Big Sky Debate Page



Download 1.79 Mb.
Page1/32
Date18.10.2016
Size1.79 Mb.
#2940
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   32

Big Sky Debate Page |


c:\users\jason\dropbox\big sky debate master share\graphics and design\2011-12covers\galileo galilei affirmatives.jpg
Welcome to the eleventh year of Big Sky Debate! These three volumes represent our efforts to combine the best of research oriented handbooks and teaching tools in the same product. Our materials are guaranteed to be cut for this topic, in the months and days before the season begins, guaranteeing that you will have the most relevant, most thought-provoking research available on the topic. Whether it is for education, competition, or both, we believe that Big Sky Briefs will benefit your program, and we appreciate your support.
The role of handbooks is not without controversy. Some coaches feel that the material limits student exploration and discovery, while others contend that handbook evidence is rarely useful. In our view, the best debate handbooks open doors for students, by providing source material, useful models, and fodder for those early practice rounds at the start of the season. Novice debaters can find the material helpful as they struggle with terms and concepts, and more experienced debaters can use handbooks to fill in research gaps as they acquaint themselves with the topic. No one should expect any debate handbook to carry them through a season of competition—one of the critical skills that debaters must acquire is independent research, and an effective handbook will facilitate and encourage that.
Our goal is to be the most user-friendly and responsive publishers of debate handbooks. Please feel free to contact us with questions, complaints, even praise! Our web site, http://www.bigskydebate.com will continue to feature information about the topic all season, research resources, and forums for discussion—for both coaches and students. Please feel free to drop Don (dpogreba@bigskydebate.com) or Jason (jason@bigskydebate.com) an e-mail at any time.
Many thanks to the people who helped make this project possible. Our summer staffer Rachael Green made invaluable contributions. Finally, the biggest thanks go out to you, the customers who have chosen (once again) to purchase Big Sky Debate materials.
Enjoy the books and good luck to all of you this season! Thanks for being a part of something that is very exciting for us.

-- Pogie and Norm


Big Sky Debate

P.O. Box #7031

Helena, Montana 59604

(406) 285-1087

This compilation is Copyright, 2011, Big Sky Debate Publishers, All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized duplication of these materials is prohibited, with the exception of the following “fair use” stipulations:



  • You may make unlimited copies of the material included in these books for use within your own school/debate team. This provision does not entitle you to share materials with other teams, schools, or individuals outside your team.

  • You may make unlimited copies of evidence in this handbook as part of arguments or briefs you produce, as long as your versions significantly differ from the original and contain significant evidence and arguments from other resources.

  • If you have any questions about fair use, bulk purchase, or anything else, please contact us at orders@bigskydebate.com or by telephone at (406) 285-1087.


Table of Contents


Lunar Helium-3 Mining Affirmative 4

HELIUM-3 IS RAPIDLY DEPLETING 9

ADVANTAGE 1: PEAK OIL WILL HAVE DEVASTATING IMPACT 14

ADVANTAGE 1: HELIUM-3 IS CLEAN, RENEWABLE ENERGY 16

ADVANTAGE 1: HUGE AMOUNT OF HE-3 ON THE MOON 18

ADVANTAGE 1: SMALL AMOUNT OF HELIUM-3 WILL MEET ENERGY NEEDS 19

ADVANTAGE 1: LUNAR HELIUM-3 CAN REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON FOSSIL FUELS 22

ADVANTAGE 2: HE-3 SHORTAGE IMPACTS NUCLEAR DETECTION 24

ADVANTAGE 2: HELIUM-3 IS CRITICAL FOR DETECTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS 25

ADVANTAGE 2: NUCLEAR TERRORISM IS A HUGE THREAT 27

ADVANTAGE 3: HELIUM-3 WILL POWER SPACE EXPLORATION/COLONIZATION 29

ADVANTAGE 3: SPACE EXPLORATION CRITICAL FOR HUMAN SURVIVAL 31

ADVANTAGE 4: HELIUM-3 IS CRITICAL FOR MEDICINE/SCIENCE 35

OTHER NATIONS ARE RAPIDLY EXPANDING RACE FOR HELIUM-3 35

COST DETAILS 39

SOLVENCY: US SHOULD LEAD INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK 40

