NDI 6WS - Deep Ocean Exploration Aff

**First Affirmative Constructive**

1AC – Plan Text

The United States federal government should substantially increase its deep ocean exploration.

1AC – First Contention

Contention One – Oceans

We know nothing about them – despite their vast size, extreme importance, and unknown potential, only a tiny fraction of the oceans has been explored National Research Council, 2009 (Ocean Exploration: Highlights of National Academies Reports, National Academies Ocean Science Series, http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf)

The ocean is the largest biosphere on Earth, covering nearly three quarters of our planet’s surface and occupying a

volume of 1.3 billion cubic kilometers. Despite the major role of the ocean in making the Earth habitable—through climate regulation, rainwater supply, petroleum and natural gas resources, and a breathtaking diversity of species valued for their beauty, seafood, and pharmaceutical potential—humankind has entered the 21st century having explored only a small fraction of the ocean. Some estimates suggest that as much as 95 percent of the world ocean and 99 percent of the ocean floor are still unexplored. The vast mid-water—the region between the ocean’s surface and the seafloor—may be the least explored, even though it contains more living things than all of Earth’s rainforests combined. Similarly, the ocean floor and sediments encompass an extensive microbial biosphere that may rival that on the continents, which is not yet understood and remains largely unexplored. The impacts of human activities on the ocean drive a growing urgency for its exploration before permanent and potentially harmful changes become widespread. Even events that occur far inland, such as nutrient runoff from agriculture and pollutants and debris carried by stormwater, have impacts. The ocean bears a double burden from the burning of fossil fuels and associated climate change; not only is it warmer, but the additional carbon dioxide dissolves in the ocean, making it more acidic. Although mariners have traversed the ocean for centuries, exploring its inky depths is no easy task. Recent

technological advances now make possible scientific investigations only dreamed of 20 years ago. The development of state-of-the-art deep-sea vehicles and a host of other technologies have opened doors for finding novel life forms, new sources of energy, pharmaceuticals, and other products, and

have promoted a better understanding of the origins of life, the workings of this planet, and of

humanity’s past. New discoveries are being made all the time. “. . . there is still so much we do not know about the oceans that often we do not even know the proper questions to ask or an unambiguous way to test what hypotheses we do have. For that reason, I am a fan of ocean exploration.” —Marcia McNutt, president and CEO, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute In 2003, scientists made a discovery that set the telecommunications industry buzzing. The skeleton of a type of deep-sea sponge known as the Venus Flower Basket, or Euplectella, was shown to consist of thin silicon fibers, called spicules, that transmit light at least as well as commercial optical fibers.1 Unlike manmade optical fibers that will break if bent too far, the silicon spicules of the Venus Flower Basket can be tied in a knot without breaking. Marine biologists have known for decades that sponge skeletons transmit light, but until recently they

hadn’t studied the light carrying properties of spicules. Even though practical applications could be decades away, this deep-sea discovery gives researchers new perspectives on how nature creates materials with nanoscale precision. There are many such discoveries. An enzyme, taken from bacteria that break down fats in cold water, has been used to improve laundry detergent. A glowing green protein from jellyfish has been widely used in medicine, helping researchers illuminate cancerous tumors and trace brain cells leading to Alzheimer’s disease—an accomplishment that garnered the 2008 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for the researchers Osamu Shimomura, Martin Chalfie, and

Roger Y. Tsien, who discovered and developed this technology. Each new discovery is a reminder of how little is known about the ocean environment, which is so critically important to health and life on Earth. To enable the full exploration of the oceans and seafloor and the sustainable

development of their resources, the National Research Council report Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown (2003)

recommended that the United States vigorously pursue the establishment of a global ocean exploration program. Such an effort could be modeled after the federally funded space exploration program, involving

multiple federal agencies as well as international participation. Ocean Exploration and Human Health At least 20,000 new biochemical substances from marine plants and animals have been identified during the past 30 years, many with unique properties useful in fighting disease. “Biodiscovery”

researchers have had success in all types of ocean environments. A 1991 expedition by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Paul Jensen and William Fenical resulted in the discovery of a new marine bacterium, Salinispora tropica, found in the shallow waters off the Bahamas. This bacterium produces compounds that are being developed as anticancer agents and antibiotics. It is related to the land-based Streptomyces genus, the source of more than half of our current suite of antibiotics.3 Deep-water marine habitats constitute a relatively untapped resource for the discovery of drugs. In early 2000, Shirley Pomponi and Amy Wright from Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution explored deep waters a few miles off the shore of the Florida Keys. Using the robotic claws and high-powered vacuums of the Johnson Sea-Link submersibles, the team gathered a host of deep-water organisms. They met success with the discovery of a new genus of sponge, nicknamed the “Rasta” sponge, containing anticancer compounds.4 The promise and problems of developing novel marine chemicals into bioproducts, from pharmaceuticals to compounds used in agriculture, is examined in

the National Research Council report Marine Biotechnology in the Twenty-First Century. The report recommends revitalizing the search for new products by making it a priority to explore unexamined habitats for new marine organisms. Ocean discoveries have answered critical questions about Earth’s processes and history. Since its inception in the late 1960s, the theory of plate tectonics—that heat from Earth’s interior drives the movement of plates on the surface—has revolutionized our understanding of the forces that shape Earth. This groundbreaking idea, which contributes fresh insights into disciplines ranging from earthquake science to mineral and gas exploration, could not have been developed without ocean exploration. As early as the 16th century, it was thought that the continents could once have been joined, suggested by the apparent fit of the facing shores of South America and Africa. In the early 20th century, German researcher Alfred Wegener published the hypothesis of “continental drift,” which posited that the continents had drifted apart from a single large land mass he called Pangaea. At the time, Wegener’s theory wasn’t generally accepted because there was no explanation for the forces required to drive the continents apart. The key to the puzzle lay on the seafloor at one of the ocean’s most distinctive features: a 65,000-kilometer-long (40,000 miles) underwater, volcanic mountain range that winds its way around the globe, known as the mid-ocean ridge. New seafloor mapping technologies available by the 1940s and 1950s brought many explorers to the ridge. In 1961, scientists from Scripps Institution of Oceanography studying the mid-ocean ridge off the U.S. northwest coast documented a distinctive pattern of magnetized rocks that resembled the stripes on a zebra. 5 In a landmark 1963 publication, scientists hypothesized that the striping resulted from shifts in Earth’s magnetic field during a period when hot magma erupted at the mid-ocean ridges and solidified to form new ocean floor.6 Other supporting evidence for this phenomenon, known as seafloor spreading, eventually developed into the theory of plate tectonics. MAPPING THE SEAFLOOR As early as the 16th century, navigators began measuring ocean depth with heavy ropes, called sounding lines, that were dropped over the side of the ship. By the 19th century, deep-sea line soundings (bathymetric surveys) were routinely conducted in the Atlantic and Caribbean. In 1913, the use of sound waves (echo soundings) to measure ocean depth was patented by German physicist Alexander Behm, who was originally searching for a method to detect icebergs following the Titanic disaster. With echo sounding, the time it takes for an outgoing pulse to go to the seafloor and back is measured and used to calculate distance based on the average speed of sound in water. The next breakthrough came with the introduction of sonar—“sound navigation and ranging”—first used in World War I. Multibeam sonar, developed by the U.S. Navy in the 1960s, uses an array of beams at varying angles, enabling much larger swaths of ocean floor to be mapped with much greater precision. A project in Tampa Bay generated continuous maps of that area from land out through the shoreline and beneath the water. The National Research Council report A Geospatial Framework for the Coastal Zone examines the requirements for generating such maps, which help show how natural and manmade forces interact and affect processes in complex coastal areas. All of the new mapping techniques have revolutionized our understanding of the topography of the ocean floor and helped to develop ideas about the fundamental processes responsible for creating seafloor terrains and modifying the oceanic crust. Ocean exploration continues to illuminate details about Earth processes. The Ridge Inter-Disciplinary Global Experiments (RIDGE) program, established in 1987 and supported largely by the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies, funded expeditions that served to broaden understanding of the global ridge system and the life it hosts. Since 2001, the new NSF-sponsored Ridge 2000 program (http://www. ridge2000.org) has conducted detailed integrated studies at three mid-ocean ridge sites in the eastern and western Pacific. Ocean discoveries have answered critical questions about life on earth. In 1977, the deep-sea submersible, Alvin, was sent to explore a part of the mid-ocean ridge north of the Galápagos Islands known as the Galápagos Rift. Alvin was following in the tracks of an unmanned vehicle, towed by the research vessel Knorr, that had detected unusually high bottom-water temperatures and had taken photographs of odd white objects among the underwater lava flows—tantalizing clues about curious, possibly biological features. The images researchers took from Alvin that day stunned The discovery in 1977 of a world of colorful tube worms, crabs, and fish living off the chemosynthetic bacteria at the hydrothermal vents surprised scientists everywhere. Photo used with permission from Richard Lutz, Rutgers University, Stephen Low Productions, and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Vent organisms and DNA detection Microbes associated with hydrothermal vents have evolved enzymes that can withstand some of the harshest conditions on Earth. One such enzyme, Vent DNA polymerase, has been employed by researchers to improve the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a technique used to detect and identify trace amounts of genetic material. PCR involves many cycles of heating and cooling to separate and replicate the two strands of the DNA molecule. The heat-stable DNA polymerase from the vent microbes is a perfect fit for this revolutionary technology. This technique is widely used in biological research and in practical applications, such as DNA forensic analysis in criminal investigations, medical diagnostic procedures, biowarfare agent detection, and genetic studies of extinct species, for example, woolly mammoths. and amazed people everywhere. They revealed a rich oasis of life, teeming with never-before-seen varieties of shrimp, large clams, huge red tubeworms in white casings, and other creatures. These images attracted a flurry of attention from scientists. One of the most puzzling questions was how this assortment of creatures managed to thrive in the dark in the absence of photosynthetic algae—the base of the food web for all known ecosystems in the ocean and on land. It turned out that the ecosystem Alvin had visited, and other hydrothermal vent ecosystems like it, are supported by chemosynthetic bacteria that derive energy from compounds such as hydrogen sulfide and methane that are found in the waters emanating from the vents. At vents on the Pacific ridge system, chimneylike structures known as black smokers spew large amounts of hydrogen sulfide into the environment. Large clams and tubeworms soak up hydrogen sulfide to feed the chemosynthetic bacteria they harbor in their tissues, a symbiotic relationship so central to their biology that these animals don’t even have a mouth or a gut. More than 500 new species have been found at seafloor vents since their discovery—a rate of about one new species every 2 weeks for an entire human generation (~30 years). With much of the ocean ridge still unexplored, scientists expect that many new species await discovery. In 1991, Rachel Haymon, from the University of California, Santa Barbara; Dan Fornari, a scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI); and their colleagues working near the mid-ocean ridge in the eastern Pacific witnessed a new phenomenon— a “blizzard” of microbes and microbial debris spewing out of the seafloor7. The material rose more than 30 meters above the ocean bottom and formed a thick white layer on the seafloor. Since then, this phenomenon of rapid effusion of microbial material has been observed several times in the vicinity of undersea volcanic eruptions .Discovery of “Lost City” Reveals Vents of a Different Kind In 2000, a team of scientists led by Donna Blackman from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Deborah Kelley from the University of Washington, and Jeff Karson of Duke University (now at Syracuse), were exploring the Atlantic on a National Science Foundationsupported expedition on the research vessel Atlantis. About 2,300 miles east of Florida, on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the team stumbled on an amazing sight: a hydrothermal vent field with mounds, spires and chimneys reaching18 stories high. Not only were these structures higher than the black-smoker vents discovered earlier, but they were very different in color, ranging from cream color to light gray. Kelley dubbed the find “The Lost City.” The Lost City vents were found to be made up of nearly 100 percent carbonate, the same material as limestone in caves. The fluids discharging at Lost City are very alkaline—the opposite of the acidic black smokers—and in some places as caustic as drain cleaner. The heat and chemicals at the vents come, in part, from the strong chemical reactions produced when seawater interacts with dark green rocks, called peridotites, which have been thrust up from deep beneath the seafloor. Lost City microbes live off methane and hydrogen instead of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide that are the key energy sources for life at black-smoker vents. Kelley believes that many more Lost City-type systems may exist and study of these systems may be key to understanding the origin of life.8 These discoveries led to the hypothesis that a massive, deep biosphere may exist beneath the ocean floor and overlying marine sediments that rivals the combined biomass in the entire ocean above the seafloor—or even on the planet. These microbes might have evolved when the Earth was much hotter, potentially providing new insights into the origins of life on Earth, as well as the possibility of life on other planets. Studies of how these life forms relate to energy from the Earth’s mantle are being conducted within the NSF-sponsored RIDGE 2000 Program. Ocean exploration Answers questions about humanity’s past. In 1997, oceanographer Bob Ballard took an expedition to the Black Sea to search for the remains of ancient dwellings that might have been submerged there. Scholars agree that the Black Sea, once a freshwater lake, was flooded when rising sea levels, most likely from melting ice sheets, caused the Mediterranean to overflow. The flood was thought to have happened gradually about 9,000 years ago, but a 1997 report by marine geologists Walter Pitman and Bill Ryan at Lamont- Doherty Earth Observatory posited that the flood was sudden and took place about 7,150 years ago—a theory that could provide support for the biblical story of a great flood.9 Although the explorers found no evidence to indicate the loss of an ancient civilization, Ballard’s team did find shells and other materials. Carbon dating of these materials supported the theory that a freshwater lake was inundated about 7,000 years ago. Ballard’s team also made another serendipitous find: four ancient shipwrecks, one almost perfectly preserved because of low oxygen at the bottom of Black Sea. The expedition also saw the debut of the remotely operated vehicle Hercules, a 7-foot robot that can retrieve artifacts using high-tech pincers with pressure-regulated sensors that operate much like a human hand.10 Scientific exploration of the oceans can be traced back at least to Captain James Cook’s three Pacific Ocean expeditions

between 1768 and 1779, although expeditions by Chinese explorers starting with the Ming Dynasty in 1405 had already provided many navigational clues for later expeditions.12 By the time Cook died, he had mapped much of the Pacific’s shoreline from Antarctica to the Arctic. Cook’s explorations set the stage for Darwin and his voyage on the Beagle (1831- 1836), which laid the groundwork for Darwin’s development of the theory of evolution. The influence of the discoveries associated with these early expeditions is impossible to overestimate in terms of both science and culture. The first ocean expedition undertaken purely for the sake of ocean science was the voyage of the HMS Challenger (1872-1876), which set out to investigate “everything about the sea.” With support from the British Admiralty and the Royal Society, crew members made systematic measurements every 200 miles around the globe, traversing each ocean except the Arctic. Ocean depth was measured by lowering a sounding rope over the side; specimens were collected with nets and dredges. The results were staggering, filling 50 volumes and resulting in the identification of 4,417 new species. The Challenger also discovered that the ocean was not—as had been assumed at the time— deepest in the middle, giving the first hint of the existence of a global mid-ocean ridge system. The Challenger expedition also confirmed that life existed in the deepest parts of the ocean. Exploration continues to evolve as a systematic endeavor. A recent example is the Census of Marine Life (CoML at http:// www.coml.org)—a concerted 10-year effort involving thousands of scientists from more than 80 nations who are cataloging the diversity, distribution, and abundance of marine life in the world’s oceans. Findings are collected in the Census database and will be issued in a final report in 2010. The Census has uncovered hundreds of previously unknown species— including 150 species of fish—and many new phenomena, such as a school of 20 million fish, roughly the size of Manhattan, swarming just off the coast of New Jersey. The Census is intended to help identify rare species and important breeding areas to aid in the pursuit of sustainable

management of marine resources, among other goals. Currently, a substantial portion of the limited resources for ocean research is spent revisiting established study sites to verify hypotheses and confirm earlier findings. For example, researchers return to hydrothermal vent sites due to their unique environmental conditions,

biological diversity, and intriguing research questions. However, it is harder to secure funding to visit places yet unexplored—missions considered high-risk in terms of return on investment. Given the continued support for and successes of

oceanographic research in the United States, a new program to fund exploration, as recommended in Exploration of the

Seas: Voyage into the Unknown, could provide the resources needed to systematically survey the vast unknown regions of the ocean.

