Wind Aff and Neg Supplement - Gonzaga 2014

Aff1ACPlan

The United States federal government should expand necessary incentives, permitting, and siting to facilitate offshore wind power in the United States ocean Exclusive Economic Zones.

Climate

AT US Not Key

US is the main polluter of CO2

Blakemore, ABC News domestic and foreign correspondent, 12

[Bill, 7-22-12, ABC News, Whos Most to Blame for Global Warming?, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/07/whos-most-to-blame-for-global-warming/, accessed 7-11-14, AKS]

Whos most to blame for global warming?

Nobody meant it to happen.

But it has, and theres no debate among the worlds scientists about which country is most responsible. That is, about which nation has injected the greatest amount of the heat-trapping invisible gas CO2 into to the atmosphere, where a lot of it remains for years, piling up and only adding to the heat.

The answer: United States has, with China a distant second.

And figured on a per person basis, the most responsible is the United Kingdom, with the United States a close second, Germany a close third, and China a distant seventh.

If youre surprised the most to blame isnt China, the explanation is simple:

In about 2007, China did pass the United States in putting the greatest amount of CO2 into the air per year, but Chinas economic boom only got started recently and they still have a couple of decades to go (if there are no drastic changes) before they catch up with the United States in the total cumulative amount of heat-trapping CO2 they will have been piling up in the air.

(Regarding the per person way of thinking, the United Kingdoms population is about 62 million, Americas is just over 310 million,Germanys about 82 million, and Chinas about 1.4 billion.)

The graphs below from NASA show all this responsibility in simple form. Most 12-year-olds understand them in a matter of minutes.

US key to solve Emits 1/3 of greenhouse gases

Spross, Climateprogress, 13

(Jeff, 6-6-13, Thinkprogress, Heres Why The U.S. Is Morally Obligated To Act On Climate Change, http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/06/06/2110951/us-obligated-climate-change/, accessed 7-19-14, CLF)

Internationally, the big hurdle to fighting climate change and global warming is figuring out a fair way to divvy up responsibility. Serious efforts to curb carbon emissions will require considerable upfront investment, so who should make those investments and how much? That impasse then influences domestic political reluctance in the United States. If the rest of the world isnt moving, why should we?

Earlier this week, Bloomberg flagged work by the Stockholm Environment Institute and others to nail down answers to those questions with hard numbers. Their conclusion?

As of now, the United States bears fully one third of the burden to reduce global carbon emissions, with much of Europe shouldering nearly another third. Its a bracing conclusion. The latest analysis suggests the per-unit social and economic damage from carbon emissions due to global warming is as much as twice what we thought. Several countries with much more modest obligations than Americas have already moved to price carbon, leaving the U.S. sticking out like a sore thumb. Even China is tip-toeing up to it.

Much of the researchers work comes from the Greenhouse Development Rights Framework. First, they set a global threshold for living standards, below which people are considered free from the responsibility to sacrifice in the fight against climate change. They came up with $7,500 a year in dollars (adjusted for purchasing power parity) its the living standard at which malnutrition, infant mortality, low education, and other problems of poverty begin to fade, plus a bit of breathing room. Even then, about 70 percent of the globe lives at or below this level, and taken all together is responsible for only 15 percent of the cumulative global emissions.

Capacity to invest in climate mitigation and adaptation was then defined as all income per person falling above that threshold. As you can see below, the United States capacity swamps that of both India and China, despite the much larger populations of the latter two countries:

Source: The Greenhouse Development Rights Framework

The researchers then tried to quantify responsibility for climate change by accounting for cumulative emissions since 1990, and all projected emissions going forward, while excluding all emissions associated with income below the threshold. Putting it all together, they calculated the responsibility and capacity indicator (RCI) for each country. In other words: everyones fair share of the responsibility to reduce carbon emissions enough to keep the planets climate under two degrees Celsius of warming.

The result? The United States has 33.1 percent of the global RCI in 2010, dropping to 25.5 percent in 2030. The European Union has 25.7 percent in 2010 and 19.6 percent in 2030. Thanks to its economic growth, China does jump from 5.5 percent in 2010 to 15.2 percent in 2030. But no other country even cracks 8 percent, or changes much over that period.

Source: The Greenhouse Development Rights Framework

This shouldnt be surprising. Other data suggests the U.S. can claim a third of the worlds carbon dioxide emissions since the mid-1800s, and our per capita emissions top nearly every other nation. Were also the most economically developed nation without a price on carbon, meaning we implicitly subsidize fossil fuel use far more than anyone else.

Wind Solves Climate

Offshore wind can help stop warming

National Wildlife Federation, Wildlife preservation organization, 14*

(NWF (organization helping wildlife survive the challenges of the 21st century like climate change and habitat loss), 2014, NWF, Offshore Wind Power, http://www.nwf.org/What-We-Do/Energy-and-Climate/Renewable-Energy/Offshore-Wind.aspx, accessed 7-11-14, CLF)

*last date cited

Offshore wind energy has great potential to help America forge a clean, independent energy future.There are currently nearly 2,000 offshore wind turbines spinning in Europe butnot a single one can be found here in America,despite the immense potential for clean energy generation right off our shores.

National Wildlife Federation is working with a broad coalition of partners to build momentum and support for the rapid, environmentally-responsible development of our offshore wind energy resources. If we are to protect wildlife from thedangers of climate change, we can no longer afford to ignore this massive local clean energy source.

Offshore Wind Potential in the Atlantic Ocean

Over 1.5 million acres off the Atlantic Coast of six states already designated for wind energy development could generate over 16,000 megawatts of electricity, enough to power over five million homes.Catching the Wind: State Actions Needed to Seize the Golden Opportunity of Atlantic Offshore Wind Powerequips Atlantic Coast state leaders with five recommendations on how to build the long-term market certainty needed tofully launch offshore wind power for America.

Download the full report (pdf)

The Atlantic Ocean is one of the best attainable renewable energy resources in the United States withthe potential to create local jobs while reducing global warming pollution.

America has some of the best offshore wind resources in the world, particularly along the Atlantic coast where over 1,300 GW of energy generation potential has been identified. Harnessing just a fraction of our offshore wind resource52 GWcould power about 14 million U.S. homes with local, pollution-free energy while creating over $200 billion in new economic activity along the coast. New analysis shows that a robust offshore wind industry could create 300,000 jobs here in America.

By tapping the power ofoffshore wind, America can help ensure energy security, price stability, and decreased pollution, whiledecreasing the use offossil fuelsthat pose the biggest threat to our wildlife and ocean resources.

Wind turbines curb emissions and hurricanes

Dance, Weather & Science Reporter, 14

(Scott, 2-26-14, The Baltimore Sun, Offshore wind turbines could weaken hurricanes, study finds, http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/weather/weather-blog/bal-wx-offshore-wind-turbines-could-weaken-hurricanes-study-finds-20140226,0,3734586.story, accessed 7-11-14, CLF)

Massive wind turbines that could dot the horizon from Ocean City within a few years could affect more than the power grid -- they might offer some protection from hurricanes, a study has found.

The idea is that the turbines' rotation saps some of the energy out of the atmosphere along the coast, according to a study published online today in the journal Nature Climate Change. That means the ingredients a storm needs to maintain or gain strength could be reduced.

That could end up providing fodder for offshore wind proponents' arguments, because the study suggests the value of hurricane damage that could be avoided could be added to any cost-benefit analysis of offshore wind.

Researchers at the University of Delaware and Stanford University used a model that forecasts climate, weather, air pollution and ocean conditions to explore how the presence of offshore windmills would have affected the strength and the tracks of hurricanes like Sandy and Katrina. They had previously used the model to test whether wind energy generation contributed to global warming, as some had suggested in the past, said Cristina Archer, an associate professor at Delaware and co-author of the study.

The model suggested that in the case of Sandy, Katrina and Hurricane Isaac, the wind turbines would have indeed had an impact.

The model found that the wind farms would have caused slight shifts in the storms' routes to shore, and would have slightly lessened wind speeds before, during and after landfall. The models also suggested slightly higher pressure in the storms' center, meaning they would be slightly weaker overall.

The model also found reductions in air pollution and other factors that helped to make wind power more cost-effective. Critics have fought efforts by Gov. Martin O'Malley's administration to build wind power because of its high cost.

"In sum, large arrays of offshore wind turbines seem to diminish hurricane risk cost-effectively while reducing air pollution and global warming and providing energy supply at a lower net cost than conventional fuels," the study's authors wrote.

Laundry List Impact

Laundry listWarming disrupts the fishing industry, destroys coral reef habitats, drowns wetlands and other land ecosystems, and causes acidification of the ocean meaning fish cant form their skeletons

Fujita, Environmental Defense Fund research and development director, 13

(Rod, 10-8-13, Environmental Defense Fund, Five ways climate change is effecting our oceans, http://www.edf.org/blog/2013/11/14/five-ways-climate-change-affecting-our-oceans, accessed 7-11-14, CLF)

Much attention has been focused on the effects of climate change on forests, farms, freshwater sources and the economy. But what about the ocean? Even with its vast capacity to absorb heat and carbon dioxide, the physical impacts of climate change on the ocean are now very clear and dramatic.

