Chicago Debate League 2013/14 Core Files
NC Extension Harms – Environment #1 “Species are Resilient” 146
Download 3.16 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 2NC Extension Harms – Environment 2 “Corn is Clean” 1 47
- 2NC Extension Harms – Environment 3 “No Crop Trade-off” 1 48
- 2NC Extension Harms – Environment 4 “Developing Countries are Key” 1 49
- 1NC Frontline: Harms – Economy 1 50
2NC Extension Harms – Environment #1 “Species are Resilient” 1461) Species loss happens all the time, and “keystone species” are a myth because surviving species are forced to adapt and become stronger. Habitat destruction does not spillover, and the most likely causes of species extinction are natural calamities like volcanoes and meteors. Extend our FORBES evidence. 2) Habitats are not uniquely critical to biodiversity. Weather patterns make survival random. TONN, 7 [Bruce, Department of Political Science, Environmental Sciences Division, University of Tennessee; 11/01, http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-33265107_ITM] It should be clear, though, that protecting biodiversity does not mean that it is necessary that the status quo of all ecosystems on earth be maintained [13]. Taken literally, that is an impossible goal because there will always be fluctuations in species populations if only due to annual changes in weather and precipitation. 2NC Extension Harms – Environment #2 “Corn is Clean” 1471) Corn production techniques are becoming more efficient, producing more corn and using less land. This takes out their internal link because if less land is needed and fewer pollutants are produced, the domestic corn industry is not responsible for climate change. Extend our MUELLER AND KWIK evidence. 2) Don’t trust their evidence – other studies of corn production are outdated and do not assume new technologies. MUELLER AND KWIK, 13 [Steffen, Ph.D. University of Illinois at Chicago; John, Dominion Energy Services; “2012 Corn Ethanol: Emerging Plant Energy and Environmental Technologies” 4/29, http://ethanolrfa.org/page/-/PDFs/2012%20Corn%20Ethanol%20FINAL.pdf?nocdn=1] Energy consumption and advanced production technologies of corn ethanol are a topic of considerable interest since these factors constitute important inputs into environmental models that compare different fuel alternatives. The last comprehensive assessment of ethanol plant energy technologies and their adoption rates dates back to 2008.1 Since then ethanol plants have continued to improve their processes in an effort to reduce energy costs, target specific co‐product markets, and improve their environmental performance. Furthermore, emerging agronomic technologies are being rapidly adopted that reduce the environmental footprint of the ethanol production pathway. The recent adoption of energy saving technologies as well as advanced processing technologies has also been supported by new funding sources including ARRA grant money, State Renewable Portfolio Standards, and other state and federal energy efficiency grants. 2NC Extension Harms – Environment #3 “No Crop Trade-off” 1481) Corn fertilization allows for additional crops to be planted during corn season, meaning there is no need to replace other crops. Also, corn can produce multiple useful parts so that no food is destroyed in the process of developing ethanol. Extend our MUELLER AND KWIK evidence. 2) Corn use numbers are hyped – the U.S. used mostly filler crops or ethanol by-products for animal feed and other uses instead of raw corn. REUTERS, 12 [Gerard Wynn; “COLUMN-U.S. use of corn for ethanol is high but hyped: Wynn” 08/08, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/08/column-wynn-ethanol-corn-idUSL6E8J65JU20120808] But the estimate is inaccurate, by assuming away ethanol co-products and in particular so-called "distillers grains" which substitute for corn in animal feed. The problem has arisen partly because the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) fails to distinguish between ethanol and distillers grains in its headline statistics on corn consumption. Distillers grains now equal about a third of corn's contribution to animal feed, reflecting massive growth in the ethanol industry. The good news for the ethanol industry is that its net corn consumption is far smaller than the apocryphal 40 percent figure. The bad news is it is still an eye-watering 28 percent or so of the national crop. 2NC Extension Harms – Environment #4 “Developing Countries are Key” 1491) China, India and other developing countries are more responsible for greenhouse gas emissions than the United States, and the plan does nothing to get them to reduce pollution. Even if the plan can decrease U.S. emissions, global warming would be inevitable. Extend our DUTTA AND RADNER evidence. 