manufacture of nuclear weapons — and well nigh impossible for amateurs.
Discourse surrounding opposition to nuclear power is based on fear mongering that ignores growing scientific backing of nuclear power and sets up a moral boundary that kills democratic deliberation. Taylor 13:
~Bob Pepperman Taylor (Professor of Political Science at the University of Vermont, he specializes in and has been published on political theory, the history of political thought, American political thought, and environmental political theory), "Thinking About Nuclear Power." March 18, 2013. Polity Volume 45, Issue 2, pgs. 297-311. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/pol.2013.3~~ SF These claims created two problems for anti-nuclear advocates. First, given the AND It became difficult to identify rational grounds upon which to debate political opponents.
Turn - Fear mongering about nuclear power forces us to a world of coal, which produces cyclical public health harms and is worse for Nature as a whole. Taylor 13:
~Bob Pepperman Taylor (Professor of Political Science at the University of Vermont, he specializes in and has been published on political theory, the history of political thought, American political thought, and environmental political theory), "Thinking About Nuclear Power." March 18, 2013. Polity Volume 45, Issue 2, pgs. 297-311. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/pol.2013.3~~ SF But climate change is not the only factor causing reassessments about the value of nuclear AND plants are, in addition, the single biggest producers of greenhouse gases.
Liberal environmentalism has been pigeonholed as a "special interest" that regular people can't relate to. We should not judge environmentalism through individual policies but rather how we as a community can help solve. The alternative is a third wave of environmentalism structured around investing in the people as a creative body that can commit itself to solving massive issues – the New Apollo Project models this. Nordhaus and Shellenberger 04:
~Ted Norhaus (American author, environmental policy expert, and the director of research at The Breakthrough Institute) and Michael Shellenberger (American author, environmental policy expert, and cofounder of Breakthrough Institute.) , "The Death of Environmentalism." Sept. 16, 2004. The Breakthrough Institute. http://www.thebreakthrough.org/images/Death_of_Environmentalism.pdf~~ SF In early 2003 we joined with the Carol/Trevelyan Strategy Group, the Center AND deconstruct the assumptions underneath the categories "labor" and "the environment."
Having faith in humanities ability to solve warming through technological advances has the ability to rally public support for environmentalism. Taylor 13:
~Bob Pepperman Taylor (Professor of Political Science at the University of Vermont, he specializes in and has been published on political theory, the history of political thought, American political thought, and environmental political theory), "Thinking About Nuclear Power." March 18, 2013. Polity Volume 45, Issue 2, pgs. 297-311. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/pol.2013.3~~ SF While some readers may find Nordhaus and Shellenberger's rhetoric startling, it is less so AND benefit evaluation of nuclear power as one among many, very imperfect options.
2-off
Nuclear power is resolving emissions now- models show it prevents almost half of the CO2 necessary to stop runaway warming. Kharecha and Hansen 13, Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, "Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power," American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, 2013 We calculate that world nuclear power generation prevented an average of 64 gigatonnes of CO2- equivalent (GtCO2-eq), or 17 GtC-eq, cumulative emissions from 1971 to 2009 (Figure 3a; see full range therein), with an average of 2.6 GtCO2-eq/year prevented annual emissions from 2000 to 2009 (range 2.4−2.8 GtCO2/year). Regional results are also shown in Figure 3a. Our global results are 7−14 lower than previous estimates8,9 that, among other differences, assumed all historical nuclear power would have been replaced only by coal, and 34 higher than in another study10 in which the methodology is not explained clearly enough to infer the basis for the differences. Given that cumulative and annual global fossil fuel CO2 emissions during the above periods were 840 GtCO2 and 27 GtCO2/year, respectively,11 our mean estimate for cumulative prevented emissions may not appear substantial; however, it is instructive to look at other quantitative comparisons. For instance, 64 GtCO2-eq amounts to the cumulative CO2 emissions from coal burning over approximately the past 35 years in the United States, 17 years in China, or 7 years in the top five CO2 emitters.11 Also, since a 500 MW coal-fired power plant typically emits 3 MtCO2/year,26 64 GtCO2-eq is equivalent to the cumulative lifetime emissions from almost 430 such plants, assuming an average plant lifetime of 50 years. It is therefore evident that, without global nuclear power generation in recent decades, near-term mitigation of anthropogenic climate change would pose a much greater challenge. For the projection period 2010−2050, in the all coal case, an average of 150 and 240 GtCO2-eq cumulative global emissions are prevented by nuclear power for the low-end and high-end projections of IAEA,6 respectively. In the all gas case, an average of 80 and 130 GtCO2-eq emissions are