According to a recentreport, temperatures in the shallowest waters rose by more than 0.1 degree Celsius (0.18 degree Fahrenheit) a decade for the 40 years through 2010 . . . Average sea levels have increased worldwide by about 19 centimeters (7.5 inches) since 1901. What are the effects of these warmer temperatures?

Coral bleaching

As early as 1990, coral reef expert Tom Goreau and I pointed out that mass coral bleaching events observed during the 1980s were probably due to anomalously warm temperatures related to climate change. Mass coral bleaching results in the starvation, shrinkage, and death of the corals that support the thousands of species that live on coral reefs.

Fish migration

In addition, many fish species havemoved toward the polesin response to ocean warming, disrupting fisheries around the world.

Drowning wetlands

Rising sea levels, partly the result of heat absorbed by the ocean, is also drowning wetlands. Wetlands normally grow vertically fast enough to keep up with sea level rise, but recently the sea has been rising too fast for wetlands to keep their blades above water. Coral reefs and sea grass meadows are also in danger of drowning since they can only photosynthesize in relatively shallow water. (Their depth limits are greater when the water is extremely clear, but deforestation, farming, construction, and other activities adjacent to coral reefs are all reducing water clarity and thus exacerbating the risk of drowning.)

Ocean acidification

The ocean has absorbed about 30% of all of the carbon dioxide we humans have sent into the atmosphere since the start of the Industrial Revolution some 150 billion tons. However, this great service, which has substantially slowed global warming, has been accomplished at great cost: thetrend in ocean acidificationis about 30 times greater than natural variation, and average surface ocean pH (the standard measure of acidity) has dropped by 0.1 unit (a highly significant increase in acidity).

This is damaging many ocean species that use calcium carbonate to form their skeletons and shells. Recentstudiesshow that calcium carbonate formation is disrupted if water becomes too acidic. Ocean acidification also appears to be affecting whole ecosystems, such as coral reefs, which depend on the formation of calcium carbonate to build reef structure, which in turn provides homes for reef organisms.

A disastrous positive feedback loop

Finally, acidification also appears to bereducingthe amount of sulfur flowing out of the ocean into the atmosphere. This reduces reflection of solar radiation back into space, resulting in even more warming. This is the kind of positive feedback loop that could result in runaway climate change and of course, even more disastrous effects on the ocean.

For decades, the ocean has been absorbing carbon dioxide dumped into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. It has also absorbed a lot of theextra heatproduced by elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. But even the ocean has limits, and we are bumping up against them, with damaging consequences for the whole world.

Economy

Economy Uniqueness

US economy fragile now could go back into recession

Booker, Seeking Alpha Value Walk columnist, 6-26-14

[Brian, 6-26-14, SeekingAlpha, American GDP Shrinks 2.9%: U.S. Economy On The Verge Of Recession?, http://seekingalpha.com/article/2287983-american-gdp-shrinks-2_9-percent-u-s-economy-on-the-verge-of-recession, accessed: 7-11-14, CLF]

Many analysts were expecting theU.S. economyto contract in the first quarter, however the severity of the decline has shocked some. Revised datapoints toa 2.9% contraction, far worse than most analysts had predicted. So could the United States be teetering towards a recession, yet again?

Economic indicators are often revised as more and more info and data becomes available. In April, the government released a report stating that the economy had actually expanded by .1 percent. As more data came in economists began to revise the data downwards, with predictions averaging out to a 1.7% decline. The revision from tepid growth to an outright retreat is rather worrisome.

Economy appears to have since rebounded

Most analysts aren't too worried over the shockingly poor numbers from the first quarter. Since the sharp decline, the economy appears to have rebounded quite dramatically. Hiring is up, the manufacturing sector isreporting its best numbersin four years, and all12 of the Federal Reserve banksare reporting that the economy is indeed growing.

At the same time, many economists are pointing to the particularly harsh winter as restraining the economy. During the winter some economic activities are constrained. Obviously, farms won't be in full operation, but also consumers will be less likely to head to the store, movies, or restaurants.

As the weather warms, people tend to head outside and out of their homes more often. And when they do, there's an increased likelihood of them opening up their wallets. With the summer having finally set in, it does indeed appear that economic activity is picking up. This should bolster growth, though seasons always change and it's only a matter of months before winter comes around again.

Meanwhile, the economy has addedover a million jobsin the last five months. Increased employment generally leads to increased spending, which bolsters economic growth. Economists point out that such hiring generally suggests an economy that is growing between 2 to 3 percent, and certainly not one that is in the midst of a contraction.

All of these factors combined suggest that the economy is growing, at least at the moment. There are numerous other indicators that suggest, however, that the economy is still on weak ground and could fall back into negative territory.

Not all of the data is good

While the United States economy is almost certainly not in recession (as a recession is defined as two quarters of negative growth), not all of the economic indicators look good. While the U.S. economy has been adding jobs, wages are largely stagnant and participation in the work force has actually been shrinking.

Solvency

US Modelled

US action and development will spill over internationally

Global Wind Energy Council, 13

[No Author, September, GWEC, Global Offshore, http://www.gwec.net/global-figures/global-offshore/, accessed July 19, 2014, EK]

The potential of offshore wind is enormous. It could meet Europes energy demand seven times over, and the United States energy demand four times over.

Offshore wind is a relatively new technology, so costs will reduce and the technology will advance, helping offshore wind to be more efficient and cost competitive in the near term. But this exciting technology is already being incorporated into governments energy planning around the world.

More than 90% of the worlds offshore wind power is currently installed off northern Europe, in the North, Baltic and Irish Seas, and the English Channel. Most of the rest is in two demonstration projects off Chinas east coast.

Offshore wind is an essential component of Europes binding target to source 20% of final energy consumption from renewables, and China has set itself a target of 30 GW of installations off its coast by 2020. The United States has excellent wind resources offshore, and many projects are under development, but there is no offshore wind power installed yet.

The key benefits of offshore wind are:

The wind resource offshore is generally much greater, thus generating more energy from fewer turbines;

Most of the worlds largest cities are located near a coastline. Offshore wind is suitable for large scale development near the major demand centers, avoiding the need for long transmission lines;

Building wind farms offshore makes sense in very densely populated coastal regions with high property values, because high property values makes onshore development is expensive sometimes leads to public opposition.

Although offshore wind is often the most talked about part of the wind sector, today it represents about 2% of global installed capacity. In 2012 1,296 MW of new offshore capacity was added, a 33% increase from 2011 market, bringing the total to 5,415 megawatts.

Our projections show that by 2020, offshore wind will be about 10% of global installed capacity.

US offshore wind will be modelledbut strong investment commitment will be key.

Pratt, Credit Week, 12

[Terry A., May 23, Standard & Poors Rating Services: Credit Week, Strong Growth Of Global Offshore Wind Power Needs Substantial Investment Overview, http://www.standardandpoors.com/spf/upload/Ratings_US/CreditWeekMay232012OffshoreWindandRenewables.pdf, p. 17-19, accessed July 19, 2014, EK]

Electricity comes from many sources, but there is one source that only a few countries in Western Europe, along with China, take advantage of, and it is in growing abundance: offshore wind power. The industry began in Sweden and Denmark in 1991 but had not grown significantly until recently. European utilities and project developers have built more than 3,800 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind power capacity, according to the European Wind Energy Assn., and another 2,400 MW will become operational globally in 2012 or early 2013, mostly offshore of the U.K. and Germany and to a lesser extent China. Countries are increasingly relying on offshore wind power to help meet social and economic policies over the next decade, but the investment required globally to meet this vision is immense (see table 1).

The factors behind the industrys growth their resource arsenals, especially where for this relatively new asset class, but in Western Europe and China are fuel large demand centers are near favorable these will not be nearly enough to fund diversification, climate-change mitiga-tion, and, more recently, job creation. For the same reasons, governments and stakeholders in many other countries are looking to add offshore wind power to their resource arsenals, especially where large demand centers are near favorable locations for offshore wind farms.

Funding will be a key issue for industry growth. Utility balance sheets and state lending organizations have been the dominant sources of funding for this relatively new asset class, but these will not be nearly enough to fund the ambitious investment needed by 2020. Standard and Poors Rating Services estimate that the amount needed to meet U.K. and German gov-ernment goals by 2020 falls between 91 billion ($117 billion) and 104 bil- lion ($133 billion).