2) China is leading the world in emissions. CNN MONEY, 13 [Wenqian Zhu; “Global CO2 emissions at record high in 2012,” 6/11; http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/11/news/economy/co2-emissions-record-high/] A part of the 2010 Cancun Agreements, 91 countries, representing nearly 80% of global greenhouse gas emissions, have pledged to act. These pledges, however, collectively fall well short of what is necessary to deliver the 2°C goal, according to the IEA report. China, Japan, India and the Middle East all contributed to the growth in global CO2 emissions. China was the largest polluter, but the pace of its increase was one of the lowest in the last decade. IEA attributed China's improvement to a wider use of alternative energy. 1NC Frontline: Harms – Economy 1501) Turn: Midwest Economies. A) Government support for domestic corn ethanol is critical to preventing Midwest state economies from collapsing. The plan causes prices to drop, destroying jobs and magnifying the impact of any recession. SPECHT, 12 [Jonathan, Legal Advisor for Pearlmaker Holsteins, Inc. B; J.D., Washington University in St. Louis; “Raising Cane: Cuban Sugarcane Ethanol’s Economic and Environmental Effects on the United States,” 4/24, http://environs.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/36/2/specht.pdf] Over the past thirty years, ethanol has become a greater and greater factor in the economics of corn production, and thus the economy of the Midwestern United States. In this time period, the amount of U.S. corn production used for ethanol has dramatically increased. In 1980, less than 1% of the U.S. corn crop went to ethanol production. By 2011, that amount rose to approximately onethird of the annual U.S. corn crop. The success of the ethanol industry has been one reason that much of the Corn Belt has weathered the most recent economic recession relatively well. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of March 2013, North Dakota (with 3.2%), Nebraska (with 3.8%), South Dakota (with 4.43%), and Iowa (with 5.0%) had four of the six lowest state unemployment rates in the United States. Two other states with significant ethanol production, Minnesota and Kansas, were also in the bottom fifteen states for unemployment. While it may be true that the Corn Belt region is currently doing well economically (that is, aside from the effects of the drought of 2012), especially relative to other parts of the country, this has not always been the case. During the 1980s, when commodity prices were very low, the Corn Belt region suffered economic stress from sharply reduced farm profits. By providing a certain source of demand for corn, domestic ethanol production sets a floor on the price of corn, preventing this type of regional disaster from repeating. Additionally, the population of the rural Midwest has been declining for years. As President Obama acknowledged in a 2010 speech, in an era of outsourcing and downsizing that began long before the most recent economic recession, the domestic corn-based ethanol industry stands out as one of the few sectors that is bringing jobs to rural America and allowing towns that might otherwise die to survive. For roughly two decades, the domestic ethanol industry has relied on the promise of continued government support in some form in order to expand facilities and ratchet up production. For years policy-makers have promoted the goals of reducing carbon dioxide emissions, cutting back on fossil fuel usage, and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign countries for its energy needs. Although the degree to which the domestic ethanol industry actually meets these goals is disputed, it does contribute to achieving each goal to some degree. While importing ethanol from Cuban sugarcane would meet the first two national policy goals, it would detract from the third. It would seem perverse for policy-makers to enact policies that would severely damage an industry that helped meet the national policy goals they had espoused, especially after the policy-makers had supported the industry. Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2011 2011 -> Voices of the Old Sea Norman Lewis 2011 -> Malevil Robert Merle 2011 -> The Elephant Keeper’s Children Peter Hoeg 2011 -> Jv packet •Mars Colonization Affirmative •Mars Colonization Negative 2011 -> Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) omb no. 1024-0018 2011 -> All America Looks Up to Virginia;” Virginia and the Declaration of Independence 2011 -> Rao bulletin 2011 -> Christopher Columbus was born between 25 August and 31 October 1451 in 2011 -> The Battle of Frenchtown (1855), Washington Territory: the Political and Demographic Context rev 9/4/11 2011 -> Seti aff •seti neg •Asteroids Aff Download 3.16 Mb. Share with your friends:
|