prevented (see Figure 3b,c for full ranges). Regional results are also shown in Figure 3b,c. These results also differ substantially from previous studies,9,10 largely due to differences in nuclear power projections (see the Supporting Information). To put our calculated overall mean estimate (80−240 GtCO2-eq) of potentially prevented future emissions in perspective, note that, to achieve a 350 ppm CO2 target near the end of this century, cumulative "allowable" fossil CO2 emissions from 2012 to 2050 are at most ∼500 GtCO2 (ref 3). Thus, projected nuclear power could reduce the climate-change mitigation burden by 16−48 over the next few decades (derived by dividing 80 and 240 by 500). Uncertainties. Our results contain various uncertainties, primarily stemming from our impact factors (Table 1) and our assumed replacement scenarios for nuclear power. In reality, the impact factors are not likely to remain static, as we (implicitly) assumed; for instance, emission factors depend heavily on the particular mix of energy sources. Because our impact factors neglect ongoing or projected climate impacts as well as the significant disparity in pollution between developed and developing countries,16 our results for both avoided GHG emissions and avoided mortality could be substantial underestimates. For example, in China, where coal burning accounts for over 75 of electricity generation in recent decades (ref 14; Figure S3, Supporting Information), some coal-fired power plants that meet domestic environmental standards have a mortality factor almost 3 times higher than the mean global value (Table 1). These differences related to development status will become increasingly important as fossil fuel use and GHG emissions of developing countries continue to outpace those of developed countries.11 On the other hand, if coal would not have been as dominant a replacement for nuclear as assumed in our baseline historical scenario, then our avoided historical impacts could be overestimates, since coal causes much larger impacts than gas (Table 1). However, there are several reasons this is unlikely. Key characteristics of coal plants (e.g., plant capacity, capacity factor, and total production costs) are historically much more similar to nuclear plants than are those of natural gas plants.13 Also, the vast majority of existing nuclear plants were built before 1990, but advanced gas plants that would be suitable replacements for base-load nuclear plants (i.e., combined-cycle gas turbines) have only become available since the early 1990s.13 Furthermore, coal resources are highly abundant and widespread,24,25 and coal fuel and total production costs have long been relatively low, unlike historically available gas resources and production costs.13 Thus, it is not surprising that coal has been by far the dominant source of global electricity thus far (Figure 1). We therefore assess that our baseline historical replacement scenario is plausible and that it is not as significant an uncertainty source as the impact factors; that is, our avoided historical impacts are more likely underestimates, as discussed in the above paragraph. Implications. More broadly, our results underscore the importance of avoiding a false and counterproductive dichotomy between reducing air pollution and stabilizing the climate, as elaborated by others.27−29 If near-term air pollution abatement trumps the goal of long-term climate protection, governments might decide to carry out future electric fuel switching in even more climate-impacting ways than we have examined here. For instance, they might start large-scale production and use of gas derived from coal ("syngas"), as coal is by far the most abundant of the three conventional fossil fuels.24,25 While this could reduce the very high pollutionrelated deaths from coal power (Figure 2), the GHG emissions factor for syngas is substantially higher (between ∼5 and 90) than for coal,30 thereby entailing even higher electricity sector GHG emissions in the long term. In conclusion, it is clear that nuclear power has provided a large contribution to the reduction of global mortality and GHG emissions due to fossil fuel use. If the role of nuclear power significantly declines in the next few decades, the International Energy Agency asserts that achieving a target atmospheric GHG level of 450 ppm CO2-eq would require "heroic achievements in the deployment of emerging lowcarbon technologies, which have yet to be proven. Countries that rely heavily on nuclear power would find it particularly challenging and significantly more costly to meet their targeted levels of emissions." 2 Our analysis herein and a prior one7 strongly support this conclusion. Indeed, on the basis of combined evidence from paleoclimate data, observed ongoing climate impacts, and the measured planetary energy imbalance, it appears increasingly clear that the commonly discussed targets of 450 ppm and 2 °C global temperature rise (above preindustrial levels) are insufficient to avoid devastating climate impacts; we have suggested elsewhere that more appropriate targets are less than 350 ppm and 1 °C (refs 3 and 31−33). Aiming for these targets emphasizes the importance of retaining Environmental Science and Technology Article 4893 dx.doi.org/10.1021/es3051197 | Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 4889−4895 and expanding the role of nuclear power, as well as energy efficiency improvements and renewables, in the near-term global energy supply.