And – The plan is critical to effective deep ocean exploration – a substantial commitment to robust ocean exploration is key Detrick, McNutt, & Shubel, 2013 (Robert, Assistant Administrator for NOAA Research, Marcia, Editor-in-Chief of Science Magazine, Jerry, President and CEO of the Aquarium of the Pacific, The Report of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf)

There was a strong consensus—near unanimity—that in 2020 and beyond, most ocean exploration expeditions and programs will be

partnerships—public and private, national and international. NOAA has been assigned a leadership role in developing and sustaining a national program of ocean exploration under the Ocean Exploration Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11). The act mandated that NOAA undertake this responsibility in collaboration with other federal agencies. Ocean Exploration 2020 invitees felt that federal and academic programs should be more assertive in seeking partnerships with ocean industries. It was, however, acknowledged that the necessity of sharing data might pose a challenge for some industry partners as well as federal agencies with restricted missions, like the Navy’s Office of Naval Research. There was a strong feeling that the community of ocean explorers needs to be more inclusive and more nimble, two sometimes conflicting qualities. Nimbleness will require more non-governmental sources of support and a small, dedicated, dynamic decision-making group that represents the interests of the ocean exploration community and that commands their

trust. A coherent, comprehensive national program of ocean exploration requires sustained core support at some predictable level from the federal government and demonstrated

coordination among the federal agencies involved in ocean exploration, in order to leverage involvement of business, industry, foundations, and NGOs . Timely and effective communication among partners is necessary to build and sustain the expanded community of ocean explorers. PLAT PLAT F OR MS In 2020, a greater number of ships, submersibles, and other platforms are dedicated to ocean exploration. Ocean exploration priorities will frequently dictate the types of platforms needed for a national program of ocean exploration. Since mission priorities change, the mix of platforms needs to include a wide variety of capabilities as well as provide flexibility and nimbleness. The great majority of Ocean Exploration 2020 participants felt that the current suite of available platforms is

not sufficient to sustain an evolving national program. There was a strong consensus that a more diverse and dynamic mix of platforms is needed that includes: • Dedicated ships of exploration • Ships of opportunity • A variety of submersibles—AUVs, ROVs, and HOVs—with a range of depth capabilities that include full ocean depth • Small, inexpensive ROVs that put ocean exploration in the hands of citizen scientists • Instrumented marine animals • Stationary observing networks and sensors The value of having one or more dedicated federal ships of ocean exploration was

endorsed. In addition to platforms that move through the water in three dimensions, there was strong support for seafloor observatories that document changes in the fourth dimension—time. A fully mature national program of ocean exploration must have both components. In addition to greater investments in ships, better coordination among ships of exploration and other exploration assets is

essential to ensure a maximum science payoff per dollar invested. In 2020, platforms will be equipped with better, more

sensitive, more robust sensors that are capable of measuring priority ocean properties. CHNOLOG HNOLOG Y DEVELOP ELOP MENT B y 2020, private sector investments in exploration technology development, specifically for the dedicated

national program of exploration, exceed the federal investment, but federal partners play a key role in testing and refining new technologies. Forum participants agreed that a top priority for a national ocean exploration

program of distinction is the development of mechanisms to fund emerging and creatively disruptive

technologies to enhance and expand exploration capabilities. In addition to significant federal government investment in ocean exploration technology over time—whether by the U.S. Navy, NASA, NOAA, or other civilian agencies involved in ocean exploration—many felt strongly that to shorten the time from development to unrestricted adoption, more of the required investment

would come from the private sector. These emerging technologies will likely include the next generations of

ships; remotely operated vehicles; autonomous underwater vehicles; telepresence capabilities; and new sensors. Most participants felt that continuing to develop human occupied vehicles should be a much lower priority for a national program than focusing on autonomous vehicles, sensors, observatories, and communications systems. Participants

also felt that federal partners in the national program of exploration should play a key role in testing and refining these technologies as well as working to adapt existing and proven technologies for exploration. Overall, some of the most important technologies to cultivate are those that collect physical and chemical oceanographic data, biological data, and seafloor mapping data. CITIZEN SCIEN CE In 2020, citizen scientists/citizen explorers play an increasingly important role in ocean exploration. Expanding opportunities for citizens to be involved in all phases of ocean exploration will engage and energize them in efforts to support ocean exploration. Combining “citizen science,” or scientific research conducted by non-professional scientists, with the work being conducted by the professional ocean exploration community, has the potential to expand the resources available. There was a consensus among Forum participants that citizen explorers will play an increasing role in ocean exploration by 2020. These citizen explorers may follow and contribute to national expeditions online, or analyze data from past expeditions and submit their work to relevant national and international data bases. They also may use their own tools, such as small, inexpensive remotely operated vehicles equipped with cameras or measuring devices to collect data that are then quality controlled and included the same national and international databases. Opportunities for citizen explorers to participate in shipboard experiences should also be expanded. There are excellent models for engaging citizens in large scientific projects such as Citizen Science Alliance’s Zooniverse and the USGS National Map Corps. A national program of ocean exploration could provide similar opportunities for citizen participation in classifying oceanographic features or biota. Appropriate data assurance and quality control mechanisms are required for data collected by citizen scientists/explorers to be incorporated into existing relevant data repositories. Forum participants overwhelmingly agreed that with these mechanisms, crowdsourced data should be eligible for inclusion in national and international data sets. With proper protocols, citizen explorers can play an important role in advancing the objective of a broad-based, national program of ocean exploration. Forum participants felt strongly that a national ocean exploration program should establish mechanisms that not only allow, but encourage, meaningful participation of citizen explorers in a variety of ways. DATAATAATA SHAR ING In 2020, all data obtained through publicly funded, dedicated civilian ocean exploration projects are available quickly and widely at little or no additional cost to the user. Ocean exploration missions will typically collect very large amounts of data. It is through the transformation of these data into information that the full value of exploration is realized. The more people who have access to the data, the richer the opportunities are for interpretation and transformation into information that is useful to a wider variety of stakeholders from scientists to educators to policymakers. There was a strong consensus among Ocean Exploration 2020 participants that all data, including images and access to samples, resulting from publicly supported, dedicated civilian exploration expeditions should be made widely available at little or no additional cost in real time or as soon as appropriate quality assurances have been completed. Participants noted that this requirement should be a condition of a grantee’s acceptance of public funding and that any funds necessary to meet this requirement should be included in an expedition’s budget. Ocean exploration data should reside within established data repositories and their existence should be made widely

known. Participants agreed that maps of the seafloor, oceanographic and biological observations, video and still images, and chemical and geochemical data were among the most important ocean data sets to share with the extended exploration community. There was also agreement that leaders of a national program should have a responsibility to synthesize data collected for ocean exploration and other purposes to identify gaps and help refine priorities. PUBL IC ENGAGE ENGAGEENGAGE MENT In 2020, ocean explorers are part of a coordinated communication network and have

the tools they need to engage the public. The public clearly has a stake in federally funded ocean exploration, and their

support is required to create a sustained, successful, and comprehensive national program of ocean exploration. Forum participants felt that we are falling short of effectively engaging the broader public in the excitement and importance of ocean exploration and that this needs to change. Participants were in strong agreement that we must enhance and expand existing efforts and find new ways to communicate with the public about ocean exploration. We must provide better interaction with scientists during expeditions, especially by taking telepresence beyond passive viewing and into active participation. Ocean Exploration 2020 participants agreed that we need a shared strategy to communicate effectively and engage with the public about ocean exploration. Many ocean exploration scientists need more experience and better resources, tools, and partnerships to implement this communication strategy and to build public support for the national program. Partnerships of ocean explorers with professional science communicators and with informal science institutions, including aquariums—which specialize in this domain—have the potential to expand the size of the audience and to broaden it to include a larger cross section of society. Concludi ng Remarks These characteristics of a national program of ocean exploration imply a network of universities, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and government agencies working together in pursuit of

shared goals. Federal—and in particular, NOAA—leadership is essential to help design and maintain what might be called an “architecture for collaboration” that convenes national and international ocean exploration stakeholders regularly to review and set priorities, to match potential expedition partners, to facilitate sharing of assets, and to help test and evaluate new technologies. The program should facilitate the review and analysis of new and historical data and the synthesis and

transformation of data into a variety of informational products. In this leadership role, NOAA would promote public

engagement, and guide and strengthen the national ocean exploration enterprise.

1AC – Pharmaceuticals Advantage

Contention ___ – Pharmaceuticals

Unexplored deep ocean waters hold immense and unique potential for groundbreaking pharmaceutical innovationsMartins et al, 2014 (Ana, Assistant Professor and Head of the Oceanography Department at the University of the Azores, Helena Vieira, Helena Gaspar, Susana Santos, “Marketed Marine Natural Products in the Pharmaceutical and Cosmeceutical Industries: Tips for Success”, Mar Drugs 12(2): 1066-1101, February 17, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3944531/)

Natural products (NP) are usually small molecules, with a molecular weight below 3000 Da, which are produced by a biological source such as plants, animals and microorganisms, but which occurrence may be limited to a particular taxonomic family, genus, species or even organism [1]. They are often called secondary metabolites because, predominantly, they are not biosynthesized by the general metabolic pathways and have no primary function directly involved in the normal growth, development or reproduction of an organism. They are generally used by organisms to control ecological relationships that involve defense against predation, competition for space and food, interspecies communication for the purposes of mating,

hunting or quorum signaling, among other functions. NP have long been a traditional source of medicines, and are still nowadays considered the most successful supply of potential drug leads with more than 1 million new chemical entities discovered so far [2,3]. Historical examples of early identified natural compounds are undoubtedly the isolation of morphine from Papaver somniferum poppies, first reported in 1803, and the discovery in 1929 by Flemming of the first antibiotic penicillin from the fungus Penicillium notatum [3]. Since then, numerous other NP have been isolated and

identified with 60% of the drugs currently on the market being of natural origin [4]. These compounds are known to present several advantages as compared with non-natural compounds such as high chemical diversity, biochemical specificity, binding efficiency and propensity to interact with biological targets, which make them favorable lead structures. Suitable

natural sources for the discovery of new potentially bioactive molecules are numerous, but marine environment, harboring a vast variety of organisms differing in their physiology and adaptation capacity, is becoming a top spot for the identification of new drug leads. From the over 33 animal phyla described to date, 32 are represented in the aquatic environment, with 15 being exclusively marine [5]. Despite the fact that oceans cover more than 70% of the earth’s surface, the exploration of marine ecosystems has only began in the mid 1970’s, with the emergence of modern snorkeling, the introduction of scuba in 1970 and later, around 1990, with the use of remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) [2]. Due to technical limitations, exploitation of marine organisms started with the

collection of large creatures such as red algae, sponges and soft corals, which were shown to produce a large variety of compounds with quite unique chemical structures [6]. Invertebrates alone comprise approximately 60% of all marine animals and were described as the source of more than 11,000 new NP since 1990

[7,8,9]. With the continuous exploitation of the marine environment, attention turned to microorganisms such as marine cyanobacteria, marine fungi, and several other groups of marine bacteria due to their biological and habitat

diversity, which resulted in the ability to produce metabolites with unmatched structures [10].

Microorganisms constitute nowadays a prolific source of structurally diverse bioactive metabolites and have yielded some of the most important active ingredients known today [11]. Recently it was even realized that many compounds previously isolated from marine macroorganisms, such as

sponges and tunicates, are in fact, metabolic products of associated microorganisms [12,13]. Due to their broad panel of bioactivities such as anti-tumor, anti-microtubule, anti-proliferative, photoprotective, antibiotic and anti-infective marine natural products (MNP) are exceptionally interesting high-value ingredients for applications in the pharmaceutical industry and more and more companies are investing in this field. Following the same trend, cosmetics industry is progressively turning to the sea in the search for new ingredients. Traditionally, in the field of cosmetic industry cosmetics were defined as articles to be applied to human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance without affecting body structure or functions [20]. However, more recently, the cosmetic industry introduced a special class of products, the cosmeceuticals, as a combination of cosmetics and pharmaceuticals, as bioactive

ingredients are now combined with creams, lotions and ointments [21]. Interestingly, an increasing number of suppliers of the cosmetic industry are being pushed to include extracts made from costal plants, seaweeds, algae and sea minerals into cosmeceutical ingredients. These extracts contain vitamins and minerals and they show ultraviolet and anti-oxidant protection and general anti-aging benefits [22,23,24,25]. In fact, activities such as antioxidant, anti-wrinkle, anti-tyrosinase and anti-acne are among the most usual activities of marine cosmetic ingredients for skin health [21,26]. Hence, an entire new paradigm of beauty care, combining cosmetics and pharmaceuticals properties into novel products with biologically active ingredients, will be the hallmark of the next decades. The aim of this review is to outline the role of MNP in pharmaceutical and cosmeceutical industries, to identify the main bottlenecks found during the process of discovery and development, and to give an overview over the compounds that entered successfully in those markets. Tips for success will also be given so that more MNP can reach the market.