Favorable Regulations Are the Key to Increasing Investment

Electricity from offshore wind costs much more to produce than that from conventional fossil fuels that dominate supply in most countries. Consequently, offshore wind owes its existence to regu-latory support. We do not see this changing for years to come. Countries are investing in renewable energy not so much to produce electricity at the lowest cost, but more to meet the goals of energy security, climate-change mitigation, industrial policy, or a combination of the three. Government policies have been effective in attracting offshore wind proj-ects to the U.K., Germany, and Denmark, but not yet in the U.S. Interestingly, diverse policies result in favorable investment frameworks and rapid growth.

AT Doesnt Solve Fossil Fuels

Plan offsets need for oil and gas, and produces net more jobs in the process

Oceana, 12

[Oceana, Could Offshore Wind Displace Oil?, http://oceana.org/en/our-work/climate-energy/clean-energy/learn-act/could-offshore-wind-displace-oil, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

Wind power can directly offset oil consumption in the electricity generation and home heating sectors. Currently, 43.7 million barrels of oil are consumed annually to generate electricity across the country. This amount of electricity could easily be generated by offshore wind in an affordable way that creates more jobs than offshore oil and gas.

Offshore wind could generate nearly 30% more electricity than offshore oil and gas resources combined. Learn More

Offshore wind power could provide enough electric heat for every home in the country and then some, more than new offshore oil and gas combined. Learn More

Offshore wind energy could power 55% more vehicles as the fleet becomes electrified, more than new offshore oil and gas development combined.

Developing offshore wind would cost about $36 billion less over 20 years than the estimated cost of producing oil, but unlike oil and natural gas, offshore wind will not be depleted in that period of time. Learn More

Offshore wind could provide about three times as many jobs as could be created by the offshore oil and gas industries.

AT Turbines Break

Wind turbines built to withstand wear and tear

Sustainable Business, 13

[No author, February 12, 2014, Sustainable Business, Maine Leads Trend Toward Floating Offshore Wind Turbines, http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/24556, accessed July 17, 2014, EK]

As countries around the world focus more on offshore wind, scientists are working on next-generation turbines that float rather than having to be anchored into the sea bed.

Having to anchor them to withstand extreme winds or rough seas limits offshore turbines to being sited in water no deeper than about 165 feet (50 meters).

But if wind turbines can float, they can be installed in water up to 2,300 feet deep. "Many countries all over the world have steeply sloping coast," says Frank Sandner, an engineer at the University of Stuttgart. "Floating wind turbines are the only chance to utilize the wind energy out on the ocean."

A $120 million demonstration project starts this year off the coast of Maine - the first test for floating turbines in the US. They will ride on the surface of the water and simply be tethered to the ocean floor.

Four, 3-megawatt (MW) turbines will be deployed two miles off Boothbay Harbor in the Gulf of Maine. Norwegian energy company Statoil is developing the project using Hywind turbines similar to those used in its home country since 2009.

Hywind turbines have exceeded expectations, performing well in 50-foot waves and hurricane-force winds.

Wind turbines sit on giant, bottle-shaped buoys - the tower with rotor blades sits tall above the water's surface and the body floats deep below, weighed down by a cement ballast and tethered to the ocean floor.

The Department of Energy (DOE) gave a $4 million grant to both Statoil and the University of Maine for the project, because their partnership it's likely to improve performance of offshore wind technologies.

"This is an opportunity for many Maine companies to develop cutting-edge expertise on energy projects not just in Maine but around the world," says State Senator Troy Jackson, who serves on Maine's Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee.

Maine has local manufacturer that will receive contracts to help build the array and a consortium of companies, the Maine Wind Industry Initiative, will provide expertise. A lab at the University of Maine is devoted to advancing these technologies.

Floating Wind Farms Take Many Shapes

Although Statoil's Hywind design is the most advanced, scientists are looking at other options for floating wind farms.

An alternative being designed by Sweden's Hexicon uses a massive pontoon that's a quarter mile long and can support 24, 3 MW turbines for a total generating capacity of 72 MW. It would be a floating wind park with its own power station.

Hexicon Wind

Another model, the "Windfloat," has a triangular base with three corner floating pontoons, forming a "floating island" that supports turbines from 3 MW to 10 MW in size. One has already been installed off the coast of Portugal.

Floating turbines cost less to install than conventional tower-based designs. They can be assembled onshore and then towed out to the installation site, eliminating the expensive and arduous process of building them out in the open ocean.

On the flip side, the huge amount of steel needed to make turbines sturdy and heavy enough to withstand rough waves is too expensive. Engineers are working on solutions to get around that, such as intelligent systems that pump ballast water from one tank to the next as a way to stabilize turbines.

One thing that's clear is the need for specialized turbine blades that can produce energy even as they rock and tilt on ocean waves. All that motion means more wear and tear and can also interfere with power generation.

Offshore wind turbines are sturdy, light, compact, and built to withstand marine conditions

AREVA, No Date

(AREVA: Forward Looking Energy, no date, AREVA, POWERFUL WIND TURBINES DESIGNED FOR OFFSHORE USE, http://www.areva.com/EN/global-offer-713/wind-turbines-for-offshore-wind-farms-renewable-energies-solutions.html#, accessed 7-17-14, CLF)

Windmills in the Alpha Ventus wind farm in the North Sea

With power of 5 and 8 MW, the M5000 and AREVA 8MW wind turbines are intended for offshore wind farms. Sturdy, light and compact, they entirely designed to withstand the stress and severe conditions of the marine environment.

Today, offshore wind farm operators require strong partners offering large turbines with enhanced reliability, proven track record, high-performance and cost-effective design for higher water depths and greater distance to shore.

Find out how AREVA is helping utilities to make offshore wind projects successful.

Read the Field Report

OPTIMUM OPERATING CONDITIONS

M5000 Multibrid turbine leaving the production hall

Powerful: the M5000 delivers up to 5 MW (for an average wind speed of around 12 m/s). The AREVA 8MW wind turbine delivers up to 8 MW (for an average wind speed of around 12 m/s).

Corrosion resistant: AREVA wind turbines are equipped with a patented air handling system that protects the interior of the facility. The principle consists of purifying the air entering the facility and preventing any unpurified air from entering, thereby creating an internal overpressure phenomenon.

Reliable: number of turning components reduced to a minimum; redundancy of auxiliary equipment and sensors; compact platform.

Easy to assemble: lightness of the platform and rotor ; the entire unit is compact.

Easy to maintain: the continuous remote surveillance of the wind turbine in operation and the presence of auxiliary emergency components enable less frequent interventions and enable them to be planned in accordance with the weather conditions.

AT NIMBY

No NIMBYlocals support offshore wind projects

Kraemer, Environment Journalist, 9

[Susan, writes at CleanTechnica, CSP-Today, PV-Insider , SmartGridUpdate, and GreenProphet. She has also been published at Ecoseed, NRDC OnEarth, MatterNetwork, Celsius, EnergyNow, and Scientific America, September 24, Clean Technica, No Off-Shore Wind NIMBYism, Gigantic Potential for Mid-Atlantic States, http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/24/no-off-shore-wind-nimbyism-gigantic-potential-for-mid-atlantic-states/, accessed July 17, 2014, EK]

An amazingly high percentage of people who live down the Mid-Atlantic Seaboard from New York to Virginia want wind turbines off their coast.

Even if they can be seen from the shoreline, 67% support off-shore wind power, according to a new poll of coastal residents of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia .

If the turbines are out of sight, the level of support goes up to an astounding 82%.

A full 25% of the population of the US lives in the nine Atlantic states from Massachusetts to North Carolina. The potential is staggering. So it is very fortunate that so many people in the middle of part of the region with such great potential for wind power feel this way.

Off-shore wind power off the Atlantic could take one third of the US population off the fossil grid.

The off-shore energy potential down all nine Atlantic states is a colossal 330 gigawatts. That is almost twice the total amount the nine states use: 185 gigawatts. The job would take over 160,000 5 MW turbines spaced about a mile apart down the coast. This would be an energy superhighway.

NIMBYism has been the impediment for development of off-shore wind power off the East Coast. This poll certainly had surprising findings, for the middle five of this nine-state wind powerhouse.

Most of the residents polled in the five middle states lived within a block or so of the ocean, three quarters of them are homeowners; about 15% with waterfront property. A third of the people are 60 or older. Fully 90% of these coastal dwellers really get out and enjoy beach activities, swimming, walking, crabbing and clamming and they put a higher priority on protecting the coastal environment (76%) than improving the economy (69%), lowering taxes (65%), improving education (64%), or controlling growth (56%)

In March 2009, the governors of the five states in the middle of this wind energy goldmine had initiated an effort to develop an interstate agreement on ocean and coastal management for the Mid-Atlantic region. While NOAA funded a grant for the Urban Coast Institute and Polling Institute at Monmouth University to do the poll, coincidentally, the governors of the five states would need to know if there was any agreement on coastal development.