SOLVENCY: FUSION WILL WORK 42

SOLVENCY: THERE IS A HUGE ADVANTAGE TO BEING FIRST 45

SOLVENCY: MINING IS FEASIBLE 47

A/T: OTHER MATERIALS 48

A/T: HELIUM-3 WILL BE TOO EXPENSIVE 49

A/T: MOON TREATY/OUTER SPACE TREATY 50



Mars Direct Affirmative 51

HARMS: US SPACE PROGRAM IS IN STAGNATION 59

HARMS: NASA MINDSET STUCK IN COMPLEX, WASTEFUL MISSIONS 61

HARMS: LOSING FOCUS ON MARS HURTS US SPACE CREDIBILITY 63

INHERENCY: CURRENT NASA MARS VISIONS ARE TOO COMPLEX AND EXPENSIVE 65

INHERENCY: OTHER PATHS TO MARS EXPLORATION STALLED 67

INHERENCY: MARS PROGRAMS AT NASA HAVE BEEN CUT OR DELAYED 68

SOLVENCY: MARS DIRECT TECHNICAL DETAILS 70

SOLVENCY: ZUBRIN GOOD 71

SOLVENCY: MUST ACT NOW ON A MARS MISSION 72

SOLVENCY: MARS DIRECT WOULD TAKE LESS THAN A DECADE TO TOUCHDOWN 75

SOLVENCY: EXISTING FUNDING SOURCES ENOUGH FOR MARS DIRECT 78

SOLVENCY: MARS IS A NECESSARY GOAL FOR NASA 79

SOLVENCY: MARS DIRECT IS LIGHTER 80

SOLVENCY: “LIVING OFF THE LAND” OF MARS DIRECT SOLVES 80

SOLVENCY: MARS DIRECT WILL BE LOW COST 83

SOLVENCY: SMALLER CREW IS PREFERRED 88

ADVANTAGE: MARS MISSION WOULD DRIVE INTEREST IN SCIENCE 90

ADVANTAGE: MARS MINING/EARTH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 92