And – Despite the ocean’s potential, we have barely even begun the exploration necessary – only the plan revitalizes the pharmaceutical sector Skropeta, 2008 (Danielle, Ph.D. from Australian National University, “Deep-Sea Natural Products”, http://pubs.rsc.org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/en/content/articlehtml/2008/np/b808743a)

Over the past 50 years, approximately 20,000 natural products have been reported from marine flora and fauna, and yet less than 2% of those derive from deep-water marine organisms.1

The vast oceans cover 70% of the world's surface, with 95% greater than 1000 m deep.2Although difficulty in accessing these depths has previously hindered deep-sea research, today with improved acoustic technology and greater access to submersibles, deep-sea exploration is uncovering extensive deep-water coral reefs

that are home to a wealth of species on continental shelves and seamounts world-wide (Fig. 1).3 It has been estimated that the number of species inhabiting the world's oceans may be as high as 10 million,4 and the ocean fringe with its high concentration of competing species was always thought to have the highest

species diversity. On the contrary, recent analyses have shown that the deep sea is one of the most biodiverse and species-rich habitats on the planet, rivalling that of coral reefs and rainforests. With over 60% of drugs on the market of natural origin, natural products can be considered the foundation of the pharmaceutical industry.10 Although in recent years the pharmaceutical industry decreased its activity in this area, today natural product-based drug discovery is experiencing a renaissance.11 In particular, the marine environment, a rich source of structurally unique, bioactive metabolites, has produced a number of drug

candidates that are currently in clinical trials.12–16 In the ever-expanding search for sources of new chemical diversity, the exploration of deep-sea fauna has emerged as a new frontier in drug discovery and development. Novel marine actinomycetes obtained from deep oceanic sediments such as the Mariana

trench, are a promising source of new and unexplored chemical diversity for drug discovery. There are vastly different environmental conditions and oceanographic parameters at play in the deep-sea (Fig. 2).26,27 Pressure increases by 1 atm for every 10 m below sea level, thereby varying from 10 atm at the shelf-slope interface to >1000 atm in the deepest part of the trenches. Consequently, species inhabiting these depths must adapt their biochemical machinery to cope with such pressures. Temperatures taper off rapidly with increasing depth down to [similar]2 °C at bathal depths of >2000 m. As lower temperatures reduce the rates of chemical reactions, deep-sea species must adjust their biochemical processes to function at depressed temperatures. Light penetration decreases exponentially with depth, such that below 250 m essentially no light penetrates. In the dark, cold depths of the ocean, vision becomes less important, and it is presumed that chemoreception and mechanoreception play greater roles. The near-bottom current is much slower in the deep sea compared to shallow-water with speeds of around 10 cm s−1 at bathyal depths and 4 cm s−1 at abyssal depths. The average metabolic rates and growth rates are lower than shallow-water species, however the latter is closely aligned to food availability. In the deep-sea the pH is typically around 828,29 and the salinity about 35% and therefore entirely marine, with a relatively low level of variability. The sediment comprises weathered rock washed into the sea by wind and rivers, as well as

planktonic material obtained from the water above.26,27 Deep-sea organisms survive under extreme conditions in the absence of light, under low levels of oxygen and intensely high pressures, all of which may affect their

primary metabolic pathways and consequently their secondary metabolites.31,32 For this reason, deep-sea fauna are expected to have a greater genetic diversity than their shallow-water counterparts, and a higher probability of containing structurally unique metabolites. The extraordinarily high level of diversity of deep-sea benthic fauna has been well known, and the mechanism to explain it hotly debated, since the

1960s.5,33–36 Soft-bottom deep-sea fauna are found to be similar at the higher taxonomic level to shallow-water fauna and consist primarily of megafauna such as echinoderms (sea cucumbers, star fish, brittle stars) and anemones; macrofauna such as polychaetes, bivalve molluscs, isopods, amphipods and other crustacea; and meiofauna which primarily comprise foraminifers, nematodes and copepods, while hard-bottom deep-sea fauna are dominated by sponges and cnidarians(soft

corals, gorgonians). At the species level, however, deep-sea fauna are found to contain a high number of single rare species, with more than half being new to science, and with some taxa comprising almost entirely of

new species. In addition, many of the species are found to exclusively inhabit the deep sea, with high levels of biodiversity extending to abyssal depths of 5000 m.26,27 Recent sampling expeditions by the ANDEEP (Antarctic benthic deep-sea biodiversity) project in the Southern Ocean deep sea revealed extremely high levels of biodiversity across a range of taxa including meio-, macro- and megafauna, with the highest levels of species richness amongst the first two. In general, abundance decreased with increasing depth, while species richness increased with the highest number of species found at bathyal depths of 3000 m. Depth and biogeography trends were found to vary between taxa, and there was an apparent higher species richness for many taxa of the Southern ocean compared to the Arctic deep sea.

And – Specifically, marine-based drug discovery is critical to innovations that effectively solve global disease pandemics National Research Council, 2009 (Ocean Exploration: Highlights of National Academies Reports, National Academies Ocean Science Series, http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf)

The ocean benefits human health and well-being in immeasurable ways. The nutritional benefits of eating fish, rich in protein and omega-3 fatty acids, make the ocean an indispensable—but not unlimited—source of healthy

food. Ocean science is revealing many other ways the ocean can benefit human health, from providing new sources of drugs to helping unravel many of the mysteries of human disease. The Ocean Is the Most Promising Frontier for Sources of New Drugs In 1945, a young organic chemist named Werner Bergmann set out to explore the waters off the coast of southern Florida. Among the marine organisms he scooped from the sand that day was a Caribbean sponge that would later be called Cryptotethya crypta. Back in his lab, Bergmann extracted a novel compound from this sponge that aroused his curiosity. The chemical Bergmann identified in this sponge, spongothymidine, eventually led to the development of a whole class of drugs that treat cancer and viral diseases and are still in use today. For example, Zidovudine (AZT) fights the AIDS virus, HIV, and cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) is used in the treatment of leukemias and lymphomas. Acyclovir speeds the healing of eczema and some herpes viruses. These are just a few examples of how the study of marine organisms contributes to the health of thousands of men, women, and children around

the world. New antibiotics, in addition to new drugs for fighting cancer, inflammatory diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases (which often cannot be treated successfully today), are greatly needed. With drug resistance nibbling away at the once-full toolbox of antibiotics, the limited effectiveness of currently available drugs has dire consequences for public health. Historically, many medicines have come from nature —mostly from land-based natural organisms. Because scientists have nearly exhausted the supply of terrestrial plants, animals, and microorganisms that have interesting medical properties, new sources of drugs are needed. Occupying

more than 70 percent of the Earth’s surface, the ocean is a virtually unexplored treasure chest of new and unidentified species—one of the last frontiers for sources of new natural products. These natural products are of special interest because of the dazzling diversity and uniqueness of the creatures that make the sea their home. One reason marine organisms are

so interesting to scientists is because in adapting to the various ocean environments, they have evolved fascinating repertoires of unique chemicals to help them survive. For example, anchored to the seafloor, a sponge that protects itself from an animal trying to take over its space by killing the invader has been compared with the human immune system trying to kill foreign cancer cells. That same sponge, bathed in seawater containing millions of bacteria, viruses, and fungi, some of which could be pathogens, has developed antibiotics to keep those pathogens under

control. Those same antibiotics could be used to treat infections in humans. Sponges, in fact, are among the most prolific sources of diverse chemical compounds. An estimated 30 percent of all potential marine-derived medications currently in the pipeline—and about 75 percent of recently patented marine-derived anticancer

compounds—come from marine sponges. Marine-based microorganisms are another particularly

rich source of new medicines. More than 120 drugs available today derive from land-based microbes. Scientists see marine-based microbes as the most promising source of novel medicines from the sea. In all, more than 20,000

biochemical compounds have been isolated from sea creatures since the 1980s. Because drug discovery in the marine frontier is a relatively young field, only a few marine-derived drugs are in use today. Many others are in the pipeline. One example is Prialt, a drug developed from the venom of a fish-killing cone snail. The cone snails produce neurotoxins to paralyze and kill prey; those neurotoxins are being developed as neuromuscular blocks for individuals with chronic pain, stroke, or epilepsy. Other marinederived drugs are being tested against herpes, asthma, and breast cancer. The National Research Council report Marine Biotechnology in the Twenty-First Century (2002) concluded A cone snail uses its powerful venom to kill a fish. Prialt, an effective medication for managing chronic pain in AIDS and cancer patients, was derived from the venom produced by this type of snail. (Image from Kerry Matz, University of Utah,

Salt Lake City) OCEAN SCIENCE SERIES that the exploration of unique habitats, such as deep-sea environments, and the isolation and culture of marine microorganisms offer two

underexplored opportunities for discovery of novel chemicals with therapeutic potential. The successes to date, which are based upon a very limited investigation of both deep-sea organisms and marine microorganisms, suggest a high potential for continued discovery of new drugs Marine Organisms Provide Models for Understanding Human Biology Among the most fascinating aspects of ocean science is the use of marine creatures as models for unraveling the mysteries of basic biochemical and physiological processes. Scientists have made many remarkable discoveries by studying marine life. For example, the big purple slug offers researchers clues about learning and memory.

And – Left unchecked, disease pandemics guarantee extinctionYu 9 (Victoria, Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science, Human Extinction: The Uncertainty of Our Fate, 22 May 2009, http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/spring-2009/human-extinction-the-uncertainty-of-our-fate)

A pandemic will kill off all humans. In the past, humans have indeed fallen victim to viruses. Perhaps the best-known case was the bubonic plague that killed up to one third of the European population in the mid-14th century (7). While vaccines have been developed for the plague and some other infectious diseases, new viral strains are constantly emerging — a process that maintains the possibility of a pandemic-facilitated human extinction. Some surveyed students mentioned AIDS as a potential pandemic-causing virus. It is true that scientists have been unable thus far to find a sustainable cure for AIDS, mainly due to HIV’s rapid and constant evolution. Specifically, two factors account for the virus’s abnormally high mutation rate: 1. HIV’s use of reverse transcriptase, which does not have a proof-reading mechanism, and 2. the lack of an error-correction mechanism in HIV DNA polymerase (8). Luckily, though, there are certain characteristics of HIV that make it a poor candidate for a large-scale global infection: HIV can lie dormant in the human body for years without manifesting itself, and AIDS itself does not kill directly, but rather through the weakening of the

immune system. However, for more easily transmitted viruses such as influenza, the evolution of new strains could prove far more consequential. The simultaneous occurrence of antigenic drift (point mutations that lead to new strains) and antigenic shift (the inter-species transfer of disease) in the

influenza virus could produce a new version of influenza for which scientists may not immediately find a cure. Since influenza can spread quickly, this lag time could potentially lead to a “global influenza pandemic,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (9). The most recent scare of this variety came in 1918 when bird flu managed to kill over 50 million people around the world in what is sometimes referred to as the Spanish flu pandemic. Perhaps even more frightening is the fact that only 25 mutations were required to convert the original viral strain — which could only infect birds — into a human-viable strain (10).

And – Independently, a revitalized and innovative pharmaceutical sector prevents economic collapse Washington Post, 2014 (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, “One Perscription for U.S. Economic Growth”, May 5, http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/brand-connect/wp/enterprise/one-prescription-for-u-s-economic-growth/)

After withering under six years of financial storm clouds, the U.S. economic forecast appears to be showing new life. But

leaders in government and business have work to do if they want to create an environment that not only encourages continued growth, but accelerates it versus global competitors. One area ripe for harvest: U.S. biopharmaceuticals. The U.S. currently leads the world in biopharmaceutical invention. And according to a new report by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and the Battelle

Technology Partnership Practice, this pioneering role and investment in innovation not only creates a favorable environment for improved patient outcomes and the development of new medicines, it could also help spur the U.S. economy by adding more than 300,000 jobs in the next 10 years. The report looks at two possible 10-year trajectories. One examines a future of continued investment and growth, while the other imagines the U.S. falling behind competitor nations, including Brazil, Singapore and China, which are investing in their own biopharmaceutical industries. Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom have been longstanding competitors in this sector as well. The differentiator? Whether or not the U.S. embraces advanced policies. If current trends continue, industry leaders cited in the report predict the next 10 years will bring only modest growth, and biopharmaceutical companies could

lose nearly 150,000 jobs, according to the report. A lack of investment in innovation could have major implications for both the overall economy and the biopharmaceutical industry, which generates nearly $790 billion in the U.S. each year, supports more than 3 million jobs and helps

improve the quality of life for millions of Americans. “The message is clear: the continued success of the biopharmaceutical industry — both in delivering life-saving and life-enhancing medicines to

patients and in contributing to U.S. economic growth — is dependent on thoughtful, forward-

looking policies that prioritize innovation,” says John J. Castellani, President and CEO of PhRMA. What are the factors that promote growth? The report outlines a number of recommendations, including the following: Increase understanding around the costs of new product development. Ensure appropriate protection for intellectual property and promote access to innovative medicines to give biopharmaceutical companies the incentive they need to continue to develop cutting-edge therapies. Ensure that startup efforts have the private financial backing they need to develop new medicines. Revise the drug-approval process to help get new medications to market more quickly. Back educational efforts to create a strong workforce. Provide economic innovation incentives to fuel growth. The current regulatory climate without these changes may stifle growth and have a negative effect on innovation. “This report vividly illustrates the inextricable link between a healthy biopharmaceutical R&D system and the health care policy environment,” says Robert J. Hugin, PhRMA Immediate Past Chairman and CEO of Celgene Corporation, in a written release. “Sustainable, market-based access and reimbursement for innovative medicines today is essential to incentivize the long-term, high-risk investment needed for new

medical innovations in the future.” The ability to innovate quickly is becoming the most important determinant of economic growth and a nation’s ability to compete and prosper in the 21st

century global knowledge-based economy. As this new report indicates, the U.S. must focus squarely on ensuring that its policies help encourage such invention, not hinder it.

And – An innovative pharmaceutical industry is also critical to sustain long-term growth Lechleiter, 2012 (John, Ph.D. and Senior Organic Chemist in Research and Development, “Beyond the Fiscal Cliff, Pharmaceutical Innovation is the Key to Long-Term Fiscal Health”, December 11, http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlechleiter/2012/12/11/beyond-the-fiscal-cliff-pharmaceutical-innovation-is-the-key-to-long-term-fiscal-health/)

When you look beyond the current “fiscal cliff” brinksmanship, the long-term budget deficit will depend in large part on two key trendlines: health care costs and economic growth. I’d like to explain

how pharmaceutical innovation can be a key positive factor in both areas – if it isn’t choked

off by short-sighted efforts to close the budget gap. The first trendline: health care costs. Back in 2009, then-budget director

Peter Orszag wrote, “Over the long run, the deficit impact of every other fiscal policy variable is swamped by the impact of health-care costs.” That hasn’t changed. One big reason: 10,000 Americans will reach retirement age every day for the next 19 years. Medicare is the fastest-growing major entitlement, growing 68 percent since 2002, according to the Heritage Foundation. And these folks, as a whole, can be expected to live longer than those who started receiving benefits when Medicare was enacted in the 1960s. So, while pharmaceuticals account for only 10 percent of health care spending, medicines are inevitably caught up in efforts to tame its growth. In countries around the world – including the U.S. – our biggest customer is the government, operating a health care system faced with relentlessly rising costs of caring for an aging population. Yet those medicines often represent the most cost-effective approach to preventing and treating disease. That’s the true value of pharmaceutical innovation. To cite just one example, Columbia University economist Frank Lichtenberg has estimated that every dollar Medicare spends on new medicines saves six dollars in other health care costs, on things like hospitalizations and physicians’ services. This finding was borne out by a 2011 study of the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The study found that older Americans who previously lacked comprehensive drug coverage saved about $1,200 in medical costs the year they signed up for Part D. If we apply that to the 11 million seniors who have gained comprehensive coverage through Part D, total savings exceed $13 billion. And new medicines ultimately yield a legacy of cost-effective generics, which today account for 80 percent

of U.S. prescriptions and are actually less expensive here than in other countries around the world. But we need continued innovation to address serious medical needs unmet by current medicines

or by any other medical intervention. For example, a recent study found that new treatments that could delay the onset of Alzheimer’s disease for five years would save U.S. government health care programs $140 billion annually by 2030. As Washington grapples with the difficult trade-offs of entitlement reform, innovation is the best hope of making those choices less painful – of providing better health care without busting the budget. The second trendline: economic growth. As President Obama has noted, “The single most important thing we can do to

reduce our debt and deficits is to grow.” Here’s an area where our industry would appreciate more attention. Innovative pharmaceuticals are a U.S. economic strength, a 21st century industry where the U.S. has gained world leadership in the past 30 years. The U.S. share of new medicines during the decade 2001-2010 was 57 percent, compared with

33 percent for France, Germany, Switzerland, and the UK combined – reversing the relative positions in the 1970s. The biopharmaceuticals sector accounts for about 650,000 jobs nationwide, and contributes around $917 billion to the economy each year, according to a 2011 report by Battelle. And if we include clinical testing centers, supply chain managers, and other partners, our industry supports 4 million jobs

across the nation. The value of U.S. biopharmaceutical exports totaled $232 billion between

2005 and 2010 and grew 61 percent over six years. It’s hard to find another U.S. industry that can match that record. In sum, innovative pharmaceuticals can contribute to both sides of the long-term fiscal ledger by helping hold down health care costs and driving economic growth. But that may not happen if pharmaceuticals are seen first and foremost as a ready source of near-term revenues. One particularly troublesome idea, included in the President’s proposals, calls for extending Medicaid price controls on medicines into Medicare Part D. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that such a proposal would cut revenues for research-based pharmaceutical companies by well over $100 billion over the next 10 years. Keep in mind that it takes well over $1 billion for companies like ours to bring a new medicine to patients. In a March 2011 report, the CBO cites a key “disadvantage” of extending Medicaid rebates to Part D would be to “reduce the amount of funds that manufacturers invest in research and development of new products.” The potential cost is real, as R&D cutbacks delay or derail the next breakthrough treatment for diabetes or Alzheimer’s. And it would impose costs on the economy, as well. A 2011 analysis by Battelle Memorial Institute estimated that such a $10 billion to $20 billion per year reduction in pharmaceutical industry revenue would result in 130,000 to 260,000 lost jobs. Ironically, Medicare Part D happens to be the rare example of a government program that has cost far less than anticipated. According to the CBO, it is coming in 43 percent – or $435 billion – below initial projections for its first seven years. Part D shows how the power of competition can improve government health

care programs – but that’s a subject for another day. Policymakers face a daunting task in closing the yawning gap between revenues and expenditures in the coming years, but targeting medical innovation is a particularly counterproductive approach. The trends are clear: Starving medical innovation to hit short-term fiscal targets will only make the next round of budget talks that much harder.