The Department of the Interior is developing a Comprehensive Energy Plan on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. There is a surprising level of agreement among coastal residents in the five states about what the government should do on a range of issues of interest to coastal dwellers.

While the poll questions covered many coastal issues, what jumped out at me was that these residents really agree on wind power off the Atlantic Seaboard.

AT Environment Args

Turbines Help Biodiversity

Turbines increase biodiversity

Osborne, Fellow at George Weidenfeld Programme, 2014

[Louise, 1/24/2014, Deutsche Welle, Booming German offshore wind power industry puts pressure on marine life, http://www.dw.de/booming-german-offshore-wind-power-industry-puts-pressure-on-marine-life/a-17339633, accessed 7/11/2014 CK]

A recent report released by Germany's Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency, known as the BSH, on the wind farm Alpha Ventus has sought to soothe conservationists' fears. According to the report, the effects on fish, birds and marine mammals are minimal.

Conducted over five years, the study looked at the ecological effects of the 12 turbines at Alpha Ventus, a test site run jointly by energy firms EWE, E-ON and Vattenfall, 60 kilometers off the German coast in the North Sea. It revealed an increase in the biodiversity at the bases of the turbines.

"Life on the ground had very much intensified because small life-forms such as mussels, starfish and sea anemones, were able to find a new surface on which to grow and multiply, much stronger than on the sand that was already there," said Monika Breuch-Moritz, president of the BSH.

"That is actually just a normal result, you see similar things on every shipwreck," she told DW.

AT Wind Kills Birds

Annually, fossil fuels kill exactly 2,071 times more birds than wind turbines

Sovacool, National University of Singapore Energy Governance Program, 9

(Benjamin K, Energy Governance Program, Centre on Asia and Globalisation, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, 9/13/09, NukeFree.org, Avian mortality from wind power, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity, http://www.nukefree.org/news/avianmortalityfromwindpower,fossil-fuel,andnuclearelectricity, accessed 7/11/14) NM

Fossil-fueled facilities are 17 times more dangerous to birds on a per GWh basis than wind power. Wind turbines may have killed about 7000 birds, but fossil-fueled stations killed 14.5 million and nuclear 327,000.

This article explores the threats that wind farms pose to birds and bats before briefly surveying the recent literature on avian mortality and summarizing some of the problems with it. Based on operating performance in the United States and Europe, this study offers an approximate calculation for the number of birds killed per kWh generated for wind electricity, fossil-fuel, and nuclear power systems.

The study estimates that wind farms and nuclear power stations are responsible each for between 0.3 and 0.4 fatalities per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while fossil-fueled power stations are responsible for about 5.2 fatalities per GWh. While this paper should be respected as a preliminary assessment, the estimate means that wind farms killed approximately seven thousand birds in the United States in 2006 but nuclear plants killed about 327,000 and fossil-fueled power plants 14.5 million. The paper concludes that further study is needed, but also that fossil-fueled power stations appear to pose a much greater threat to avian wildlife than wind and nuclear power technologies.

AT Fishing Industry

Turn Wind Helps Fish Industry

Offshore wind increases fish population good for fishing industry

Garus, Sun & Wind Energy, 13

(Katrina, 10-31-13, Sun & Wind Energy, Offshore wind farms increase biodiversity, http://www.sunwindenergy.com/news/offshore-wind-farms-increase-biodiversity, accessed 7-11-14, CLF)

Contrary to what many fear, offshore wind farms do not have a negative effect on plants and wildlife. A study conducted at the alpha ventus wind farm under the auspices of theGerman Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency(BSH) shows that neither the obliteration of fauna nor mass killings of birds need be feared.

"We are pleased that there has been no negative impact on the marine environment here," BSH President Monika Breuch-Moritz said. The opposite is actually the case: The foundations of offshore wind turbines form artificial reefs, on which mussels, sea anemones, sea lilies and starfish settle. The researchers noticed increased biodiversity.

The fish population at the alpha ventus wind farm also shows greater biodiversity. New species found in the area include long-spined scorpionfish, mackerel and dragonet. To detect the fish, the scientists used a special fish sonar for the first time, which they set up next to the wind turbines on the seabed.

Another important result of the research project is a binding guideline for methods to perform underwater acoustic measurements. It is the basis for DIN and ISO guidelines, which serve as a template for European countries. During the project, new methods were developed for detecting and evaluating populations of birds, marine mammals, fish and benthos in the vicinity of the offshore wind farms.

TurnWind turbines increase fish population and create habitats for new fish speciesSolves fishing DA

Leonhard, et al., Technical University of Denmark Aqua associates, 11

(S.B., C. Stenberg, J. Stttrup, 2011, Science Daily, Fish Thriving around wind farms, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120410093318.htm, accessed 7-1-14, CLF)

The first Danish study into how one of the worlds largest wind farms affects marine life is now completed. It shows that the wind turbines and the fish live quite happily together. Indeed some species of fish have actually increased in number.

As work is just beginning on Denmark's newest and so far largest offshore wind farm off the island of Anholt, comes some hopefully good news for all fish in the area. A new report from the Danish wind-park Horns Rev 1, one of the world's largest offshore wind farms, shows that offshore wind farms and fish can live together in harmony.

The 80 huge turbines at Horns Rev 1 are located just off Denmark's westernmost point and will be celebrating their tenth birthday in just over a year's time. Like other offshore wind farms, it is located in relatively shallow water, no more than 20 meters deep, and thus in an area which is typically teeming with fish.

Even before the park was built, researchers from DTU Aqua, National Institute of Aquatic Resources in Denmark, sailed out to conduct a survey of fish life in the area. Biologists then compared the data gathered at that time with the situation in the area seven years after the wind turbine blades began to turn.

"Our study showed that the turbines have not adversely affected fish life in the area," says biologist Claus Stenberg from DTU Aqua.

Several new species

Offshore turbines at Horns Rev are sunk deep into the seabed and surrounded by a rim of large piles of stones, which prevents the sea currents eroding deep trenches in the sand around the turbines. The study suggests that these stone structures also act as artificial reefs, providing enhanced conditions for fish, with an abundant supply of food and shelter from the current, and attracts fish which like a rocky sea bottom. As such, the turbines have created habitats for a number of new species in the area.

"Species such as the goldsinny-wrasse, eelpout and lumpfish which like reef environments have established themselves on the new reefs in the area -- the closer we came to each turbine foundation, the more species we found," says Claus Stenberg.

Fish living at the bottom of the sea thriving The researchers were keen to see how the fish species that live on the large fine-grained sand banks that the mills were constructed on would be affected -- species that include, for example, the sand eel, which is one of the most important fish for the Danish fishing industry.

AT Hegemony

No Link MitigationThere are mitigation processes in place to secure radar

Ling et al, University of Texas at Austin electrical and computer engineering professor, 13

[Hao, Mark F Hamilton, UTA professor of electrical and computer engineering, Rajan Bhalla, PhD Electrical Engineering, Walter E Brown, UTA faculty, Todd A Hay, UTA post-doctoral, Nicholas A Whitelonis UTA fellow, Shang-te Yang, UTA graduate research assistant, Aale R Naqvi, UTA teaching associate, 9-30-13, Final Report DE-EE0005380 Assessment of Offshore Wind Farm Effects on Sea Surface, Subsurface and Airborn Electronic Systems, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/pdfs/assessment_offshore_wind_effects_on_electronic_systems.pdf, accessed 7-17-14, AKS]

First, mitigation processes are in place to deal with existing interference of land-based wind farms on critical land-based radar systems in weather, air traffic control, and long-range surveillance. These processes include mechanisms to evaluate new wind farm proposals, funded research and development programs to examine the various mitigation approaches, and new software tools to better predict the impact. They will be very useful in dealing with the effect of future US offshore wind farms on these same systems.

No Link Doesnt Hurt Military Ops

Offshore wind has no effect on military operations Virginia proves

Associated Press, 10

[Associated Press, 5/4/10, ABC 13 (WVEC), Report: Offshore wind farm wouldn't affect military ops off Va. Beach, http://www.wvec.com/news/Report-Va-offshore-wind-farm-wouldnt-affect-DOD-92670939.html, accessed 7/16/14, GNL]

RICHMOND (AP) -- The development of a turbine manufacturing industry along Virginia's coast is key to creating jobs and reducing the costs of offshore wind energy, according to the most detailed analysis yet of the state's offshore wind prospects.

The report by the Virginia Coastal Energy Research Consortium concludes that the development of an offshore supply industry in Hampton Roads would generate thousands of jobs and reduce the estimated kilowatt hour cost of energy generated by wind turbines off the coast.

"The greatest upside opportunity for reducing the cost of offshore wind energy in Virginia is to attract major elements of a Mid-Atlantic offshore wind supply chain to the state," the report, Virginia Offshore Wind Studies, states.