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Every reduction in emissions counts – there's no threshold for extinction, it's about degree
Nuccitelli 12 (Dana, environmental scientist at a private environmental consulting firm, Bachelor's Degree in astrophysics from the University of California at Berkeley, and a Master's Degree in physics from the University of California at Davis, "Realistically What Might the Future Climate Look Like?,") We're not yet committed to surpassing 2°C global warming, but as Watson AND by reducing our greenhouse gas emissions as soon and as much as possible.
It's not too late—emissions reductions can avoid and delay catastrophic impacts.
Chestney 13 – Nina, senior environmental correspondent, "Climate Change Study: Emissions Limits Could Avoid Damage By Two-Thirds," 1/13 The world could avoid much of the damaging effects of climate change this century if AND , transport systems and agriculture more resilient to climate change," Arnell said.
10/11/16
SEPTOCT - Voices RR R2 NC
Tournament: Voices RR | Round: 2 | Opponent: Dougherty Valley CS | Judge: Michael Harris, Nick Steele
T
The affirmative must defend and advocate implementation of nuclear power prohibition within a government system. Aff may not advocate prohibition as an ideal or aim of countries. OR Debaters who defends consequentialism must only derive offense from the implementation of living wages. The affirmative thus must concede that proving a concrete policy which does not include a living wage as comparatively net beneficial is sufficient to negate. B. Violation: they refuse to defend implementation and just say (
Resolution A legislative instrument that generally is used for making declarations, stating policies, and making decisions where some other form is not required. A bill includes the constitutionally required enacting clause; a resolution uses the term "resolved". Not subject to a time limit for introduction nor to governor's veto. ( Const. Art. III, §17(B) and House Rules 8.11 , 13.1 , 6.8 , and 7.4) Your interpretation is untextual since it doesn't codify the aim or ideal into laws the government enacts. This means your interpretation is non-topical and as such is terminal defense on the aff since it doesn't affirm. And, resolved re-frames the meaning of other words in the resolution since even if they prescribe an ideal, this word shows that ideal must be implemented. 2. Real world - 90 of real world decision making is in implementation. Elmore: Elmore, 1980, Professor of public affairs at the University of Washington, (Political science quarterly, pg. 605) The emergence of implementation as a subject for policy analysis coincides closely with the discovery by policy analysts that decisions are not self executing. Analysis of policy choices matters very little if the mechanism for implementing those choices is poorly understood. In answering: the question. "What percentage of the work of achieving a desired governmental action is done when the preferred analytic alternative has been identified?" Allison estimated that in the normal case, it was about 10percent, leaving the remaining 90 percent in the realm of implementation. Real world controls the internal link into other types of education since it ensures that the skills we're taught can actually be used. 3. Resolvability - underneath your interpretation the entire debate becomes a standards debate where the contention is entirely irrelevant. However, this debate becomes entirely resolvable as there are too many arguments to weigh under. When there are multiple philosophical justifications with weighing underneath them that each sufficiently justify an ethical theory, it becomes inherently difficult to determine which justifications come first given that arguments are insufficiently impacted. ~This is especially true in the context of this debate where each of your claims say this meta-ethical justification comes first~. Resolvability is key to fairness to determine whether or not the arguments made affect the actual ballot. 4. Topic education – underneath your interp you make the implementation of particular policies or the ways that they are used irrelevant. You moot arguments about the efficacy of living wages, important as the controversy about meta-analysis and accuracy of conclusions prove. Even if you talk about the philosophy behind those theories, that's bad since it abstracts us from learning about how the programs actually work and focuses on more remote issues. Prefer impacts to topic education since it's the only thing we won't discuss after the topic ends, however, we will still have plenty of util vs. deont debates. Further, topic education is key to fairness to ensure we can effectively utilize prep. 5. Overlimits - I can't question whether or not your empirics actually work in the real world or leverage offense against your interpretation.You deny me the best types of ground – to be able to question and criticize the system.