And – Severe economic turbulence ends in global nuclear catastrophe Harris and Burrows, 2009 (Mathew, PhD European History at Cambridge, counselor in the National Intelligence Council (NIC) and Jennifer, member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit “Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis” http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf)

Increased Potential for Global Conflict Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is likely to be the result of a number of intersecting and interlocking forces. With so many possible permutations of outcomes, each with ample Revisiting the Future opportunity for unintended consequences, there is a growing sense of

insecurity. Even so, history may be more instructive than ever . While we continue to believe that the Great Depression is not likely to be repeated, the lessons to be drawn from that period include the harmful effects on fledgling democracies and multiethnic societies (think Central Europe

in 1920s and 1930s) and on the sustainability of multilateral institutions (think League of Nations

in the same period). There is no reason to think that this would not be true in the twenty-first as much as in the twentieth century . For that reason, the ways in which the potential for

greater conflict could grow would seem to be even more apt in a constantly volatile economic

environment as they would be if change would be steadier. In surveying those risks, the report stressed the

likelihood that terrorism and nonproliferation will remain priorities even as resource issues move up on the international

agenda. Terrorism’s appeal will decline if economic growth continues in the Middle East and youth unemployment is reduced. For those terrorist groups that remain active in 2025,

however, the diffusion of technologies and scientific knowledge will place some of the world’s most dangerous

capabilities within their reach. Terrorist groups in 2025 will likely be a combination of descendants of long established groups_inheriting organizational structures, command and control processes, and training procedures necessary to conduct sophisticated attacks_and newly emergent collections of the angry and disenfranchised that

become self -radicalized , particularly in the absence of economic outlets that would become narrower in an economic downturn . The most dangerous casualty of any economically-induced drawdown of U.S. military presence would almost certainly be the Middle East. Although Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons is not inevitable, worries about a nuclear-armed Iran

could lead states in the region to develop new security arrangements with external powers, acquire additional weapons, and consider pursuing their own nuclear ambitions. It is not clear that the type of stable deterrent relationship that existed between the great

powers for most of the Cold War would emerge naturally in the Middle East with a nuclear Iran. Episodes of low intensity conflict and terrorism taking place under a nuclear umbrella could lead to an unintended escalation and broader conflict if clear red lines between those states involved are not

well established. The close proximity of potential nuclear rivals combined with underdeveloped

surveillance capabilities and mobile dual-capable Iranian missile systems also will produce inherent difficulties in achieving reliable indications and warning of an impending nuclear attack. The lack of strategic depth in neighboring states like Israel, short warning and missile flight times, and uncertainty of Iranian intentions may place more focus on preemption rather than defense, potentially leading to escalating crises . 36 Types of conflict that the world continues

to experience, such as over resources, could reemerge,particularly if protectionism grows and there is a resort to neo-mercantilist practices. Perceptions of renewed energy scarcity will drive countries to take actions to assure their future access to energy supplies. In the worst case, this

could result in interstate conflicts if government leaders deem assured access to energy resources , for example, to be essential for maintaining domestic stability and the survival of their regime. Even actions short of war, however, will have important geopolitical implications. Maritime security concerns are providing a rationale for naval buildups and modernization efforts,

such as China’s and India’s development of blue water naval capabilities. If the fiscal stimulus focus for these

countries indeed turns inward , one of the most obvious funding targets may be military. Buildup of regional naval capabilities could lead to increased tensions , rivalries, and counterbalancing moves , but it also will create opportunities for multinational cooperation

in protecting critical sea lanes. With water also becoming scarcer in Asia and the Middle East, cooperation to manage changing water resources is likely to be increasingly difficult both within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.

1AC – Biofuels Advantage

Contention ___ – Biofuels

Algae biofuels are weak in the energy sector now- they need to be researched and developed to compete with other sourcesRampton and Zabarenko 2012 (Roberta Rampton and Deborah Zabarenko, environmental correspondents for Reuters.)(“Algae biofuel not sustainable now-U.S. research council,” Reuters, 10/24/12, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-biofuels-algae-idUSBRE89N1Q820121024//PL)

(Reuters) - Biofuels made from algae, promoted by President Barack Obama as a possible way to help wean

Americans off foreign oil, cannot be made now on a large scale without using unsustainable amounts of energy, water and fertilizer, the U.S. National Research Council reported

on Wednesday. " Faced with today's technology, to scale up any more is going to put really

big demands on ... not only energy input, but water, land and the nutrients you need, like carbon dioxide, nitrate and

phosphate," said Jennie Hunter-Cevera, a microbial physiologist who headed the committee that wrote the report. Hunter-

Cevera stressed that this is not a definitive rejection of algal biofuels, but a recognition that they may not be ready to supply even 5 percent, or approximately 10.3 billion gallons (39 billion liters), of U.S. transportation fuel needs.

" Algal biofuels is still a teenager that needs to be developed and nurtured ," she said by telephone.

The National Research Council is part of the National Academies, a group of private nonprofit institutions that advise government on science, technology and health policy. Its sustainability assessment was requested by the Department of Energy, which has invested heavily in projects to develop the alternative fuel. In 2009, the Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture awarded San Diego-based Sapphire Energy Inc more than $100 million in grants and loan guarantees to help build a plant in New Mexico that will produce commercial quantities of algal biofuel. Two other companies

received smaller amounts of federal assistance. In February, as gasoline prices spiraled, Obama said algal biofuels had the potential to cut U.S. foreign oil dependence. He estimated that U.S. oil imports

used for transportation could be cut substantially. The National Research Council report

shows that the government should continue research on algal biofuel as well as other

technologies that reduce oil use , an Energy Department spokeswoman said. "Today's report outlines the

need for continued research and development to make algal biofuel sustainable and cost-competitive, but it also highlights the long-term potential of this technology and why it is worth pursuing," Jen Stutsman said in a statement. The council's

report noted that future innovations, and increased production efficiencies, could enhance the viability of algal biofuels.

Despite efforts biofuels have not been fully developed- breakthroughs are keyPienkos and Darzins 2009 (Philip T. Pienkos and Al Darzins, National Renewable Energy Laboratory.)("The promise and challenges of microalgal-derived biofuels," Wiley InterScience, Volume 3 Issue 4 May 28 2009, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bbb.159/pdf//PL)

Past algal biofuels research efforts The Aquatic Species Program (ASP) funded by the Depart- ment of Energy (DoE) from 1978 to 1996 represents the most comprehensive

research effort to date on fuels from algae. DoE invested approximately $25 million over an 18-year period to study a variety of aquatic species for use in renew- able energy production, including microalgae, macroalgae, and cattails.2 ASP was successful in demonstrating the feasibility of algal culture as a source of oil and resulted in important advances in the technology. These advances were made through algal strain isolation and characterization,2 studies of algal physiology and biochemistry,3"4 genetic engineering,5"6 engineering and process development, and outdoor demonstration-scale algal mass culture (Fig. 1). Technoeconomic analyses and resource assessments were important aspects of the program, to guide limited finan- cial resources to the most important scientific and tech- nical barriers. While ASP made significant progress over its 18-year existence, the program was discontinued due to decreasing federal budgets and because the potential cost of algal oil production was estimated in the $40-$60 per barrel range compared to $20 per barrel for crude oil in 1995. The program highlighted the need to understand and optimize the biological mechanisms of algal lipid accumulation and to find creative, cost-effective solutions for culture and process engineering development to isolate lipids from very dilute

biomass suspensions. In 1998, a comprehensive overview of the project was completed.2 In the years immediately following ASP and until recently, support for algal biofuels research was rather limited, and as a result little progress was made. In the last few years, however, interest in algae has increased dramatically, and although federal agencies are beginning to show signs that increased support is immi- nent, many new groups have begun to explore this area in academic, industrial (especially small entrepreneurial organ-izations), and national laboratories, largely funded by private investors and industrial sources. This work is not limited to the USA since significant efforts are now taking place in Europe, the Middle East, Australia, New Zealand, and many other parts of the world.

Benefits of microalgal oil production Microalgae include a wide variety of photosynthetic micro-organisms capable of fixing C02 from the atmosphere to produce biomass more efficiently and rapidly than terres- trial plants. Numerous algal strains have been shown in the laboratory to produce more than 50% of their biomass as lipid " with much of this as triacylglycerols (TAGs). It must be stated that the methodology for lipid analysis (largely based on solvent extraction and gravimetric analysis) has not been standardized and so literature values must be approached with a healthy level of skepticism. TAGs are the anticipated starting material for high energy density fuels such as biodiesel (produced by transesterification of TAGs to yield fatty acid methyl esters 10), green diesel, green jet fuel, and green gasoline (produced by a combination of hydro- processing and catalytic

cracking to yield alkanes of prede- termined chain lengths).11 Most of the observations of high lipid content come from algal cultures grown under nutrient (especially nitrogen, phosphorous, or silicon) limitation. Lipid content varies in both quantity and quality with varied growth conditions.8 While high lipid content can be obtained under nutrient limitation, this is generally at the expense of reduced

biomass productivities. Nevertheless, the possibility that algae could generate considerably more oil per area than typical oilseed crops must certainly be evaluated further. The development of biofuels from traditional oil crops and waste cooking oil/fats cannot realistically meet the demand for transportation fuels.12 If the entire 2007 US soybean oil yield, representing almost 3 billion gallons produced on 63.6 million acres of farm land (Soy Stats™, American Soybean Association, available at http://www.soystats.com) were converted to biofuel, it would replace only about 4.5% of the total petroleum

diesel (-66 billion gallons). If that much land were used to cultivate algae, the resulting oil could, even at a conservative projected productivity (lOg m"2 day"1 at 15% TAG), replace approximately 61% of the petroleum diesel used annually (Table 1), as well as capturing approximately 2 billion tons of C02 in the biomass. C02 capture, however, should not be confused with C02 sequestration since a portion of the C02 captured and partitioned in the oil will be released when the algal-derived fuel is combusted, and the remaining biomass will likely be used as a feedstock for a byproduct that will ultimately be converted to

C02. Algal capture of C02 for biofuels applications really amounts to a recycling' of the C02 for at least one additional use prior to be released during burning of the fuel. Under this scenario there is no permanent C02 capture unless the algal biomass is completely isolated from the environment and stored. Improvements in either areal productivity or lipid content could significantly reduce the amount of land needed to produce this much biofuel (Table 1). After removal of the lipid component, the remaining residual biomass (largely carbohydrate and protein) can also be used for the genera- tion of energy, more liquid or gaseous fuels, or for higher

value by-products (Fig. 2). Algal biofuels also offer the promise of being more sustainable than

bioethanol derived from corn and sugarcane and biodiesel derived from terres- trial oil crops

and even possibly more sustainable than cellulosic ethanol. 13 Algae can be cultivated on otherwise non-

productive land that is unsuitable for agriculture. It can also be grown in brackish, saline, and waste water that has little competing demand, offering the prospect of a biofuel that does not further tax already limited resources. Even so, a detailed life cycle assessment (LCA) and environmental impact analysis will be necessary to confirm sustainability. Algae require approximately 2g of C02 for every g biomass generated and thus have a tremendous potential to capture C02 emissions from powerplant flue gases and other fixed sources. In the future, an algal-based biorefinery could potentially integrate several different conversion technolo-gies to produce many biofuels including biodiesel, green diesel and green gasoline, aviation fuel (commercial and military), ethanol, and methane as well as valuable coprod- ucts including oils, protein, and carbohydrates

(Fig. 2). In some ways algal strains with promise for biofuel production are comparable

to food crops utilized prior to the agricul- tural revolution - they have enormous

potential for further development and improvement . Unlike first-generation biofuels, however, advanced biofuels, like those derived from algae, are likely to effect a much higher overall reduction in fossil fuel use.

Efficiency is key- researched and proven viability and sustainability are key to usageJones and Mayfield 2012 (Carla S. Jones, the San Diego Center for Algae Biotechnology, University of California San Diego. Stephen P. Mayfield, Division of Biological Sciences, University of California San Diego.)(“Algae biofuels: versatility for the future of bioenergy,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology Volume 23, Issue 3, June 2012, Pages 346–351 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958166911007099//PL)

Versatility of microalgae for economic success The versatility of biofuel production from algae may provide answers to both the economic hurdles and the lifecycle challenges faced in renewable energy production. By extracting more than one type of biofuel from algal biomass or an additional coproduct, the value of the biomass increases while also offering additional offsets to the environmental impacts. As mentioned above, the combined biorefinery concept can be used to increase ethanol content from algae following extraction of lipids [20••]. This concept can also be used in combination with biogas and biohydrogen production, either by producing a valuable product before fermentation or by using the gaseous products of fermentation to power the process of producing that high value product. In the first scenario, the high value product can include biohydrogen produced anaerobically just before anaerobic digestion for biogas production [29••, 37 and 38]. In the second case, electricity generated from biogas can be used to offset the energy requirements for anaerobic digestion of microalgae during biogas production, agriculturally derived biogas can be used to provide a CO2 stream for algae growth and coproduct production, and biogas can be used to power the cultivation and lipid extraction process for algae biodiesel [36, 39 and 40]. Regardless of the combined

biorefinery concept chosen, the economic viability and environmental sustainability of the

production of algae biofuels will depend on creating a completely optimized and efficient

overall utilization that leaves little waste and uses every component of the algal biomass.