Using existing coastal facilities, the manufacture of huge components needed to capture winds off the Virginia coast would create thousands of jobs, the study found.

"The shipbuilding and port facilities in Hampton Roads are well positioned to manufacture, stage and install foundations, towers and turbines anywhere on the Mid-Atlantic continental shelf," wrote George Hagerman, who led the research.

"Attracting investment in offshore wind turbine manufacturing to our region would create thousands of new, career-length jobs and reduce offshore wind energy costs by 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour," said Hagerman, who is with Virginia Tech's Advanced Research Institute.

Other key findings of the study:

-- Researchers identified 25 leasing sectors that could generate 3,200 megawatts of offshore wind generating capacity without interfering with shipping lanes, Navy training or space launches from NASA's Wallops Island facility on the Eastern Shore. The Navy and NASA have expressed concerns about offshore energy developments, and NASA has stated serious reservations about ocean structures within its flight path.

-- Turbine manufacturing in Virginia would decrease the capital costs of wind projects by 15 percent and generate an investment of $403 million in the local economy.

-- Within two decades, 9,700 to 11,600 jobs could be created with the development of 3,200 megawatts of offshore wind.

-- Research on the environmental impacts to shore and sea birds is scant and will require additional studies. A separate report will address that issue in June.

At least two energy companies have formally expressed interest in developing wind farms 12 miles off of Virginia Beach.

Proponents of developing offshore wind resources received the most significant boost in years last week with federal approval of the nation's first offshore wind in the waters off Massachusetts' Cape Cod. The developers want to generate power by 2012.

The $2 billion project still faces opposition in the courts, which could cool investors necessary to bankroll it.

In Virginia, Gov. Bob McDonnell has pushed for offshore energy development, including wind power, and a coalition of industry groups and seacoast mayors are lobbying for offshore wind.

"Virginia has a really unique asset when it comes to offshore winds," said Maureen Matsen, the governor's energy adviser. "We have a relatively shallow continental shelf but with very strong winds. That's a very unusual combination."

AT Oil DA

No link plan primarily affects electricity not driven by oil

Palmer et al., Resources for the Future, 10

[Karen, Richard Sweeney, and Maura Allaire, Oct 2010, "Modeling Policies to Promote Renewable and Low-Carbon Sources of Electricity" http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-BCK-Palmeretal%20-LowCarbonElectricity-REV.pdf, p.2, accessed 7-10-14]

A greater reliance on domestic renewable sources of electricity may also be associated with energy security benefits, although the fact that very little electricity comes from oil means that the benefits from reduced oil consumption are likely to be small.

Prices are set to crash structural changes in oil trade- US reductions and Chinese fill-in

Hill, Washington Times Chief Economic Correspondent, 13

[Patrice, 2/3/13, Washington Times, Major changes from oil revolution, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/4/sea-changes-from-oil-revolution/ accessed 7-17-14, AAZ]

Something very dramatic happened in world oil in 2004. We left behind a world of $20 oil and entered the world of $100 oil, which corresponds with gasoline prices of $3 to $4 a gallon on average, Mr. Yergin said in an interview with McKinsey & Co. last year. What happened was the recognition of the impact of emerging market countries and what their demand would be, and that growth in world oil demand would shift from the traditional industrial countries to these emerging markets. That has carried us to a new higher price plane and launched the drive to exploit huge unconventional oil reserves that is now bearing fruit in North America. The higher prices of the past decade kick-started the trend toward energy conservation that has shaved billions of dollars off U.S. oil trade deficits. The trend promises to accelerate as the Obama administration ratchets up fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks. Technologies and materials also are making possible average miles per gallon of 50 or higher in cars and sport utility vehicles.

The combination of fuel savings and increased production from unconventional sources has allowed Americans to entertain hopes for energy independence. Although it will take heroic efforts to achieve, Mr. Yergin said, oil independence is no longer just a chimera held out by politicians as it once was.

OPECs China pivot

That prospect also ushers in a major shift in OPEC exports toward China and the rest of emerging Asia especially as Iraq ascends once again as a game-changing exporter in a development that also has important implications for the U.S., Mr. Yergin said. While triggering a potentially fundamental reordering of U.S. priorities in the Middle East, it also heightens the importance of the U.S. managing its relationship with China so that the competition between the two economic giants over securing energy supplies doesnt turn into outright conflict over such issues as Beijings energy claims in the South China Sea, he said.

China already consumes more energy from all sources coal, oil, gas and renewable fuels than the United States, and it has an increasingly urgent need to secure its supplies much as the U.S. did when it shifted to heavy dependence on imports in the 1970s. Demand for oil continued to strengthen in China even during the recession, while oil consumption in the U.S. and other developed nations peaked years ago, with U.S. demand down 10 percent since 2005.

The more confident the Chinese are about their sources of energy, the more comfortable everyone will be, Mr. Yergin said.

AT Politics

Congressional Support

Wind industry has congressional support

Salerno, Vice president of Industry Data and Analysis at the American Wind Energy Association, 1-10-14

[Elizabeth, The Hill, Wind energy credit is successful, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/194975-wind-energy-credit-is-successful, Accessed: 7/11/14, JO]

With the support of the PTC, wind power attracts an average of $18 billion annually in private investment, with a record $25 billion in 2012. That money, combined with lease payments to property owners and taxes paid to local and state authorities translates into significant economic gains for those who host wind farms, particularly rural communities.

With wind industry activity in 70 percent of all U.S. Congressional districts, those gains arent missed by legislators, Republican and Democrat, who support wind power on the grounds that it is creating jobs, diversifying regional economies, and saving consumers (constituents) money on their power bills.

In November, The Governors Wind Energy Coalition, a bipartisan group that includes the governors of 23 states from every U.S. region, noted that adding wind power does reduce total consumer energy costs over time, diminish our dependence on foreign oil, decrease the trade deficit, and lessen carbon emissions.

Bipartisan support for the plan

Margaronis, Rebuild the United States president, 12

[Stas Margaronis, founder and president of Rebuild the United States an organization with the goal of putting 20 million Americans back to work through investment in renewable energy, 10/30/12, RBTUS, OFFSHORE WIND: DEVELOPERS SAYS COAST GUARD REPORT RESTRICTS ATLANTIC COAST DEVELOPMENT, http://rbtus.com/offshore-wind-developers-says-coast-guard-report-restricts-atlantic-coast-development/, accessed 7/11/14, GNL]

This is happening just as the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is to announce funding for offshore wind demonstration projects.

In early 2013, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is expected to announce six new demonstration projects for offshore wind energy that will include the Atlantic Coast, Pacific Coast, the Great Lakes and perhaps the Gulf Coast, according to the OWDC.

Lanard says DOEs new projects will create a national offshore wind presence that should demonstrate to developers, suppliers, and public officials that the lights are about to be turned on for offshore wind power.

In addition, Lanard says that he has a high degree of confidence that Congress will re-authorize tax credits for onshore and offshore development after the November election: a Senate Finance Committee bi-partisan vote of 19-5 supported the tax credit extension.

Lanard says 84% of land-based, turbine installations occur in Republican congressional districts, which encourages bi-partisan support.

[*Note: Lanard is the President at OffshoreWindDevCo]

Offshore wind has political support - local energy incentive and Cape Wind prove

Fairley, MIT Technology Review contributing editor, 10

[Peter Fairley, contributing editor at MIT Technology Review, 5/3/10, MIT Technology Review, Offshore Wind: Expensive but Politically Popular, http://www.technologyreview.com/news/418767/offshore-wind-expensive-but-politically-popular/, accessed 7/11/14, GNL]

An environmental permit granted last week for the Cape Wind power project is not the last hurdle facing the most advanced offshore wind farm proposed for the United States. However, wind power technology developers and analysts express confidence that the nine-year-old offshore wind project will get built, and that more like it will dot U.S. coastal waters by 2020.

The drive toward offshore wind, however, may be driven more by politics than economic and energy policy. Offshore wind farms cost up to twice as much as land-based wind installations, but they offer political leaders in densely populated U.S. coastal states a source of local energy other than offshore oil and gas. They want their energy to be local. They want to harvest it inside their own state. And for the first time they can conceive of that possibility, says Walt Musial, who leads offshore wind energy research activities for the U.S. Department of Energys National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, CO.

Musials analyses show that the 28 U.S. coastal states consume 78 percent of the nations electricity, but only six could meet even one-fifth of their power demand with land-based wind energythe fastest growing source of energy. Add in offshore wind potential in shallow waters, however, and that number jumps to 26 states; for many it could serve 100 percent of power demand. But achieving favorable economics will be hard.

Cape Winds top challenge now is to get a deal with an electric utility. Proving that it has a firm buyer and price for its energy is a prerequisite to then clearing the next hurdle, which is raising the close to $2 billion in financing thats likely necessary to build the 130-turbine, 468-megawatt project. Cape Wind and local utility National Grid say they are negotiating an agreement.