ADVANTAGE: COLONIZATION 93

ADVANTAGE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 94

A/T: MARS IS TECHNICALLY IMPOSSIBLE 97

A/T: COMMON RISK-BASED OBJECTIONS TO MARS 99

A/T: SHOULD GO ROBOTIC MISSIONS INSTEAD 102

ALTERNATIVE PLAN: ONE-WAY MARS TRIPS 106

Planetary Defense Affirmative 108

INHERENCY: CONGRESS IS INADEQUATELY FUNDING 115

INHERENCY: NASA ISN’T PRIORITIZING 118

INHERENCY: NOT ENOUGH RESEARCH 120

HARMS: NEOS CAN CAUSE EXTINCTION/MASSIVE IMPACT 121

HARMS: THERE ARE MANY THREATENING NEOS 125

HARMS: EVEN SMALL OBJECTS CAN BE DEVASTATING 126

HARMS: THREATS ARE FREQUENT 128

HARMS: SMALL RISK, BUT ENORMOUS IMPACT 130

HARMS: FAILURE TO ADDRESS WILL UNDERMINE NATION STATE 132

HARMS: APOPHIS 133

SOLVENCY: THE DAVID PLAN 134

SOLVENCY: EARLY DETECTION IS CRITICAL 135

SOLVENCY: DEFLECTION TECHNOLOGY 137

SOLVENCY: GROUND BASED TELESCOPES 138

SOLVENCY: VENUSIAN TELESCOPE 139

SOLVENCY: WE CAN PREVENT EXTINCTION 140

SOLVENCY: KINETIC IMPACTORS 140

SOLVENCY: NUCLEAR WEAPONS 142

SOLVENCY: NASA SHOULD LEAD PLANETARY DEFENSE 144

SOLVENCY: THE US SHOULD LEAD 147

SOLVENCY: TIME TO ACT IS NOW! 150

SOLVENCY: COST 152

UNDERVIEW: MORAL IMPERATIVE 155

A/T: DOD SOLVES 156

A/T: NO INTERCEPTOR TECH 158

A/T: LEGAL QUESTIONS/INTERNATIONAL LAW 160

A/T: EXISTING SURVEYS SOLVE 164

A/T: NUKES/WEAPONS IN SPACE NOT ALLOWED 165

A/T: MORE IMMEDIATE THREATS 168

A/T: CONSISTENT ORBITS 168

Space Based Solar Power Affirmative 169

INHERENCY: GOVERNMENT IS NOT INTERESTED/ACTIVE 176

SOLVENCY: SBSP MEETS AMERICAN ENERGY NEEDS 178

SOLVENCY: SBSP WILL WORK 179

SOLVENCY: SBSP CAN BE USED WITH EXISTING ENERGY GRID 181

SOLVENCY: DEMONSTRATION SATELLITE 182

SOLVENCY: GOVERNMENT SUPPORT IS CRITICAL 185

SOLVENCY: ANCHOR CUSTOMER 186

SOLVENCY: TIME TO ACT IS NOW 187

SOLVENCY: OTHER NATIONS WILL DEPLOY SBSP 188

ADVANTAGE 1: SOLAR EXPLORATION 190

ADVANTAGE 2: SBSP WILL PREVENT WARMING 194

ADVANTAGE 2: GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS 197

ADVANTAGE 3: SBSP CAN MAKE DESALINIZATION CHEAPER AND BETTER 200

ADVANTAGE 3: WATER IMPACTS 200

ADVANTAGE 4: SBSP CRITICAL FOR ENERGY PRODUCTION 201

ADVANTAGE 4: MUST TRANSITION TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 205

ADVANTAGE 5: SBSP CRITICAL FOR MILITARY POWER PROJECTION 210

ADVANTAGE 5: SBSP WILL REDUCE WAR 212

ADVANTAGE 6: ECONOMY 213

A/T: LAUNCH COSTS 215

A/T: FOSSIL FUELS ARE CHEAPER 217

A/T: FUSION AND RENEWABLES 218

A/T: TECHNOLOGY ISN’T THERE YET 220

A/T: MICROWAVE SAFETY 224

A/T: INTERNATIONAL OBJECTIONS/CPLAN 226

A/T: SBSP AS A WEAPON 227

Space Debris Affirmative 228

INHERENCY 234

HARMS: DEBRIS PROBLEM IS GROWING 235

HARMS: SPACE EXPLORATION ALREADY BEING HURT 236

HARMS: LONG-TERM USE OF SPACE 239

HARMS: FAILURE TO ACT NOW WILL LEAD TO CASCADE 240

HARMS: TIPPING POINT FOR KESSLER EFFECT NOW 242

SOLVENCY: LASERS WORK 244

SOLVENCY: REMOVING FEW OBJECTS ENOUGH 249

SOLVENCY: THE US SHOULD LEAD 250

SOLVENCY: TIME TO ACT IS NOW 252

ADVANTAGE 1: DEBRIS BLOCKS SPACE EXPLORATION 253

ADVANTAGE 2: MILITARY IS DEPENDENT ON SATELLITES 257

ADVANTAGE 2: AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY 258

ADVANTAGE 3: DEBRIS THREATENS ECONOMY 259

ADVANTAGE 3: ECONOMY IMPACT 260

A/T: SPENDING/COST 261

A/T: INTERNATIONAL ACTION 263

A/T: PRIVATE COUNTERPLAN 264

A/T: BIG SKY THEORY 265

A/T: PREVENTION IS ENOUGH 266

A/T: LASERS=SPACE WEAPONS 267

A/T: LIABILITY CONVENTION 268



Lunar Helium-3 Mining Affirmative
Plan: The UFSG should lead the development of an international plan to extract Helium-3 from the moon, per the Bilder ’10 plan.
Advantage 1. LUNAR HELIUM 3 WILL PROVIDE CLEAN, EFFICIENT ENERGY TO REPLACE OIL BEFORE THE DEVASTATING IMPACT OF PEAK OIL
A. $15 BILLION OVER 15 YEARS WILL BE ENOUGH TO MAKE HE-3 POWER PRODUCTION A REALITY-Dillow ‘11

[Clay; staff writer; Former Apollo Astronaut and Senator Says Mining Helium on the Moon Could Solve The Global Energy Crisis; Popular Science; 05 May 2011; http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-05/former-apollo-astronaut-says-moon-mining-could-solve-global-energy-crisis; retrieved 28 Jun 2011]


Former astronaut, Apollo moonwalker, geologist and former Senator Harrison Schmitt has a modest plan to solve the world’s energy problems. All we need is $15 billion over 15 years and some fusion reactors that have yet to be invented. And we’ll need a moon base.