Exploration of Hydro-thermal vents is key – marine microorganisms are necessary for biofuel breakthroughsGirguis and Holden 2012 (Peter R. Girguis, John L. Loeb Associate Professor of the Natural Sciences at Harvard University. James F. Holden, PH.D in oceanography, associate professor at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.)(“On The Potential for Bioenergy and

Biofuels From Hydrothermal Vent Microbes,” Oceanic Center Spreading Processes, Oceanography March 2012 Edition, http://www.oeb.harvard.edu/faculty/girguis/pdf/2012OceanographyGirguisHolden.pdf//PL)

Biofuel generation using hydrothermal vent microbial cultures In an effort to reduce dependence on petroleum, promote economic growth and diversification, and reduce human-induced climate change, the United States has developed a strategy that includes bio-based energy production focused on the development of robust, large-scale

production of sustainable energy-dense biofuels. As marine hydro-thermal vents harbor

some of the most chemo- and thermo-tolerant micro-organisms known, they have caught the attention of

scientists and industrialists alike for biofuel production. While generating biofuels from vent microbes is

attractive, there are, nonetheless, key issues that need to be addressed prior to commercial implementation. Here, we briefly discuss the advantages and limitations of such approaches and consider the commercial relevance of some recently proposed

technologies. In general, biofuel production depends on feedstock availability and costs, proper reactor conditions for biosynthesis, and efficient sequestration of the biomass or metabolite for biofuel production. The best-known biofuel, corn ethanol, uses starch derived from corn as

feedstock for the production of ethanol via fermentation by yeast. Although the process and infrastructure for ethanol production is well developed, challenges in maintaining the supply of feedstock, the limited availability of arable land for production, and the adverse impact of corn ethanol production on food prices in the developing world have diminished the practicality of replacing existing liquid fossil fuels with corn ethanol

(Singh et al., 2010). Alternatively, it has been suggested that microorganisms with differing

physiological capacities may provide an opportunity to generate biofuels in a more

sustainable, commercially viable manner (Chou et al, 2008). For example, vent hyperthermophilic microbes

that grow optimally at temperatures above 80°C are known to be capable of producing hydrogen from organic matter. Recently, 19 hyperthermophilic deep-sea vent microbes were found to produce hydrogen using maltose (a breakdown product of starch) and protein as feedstocks (Oslowski et al., 2011). A closely related hyperthermophile, Pyrococcus furiosus isolated from a geothermally heated beach in the Mediterranean Sea (Fiala and Stetter, 1986), grew on starch, cellulose, and

peptides, with the highest net hydrogen production coming from growth on starch (Oslowski et al, 2011). Because metabolic rate increases exponentially with temperature, at a rate that typically doubles with every 9°C increase (Tijhuis et al., 1993), biofuel production by a hyperthermophile growing at 95°C could be as much as 250 times higher than the same metabolic process occurring at room temperature. While hyperthermophiles may be well poised to produce biofuels at rates greater those previously observed, it is important to note that other factors, including increased energy consumption by the organism at higher temperatures and the biological regulation of metabolite flux, can

influence the rate of biofuel production. One goal of hyperthermophilic hydrogen production research is to determine whether hyperthermophiles could produce hydrogen using anaerobic sludge from sewage treatment plants for either hydrogen biofuel production or on-site combustion for electricity gener- ation. This approach is attractive because hyperthermophiles can extract organics from sludge and effluent, producing hydrogen for local electricity genera- tion while simultaneously reducing the amount of organics in the effluent stream (minimizing the potential for eutrophi- cation

downstream) and killing patho- gens that may be present. The energy produced on site is distributed via the existing electrical power grid, and, as a result, feedstock production, trans- portation logistics, and public energy distribution concerns are minimized because the infrastructure for sludge-to- energy conversion is largely in place. To our knowledge, however, no data exist on the efficacy of this approach, though the theoretical considerations outlined above are compelling. While it is implausible that sludge- to-energy conversion could fully replace fossil fuel use, such approaches are

being successfully employed in North America and Europe for small-scale energy production. In the United Kingdom in 2005, municipal solid waste and biogas for electricity generation yielded 2,500 GWh yr"1, accounting for ~ 15% of all renewable

energy (see http:// ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/ studies/renewables_en.htm). Although it remains to be seen whether hyper- thermophile-catalyzed reactions will exhibit comparable yields, the value of such an approach resides in the promise of increased efficiency and lower envi- ronmental impact. If hyperthermophiles are capable of generating economically relevant volumes of hydrogen (or elec- tricity from hydrogen), then subsequent research should focus on addressing the other factors that typically influence commercial relevance such as scalability and operating costs. From vent productivity to meeting

humankind’s energy needs Vast amounts of energy flow through marine biogeochemical cycles, including hydrothermal vents.

Research on marine microbes , in particular, in deep-sea sediment and vents, has

offered a small glimpse into the variety of physiological processes by which these microbes

mediate the transfer of matter and energy from the lithosphere to the biosphere. The

technologies outlined herein provide a modest look at the potential role that microbes

may play in energy production . The future of these particular technologies, like so many alternative energy

technologies, remains uncertain. However, the lessons learned from these pursuits will certainly shed

light on how we may better harness the physiological capacity of microbes to meet our

growing energy demands.

Scenario 1 is Warming

Fossil fuels are unsustainable- biofuels offset them and are key to creating effective carbon sinksSingha et al. 2011 (Anoop Singha, Biofuels Research Group, Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork. Poonam Singh Nigamb, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster. Jerry D. Murphy, iofuels Research Group, Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork.)(“Mechanism and challenges in commercialisation of algal biofuels,” Bioresource Technology, Volume 102, Issue 1, January 2011, Pages 26–34 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852410010382//PL)

2. Importance of algal fuel The use of fossil fuels as energy is now widely accepted as unsustainable due to depleting resources and also due to the accumulation of GHGs in the environment. Renewable and carbon neutral biodiesel are necessary for environmental and economic sustainability. Biodiesel demand is constantly increasing as the reservoir of fossil fuel are

depleting. Unfortunately biodiesel produced from oil crop, waste cooking oil and animal fats are not able to replace fossil fuel. The viability of the first generation biofuels production is however

questionable because of the conflict with food supply. Production of biodiesel using microalgae biomass appears to be a viable alternative (Khan et al., 2009). The idea of microalgae utilization as a fuel source is being taken seriously because of the rising price of petroleum and more significantly, the emerging concern about global warming that is associated with burning of fossil fuels (Gavrilescu and Chisti, 2005). Recent research initiatives have proven

that microalgae biomass appear to be the one of the promising source of renewable biodiesel

which is capable of meeting the global energy demand and it will also not compromise

production of food, fodder and other products derived from crops. Microalgae appear to be

the only source of biodiesel that has the potential to completely displace fossil diesel . Unlike

other oil crops, microalgae grow extremely rapidly and many are exceedingly rich in oil. Microalgae commonly double their biomass within 24 h. Biomass doubling times during exponential growth are commonly as short as 3.5 h (Chisti, 2007). Oil

content in microalgae can exceed 80% by weight of dry biomass (Metting, 1996 and Spolaore et al., 2006). Similar to other biomass resources algal biofuel is also a carbon neutral energy source. There may be opportunities for applying biorefinery-type processes to extract and separate several commercial products from microalgal biomass. Besides lipids, microalgal biomass offers opportunities for obtaining additional commercial materials. These include fermentation to obtain ethanol and biogas. It is also possible to produce protein-rich feed for both animal and human consumption. Poly-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are a potential co-product of biodiesel production from microalgae. PUFAs are alternative to fish oils and other oils rich in omega-3 fatty acids (Bruton et al., 2009). Bulk markets for the co-products are potentially available. The microalgal oil contain high proportions of long chain fatty acids (i.e., C-20, C-22) with a high degree of un-saturation (20:5). These very long chain-poly-unsaturated fatty acids are important in aquaculture applications as they improve the nutritional quality of feed (Packer, 2009). There is much speculation that integrated biorefinery solutions would allow sufficient scale to enable economic production of fuel from macroalgae. The only industrial product of significance from macroalgae is hydrocolloids. Extraction of energy from wastestreams is a valid commercial biorefinery concept. If the cost of seaweed permits, a dual production of ethanol and biogas is also possible. There are many other opportunities for extraction of high-value niche products from seaweeds. Each would have to be assessed on commercial terms and demonstrate the feasibility for co-production of energy alongside the higher-value product, with particular attention to whether the scale of

operation is appropriate (Bruton et al., 2009). There has been a great deal of analysis done on the land required to produce microalgae for biofuels production (Chisti, 2007). Although most of these studies are in the context of using North American saline aquifers, it is sufficient to say that these analyses suggest that there is certainly more than enough non-arable land suitable for mass algal cultivation for biofuel production to meet the needs of that country (Packer, 2009). Drawing from these studies it is also probable that several countries like New Zealand, Canada, etc. have enough land that does not compete with food production that is also close to industrial CO2 sources to meet

the liquid fuel requirements. The ocean has already absorbed nearly half of the anthropogenic CO2

generated since the industrial revolution and the absorption of CO2 has an induced effect on

the water acidity, which is negatively affecting marine life including microalgae (Riebesell et

al., 2007). However, it has also been suggested that increased levels of CO2 on the atmosphere might

actually stimulate the biological pump involving growth of some algal species for the

transport of carbon to long-term deep ocean storage (Arrigo, 2007 and Riebesell et al., 2007). The

LOHAFEX (LOHA is Hindi for iron, F stands for Fertilization EXperiment) an Indo-German iron fertilization experiment in the Southwest Atlantic Sector of the Southern Ocean conducted for rapid growth of the minute, unicellular algae that not only provide the food, sustaining all oceanic life, but also play a key role in regulating concentrations of the CO2 in the atmosphere.

The development of such algal bloom on its environment and the fate of the carbon sinking out of it to the deep ocean might play a crucial role in popularization of algal biofuels.

That mitigates warming- only the plan can offset other fuel sourcesMuhs et al. 2009 (“A Summary of Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Needs: Algae Biofuels & Carbon Recycling,” May 2009, Utah State University, http://www.utah.gov/ustar/documents/63.pdf//PL)

IV. The Promise of Algae Energy Systems Aquatic (algae) energy systems have the unique potential to address all five of the interdependent challenges facing

the United States today . They can domestically-produce renewable transportation fuels and recycle carbon and do so in a way that is potentially affordable, environmentally-sustainable, and does not interfere with food supplies. Although there is no single answer to reduce atmospheric carbon levels or end our dependence on foreign oil, aquatic- based algae energy systems represent a possible partial solu- tion to both challenges. Growing algae, the most productive of all photosynthetic life, and converting it into plastics,

fuels, and or secondary feedstocks, could significantly help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, reduce

energy price shocks, reclaim wastewater, conserve fresh water (in some scenarios), lower food

prices, reduce the transfer of U.S. wealth to other nations, and spur regional economic

development (Figure 5). Because of its high lipid (i.e., oil) content, affinity for (and tolerance of) high concentrations of

C02, and photosynthetic efficiency, algae cultivation results in higher arcal yields and liquid fuels with a higher energy density than alternatives, see Table 1 and Figure 6, respectively. For example, Figure 7 shows the extent to which soybeans are planted each year across the United States. If all the soybeans grown and harvested in the U.S. each year were con- verted into biodiesel, the resultant fuel supply would accommodate less than 10% of our annual diesel fuel consumption. Conversely, if an area roughly equating to 1/10th the land area of Utah were developed into algae energy systems, algae could supply all of

America's diesel fuel needs. Thus, algae are an ideal feedstock for replacing petro- leum-based diesel and jet-fuel, which have a combined U.S. market ap- proaching 100 billion gallons per year. Likewise, because algae cultivation systems do not need fertile soil or rainfall, they can be sited virtually any- where that five fundamental inputs (Fig-ure 8) are present or can be transported. Since some algae and cyanobacteria species have a high affinity for C02, siting algae energy systems near centralized C02 emitters is a very attrac-

tive option. Research has demonstrated that algal yields can be improved dramatically using enhanced concentrations of CO2.

Runaway warming leads to extinctionPfeiffer 2004 (Dale Allen, Geologist, Global Climate Change & Peak Oil, The Wilderness Publications, Online)

The possibility of runaway global warming is not as distant a threat as we may wish. It is a threat which worries some of the greatest minds living among us today. Stephen

Hawking, physicist, best selling author of A Brief History of Time, and claimant of the Cambridge University post once occupied by Sir Isaac Newton (the

Lucasian Chair of Mathematics), has been quoted as saying, "I am afraid the atmosphere might get hotter and hotter until it will be like Venus with boiling sulfuric acid ."1 The renowned physicist was

joined by other notables such as former President Jimmy Carter, former news anchor Walter Cronkite, and former astronaut and Senator John Glenn in drafting a letter

to urge President Bush to develop a plan to reduce US emissions of greenhouse gases.2 Former British Environmental Minister Michael Meacher is also worried about the survival of the human race due to global warming.

Scenario 2 is Oil Dependence-

Algae biofuels solve fuel demand- further breakthroughs are necessary for successful cultivation to solve dependencyEnderle 2013 (Timo Enderle, Biotech Consultancy and a Life Science Marketing Agency.)(“Sea Water Could Hold Key to Fuel Demands,” Algae Observer, University of Aberdeen, 2/5/13, http://www.algaeobserver.com/sea-water-key-to-fuel-demands//PL)

The answer to society’s fuel demands could literally be all around us according to Aberdeen scientists – in fact it makes up two thirds of the planet’s surface. An international research team led by

the University of Aberdeen is hoping to make biofuels out of microscopic algae found in the world’s oceans

and seas. Currently biofuels are created from crops and land-based vegetation –

something project coordinator Dr. Oliver Ebenhoeh, from the University of Aberdeen’s Institute of Complex Systems and

Mathematical Biology, says is not sustainable. He said: “We need to find efficient ways of

supplying our energy demand in a way that doesn’t compete for valuable resources like arable land or fresh water. “We can’t just put corn in your car’s gas tank because it’s being used to feed millions

already – it won’t be sustainable. This is one of the key motivations to look into marine microalgae. “Cultivating algae using water that can’t be used for irrigation, like salt water or brackish water, makes sense because it’s so vast – it’s all around us and there’s no competition to use the land to grow other things.” The AccliPhot project is due to run for four years and is backed by €4million of EU funding and involves 12 partners from across the continent. Today First Minister Alex Salmond praised the initiative. He said: “Scotland is leading the way in the energy sector, with our world class oil and gas industry now allied to a vibrant renewables sector that is harnessing the power of our boundless wind and water resources to bring jobs and investment to our country and ensure we can power our nation on a sustainable basis. “The AccliPhot project could herald another exciting development in Scotland’s energy story with the team at the University of Aberdeen using cutting-edge techniques to support the development of a sustainable biofuel from microscopic algae. “In many ways, these researchers are ideally placed to undertake this work, being based in a city that has a magnificent heritage in the offshore industry. I would like to extend my best wishes to the team for this exciting project and I look forward to hearing the results.” The team will try to understand more fully how plants and

microalgae respond to changes in light and other conditions and use that information to make new products. Whilst the main focus is on biofuels the study could also yield breakthroughs in antibiotics, nutritional supplements or even produce chemical compounds used in the cosmetics industry. Dr Ebenhoeh added: “We’re hoping to understand the principles that guide these changes to environments and then see if this can be scaled up to industry scale. If that is successful then the applications are enormous because then you can

really look into targeted pharmaceuticals or precursors for the chemical industry.” Micro algae eat nothing but carbon dioxide, light and some minerals. Cells of microalgae typically measure between a few to several

hundred micrometers across and can be grown in vast numbers in giant 10,000 litre water tanks called photo-bioreactors. So

if they can be successfully cultivated to make biofuels they could contribute hugely to the

planet’s energy consumption

Biofuel development stops exposure to security threats- reducing dependency is necessaryBosselman 11 (Fred P. Bosselman, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.)(“Green Diesel: Finding a Place for Algae Oil,” Scholarly Commons at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, 1/1/11, http://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=fac_schol//PL)

C. Potential Additional Stimuli to Algae Oil Development Investors in algae research and development have long-term expecta- tions. Few people are predicting that algae will be a significant source of motor fuel in the next few years. A 2009 Accenture study opines that commercialization of fuel from algae is not expected for another

tenyears. However, investors are also aware that any number of things could happen within a shorter time frame that would speed up the timetable. For example, the remarkable volatility of oil prices in the first decade of the twenty-first century is fresh in everyone's mind.51 The price of diesel fuel and gasoline goes up and down with the price of crude oil.