The difficulty is that offshore wind is pricey compared to onshore wind power, the leading alternative by which utilities are meeting renewable portfolio standards. Onshore wind costs about five cents per kilowatt-hour today, whereas Musial says offshore costs start at nine cents per kilowatt-hour for the best European projects and can rise as high as 25 cents per kilowatt-hour, depending on such factors as water depth, distance to shore, and wind conditions.

Matthew Kaplan, a senior analyst tracking North American wind energy markets for Cambridge, MA-based consultancy Emerging Energy Research, says recent examples show that offshore wind projects require additional intervention by states to get launched. The Long Island Power Authority, for example, killed a deal for power from a proposed 144-megawatt project in 2007 after an independent assessment pegged the cost at 29 cents per kilowatt-hour. And just last month, a 28.8-megawatt demonstration in Rhode Island hit the rocks when the states Public Utilities Commission recently rejected the agreement signed by National Grid, which would have paid project developer Deepwater Wind 24 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Kaplan says only state intervention sealed the deal between project developer NRG Bluewater Wind and Wilmington-based Delmarva Power. Delaware regulators changed state rules, more than tripling the credits Delmarva will earn toward the states renewable portfolio standard and enabling it to spread the cost to rate-payers. In the end, the state had to step in to make the costs more palatable, says Kaplan.

There is, as yet, no sign of government sweeteners for Cape Wind, but it is clear that it enjoys strong political support. Cape Wind will be built, says Musial. The approval from the top of the U.S. government shows theres political will to do this.

Musial adds that the presidents budget proposal for 2011 requests $49 million for offshore wind R&Dthe first targeted request for offshore windprovides another significant signal that offshore wind is on the table as a new direction for the Department of Energy.

Still, building the offshore wind industry in the U.S. could be a slow process. Cape Wind says it hopes to begin construction this year, but Kaplan bets that Cape Wind will likely generate power in 2013 at the earliest. Further projects in the pipeline are years away, he says, mostly due to the federal environmental review process.

Then there is the challenge of developing the infrastructure to build, install, and maintain offshore wind turbines, their foundations, and the underwater power lines to link them with shore. Musial says that incentives introduced in Ontario recently could accelerate that process by creating another North American foothold for offshore wind power. Ontarios feed-in tariffs for renewable energy, akin to price supports that many European countries provide, guarantee a price of 19 cents per kilowatt-hour for offshore turbines installed in the Great Lakes.

Kaplan estimates that 8,100 megawatts of offshore wind power will be installed in the United States by 2025, with most of the construction taking place starting in 2018. That is still a fraction of wind power installation in the U.S., which Kaplan expects to reach 192,000 megawatts by 2025. But it could go much further according to 2008 report from the DOE, in which it determined that wind energy could provide 20 percent of U.S. power by 2030. In that scenario, shallow offshore wind farms provide fully 54 gigawatts of the 300 gigawatts envisioned.

Business Lobbies Support

The plan has massive lobbying supportGeneral Electric, Google, Warren Buffet, retired congressman from both parties, and more will jump on board the plan

Carney, The Examiner senior political columnist, 2012

[Timothy P., 12-30-12, American Enterprise Institute, Lobbying blitz to save tax credits for wind energy, http://www.aei.org/article/politics-and-public-opinion/lobbying-blitz-to-save-tax-credits-for-wind-energy/, Accessed: 7/1/14, JO]

The lobbying team to renew the tax credit is formidable, packed with Obama's closest corporate confidants as well as former congressmen from both parties.General Electric in 2002 inherited Enron's wind energy business and is now the top U.S.-based supplier of wind turbines and a leading lobbying force for extending the PTC. The company is famously cozy with the Obama administration. CEO Jeffrey Immelt has served as Obama's jobs czar for two years.GE spent more on lobbying Washington in Obama's first term -- $120 million from January 2009 through September 2012 -- than any other company. GE's hired guns lobbying on the PTC include the K Street firm McBee Strategic Consulting.McBee is a premier lobbying force on green energy subsidies. The firm is also pushing the PTC on behalf of Obama-friendly Google, which has invested a billion dollars in wind farms and other green energy. Google was Obama's No. 3 source of funds, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, and CEO Eric Schmidt has been floated as a possible commerce secretary.China-based Goldwind, the second-largest wind turbine manufacturer in the world, is also paying McBee to lobby on the PTC, federal lobbying filings show.Germany-based Siemens is lobbying on the PTC, led by its VP for federal lobbying, David McIntosh. McIntosh was a Democratic Senate aide before serving on Obama's transition team, then held various senior roles in Obama's Environmental Protection Agency. He gave the maximum donation to Obama, skirting Obama's prohibition on lobbyist donations because he made the donations on June 23, 2011, and didn't register as a lobbyist until the third quarter, which began nine days later.Billionaire Obama adviser and fundraiser Warren Buffett is also behind the push to renew the credit. His company Berkshire Hathaway owns MidAmerican Energy, which describes itself as "No. 1 in the nation in ownership of wind-powered capacity among rate-regulated utilities." Lobbying filings show MidAmerican lobbying on the PTC.NextEra Energy is a leading beneficiary of the PTC. NextEra has retained K Street powerhouses Quinn Gillespie & Associates. The company, which has paid no corporate income tax in three years despite billions in profits, also retains Capitol Counsel, a leading lobbyist on the PTC.Capitol Counsel's Jim McCrery, the former congressman who was recently the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, lobbies on the tax credit for NextEra. He also represents the American Wind Energy Association, the wind industry's D.C.-based lobbying group.McCrery is not the only former congressman lobbying on the tax credit. Delaware Republican Mike Castle, now at DLA Piper, is lobbying for Cape Wind, while Maryland Democrat Albert Wynn, at Dickstein Shapiro, is lobbying for Covanta, which turns trash into energy.

Wind Lobbies Support

Wind lobbies make the plan popular and the public supports the plan

LaRussa, OpenSecrets.org Journalist, 2010

[Cassandra, 3-30-10, OpenScrets.org, Solar, Wind Power Groups Becoming Prominent Washington Lobbying Forces After Years of Relative Obscurity , https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/03/solar-wind-power-becoming-prominent/, Accessed: 7/11/14, JO]

In 1998, the entirealternative energy industrybarely even registered as a political player in Washington, spending a mere $2.4 million on lobbying the federal government. Meanwhile, in the same year, theoil and gas,electric utilitiesandmining industriesspent a combined $142 million advancing their own legislative interests.

That landscape, however, has changed considerably.

By 2007, the alternative energy industry had begun to drastically increase its lobbying spending, almost doubling its expenditures from the previous year. In 2009, alternative energy organizations shelled out an unprecedented $30 million to protect and promote their interests on Capitol Hill.

The alternative energy industrys lobbying expenditures have grown to 12 times from its 1998 level. In comparison, oil and gas spending and mining spending have grown less than three times their 1998 amount, and electric utility spending has grown to just twice its 1998 amount.

The growing involvement of the alternative energy industry in legislative affairs is reflected not just in increased spending, but also in the number of companies and organizations that employ federally registered lobbyists.

In the late 1990s, only about 20 alternative energy industry organizations used federal lobbyists.

By 2009, there were about 200 alternative energy companies and organizations employing lobbyists to help advance the industrys interests.

TheAmerican Wind Energy Associationis one of those organizations that recently and significantly increased lobbying efforts.

Until 2008, AWEA failed to crack the $1 million mark in annual lobbying expenditures and most years, it spent less than $500,000. In 2009, its expenditures experienced a drastic increase, and the group spent almost $5 million on lobbying for issues related to the wind power industry.

But why did AWEA, and scores of other alternative energy corporations, trade organizations and non-profits, get involved in legislative affairs so suddenly and with such gusto?

The involvement stems from the growth in number of alternative energy companies, which was made possible by the growth in popularity of wind power in the national consciousness, said Christine Real de Azua, an AWEA spokeswoman.

Real de Azua states that this, in turn, increased AWEAs ranks by more than 1,000 new business members in 2009 alone, many of them companies entering or seeking to enter the wind turbine supply chain.

Last year was a record year for wind power in the U.S., Real de Azua said. The industry installed 10,000 megawatts last year, enough to generate as much new electricity as three new nuclear plants.

AT Other DAs

AT Federalism

No Link CZMA has checks to federalist take overspecifically for offshore wind

Environmental Law Institute, 13

[Environmental Law Institute for the Mid Atlantic, April 2013, A Guide to State Management of Offshore Wind Energy in the Mid-Atlantic Region

Although state primary jurisdiction ends at the 3nmi mark, a state can influence any federal activity, regardless of where it will take place, when the activity in question may affect the uses or resources of the states coastal zone. This authority applies to federal activities occurring within the affected states lands and waters or federal waters (federal consistency review). It also applies to federal activities located within another states land or waters (interstate consistency review) if NOAA has approved the reviewing states list of activities that will trigger interstate consistency.