Schmitt’s idea isn’t novel--he thinks the U.S. should go back to the moon, this time to mine the surface for helium-3, an isotope of helium that is rare on earth but relatively bountiful on the moon. The Russians have been talking about mining helium-3 from the moon for years, but they’ve never put forth a viable plan. Schmitt thinks his, all things considered, is pretty realistic.

So how does Schmitt’s plan break down? We’ll need $5 billion for a helium-3 fusion demonstration plant, because as of right now no such thing exists. We’ll also need to invest $5 billion more in a heavy-lift rocket capable of launching regular moon missions, something akin to the Apollo-era Saturn V.

A moon base for mining the stuff would cost another $2.5 billion, and though Schmitt didn’t really specify in his recent presentation to a petroleum conference, the other $2.5 billion could easily be chalked up to operating costs in an endeavor of this magnitude.


B. THERE COULD BE TEN TIMES THE ENERGY OF ALL FOSSIL FUEL SOURCE ON THE EARTH IN LUNAR HE-3-Bilder ‘09

[Richard; Law Professor @ University of Wisconsin; A Legal Regime for the Mining of Helium-3 on the Moon: U.S. Policy Options; Fordham International Law Journal; Volume 33, Issue 2; 2009]


He-3 is a component of the "solar wind" comprised of gas and charged particles continuously emitted by the sun into the solar system in the course of its thermonuclear fusion processes.1 2

During more than four billion years in which the solar wind has impacted the Moon, significant amounts of He-3, in addition to particles of other ionized components of the solar wind, have

become embedded in the Moon's regolith-the loose and dusty upper layer of rocks and soil comprising much of the Moon's surface.13 While He-3 constitutes only a minute proportion of the lunar regolith, 14 it is estimated that, altogether, there may be as much as one million metric tons of He-3 potentially recoverable from the Moon's surface.'5 This amount of He-3 is theoretically equivalent to ten times the energy content of all of the coal, oil,and natural gas economically recoverable on Earth. 16 Since the Earth, unlike the Moon, possesses a magnetic field and atmosphere that deflect the solar wind, He-3 is rarely found naturally on Earth.1 7 The small amounts of He-3 available for research and experiment on Earth are derived principally from the decay of tritium used in thermonuclear weapons.
C. HE-3 IS THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO MODERN ENERGY SOURCES AND PRESENTS NO SIGNIFICANT ENGINEERING CHALLENGES-Oberg ‘06

[James; Moonscam: Russians try to sell the moon for foreign cash; The Space Review; 06 Feb 2006; http://www.thespacereview.com/article/551/1; retrieved 20 Jun 2011]


Space geologist Erik Galimov, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, added that immediate steps must be taken to explore potential mining sites. “We should start geological survey, make maps of blocs exposed to the Sun, and design experimental installations if we want to start the production of helium-3 on the Moon in 15–20 years,” he said.

“There is nothing difficult from the engineer’s point of view in the production of helium-3,” he continued. “It is only a matter of investments.”

He calculates that an area of 10–15 square kilometers with the depth of three meters will be enough for producing one ton of helium-3. Engineers will have to remove and purify three meters of sand, enrich helium-3, and liquidify it for the delivery to the Earth.

“It is much easier to develop resources on the Moon than to produce oil on the Earth,” Galimov continued. “The Moon should become part of the Earth economy, as helium-3 is the only alternative to modern energy sources, which will ensure the normal environmental future of the planet,” he said.


D. PEAK OIL WILL COLLAPSE AGRICULTURE AND THE ECONOMY BEFORE WARS OVER DWINDLING OIL SUPPLIES BEGIN-Swartz '08

[Mimi; “The Gospel According to Matthew;” Texas Monthly; February 2008]


But here is Matthew R. Simmons, the head of one of the largest investment banking firms in the world, stabbing at his salad greens and heatedly discussing the chaos to come when, as he has long predicted, global oil production peaks and for the rest of our time on earth we struggle and suffer and barely endure under a diminishing supply of fuel until it disappears entirely. This idea is known as "peak oil," and Simmons is its most fervent, and fearsome, apostle. As he puts it, "I don't see why people are so worried about global warming destroying the planet--peak oil will take care of that."