Because crude oil's price per barrel has ranged from near $14 a barrel to around $140 per barrel, oil companies investing in algae see their investments as a hedge against future price increases. The military's interest in alternate fuels is stimulated not only by

price but by availability.52 Both the Air Force and Navy have never been com- fortable relying on

fossil fuels that come from countries whose relations with the United States have at times

been strained. They see the develop- ment of biofuels as one way to counter a serious

security threat in case of major international conflicts. 53 Research and development breakthroughs could

focus attention on a narrower range of potentially low-cost options. As Accenture pointed out in its 2009 report, if one or more low-cost options prove to be viable, the in- dustry will be likely to consolidate more rapidly and reach quicker agree- ment on common standards and methods.54

Dependence causes US-Sino SLOC conflict- escalates to warGlaser 11 (Charles, Professor of Political Science and International Relations Elliot School of International Affairs The George Washington University , Reframing Energy Security: How Oil Dependence Influences U.S. National Security, http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CF8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdepts.washington.edu%2Fpolsadvc%2FBlog%2520Links%2FGlaser_-_EnergySecurity-AUGUST-2011.docx&ei=Wf0qUPXYGIrc9ASht4GYDQ&usg=AFQjCNHTus7nNaD7cou-poSU7c3LGSu7tg&sig2=Xt_iWePfWtNRvDmeYR1Hlw&cad=rja, August 2011, PC)

Energy dependence might be most dangerous if it brings the United States into conflict with another major power. A key path along which this could occur is an energy-driven security dilemma between China and the United States. As noted above, U.S. oil supplies are not vulnerable to interruption by China, but China’s are vulnerable to the U.S. navy. Consequently, China faces this type of security dilemma, which has the potential to generate a variety of peacetime and crisis dangers. China began importing oil in

the early 1990s and its imports have grown significantly since then. Chinese oil consumption doubled from 1995-2005 and is expected to double again by 2020. During this period Chinese

domestic production is expected to remain flat; the amount of oil that it imports will grow rapidly, making up somewhere between 60 and 80 percent of Chinese demand. The vast majority of this imported oil—more than 85%

—will cross the Indian Ocean and pass through the Strait of Malacca. The problem that China faces is that its sea lanes of communication for transporting this oil are dominated by the U.S. navy. Chinese experts are well aware of the potential implications of this vulnerability . The

following statement by a Chinese scholar succinctly captures the situation: China cannot have control over development goals without corresponding control over the resources to fuel the

economy. The simple fact is that China does not possess that control. More than half of U.S. oil

imports are shipped via the sea lanes . The crucial difference is that China is almost helpless to

protect its overseas oil import routes. This is an Achilles heel to contemporary China, as it has forced China to entrust its fate (stable markets and access to resources) to others. Therefore, it is imperative that China, as a nation, pay attention to its maritime security and the means to defend its interests through sea

power (a critical capability in which China currently lags behind). In fact, the key danger facing China is likely not during peacetime, but instead during a severe crisis or war. Another Chinese scholar observes, “In the scenario of war across the Taiwan Straits, there is no guarantee that the United States would not enlist the assistance of its principal ally in northeast Asia (Japan) and other lesser allies (Singapore, the Philippines, and South Korea) to participate in another oil blockade against China.” Although China has been modernizing its navy for a couple of decades, it not only remains

quite far from having the ability to challenge U.S. control of the SLOCs from the Persian Gulf to the Strait of Malacca, but the

programs it could build in the medium term (10-15 years) would still leave this mission beyond reach. The near-term focus and top priorities for China’s naval modernization have been improving its ability to blockade Taiwan, and to deny and deter U.S. intervention in a Taiwan conflict. Beyond these top priorities, acquiring the ability to protect its SLOCs to the Persian Gulf is among the rationales for China’s naval modernization. However, apparently China’s leaders are still deciding whether to devote massive resources

to this mission. There is the possibility that China could start to challenge U.S. dominance in the Indian Ocean by developing a string of land-based capabilities from which it could both launch attacks and base naval forces; China has started to develop the type of base structure required for these capabilities. In addition, China could try to weaken U.S. naval dominance by deploying sea-based assets that threaten, but do not match, U.S. forces—for example, a large attack submarine force. In any event, well before China’s navy can reach effectively into the Indian Ocean, its efforts to protect Taiwan and its territorial claims in the East China and South China Seas will pose a threat to U.S. allies, including Japan. The extent of U.S. concern about China’s growing naval capabilities will depend on future Chinese decisions about how much to invest in protecting its SLOCs, as well as the overall state of U.S.-China relations. Assuming that the United States retains its commitment to security and stability in Northeast Asia, some increased U.S. insecurity seems likely

even if China does not make a large commitment to protecting its Indian Ocean SLOCs. On the other hand, a major Chinese investment in this mission will generate greater U.S. insecurity and likely larger U.S. reactions. The United States will question whether China’s investment reflects purely defensive motives or instead a desire to expand its influence throughout Asia and the Middle East, and will adjust it assessment of China’s motives accordingly. Arguably, this type of concern is already taking hold. In recent congressional testimony, the U.S. admiral who heads Pacific Command noted that “China’s interest in a peaceful and stable environment that will support the country’s development goals is difficult to reconcile with the evolving military capabilities that appear designed to challenge U.S. freedom of action in the region or exercise aggression or coercion of its neighbors, including U.S. treaty allies and partners.”

The result could be a negative political spiral in which military actions and reactions lead both the United States and China to conclude the other is more likely to be a greedy hostile state. Especially in combination with other possible strains in U.S.-China relations, a shift toward more negative assessments of each other’s motives could increase the probability of crisis and war. Most obviously, China will see the United States posing a larger threat to its goal of unification with Taiwan, which could further harden China’s policies, including its deployment of anti-access capabilities for preventing U.S. intervention in a China-Taiwan conflict. At the same time, the United States could become more determined to protect Taiwan, among other reasons because the importance of preserving its credibility for defending allies would grow with its assessment of China’s greed and because control of Taiwan would increase Chinese military capabilities, not only by extending its geographical reach, but also by freeing up its military forces for other missions. Consequently, although China’s oil dependence drives this security dilemma, the increased probability of conflict would be over issues not directly related to oil.

ExtinctionCheong 2k (Ching, Senior Writer at the Strait Times, “No one gains in a war over Taiwan,” June 25th, Lexis

THE high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China. If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests, then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable. Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war. Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it

considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation. In the region, this means South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and, to a lesser extent, Singapore. . If China were to retaliate, east Asia will be set on fire. And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order . With the US distracted, Russia may seek to

redefine Europe's political landscape. The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq. In south Asia, hostilities between India and Pakistan, each armed with its own nuclear arsenal, could enter a new and

dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war? According to General Matthew Ridgeway, commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War, the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat. In his book The Korean War, a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy, Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war, which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons. If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability, there is little hope of winning a war against China, 50 years later, short of using nuclear weapons . The US estimates that China possesses about 20

nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities. Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option. A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its "non first use" principle regarding nuclear weapons. Major-General Pan Zhangqiang, president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies, told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle, there were strong pressures from the military to drop it. He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention. Gen Ridgeway said that should

that come to pass, we would see the destruction of civilization .

1AC – Ecosystems Advantage

Contention ___ – Ecosystems

Ocean ecosystems on the brink- turning the tide in 5 years is keyMintPress News 6/26/14 (MintPress is an independent online journal, citing a report from The Global Ocean Commission initiative of The Pew Charitable Trusts, in partnership with Somerville College at the University of Oxford, “Report: World’s Oceans On Brink Of Collapse”, MintPress News 6/26/14, http://www.mintpressnews.com/report-worlds-oceans-brink-collapse/193075/)//BLOV

The world’s oceans face irreparable damage from climate change and overfishing, with a five-year window for intervention, an environmental panel said Tuesday. Neglecting the health of the oceans could have devastating effects on

the world’s food supply, clean air, and climate stability, among other factors. The Global Oceans Commission, an

environmental group formed by the Pew Charitable Trust, released a report (PDF) addressing the declining marine ecosystems around the world and outlining an eight-step “rescue package” to restore growth and prevent future damage to the seas. The 18-month study proposes increased governance of the oceans, including limiting oil and gas exploration, capping subsidies for commercial fishing, and creating marine protected areas (MPAs) to guard against pollution, particularly from plastics. “A healthy ocean is a key to our well-being,” said Jose Maria

Figueres, co-chair and former president of Costa Rica. “Unless we turn the tide on ocean decline within five years, the international community should consider turning the high seas into an off-limits regeneration zone until its condition is restored.” Government subsidies for high seas fishing total at least

$30 billion a year and are carried out by just ten countries, the report said. About 60 percent of such subsidies encourage unsustainable practices like the fuel-hungry “bottom trawling” of ocean floors —

funds that could be rerouted to conservation efforts or employment in coastal areas. Meanwhile, environmental nonprofits and governmental bodies are starting to recognize the insufficient protections offered by systems like the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which aims to regulate portions of the

ocean but cannot actually enforce any laws. The report includes a proposal to ratify the UNCLOS, increasing and extending its oversight to 64 percent of the ocean which is currently outside of national jurisdiction. “Without proper governance, a minority will continue to abuse the freedom of the high seas, plunder the riches that lie beneath the waves, take more than a fair share, and benefit at the expense of the rest of us, especially the poorest,” said Trevor Manuel, co-

chair of the commission and former minister of finance of South Africa. Failure to reverse the decline of the ocean’s ecosystems would be an “ unforgivable betrayal of current and future generations, ” said David Miliband, co-chair and former British foreign secretary.

Exploration of Marine Biodiversity motivates conservation efforts- the plan is necessary to an overall response to ecosystem declineGoulletquer 14 (Philippe, PhD in Biologic Oceanography at West Britain University and head of biodiversity issues at Ifremer’s Prospective & Scientific Strategy Division, Philippe Gros, Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at McGill University, his research focuses on mathematical modelling of harvested marine fish population dynamics and marine ecosystems, Gilles Boeuf, full professor at University Pierre et Marie Curie, President of the French Museum of Natural History, Jacques Weber, economist, biologist, and anthropologist, a member of the committee on Ecology, “Biodiversity in the Marine Environment,”Chapter 1: The Importance of Marine Biodiversity, page 1-2, Springer Books,

http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/862/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-94-017-8566-2_1.pdf?auth66=1405020052_78e0c78b7b3c72ce1f138fa24ef66e87&ext=.pdf)

The study of marine biodiversity is timely and fundamental for a number of reasons (CBD, Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, 2010). Marine biodiversity plays a key role through ecosystem services (provisioning and regulation, amongst others). They provide economic wealth and resources that range from active ingredients for phar- maceuticals and medicine to products from fisheries and aquaculture, as well as contributing to cultural well-being and supplying relevant "biological models" for both basic and applied research. The role and dynamics of biodiversity are central themes when addressing climate change, earth and universe sciences or sustainable use of natural resources. Thus the issues of application involve policy, regulations and ways to globally manage energy and food security.

We now have access to a breadth of diverse tools and sensitive indicators to ex- plore marine biodiversity, in realms which have been limited to terrestrial habitats until now, and have been difficult to apply. They range from molecular barcod- ing approaches that can explore entire communities, to the use of real time ma- rine sensors incorporating innovative stimulus and photo-responsive materials and Lab-on-a-

Chip (LOAC) technologies. In addition, satellite data and pctaFLOP (1015 FLoating-point Operations Per Second)

computing power to analyse extensive data sets are available. The marine environment is highly sensitive to various climatic and other en- vironmental perturbations, such as thermohaline or overturning circulation in the North Atlantic, changes in polar ice cover and

greater stratification in surface waters and their acidification; resulting in already observed changes in species* phenology and ranges of distribution. Today, the ability to robustly and quantitatively assess the implications of climate scenarios on marine ecosystems and their associated services, and appraise the scope, nature and projected effectiveness

of management actions in a changing context, is of prime importance. This has led to a

growing need to understand overall marine ecosystem responses, particularly to large- scale offshore developments. These include renewable energy structures (e.g. farms exploiting offshore wind and marine currents), ever- deeper drilling for oil and the associated changes in habitats, and growing demand for marine resources (living resources and mining), in a context of policy objectives aiming to implement holistic integrative approaches to marine management based on the principles of an ecosystem-based approach. The human population reached 7 billion individuals in 2011, and is forecast to reach 8 billion in 2024 (Palumbi et al. 2009; UNPD 2011) and 9.3 billion in 2050 (more

precisely, between 8.1 and 10.6 billion), along with population movements towards urban developed coastal areas and consequently, increased pressure on marine ecosystem services. It is currently estimated that 60% of the global popu- lation lives within 100 km of the coast, relying on marine habitats, resources and space for food, housing, food production, recreation and waste disposal. The majority of big mega-cities with more than 15 million inhabitants are and will continue to be located near coasts. Much of the remaining non-coastal population is concentrated along rivers and other waterways and generates indirect effects on marine biodiversity (Kay and

Alder 2005). Assessing the global footprint and impact on biodiversity that these changes will entail for the topology of human society is a major question. Synergies between hu- man drivers, the timescales and locations of thresholds, the trajectory and speed of biological adaptation to climate change, and the

resistance and resilience of marine biodiversity to anthropogenic disturbances are only partially understood. They are key priorities in the quest to maintain ecosystem services. Likewise, better under- standing and anticipation of the consequences that changes in biodiversity will have

on individuals and human societies, particularly in their ability to adapt to them , are urgently

needed. Drawing up methods to protect and sustainably utilise marine biodiversity

rep- resents a complex issue of collective choices to be made; requiring consideration of geographic (land-sea interfaces), political (conservation, exploitation) and eco- nomic (fisheries, tourism, intellectual property,

etc.) aspects. It is thus becoming increasingly important to clarify, quantify and communicate across social, aca- demic and industrial sectors, these stakes, values, priorities and conflicting de- mands (Fig. 1.1).

Further exploration of marine habitats is key to maximize bioremediation potentialDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Marine bacteria are found in a wide range of environmental conditions from sea floor

to fish stomachs and develop unique mechanism of resistance in adverse and diverse conditions.

Thus, it gives ample opportunity to employ as potential bioremediating agents . When a

bacterium utilizes the contaminant as its food source, its number increases rapidly in the contaminated environments and on subse- quent decontamination, the number decreases to produce harmless biomass. The process is cost-effective in compar- ison to the chemical

processes, and they can be carried out onsite. Utilization of marine bacteria in bioremediation is highly specific; hence, the chance of forming harmful by- products is less, which is the major advantage of utilizing these isolates. (End Paragraph) However, there are some disadvantages in the process of using marine bacteria. In case of mixed contaminants, finding a suitable consortium becomes difficult. In the same case, the process is time-consuming, which may take years to finish. Though there are less chances of forming by-products, in some cases, lethal by products may form (Bamforth and Singleton 2005). After the process is over, the bacterial bio- mass is degraded, and the serious problem of biofouling may occur. Another problem associated with the use of recombinant strains is the instability of the cloned genes in the con- taminated environment due to change of habitat (from saltwater to freshwater conditions) (Sanchez-Romero et al. 1998). These problems persist not only with the marine micro-

organisms but also with bacterial entity isolated from any environments. However, when the potential of the microorganisms is concerned in bioremediation, marine bacteria have been proved to be the valuable and efficient candidates. (End Paragraph) Conclusion and future prospects The major problems that the twenty-first century is facing include the environmental pollution. This has gained major attention in research communities. The global requirement for the solution to this problem includes various remediation aspects, but bioremediation is one step ahead of all these due to its many advantages over other modes of remediation protocols.