This authority stems from the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), which provides that any state with a federally approved coastal management program (CMP) may review federal activities to make sure they are consistent with the affected states enforceable coastal management policies. Federally licensed or permitted activities must be fully consistent with the enforceable policies, while direct federal activities must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable. An enforceable policy is one of the policies of the states coastal management program, made legally binding by a state constitution, law, regulation, land use plan, ordinance, or judicial or administrative decision, which a state uses to exert control over land and water uses and natural resources.

The policy must have been previously approved by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). At present, each Mid-Atlantic state has an approved coastal management program with a broad spectrum of enforceable policies.

The type of federal action can affect the states influence on and opportunity to review the proposal, based on the language of the CZMA and implementing regulations. For example, responses to the following questions may materially change whether and how a state reviews a project: Is it a direct federal action, or a federally permitted or licensed action? For direct federal actions (such as wind energy leases), the federal agency must provide a consistency determination to the relevant state coastal zone agency, which then has 60 days to concur with or object to the federal determination. If the state objects, the federal agency may not proceed unless it determines that federal law prevents the federal agency action from being consistent. For federal permits or licenses (such as development permits), the applicants must provide a certification and supporting data, then the state has six months to concur, concur with conditions, or object. In these instances, if the state objects, the Secretary of Commerce can override the state objection if he or she finds that the activity is consistent with the objectives or purposes of the CZMA or necessary for national security purposes

AT Transit

Expedited studies resolve shipping and environmental issues

Michler, Inhabitat New York City, 12

(Andrew, Inhabitat New York City, New York and NOAA Release Study to Streamline Offshore Wind Power Projects, Inhabitant New York City, http://inhabitat.com/nyc/new-york-and-noaa-release-study-to-streamline-offshore-wind-power-projects/, Accessed 7/11/14, ESB)

Fresh on the heals of NYCs announcement for a clean energy project at Freshkills Park, a study just released by New York State and NOAA aims to make off-shore wind development become a reality sooner than later. The study reveals environmentally sensitive areas as well as commercial shipping lanes with the goal of helping wind developers quickly determine good sites to install wind farms without having to wait for a long environmental review for each project. And since New York is hot on the trail for developing substantial renewable energy projects, the study could not come too soon.

The East Coast has ideal conditions for wind power not too far from shore, and it is already the focus of substantial infrastructure investments with the goal of creating a renewable energy super grid. NOAA and New York spent two years indentifying environmentally rich areas and commercial shipping lanes to help developers hone in on the best placement for wind projects. The study revels deep sea coral beds, boidivesity regions, and seabird territories to help redline potential sites for environmental review and to provide technical assistance to New York as they assess and integrate ecological and human use information, and identify significant offshore wildlife habitats.

The study also maps commercial shipping traffic to hopefully avoid commercial stress resulting from proposed wind farms. NOAA is viewing this as a prototype study to help move wind energy projects along the permit process at a greater speed. With heavy weights like Google, Co-ops, and local governments vying to make the resource of wind energy a reality on the eastern seaboard, the study is another key part of making large scale clean power a reality.

Rerouting ships would be easy and harm free and would solve the DA

Messmore communications specialist in the Environmental Public Education Office, 5/19

(Teresa, University Of Delaware, 5/19/2014, Changing Shipping Routes,

http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2014/may/shipping-routes-051914.html, Accessed 7/11/14, ESB)

Rerouting ships to open up areas for offshore wind development could save billions of dollars in construction and operating costs for the renewable energy source, according to new findings by the University of Delawares College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment (CEOE).

The savings come at a relatively small expense for sending commercial ships slightly farther out to sea when traveling between Mid-Atlantic ports, the research shows. The analysis was part of an economic study on societal costs and benefits of allocating ocean space off the coast for wind energy development.

Offshore wind projects are being considered in the United States with aims of improving air quality, increasing energy security and supporting domestic manufacturing. Numerous factors play into decisions on where to place wind turbines, from wildlife migrations and fishing hotspots to boat traffic, ocean depth and seafloor geology.

Its a big ocean, but there are a lot of users that need to work with each other to maximize benefits to society, said study co-author Jeremy Firestone, CEOE professor of marine policy and director of the Center for Carbon-free Power Integration.

Coastal and marine spatial planning is one common method used for mapping out and weighing the various options. Economic factors are typically left out of the mix, however, so UD researchers decided to examine the question of which would cost more to place farther off the coast: commercial shipping traffic or wind farms.

The team considered several hypothetical, large-scale offshore wind projects that could be built in the Mid-Atlantic region. Based on current shipping data, researchers considered deep-draft vessels like tankers and container ships that make approximately 1,500 trips between New Jersey, New York, Delaware Bay and Chesapeake Bay ports each year.

In one scenario, ships traveled at their present distance of about 33 miles from shore and wind projects were built beyond that. In a second scenario, ships traveled 46 miles from shore and wind projects were built where the ships used to go.

Researchers calculated the added cost of having ships travel farther by considering capital, fuel and operating costs and cost to society of emissions of CO2, NOx, SOx, and particulate matter emitted during ships voyages. The cost of offshore wind projects included capital costs of foundations, transmission cables and installation, as well as the cost of maintaining the turbines.

Directing ships farther out from shore added $0.2 billion to the cost of their voyages over the course of three decades. This would increase the direct cost of transporting a metric ton of goods by 25 cents. Building wind turbines farther out beyond the shipping routes added a cost of $13.4 billion to the cost of projects.

Overall, the savings from changing the routes would add up to $13.2 billion.

If the U.S. is to advance toward meeting its goal to build 54 GW (gigawatts) of offshore wind capacity by 2030, finding cost-effective locations for these wind projects is critical, the researchers wrote in the study. By modifying vessel routes, shallow, nearshore sites in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic could be opened for wind development, allowing consumers to have the benefit of clean, domestic, carbon-free wind energy at a cheaper price.

The study focused on the economic costs and benefits, but other factors such as safety measures to avoid ship collisions would still need to be considered.

It is also important to note that because the study analyzed a hypothetical scenario, any actual changes to vessel routes would be done after an extensive consultation with stakeholders.

We expect that if safety aspects to such a rerouting can be addressed, the shipping industry will come to support this accommodation as it has with, for example, North Atlantic right whales, the authors said.

CP Answers

Certainty Key to Wind Development

Wind lobbies hate the counterplans uncertainty Only the aff accesses the link turn and the CP cant solve market certainty which is key to spillover

LaRussa, OpenSecrets.org Journalist, 2010

-Azua de Real: AWEA Spokesperson

-AWEA: American Wind Energy Association

[Cassandra, 3-30-10, OpenScrets.org, Solar, Wind Power Groups Becoming Prominent Washington Lobbying Forces After Years of Relative Obscurity , https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/03/solar-wind-power-becoming-prominent/, Accessed: 7/11/14, JO]

The recent involvement of AWEA in federal affairs, she said, reflects the urgency of the industrys number one priority passing a national renewable electricity standard with aggressive, binding near- and long-term targets, as part of comprehensive energy and climate legislation.

Azua de Real cites market certainty as a concern of AWEAs members, who need legislative support of their industry in order to expand their operations and invest in new manufacturing as well as new wind farm facilities. She added that it is imperative to the members of AWEA that the U.S. government steps up and clearly commits to developing renewable energy.

AWEA cites the sheer potential of wind energy and the opportunity for job creation as two key points that their lobbyists emphasize in the fight for favorable legislation.