Slashing through his entrée, barely stop-ping for breath, he describes a bleak future, in which demand for oil will always surpass supply, the price will continue to rise--"so fast your he ad will spin"--and all sorts of problems in our carbon-dependent world will ensue. As fuel shortfalls complicate global delivery routes and leave farmers unable to run their tractors, we will face massive food shortages. Products made with petroleum, from asphalt and plastic to fabrics and computer chips, will also become scarcer and scarcer. Standards of living will fall, and people will not be able to pay their debts. Lending will tighten, and eventually there will be major defaults. Growth will cease, and hoarding will set in as oil becomes increasingly rare. Then, according to Simmons, the wars will begin. That is the peak oil scenario.


Advantage 2: Nuclear Terrorism
A. HE-3 IS THE PREDOMINANT TECHNOLOGY USED TO PREVENT NUCLEAR TERRORISM IN THE US-Hagan ‘10

[William; Acting Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Department of Homeland Security; "Caught by Surprise: Causes and Consequences of the Helium-3 Supply Crisis”; 22 April 2010; http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/hearings/042210_Hagan.pdf; retrieved 17 Jul 2011]


The United States’ supply of He-3 has traditionally come from the decay of tritium, which the nation previously produced in large quantities as part of the U.S. nuclear weapons enterprise. The suspension of U.S. production of tritium in the late 1980s, however, resulted in a reduction in the amount of He-3 available for harvest. Currently, a significant portion of He-3 is used for neutron detection to aid in the prevention of nuclear terrorism. He-3 has become the overwhelmingly predominant technology used for this purpose; the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense (DoD), and Energy(DOE) each have nuclear detection programs that use He-3-based sensors.
B. A SINGLE ACT OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM COULD UNDERMINE THE PROHIBITION AGAINST THE USE OF NUKES, UNLEASHING A FULL SCALE WAR, DESTROYING HUMAN CIVILIZATION-Morgan ‘09

[Dennis Ray; World on Fire: Two Scenarios of the Destruction of Human Civilization and Possible Extinction of the Human Race; Futures; December 2009; pgs. 683-93]


In a remarkable website on nuclear war, Carol Moore asks the question “Is Nuclear War Inevitable??” In Section , Moore points out what most terrorists obviously already know about the nuclear tensions between powerful countries. No doubt, they’ve figured out that the best way to escalate these tensions into nuclear war is to set off a nuclear exchange. As Moore points out, all that militant terrorists would have to do is get their hands on one small nuclear bomb and explode it on either Moscow or Israel. Because of the Russian “dead hand” system, “where regional nuclear commanders would be given full powers should Moscow be destroyed,” it is likely that any attack would be blamed on the United States”

Israeli leaders and Zionist supporters have, likewise, stated for years that if Israel were to suffer a nuclear attack, whether from terrorists or a nation state, it would retaliate with the suicidal “Samson option” against all major Muslim cities in the Middle East. Furthermore, the Israeli Samson option would also include attacks on Russia and even “anti-Semitic” European cities In that case, of course, Russia would retaliate, and the U.S. would then retaliate against Russia. China would probably be involved as well, as thousands, if not tens of thousands, of nuclear warheads, many of them much more powerful than those used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would rain upon most of the major cities in the Northern Hemisphere. Afterwards, for years to come, massive radioactive clouds would drift throughout the Earth in the nuclear fallout, bringing death or else radiation disease that would be genetically transmitted to future generations in a nuclear winter that could last as long as a 100 years, taking a savage toll upon the environment and fragile ecosphere as well.

And what many people fail to realize is what a precarious, hair-trigger basis the nuclear web rests on. Any accident, mistaken communication, false signal or “lone wolf’ act of sabotage or treason could, in a matter of a few minutes, unleash the use of nuclear weapons, and once a weapon is used, then the likelihood of a rapid escalation of nuclear attacks is quite high while the likelihood of a limited nuclear war is actually less probable since each country would act under the “use them or lose them” strategy and psychology; restraint by one power would be interpreted as a weakness by the other, which could be exploited as a window of opportunity to “win” the war.

In other words, once Pandora's Box is opened, it will spread quickly, as it will be the signal for permission for anyone to use them. Moore compares swift nuclear escalation to a room full of people embarrassed to cough. Once one does, however, “everyone else feels free to do so. The bottom line is that as long as large nation states use internal and external war to keep their disparate factions glued together and to satisfy elites’ needs for power and plunder, these nations will attempt to obtain, keep, and inevitably use nuclear weapons. And as long as large nations oppress groups who seek self-determination, some of those groups will look for any means to fight their oppressors” In other words, as long as war and aggression are backed up by the implicit threat of nuclear arms, it is only a matter of time before the escalation of violent conflict leads to the actual use of nuclear weapons, and once even just one is used, it is very likely that many, if not all, will be used, leading to horrific scenarios of global death and the destruction of much of human civilization while condemning a mutant human remnant, if there is such a remnant, to a life of unimaginable misery and suffering in a nuclear winter.