Marine bacteria can adapt quickly to the rapidly changing, noxious environments which may be potentially

utilized to solve the problem by remediating the toxic materials. Though many studies have been conducted and a large number of marine microbial entities have been discovered so

far, still the microbial diversity from different marine habitats is yet to be explored . Who

knows where some better potent strains are hiding inside? Hence, by combining the

molecular aspects with the metabolic approaches, the microbial diversity of the oceanic

environ- ment should be explored. The treatment of environmental pollution by

employing microorganisms is a promising technology; however, various genetic approaches to optimize enzyme production, metabolic pathways, and the growth

conditions will be highly useful to meet the purpose. Though marine microorganisms are better adapted to rapidly changing environmental conditions, little has been known regarding the mechanism of resistance to the

noxious environment. Hence, the research in this aspect will be helpful in understanding the genetic mechanism of this nature's wonder. Some modifications in their genetic system may provide useful, high-potential, and more efficient bacterial entity for enhanced bioremediation.

Three internal links to biodiversity

1st is heavy metals - Marine bacteria bioremediation solves Heavy metal pollutionDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Removal of heavy metals Heavy metal pollution is one of the most important environmental concerns due to various natural and anthropogenic activities. Though various physical and chemical methods have been proposed to remove such hazardous metals from the environment, they are of least success in terms of cost- effectiveness,

limitations, and generation of harmful sub- stances (Wuana and Okicimcn 2011). Marine

microorganisms solve these problems as they do not produce any by- products, and they are

highly efficient even at low metal concentrations (De et al. 2008). yibrio harveyi, a normal inhabitant of the

marine environment is reported to possess the potential for bioaccumulation of cadmium up to 23.3 mg Cd2+/g of dry cells (Abd-Elnaby et al. 2011). In line with that, Canstein et al. (2002) reported a consortium of marine bacteria to efficiently remove mercury in a bioreactor in disturbance-independent mechanism. A new combination of genetic systems in marine

bacteria for the potential deg- radation of phenol and heavy metals was also described (EI- Deeb 2009). Marine bacteria also possess the properties of chelation of heavy metals, thus removing them from the contaminated environment by the secretion of exopolysac- charides which have been evident from the reports of Enterohacter cloaceae, a marine bacterium. This bacterium have been reported to chelate up to 65 % of cadmium, 20 % copper, and 8 % cobalt at 100 mg/L of metal

concentration (Iyer et al. 2005). In line with that certain purple nonsulfur marine bacterial isolates, e.g.,

Rhodohium marinum and Rhodobacler sphaeroides have also been found to possess the potential of removing heavy metals like copper, zinc, cadmium, and lead from the contaminated environments either by biosorption or biotransformation (Panwichian et al. 2011). Thus, the marine bacteria have been designated for assessing marine pollution through tolerance (Das et al. 2007) and bioabsorption of heavy metals (Das et al. 2009). (End Paragraph)

Heavy metal pollutants causes loss of biodiversity- breaks down the predator prey relationship in fishBoyd 10 (Robert S, Professor in Department of Biological Sciences at Auburn University, “Heavy Metal Pollutants and Chemical Ecology: Exploring New Frontiers,” Journal of Chemical Ecology, June 28 2010, Accessed via Springer, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10886-009-9730-5/fulltext.html)

Perhaps the most active research area regarding info-disruption by heavy metals in aquatic communities deals with the effects of metals on predator/prey interactions .

The concern is that heavy metals can influence predator/prey interactions by degrading the ability of prey to respond to predators, ultimately resulting in decreased prey population sizes due to increased predator success (McPherson et al. 2004). Another reason for the interest in heavy

metals and behavior in aquatic communities is that heavy metals may have behavioral effects at concentrations much less than at which they have lethal effects (Scott and Sloman 2004), suggesting that regulatory pollution limits based upon standard toxicological studies may be too high to prevent damage to aquatic communities through these sublethal behavioral effects. This realization has led to calls for increased integration of

behavioral studies into ecotoxicological investigations (e.g., Clotfelter et al. 2004; Klaschka 2008). With regard to predator/prey relations, a number of investigations have shown decreased ability of fish exposed to heavy metals to respond to skin extracts, which can serve as an alarm signal for prey species (Smith 1992; Kats and Dill 1998). Heavy metal pollutants for which these effects have been shown include Cu (Carreau and Pyle 2005; Pyle and Mirza 2007), Cd (Honda et al. 2008; Kusch et al. 2008), and Hg (Smith and

Weiss 1997). Some studies have taken these investigations into the field to show that fish in metal-contaminated lakes respond differently from fish in uncontaminated lakes . For example, McPherson et al. (2004) showed that prey fish in a Ni/Zn contaminated lake did not respond to skin extract of

another prey species, whereas prey fish in an uncontaminated lake did. In other cases, fish from polluted and uncontaminated lakes have been brought into the laboratory for comparison of responses to skin extracts. Mirza et al. (2009) studied wild yellow perch (Perca flavescens) from a lake contaminated by a mixture of heavy metals (mainly Cu, Ni, and Zn), finding that the fish from the contaminated lake did not respond to a chemical alarm cue whereas those from an uncontaminated lake did. Although the studies referred to above have

focused upon ability of prey to detect and avoid predators, heavy metals may affect mechanisms other than escape behavior that are used by prey to avoid predation. For example, the bioluminescence ability of some marine organisms (or the presence of bioluminescent organisms as

symbionts in hosts) is thought to be an anti-predator behavior (Buskey and Swift 1983; Jones and

Nishiguchi 2004; Cronin 2005), and there is evidence that heavy metal pollution can affect bioluminescence ability. For example, Deheyn et al. (2000) collected individuals of an echinoderm, the brittle star Amphipholis squamata, along a heavy metal (Cd, Cu, Fe, Pb, Zn) gradient in a polluted bay in Spain. Those from the most polluted area had less intense and more slowly generated bioluminescence responses, and bioluminescence responses of individuals transferred from a less- to a more-polluted area became weaker and slower. The authors suggest that, since light production is a defense for some bioluminescent organisms, this defense would be less effective for this species in polluted areas. Bioluminescence of marine organisms also may play a role in mate attraction (Deheyn and Latz 2009) or attraction of prey (Cronin 2005), so that interference with bioluminescence by heavy metals may impact other organismal interactions.

While most studies show that info-disruption can result in lowered defensive ability and thus increased predation, info-disruption may act to enhance predator defense in some cases. I know of no case involving heavy metals in which prey defense against predation is enhanced by a metal pollutant, but Lürling (2006) reported that an organic pollutant (the surfactant FFD-6) affects a green alga (Scenedesmus obliquus) in a way that mimics effects of predator compounds that stimulate an anti-predator trait (formation of relatively large colonies of cells). Presumably, algal cells in the larger colonies formed in a polluted lake would be less susceptible to predation by zooplankton (Lass and Spaak 2003). Info-disruption also may benefit prey by negatively affecting predator search ability. For example, Smith and Weiss (1997) studied effects of Hg pollution on the behavior of mummichogs (Fundulus heteroclitus), a tidal creek fish that preys upon invertebrates but in turn is preyed upon by blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus). Fish from a polluted site attempted to capture prey less frequently than those from an unpolluted site, and the

polluted site fish also were more likely to be captured by blue crabs. Although the effects of Hg were not shown to be due to info-disruption (rather than other sublethal effects), these results suggest that the net result of info-disruption will depend on

the suite of species involved, their sensitivities to the pollutant, etc. Another way by which a heavy metal can affect an organism negatively is for the metal to prevent that organism from detecting and avoiding areas that contain toxic heavy metal concentrations. Hansen et al. (1999a) found that low levels of Cu can damage olfaction in Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and fish actively avoided Cu-contaminated water. However, if fish were exposed to sublethal Cu levels that damaged their olfactory abilities, they were unable to detect waters containing lethally high Cu concentrations, thus

suggesting that exposure to low levels of metal pollutants may result in mortality if fish are later exposed to greater concentrations. Although I have emphasized studies of fish behavior in the

previous sections, studies of invertebrates have shown heavy metal effects on their behavior as well. For example, Vuori (1994) concluded that sublethal concentrations of Cd changed behavior of caddisfly larvae. Larvae exposed to low (12 g/L) Cd were less aggressive in intraspecific encounters, and behavior of both μintruder and resident larvae that had been exposed to this low concentration of Cd differed from that of larvae not exposed to Cd. In a second example, Michels et al. (2000) showed that sublethal doses of Cd affected the phototactic behavior of the

crustacean Daphnia magna. A recent review of chemically-induced predator defenses in plankton summarized a number of cases of behavioral predator defenses present in this invertebrate group (Lass and Spaak 2003), illustrating the potential for heavy metals to impact these and thus

affect ecological relationships. To this point I have discussed how heavy metals may influence predator/prey interactions via info-disruption, by affecting the ability of prey to detect predators or vice versa. Heavy metals may influence predator/prey interactions in ways other than through their effects on behavior, such as through effects on physical defenses. Physical defense (involving a change in morphology) is common in plankton (Lass and Spaak 2003), and a number of studies have reported morphological reactions of plankton species to the presence of predator kairomones. For example, Daphnia produce neckteeth that reduce the rate of predation by Chaoborus midge larvae (Parejko 1991). Mirza and Pyle (2009) reported that low levels of Cu (10 g/L) μinterfered with ability of Daphnia to respond to the Chaoborus midge kairomone that induces neckteeth formation. Daphnia

exposed to Cu and kairomone had fewer and smaller neckteeth than those exposed to kairomone alone. These less well-defended offspring had lower survival when exposed to predators (Chaoborus midge larvae).

2nd is plastic pollutants - Marine Bacteria bioremediation solves plastic pollutantsDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Degradation of plastic Several broad classes of plastic used in marine environ- ments for fishing, packing, etc. which ultimately pollutes the environment include polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, polyethylene terephthalate, and polyvinyl chloride. However,

microorganisms can develop the mechanism to degrade the plastic to nontoxic forms. Recent

finding showed that Rhodococcus ruber degrades 8 % of dry weight of plastic in 30 days in

concentrated liquid culture in vitro (Andrady 2011). Similarly, bacterial isolates belonging to genera Shewanefla, Moritella, Psychrobacter, and Pseudomonas isolated from deep seas of Japan possess the potential of degrading £-caprolactone in an efficient manner (Sekiguchi et al. 2010). Some mangrove- associated bacterial species like Micrococcus, Moraxella, Pseudomonas, Slreplococcus, and Staphylococcus were also found to degrade 20 % of plastic in 1 month (Kathiresan 2003).

Plastic pollution causes marine environmental degradation- toxicity, threatens endangered species, and spreads invasive speciesBlumenfeld 12 ( Jared, Regional Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nuf said, “Petition for Preliminary Assessment of Northwest Hawaiian Islands and the Great Pacific Garbage Patch for Plastic Contamination under Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C 9601 et seq,” Center for Biological Diversity, December 11, http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_plastics/pdfs/NWHI_CERCLA_petition_dec_11.pdf)

The environmental problems arising from the indiscriminate disposal of plastics into the global oceans has long been documented in the scientific literature. Threats include accumulation of waste in natural habitats, wildlife entanglement and ingestion, the leaching of chemicals from plastic products, and the potential for plastics to transfer chemicals to wildlife and humans (Thompson et al. 2009; Gregory 2009). To fully understand the threats posed by plastics, it is helpful to understand what they are and where they come from. Plastics are synthetic organic polymers and are found in a variety of shapes to serve many functions. Plastic resin pellets, also called “nurdles,” are small granules, generally cylindrical or disk-shaped, with a diameter of a few millimeters (Mato et al. 2001). These plastic particles are industrial raw material transported to manufacturing sites where “user plastics” are made by re-melting and molding the resin pellets into final products (Mato et al. 2001). Nurdles are often found floating on coastal and ocean waters or embedded in the sand of beaches and are lost during loading and transportation, both on land and at sea, and during their handling at plastic factories (Ashton et al. 2010). Due to their buoyancy and durability, lost pellets may be transported considerable distances in the oceans before becoming temporarily or permanently stranded (Id.). “User plastics,” on the other hand, are materials found

in common commercial goods, such as plastic bags, bottle caps, fishing gear, and clothing (Barnes et al. 2009). User plastics are inexpensive, lightweight, strong, durable, and corrosion resistant, making

them ideal candidates for a wide range of products. Those same characteristics are also the reasons why plastics pose a serious hazard to the environment (Derraik et al. 2002). As the EPA has noted, “except for the small amount that's been incinerated . . . every bit of plastic ever made still exists” (Casey 2007). Waves and chemical processes eventually break user plastics into smaller pieces, but this serves only to make clean up extremely difficult and ensure they can be consumed by the smallest marine life at the base of the food web (Gordon 2006). (End Page 6) Plastics have been entering the marine environment in quantities roughly paralleling their level of production over the last half century. The production of plastics has increased substantially over the last 60 years from around 1.5 million tons in 1950 to over 230 million tons in 2009 (Hirai et al. 2011). Between 2000 and 2010, there was more plastic produced than in the entire previous century (Thompson et al. 2009). However, in the last two decades of the 20th century, the deposition rate accelerated past the rate of production; from 1960 to 2000, the world production of plastic resins increased 25-fold, while recovery of the

material remained below 5% (Moore 2006). Plastics are now one of the most common and persistent pollutants in ocean waters and beaches worldwide (Id.). Between 1970 and 2003, plastics became the fastest growing segment of the US municipal waste stream, increasing nine-fold, and marine litter is now 60–80% plastic, and as much as 90–95% in some areas (Derraik et al. 2002; Barnes et al. 2009). Eighty percent of marine debris originates from land-based sources including urban runoff, combined sewer overflows, beach visitors, inadequate waste disposal and management, industrial activities, construction, and illegal dumping (Gordon 2006). Of these, urban runoff is the primary contributor of marine debris, which is transported by storm drains, wind, or direct dumping (Gordon 2006).