2-off
a. interpretation: google defines "prohibit"
formally forbid (something) by law, rule, or other authority.
b. he defends a boycott
C.
Ground 2. Predictability 3. Limits
3-off
Global carbon emissions are way down
McKenna 15 ~Phil McKenna, Boston-based reporter for InsideClimate News, master's degree in Science W "Global CO2 Emissions Decline in 2015 After Soaring for a Decade, Study Says," Inside Climate News, December 7, 2015, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris~~ JW The volume of carbon dioxide belched into the atmosphere from human activity this year is AND years but I think it's unlikely in the long run," he said.
Closing nuclear plants forces increased fossil fuel use
Meeting the 2 degrees Celsius change is key to stopping climate change catastrophe
Mastroianni 15 ~Brian Mastroianni, "Why 2 degrees are so important to the climate," CBS News, November 30, 2015, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-un-climate-talks-why-2-degrees-are-so-important/~~ As the United Nations conference on climate change gets underway Monday in Paris, one AND carbon emissions enough so that the 2-degree threshold is not crossed.
Empirically, the fossil fuel industry has outspent almost all other industries in political influence
interp: The affirmative must defend countries in general and must not defend that only a single country or some combination of countries prohibits the production of nuclear power. C.
Grammar-the word "countries" in the resolution is a bare plural indicating the resolution is generic. Debois 16, Danny, VBI Topic Analysis Sept-Oct, p.11, 2016 Importantly, "countries" in this resolution is a bare plural—i.e. there's no article or demonstrative in front of adolescents like "the" or "these" indicating which adolescents the resolution is talking about. Bare plurals indicate that the resolution is a generic statement, and consequently, in order to textually affirm, aff advocacies have to be why in general countries have to prohibit nuclear power, not why specific countries should prohibit it. 2. Framers intent- If the framers wanted to discuss (X country) they would have specified that country or would have added a qualifier to the word country. This is empirically proven by past topics that specified only the US. Framers intent is key- words are only meant to communicate the meaning that the author intends. Grammar and framers intent are key to limits—I am more likely to prep for the true interp of how the resolution is read rather than whichever version the aff likes most. Also means the aff is not semantically in line with the way the resolution is written. And semantics outweigh pragmatic a) Semantics is the most non-biased way to determine abuse. Framers of the rez design it to create fair and educational debates. Pragmatic benefits can't be determined as well since we are incentivized to lie about them to win the T debate. b) Semantic justifications have logical priority. A pragmatic approach would say "I'll give you a million dollars if 2+2=5." Even though you want the money, the pragmatic approach only offers a reason to want the statement to be true, not an actual reason for it to be true. 3. Limits- At a base level your interp allows 200 possible aff with every country in the world. That number is exploded because you can defend any permutation of these countries or spec things like types of reactors, putting the number of aff's well into the thousands. Even if we are extremely generous and say your counterinterp limits the number of aff's to less than 30, any number above 10 is ridiculous because we've only had this topic for a month, there is no way I could prep that many specific case negs and also prep for other aspects of the resolution and also live a normal life. Limits are key to fairness because they control if the negative can clash with well-prepped, quality arguments that give us both a chance at winning the round as opposed to scripted topic-independent debates. This also means limits is key to long term clash and topic education. D. Voter:
Fairness is a voter since the ballot asks who the better debater is and you can't make that decision accurately if the round is unfair. 2. Fairness outweighs education Education loss is a reversible harm - I can always read up more on topic lit later, or do rebuttal redos to increase clash and critical thinking skills. But an unfair decision is permanent. 3. Drop the debater a) Recourse- Drop the arg always incentivizes abusive positions because worse case scenario you lose access to the arg but best case you win on an abusive arg. Drop the debater to incentives further checking of abuse and to deter your use of them. b) Drop the arg is severance on T because it shifts their advocacy to whole res in the 1ar. This is unfair because the 1nc strategy was premised on the AC plantext. If you allow them to shift it punishes me for their abuse. 4. Competing Interps a) Reasonability begs the question of what's reasonable, requiring arbitrary intervention for the judge to evaluate the round. Even if you set a brighltine its arbitrary, allowing you to always set a brightline that lets you get away with abuse. Your 1AC brightline proves, ARTICULATE WHY b) Reasonability begs the question of their interp. If I win offense, they are unreasonable. So a. even under reasonability the debater with the most offense wins and b. it collapses to competing interps because the debater has to win their interp / counterinterp first. 5. No RVIs a) RVI's prevent theory from checking abuse. I wouldn't want to initiate a theory debate against an abusive case if my opponent could win the theory debate on an RVI. This is especially bad since they knew what they were defending beforehand but I didn't ensuring a huge prep skew on theory already. b) Reciprocity-Theory is not a nib- you can go for link turns or impact turns- you can impact turn with fairness for who or link turn with arguments for why I violate or use the voters to generate offense on a new shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew.