States CP Answers

Permutation is normal means The states and the federal government will inevitably work together

Schroeder, University of California-Berkeley, School of Law JD, 10

[Erica, October 2010, Turning Offshore Wind On, California Law Review, Vol 98, Issue 5, Article 4 pg 1643-1645, PAC]

A. Federal Jurisdiction

Federal jurisdiction begins more than three nautical miles from the shore, along the Outer Continental Shelf, and ends two hundred nautical miles out to sea. n98 Analyses of offshore wind capacity typically assume that wind farms will be built in federal waters, more than five miles from the coast. n99 Thus, federal jurisdiction covers the generation component of an offshore wind project, mainly the turbines. n100 This includes site approval and permitting for project construction. n101

Section 388 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 grants the Department of the Interior (DOI) primary authority over offshore wind farm approval and permitting. n102 Section 388 specifies that the Minerals Management Service (MMS), a branch of DOI, controls the offshore wind facility permitting process; the Secretary of the Interior makes the final permitting decision. n103 This grant of authority extends MMS's existing authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), which gives it management rights over the Outer Continental Shelf primarily for offshore fossil fuel extraction. n104 Because of MMS's experience with managing offshore oil and gas extraction, Congress deemed it the proper body for offshore wind permitting as well. n105 Opponents of the decision have been concerned with MMS's lack of experience with marine habitat regulation and protection. n106 Fortunately, MMS appears receptive to coordinating with other agencies with relevant experience, like the Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries Service, Coast Guard, Department of Energy, and Environmental Protection Agency, as well [*1644] as appropriate state actors. n107

Section 388 came in response to controversy over which federal agency had permitting authority during the early stages of the Cape Wind project, which is described in more detail in Part IV. While Section 388 does not resolve all of the issues relating to federal jurisdiction over offshore wind, n108 its designation of MMS as the primary permitting agency marks Congress's first step toward a unified review process for offshore alternative energy. n109 Nonetheless, the current federal regulatory environment for offshore wind remains confusing. In April 2009, President Obama took a first step toward remedying some of that confusion by announcing a coordinated program, headed by DOI, for federal offshore renewable energy permitting. The program will cover not only offshore wind power generation, but also other offshore renewable energy, such as electricity generated from ocean currents. n110 Despite this progress toward an improved federal regulatory program, barriers to offshore wind power still exist, largely due to the absence of a strong and effective federal mandate promoting offshore wind power development and the powers that states retain over project siting. n111

B. State Jurisdiction

Under the Submerged Lands Act, state jurisdiction generally covers ocean territory three miles or less from the coast, n112 an area known as the Coastal Zone. n113 As noted previously, any electricity generated in an offshore facility must be transmitted to land through the state controlled Coastal Zone. Therefore, state - and sometimes local - authorities ultimately have a role to play in any offshore wind project through the siting and permitting of transmission cables that are necessary to bring electricity from the turbines to land. Although state and localities may only exert direct control over the permitting of transmission cables, they will almost certainly consider the impact of the generation turbines on their aesthetic view environment. They know that denying transmission permits effectively stalls or destroys the construction of generation facilities. States will also likely consider such [*1645] aesthetic and environmental considerations in the federal consistency review process, with which they may also block federal activities and permits. n114 Federal consistency review is a component of the CZMA, and will be described in more detail below.

Because most of the costs of offshore wind power development are local, there is a strong argument for state and local control over offshore wind project siting: because localities must deal with the downsides of offshore wind projects, they should control where those projects are placed. n115 On the other hand, there are broader, positive effects of offshore wind power development - such as energy security improvement and environmental benefits like climate change mitigation - that imply a need for stronger federal intervention to balance appropriately the costs and benefits of offshore wind. n116 The CZMA attempts to provide a formal structure for such balancing, but it ultimately leaves the states with too much power, and the federal government and offshore wind farm proponents with no formal federal encouragement or support.

Germany CP Answers

Germany cannot solve eurozone

Kundnani, European Council on Foreign Relations research director, 12

[Hans, 4/5/2012, German Council on Foreign Relations, What Hegemon?, https://ip-journal.dgap.org/en/ip-journal/topics/what-hegemon, accessed 7/11/2014 CK]

However, instead of making enlightened use of power like the US after 1945, Germany has seemed during the last two years to simply impose its own preferences on others in the eurozone, in so far as it could, and to pursue short-term rather than long-term interests. Given Germanys clear interest in the survival of the euronot least because its weakness compared to the Deutsche Mark benefits its exportsthe equivalent of the US role towards Europe after 1945 might have been to take measures to reduce its trade surplus, to allow a moderate increase in inflation, or to act as a consumer of last resort in order to help indebted economies grow their way out of recession and thus reduce their debt.

However, Germany has consistently refused to take such an approach. Instead, it has insisted on austerity throughout the eurozone, which has made it harder for the periphery to grow its way out of recession and may exacerbate the debt crisis. Thus while unemployment in Germany is now at its lowest level since reunification, it has reached record levels in other countries such as Spain. It appears as if Germanys approach to the euro crisis is not so much in the European interest as a whole as in Germanys own national interest. There has surely been no Marshall Plan for the indebted economies of Europe.

In fact, in some ways, Germany has not created stabilitythe central role of a hegemon but instability in Europe. Of course, German rhetoric focuses on stability: it talks about a stability union and is proud of its Stabilittskultur, or stability culture. But it defines it extremely narrowly: when Germany talks about stability it means price stability and nothing else. In fact, in attempting to export its stability culture, Germany has in a broader sense created instability. In particular, its ongoing reticence about the extent to which it will accept mutualization of European debtapparently a deliberate strategy in order to maintain pressure on indebted countries to reform has created a climate of uncertainty. Thus one might almost speak of a German instability culture.

As I have argued elsewhere, the German question has now re-emerged in geo-economic rather than geopolitical form.[4] The size of Germanys economy, and the interdependence between it and those around it, is now creating instability within Europe. This is exacerbated by German economic policy, which sometimes seems inappropriate for a country of its size. In particular, German policymakers seem to ignore the effects their economy has on the rest of Europe. As Simon Tilford of the Centre for European Reform has argued, an economy as big as Germanys cannot depend indefinitely on exports to drive real GDP growth without imposing intolerable pressures on other members of EMU.[5] Thus German pursues the economic policy of a small country rather than a hegemon.

As a result, Germany has faced, still faces, and will likely continue to face resistance from other eurozone members, including France, to its attempts to impose norms. In fact, although Germany is more powerful than ever before in the EU, it is, as Charles Grant has pointed out, also in some ways more isolated than ever.[6] This is not hegemony: there is a lack of hegemonic consent. In fact, if one looks at the current situation in European in a historical perspective, it appears that Germany is in many ways less of a hegemon than it used to be. As a cooperative hegemon together with France before German reunification and European enlargement, it successfully uploaded its own preferences with the consent of its European partners.[7]

Northern European weather leads to cost overuns

Block, Worldwatch Institute, 9*

[Ben, 2009* last date referenced, Worldwatch Institute, European Offshore Wind Projects Confront Challenging Seas, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6279, accessed 7/11/14 CK]

Rdsand 2, a 90-turbine project sited three kilometers from Denmark's southern coast, is scheduled to supply 200,000 households with electricity by next September as part of the country's drive for wind energy to supply at least 50 percent of electricity consumption by 2025 [PDF].

The project is still in the installation stage, and costs climb for every day that construction crews sit idle. Poor weather conditions prevented crews from working for almost twice the number of days in August than the project owner, German energy company E.ON, had predicted.

"We damn the wind because we can't go out there if the waves are more than 75 centimeters high," Haxgart said.

E.ON is not the only developer frustrated by the challenges of establishing offshore wind farms. Project developers across Europe have found that mastering turbulent seas and harsh weather is more difficult than many expected, especially as projects are sited farther from the coast and are built with larger turbines.

Denmark's Horns Rev 2, the largest offshore wind project in the world, was inaugurated this September following two months of installation delays due to bad weather. The London Array, a 1 gigawatt (GW) project set to be the largest offshore project when it is completed, is still on track with a 2.2 billion ($3 billion) initial investment despite nearing financial ruin on several occasions. Alpha Ventus, Germany's first offshore wind farm, went online in August after a year of delays that led the project's budget to increase from $270 million to $357 million.

"Wind projects are lagging behind. There should be offshore wind by now, but it isn't there yet," said Malte Kreutzfeldt, environment editor of the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung. "It turns out it's a lot more expensive than people thought, a lot more complicated."

Regardless, several European governments are betting that offshore wind will prove to be affordable. Denmark plans to expand from its existing and approved 825 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind to more than 3 GW by 2025. The British government has proposed 14 GW of offshore wind by 2020. The German government has set a goal of 25 GW by 2030.

Across Europe, seven offshore wind farms were installed last year, with a combined capacity of 1.47 GW. The European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) expects offshore wind to reach 2 GW continent-wide by the end of 2009, and an additional 1 GW to be installed in 2010. According to the 2010 projection [PDF], offshore wind would supply 0.3 percent of the European Union's electricity demand.

"This is the big potential for the future and we want to do it," said Sascha Mller-Kraenner, the Berlin-based European representative of The Nature Conservancy. "The future of wind in Europe will be off the coast."

Even with the recent acceleration of offshore wind projects, the industry has only installed as many turbines as the onshore wind industry had in the early 1990s. While turbine manufacturers have found the optimum size and technology for onshore installations, the offshore devices still require considerable progress.

Most offshore wind farms are found 20 kilometers from shore, at depths of 20 meters. As projects move to windier areas even farther offshore - German developer Geo GmbH has proposed a 4 GW project 200 kilometers into the North Sea - the costs for equipment, installation, and maintenance will rise.

Ultimately, the EWEA envisions projects on the scale of 200-300 MW and beyond. Such a large investment would encourage more streamlined construction processes and the manufacturing of advanced installation vessels and technologies.

In the meantime, however, installing 2 GW of offshore wind per year may lead to a shortage of installation equipment, such as crane-equipped vessels, after 2011, according to New Energy Finance, an energy analyst.

Projects also lack trained personnel to operate the installa