Advantage 3: Helium-3 Will Lead to Space Exploration Critical for Human Survival

A. HE-3 IS THE KEY TO FUTURE SPACE EXPLORATION AND SETTLEMENT-Wakefield ‘00

[Julie; staff writer; Researchers and space enthusiasts see helium-3 as the perfect fuel source; Space.com; 30 June 2000;http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html; retrieved 01 Dec 2008]

Researchers and space enthusiasts see helium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, with virtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth. But there is plenty of it on the moon.

Society is straining to keep pace with energy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world population swells toward 12 billion. The moon just may be the answer.

"Helium 3 fusion energy may be the key to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski, Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.
B. SPACE COLONIZATION OFFERS A HEDGE AGAINST HUMAN EXTINCTION AND THE LOSS OF ALL OTHER LIFE ON EARTH, PASSING BOTH A COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND MORAL TEST-Baum ‘09

[Seth; Professor of Geography; Penn State University; Cost-Benefit Analysis of Space Exploration: Some Ethical Considerations; Space Policy; 2009; http://sethbaum.com/ac/2009_CBA-SpaceExploration.pdf; retrieved 16 Jul 2011]


While space colonization would provide a hedge against these very long-term astronomical threats, it would also provide a hedge against the more immediate threats that face humanity and other species. Such threats include nuclear warfare, pandemics, anthropogenic climate change, and disruptive technology [30]. Because these threats would generally only affect life on Earth and not life elsewhere,3 self- sufficient space colonies would survive these catastrophes, enabling life to persist in the universe. For this reason, space colonization has been advocated as a means of ensuring long- term human survival. Space exploration projects can help increase the probability of long-term human survival in other ways as well: technology developed for space exploration is central to proposals to avoid threats from large comet and asteroid impacts. However, given the goal of increasing the probability of long-term human survival by a certain amount, there may be more cost-effective options than space colonization (with costs defined in terms of money, effort, or related measures). More cost-effective options may include isolated refuges on Earth to help humans survive a catastrophe [36] and materials to assist survivors, such as a how-to manual for civilization [37] or a seed bank [38]. Further analysis is necessary to determine the most cost- effective means of increasing the probability of long-term human survival. A related question also relevant to space exploration is how to make tradeoffs between increases in survival probability and other benefits. This question treats survival not as a constraint for cost-effectiveness analysis but as a benefit that can be compared with other benefits. Such comparisons require a measure of the value of human survival. However, the value of survival lacks a precise figure. In traditional money-based CBA, it is not unreasonable to assign humanity’s survival an infinite value, or a value that is sufficiently large that it dominates everything else in CBA as if it were infinite. In Catastrophe: Risk and Response [39], US Court of Appeals judge Richard Posner gave human survival a value of $600 trillion; Posner described this as a crude underestimate intended to show that, even with such an underestimate, extensive effort to avoid human extinction passes CBA. Thus, following the common approach to non-market valuation, any reasonable estimate for the value of human survival suggests that this may be an important factor in space exploration CBA.

It is of note that the priority of reducing the risk of human extinction persists in forms of CBA which value nature in an ecocentric fashion, i.e. independently of any consideration of human interests. The basic reason is that without humanity leading long-term survival efforts (which would most likely include space colonization), the rest of Earth life would perish as a result of the astronomical processes described above. This point is elaborated by futurist Bruce Tonn, who argues on ecocentric grounds for reorienting society to focus on avoiding human extinction through both immediate avoidance of catastrophe and long-term space colonization . Tonn dubs this process of surviving beyond Earth’s eventual demise ‘‘transcending oblivion.” There is thus some convergence in the recommendations of the common anthropocentric, money-based CBA and the ecocentric CBA described here. This convergence results from the fact that (in all likelihood) only humans are capable of colonizing space, and thus human survival is necessary for Earth life to transcend oblivion.
HELIUM-3 IS RAPIDLY DEPLETING

Download 1.79 Mb.

Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   32




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2022
send message

    Main page