2-off
CP Text: All relevant aff actors will adopt the American model for nuclear power plant security. Solves terror attacks
MacFarlane 4/14 ~Allison MacFarlane, "How to protect nuclear plants from terrorists," phys.org, April 14, 2016, http://phys.org/news/2016-04-nuclear-fromterrorists.html U.S. nuclear power plants now are some of the most well- AND caused machines to malfunction, showed how vulnerable unprotected computer networks can be.
Mutually exclusive with the aff because they shut down nuclear reactors while the CP keeps them open
Net beneficial with the DA's
3-off f
Paris DA
Links
Belgium and the entire EU signed the Paris Agreement into force. Chee 16: Chee, Foo Yun (Reuters Reporter) "EU ratifies Paris agreement on climate change" The Globe and Mail. 4 Oct 2016. Web. 4 Oct 2016. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/eu-ratifies-paris-agreement-on-climate-change/article32228330/ The European Parliament backed the Paris accord to fight climate change on Tuesday, the EU executive said, tipping it over the threshold needed for the global deal to enter into force. The Paris Agreement, backed by nearly 200 nations nearly one year ago, will help guide a radical shift of the world economy away from fossil fuels in an effort to limit heat waves, floods, droughts and rising sea levels.
Nuclear energy is a key part of the Paris Climate agreement's carbon reduction goals
The power behind the Paris Agreement comes from its global support. Meyer 15
Meyer, Robinson. (an associate editor at The Atlantic, where he covers technology) "A Reader's Guide to the Paris Agreement." The Atlantic. 15 Dec 2015. Web. 1 Oct 2016. http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/12/a-readers-guide-to-the-paris-agreement/420345/ This global solidarity gives the Paris agreement its power. As I wrote over the AND the driving force in a shift away from fossil fuels. Lewis 16:
Lewis, Simon L. 2016. "The Paris Agreement Has Solved A Troubling Problem". Nature 532 (7599): 283-283. Nature Publishing Group. doi:10.1038/532283a.
Is this the beginning of the end of the fossil-fuel age, as some suggest? It could be — its influence is certainly being felt. Peabody Energy, the largest private coal company, lost 12.6 of its value the day after the Paris deal was agreed. It filed for bankruptcy last week. But even before countries queue up to sign, the Paris Agreement could already have solved one of the most troublesome problems in the climate arena, one that has plagued scientists and policymakers for almost a quarter of a century. And yet almost nobody — scientists included — seems to have noticed. The Paris Agreement has finally defined the threshold for 'dangerous' climate change. It AND with the goals in the Paris agreement leads to extinction. Cockburn 16:
Cockburn, Harry. 2016. "What Burning All Remaining Fossil Fuels Would Do To The Planet". The Independent. Accessed October 4 2016. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-change-burning-all-fossil-fuels-could-cause-global-mass-extinction-a7047761.html.==== Last year's Paris climate change agreement set a goal of keeping global warming below 2C. The new research is a stark warning of what could happen if efforts are not made to keep within agreed carbon emissions limits. The temperature rises would have a rapid impact on polar and tropical rainforest ecosystems, according to Professor Camille Parmesan, an expert in marine life at Plymouth University. Speaking to CarbonBrief.org she said: "The temperature and precipitation changes ~the report~ project… are way out of bounds for several ecosystems. This is no big surprise, since even what is viewed as 'moderate' warming will cause loss of Arctic sea ice, and hence the entire ecosystem adapted to sea ice." An 8C-10C rise in temperatures could even wipe out some of the planet's most common ecosystems she explained. "Grasses didn't evolve until CO2 was low enough that grasses could out-compete trees. At least one research group has predicted loss of grasslands at very high CO2… ~It is~ likely these types of extreme climate changes would lead to a 6th mass extinction event," she said.