While undoubtedly an eyesore, plastic debris today is having significant harmful effects on marine

biota. Plastics turn up in bird nests, are worn by hermit crabs instead of shells, and

are present in sea turtle, whale and albatross stomachs (Mrosovsky et al. 2009).Two hundred and sixty seven species of marine organisms worldwide are known to have been affected by plastic debris, a number that will increase as smaller organisms are assessed (Laist 1997). Plastic pollution affects 86% of all sea turtle species, 44% of all seabird species, and 43% of all marine mammal species (Derraik et al. 2002). The impacted taxa include turtles, penguins, albatrosses, petrels and shearwaters, shorebirds, baleen whales, toothed whales and dolphins, seals, sea lions and fur seals, manatees and dugong, sea

otters, fish, and crustaceans (Id.). The number of animals that succumb each year to derelict fishing nets and other plastic debris which they ingest and become entangled in cannot be reliably

known, but estimates are in the millions (Moore 2008). Over 100 species of seabirds are known to mistake

floating plastics for food, or become entangled in plastic debris (Laist 1997). A study of birds collected off the coast of North Carolina found that 55% of species had plastic particles in their guts (Derraik et al. 2002). Likewise, over ninety percent of northern fulmars found washed up along the Pacific Northwest had plastic in their bellies, with an average of 36.8 pieces of

plastic per bird (Avery-Gomm et al. 2012). Ingestion of plastic has many detrimental consequences,

including gastrointestinal blockages, ulceration, internal perforation and death (Teuten et al. 2009). Even those animals whose innards remain intact may suffer from false sensations of satiation, or experience reduced reproductive output (Auman et al. 1997). Threatened and endangered sea turtles mistake plastic bags, fishing line and other items for jellyfish and other prey items. One study examined the digestive tracts of endangered green sea turtle carcasses and found ingested debris in 24 of 43 animals (Bjorndal et al. 1994). Ingested debris included plastic, monofilament line, fishhooks, (End Page 7) rubber, aluminum foil, and tar (Bjorndal, K., Bolten, A., & Lagueux 1994). Studies on loggerheads, leatherbacks, and green turtles have all documented high levels of plastic debris in the intestinal tracts of these animals (Mrosovsky et al. 2009; Bugoni et al. 2001; Schuyler et al. 2012), and loggerhead and green turtles actively target and consume plastics (Lutz 1990). In addition to ingestion, entanglement has been reported for all species of sea turtles that inhabit U.S.

waters. Entangling debris may cause drowning, lacerations, infection, strangulation, increased energy expenditure, reduced feeding, and starvation (Derraik et al. 2002).

Entanglement and ingestions may be highly underestimated; most victims are likely to go undiscovered, as they either sink or are eaten by predators (Id.). Other marine animals are either drawn to or accidentally entangled in netting, rope and monofilament lines that are discarded from commercial fishing activities. For those species entangled in discarded fishing equipment, many are unable to escape and are doomed to drawn or die from injury, starvation, and general debilitation (Gregory 2009). Entanglement has been documented in 58% of all pinniped populations (Boland & Donohue 2003). Packing loops, for example, attract the interest of curious seals and sea lions, and once looped around the animal’s head they create “lethal necklaces’ which result in strangulation (Boland & Donohue 2003). Even the largest creatures are not immune; recent sightings include endangered humpback whales travelling northward with a mass of

tangled rose in tow (Gregory 2009). Aside from entanglement and ingestion, plastic pollution raises toxicity

concerns. Marine plastics contain two types of chemicals; those added during the manufacturing process and those

adsorbed from surrounding seawater (Ogata et al. 2009). Chemical additives and plasticizers, such as phthalates and bisphenol

A, have adverse impacts in terms of reproductive and developmental toxicity, and as animals ingest plastic particles these toxins bioaccumulate to higher trophic levels (Teuten et al. 2009). Plastic litter

also acts as a transport vector of marine pollutants. For example, persistent organic pollutants (POPs) that are distributed globally via atmospheric and ocean circulations adsorb onto plastic particles from ambient seawater due to the hydrophobic nature of plastic surfaces (Heskett et al. 2012).

POPs are considered among the most persistent anthropogenic organic compounds introduced into the environment (Rios et al. 2007). Some of these are highly toxic and have

a wide range of chronic effects, including endocrine disruption, mutagenicy and

carcinogenicity (Id.). Studies of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs, a type of POP) in nurdles found that the

concentration of these toxic chemicals was 100,000 to 1,000,000 times that of surrounding waters, suggesting that

plastics serve as a potential source for toxic chemicals in the marine environment (Mato et al. 2001). PCBs are mixtures of synthetic organic chemicals that are highly toxic and dangerous to human health: in a

1996 report, prepared at the direction of Congress, the EPA found that PCBs cause cancer in animals and are probable carcinogens for humans. Other known significant ecological and human health effects of PCBs include neurotoxicity,

reproductive and developmental toxicity, immune system suppression, liver damage, skin irritation, and endocrine disruption (EPA 1996). PCBs are non-flammable and chemically stable, so after they are released into the (End Page 8) environment they persist for many years (Id.). The manufacture of PCBs has been banned in the United States due to their highly toxic effects and persistence in the environment once released. See 15 U.S.C. § 2605(e). PCBs are also a persistent organic pollutant targeted for

global phase-out and action under the Stockholm Convention . The persistency of both POPs and chemical

additives are of great concern due to their high bioaccumulative nature and adverse effects

on wildlife and humans (Teuten et al. 2009). Both plasticizers and organic contaminants that

concentrate on plastics at levels far superior to the surrounding marine environment have been show to affect both development and reproduction in a wide range of marine organisms (Rios et al. 2010). Some of the chemicals have estrogenic activity and may disrupt the endocrine system when ingested (Hirai et al. 2011). Mollusks and crustaceans appear to be particularly sensitive to these compounds (Oehlmann et al. 2009). Being an important

food item for many species, plastics ingested by invertebrates have greater potential to bioaccumulate and transfer toxic substances up the food web (Teuten et al. 2009). Higher trophic level organisms such as fish-eating birds, omnivorous birds, and marine mammals are exposed to toxic compounds via their consumption of prey. Even baleen whales, amongst the largest animals on earth, are exposed to micro-litter ingestion as a result of their filter-feeding activity; a recent study of stranded fin whales documented phthalates traced to microplastic pollution (Fossi et al. 2012). Generally, the typical PCB levels increase by a factor of 10- to 100-fold when ascending major consumption levels in a food chain (Gobas et al. 1995). Specifically, Wasserman et al. (1979) reported that for marine food webs, zooplankton range from < 0.003 µg/g to 1 µg/g, whereas top consumers, such as seals and fish, had ranges of PCB from 0.03 to 212 µg/g. Therefore, if PCBs and other contaminants are abundant in lower trophic levels, they will be amplified through the food chain to levels that can adversely affect higher trophic level organisms. As a result, people who ingest fish may be exposed to dangerous levels of PCBs (EPA 2006). Due to the toxin’s accumulation properties, many scientists believe

there is no safe level of exposure to PCBs (EPA). Finally, because plastics do not readily degrade and are long-

lived they provide an effective invasive species dispersal mechanism (Barnes et al. 2009; Gregory

2009). Pelagic plastic items are commonly colonized by a diversity of encrusting and fouling epibionts, including barnacles,

tube worms, foraminifera, coralline algae, and bivalve mollusks (Gregory 2009). The environmental importance of this process is widely recognized, as pelagic plastic may be vectors in

the dispersal of aggressive and invasive marine organisms that could endanger

endemic biota (Barnes et al. 2009). Plastics are already implicated in the northward range extension of some barnacles

(Moore 2008) The scientific community has conclusively demonstrated that plastic pollution has resulted in an

ocean emergency. Our seas are a giant refuse bin for all manner of plastic items, and marine

species are forced to endure a constant barrage of plastic bags, monofilament, and toxic

chemicals. But the pollution is not equally distributed; the Northwest Hawaiian Islands are particularly hard hit by

marine debris and must be evaluated for their potential to be included on the National Priorities List.

3rd is PAH’S - Marine bacteria bioremediation solves Polyaromatic hydrocarbons pollutionDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art

%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Degradation of PAHs and other recalcitrants Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are ubiquitous in nature and are of great environmental concern due to their persis- tence, toxicity, mutagenicity, and carcinogenicity in nature (Cemiglia 1992). However, many marine bacteria have been reported to have the potential for bioremediation of the same in the process of metabolism to produce CO2 and metabolic intermediates, thus gaining energy and carbon for cell growth. The bioremediation potential in these marine bac- teria can be increased, which has been successfully experi- mented by Latha and Lalithakumari (2001) when they

transferred a catabolic plasmid of Pseudomonas putida con- taining hydrocarbon degradation genotype in a marine bac- terium which increases its efficiency. Some novel marine bacterial species like Cycloclasticus spirillensus, Lutibaelerium anuhederansy and Neplunomonas naphtho- vorans have also been utilized in enhanced biodegradation of PAHs in marine environment (Hedlund et al. 1999; Chung and King 2001). Similarly, Achromobacter denitrifi- cansy Bacillus cereus, Corynebacterium renaie, Cyciotrophicus sp., Moraxella sp., Mycobacterium sp., Burkholderia cepacia, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas paucimohilis, P puliday Brevundimonas vesicularis, Comamonas teslosleroni, Rhodoeoceus sp., Slreptomyces sp., and Vibrio sp. have been isolated from marine sources and were

capable of degrading naphthalene, one of the greatest entity of PAHs by the process of miner- alization (Samanta et al. 2002). However, bacteria belonging to genus Cycloclasticus play the major role in biodegradation of hydrocarbons (Teramoto et al. 2009). Bacterial iso- lates like Sphingomonas paucimobilis EPA505 have been found to utilize fluoranthene as their sole carbon source (Kanaly and Harayama 2000). (End Paragraph)

Polyaromatic hydrocarbon pollution prevents reproduction and development in marine organismsMolnar and Koshure 9 (Michelle, environmental economist, and Nicole, marine biologist with masters degree in fisheries and planning, “Cleaning Up Our Ocean: A report on pollution from shipping-related sources in the Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area (Pncima) on the British Columbia Coast,” http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2009/pollution_report_web.pdf)

Most PAHs enter the marine environment from airborne emissions, waterborne effluents, and surface runoff (Eickhoff et al., 2003). They can be introduced to the environment through many sources, both anthropogenic (e.g., oil spills and chronic oiling, smelter emissions, and coal-based energy) and natural (e.g.,

forest fires and volcanic activity) (Cordell et al., 1996; Stevenson, 2003). In the marine environment, PAHs are associated with particulate materials (e.g., soot) and are not only resistant to degradation and desorption, but are also found to be bioavailable to marine organisms such as crabs (Eickhoff et al., 2003). PAHs of low

molecular weight have been shown to be acutely and chronically toxic and can impair survival and growth by causing abnormal reproduction and development (Cordell et al.,

1996). In contrast, high molecular weight PAHs can be carcinogenic and mutagenic to higher-level

organisms such as fish, seabirds, and sea otters (Haggarty et al., 2003). For example, exposure to high molecular weight PAHs has resulted in carcinogenesis and immunotoxicity in flat fish from polluted harbours in Puget Sound, Washington (Myers et al., 1999). Some bottom-dwelling fish caught in PAH-contaminated waters have also been found to display tumours in their mouths, livers, and on their skin (Eickhoff et al., 2003). Bioaccumulation of PAHs by invertebrates such as mollusks can

occur since they are not capable of excreting or metabolizing them. Adding to concerns related to the impacts of this carcinogen on sediment-dwelling organisms is the potential for public health risks related to the ingestion of some marine organisms (e.g., crab). Ports, marinas, and harbours have been found to exhibit high levels of pollutants such as PAHs and PCPs, especially those with fuel docks

(Haggarty et al., 2003). Kay (1989, in Haggarty et al., 2003) found PAH levels up to 260 times higher at harbour sites than at non-harbour sites. Increased levels of dioxins and furans from nearby industrial activities or wood-treatment facilities may also be detected in harbour locations, including Campbell River, Prince Rupert, and Kitimat.

Best recent scientific evidence proves biodiversity loss causes extinction- it’s irreversible, rapidly increasing, and unprecedentedBarnosky et al 14 (Anthony D, professor of Integrative Biology at UC Berkeley, recipient of multiple National Science Foundation awards for his work studying ecosystems and biodiversity, James H Brown, Distinguished Professor of Biology at the University of New Mexico, recipient of Robert H. MacArthur Award for Ecological Society of America, Gretchen C Daily, senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Rodolfo Dirzo, a Bing Professor in Environmental Science at Stanford, Anne H Ehrlich, associate director of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford, Paul R. Ehrlich, Stanford professor in Environmental Science, Jussi T. Eronen, Phd in environmental sciences, Mikael Fortelius, professor of Evolutionary Palaeontology at University of Helsinki, Elizabeth A Hadly, Paul S. and Billie Achilles Chair of Environmental Biology, Estella B Leopold, professor emeritus of Biology at the University of Washington, Harold A Mooney, Paul S. Achilles Professor in Environmental Biology at Stanford, John P Meyers, chief scientist of Environmental Health Sciences, Rosamond L Naylor, professor of environmental earth system science at Stanford, Stephen Palumbi, PhD in marine ecology from University of Washington, Nils Chr Stenseth, leader of centre for ecological and evolutionary synthesis and chief scientist at Norwegian Institute of Marine Research, Marvalee H. Wake, professor of biology at UC Berkeley, “Introducing the Scientific Consensus on Maintaining Humanity’s Life Support Systems in the 21st Century: Information for Policy Makers,” The Anthropocene Review, March 18th, 2014, accessed via Sage Publication, http://anr.sagepub.com/content/1/1/78)

Biological extinctions cannot be reversed and therefore are a particularly destructive kind of

global change. Even the most conservative analyses indicate that human-caused extinction of

other species is now proceeding at rates that are 30-80 times faster than the extinction

rate that prevailed before people were abundant: on Earth (Barnosky ct al., 2011), and other estimates

arc much higher (Pimm and Raven, 2000; Pimm ct al., 1995,2006; World Resources Institute (WRI), 2005). If the current rate of extinction is not slowed for species and their constituent populations, then

within as lifclc as three centuries the world would see the loss of 75% of vertebrate species

(mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish), as well as loss of many species of other kinds of animals and plants

(Barnosky ct al., 2011). Earth has not seen that magnitude of extinction since an asteroid hit the planet 65

million years ago, killing the dinosaurs and many other species. Only five times in the 540 million years since

complex life forms dominated Earth have mass extinctions occurred at the scale of what

current extinction rates would produce; those mass extinctions killed an estimated 75—96% of the species

known to be living at the time. Currently, sound scientific criteria document that at least 23,000 species are threatened with extinction, including 22% of mammal species, 14% of birds, 29% of evaluated reptiles, as many as 43% of amphibians, 29% of evaluated fish, 26% of evaluated invertebrate animals, and 23% of plants (Collcn ct al., 2012; GB03, 2010; International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2010). Populations — groups of interacting individuals that arc the building blocks of

species — arc dying off at an even faster rate than species. The extinction of local populations, in fact,

represents the strongest pulse of contemporary biological extinction. For example, since 1970 some 30% of all vertebrate populations have died out (McRae et al., 2012), and most species

have experienced loss of connectivity between populations because of human-caused habitat fragmentation. Healthy species are composed of many, interconnected populations; rapid population loss, and loss of connectivity between populations, arc thus early warning signs of

eventual species extinction. Causes for concern The world's plants, animals, fungi, and

microbes arc the working parts of Earth's life support systems. Losing them imposes direct

economic losses , lessens the effectiveness of nature to serve our needs ("ecosystem services', sec below), and

carries significant emotional and moral costs. • Economic losses. At least 40% of the world's

economy and 80% of the needs of the poor are derived from biological resources (Dow and Downing, 2007). In the USA, for example, commercial fisheries, some of which rely on species in which the majority of populations have already gone extinct, provide approximately one million jobs and USS32 billion in income annually (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2013b). Internationally, ecotourism, driven largely by the opportunity to view currently threatened species such as elephants, lions, and cheetahs, supplies 14% of Kenya's GDP (in 2013) (United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 2013) and 13% of Tanzania's (in 2001), and in the Galapagos Islands, ecotourism contributed 68% of the 78% growth in GDP that took place from 1999 to 2005 (Taylor ct al., 2008). Local economics in the USA also rely on revenues generated by ecotourism linked to wildlife resources: for example, in the year 2010 visitors to Yellowstone National Park, which attracts a substantial number of tourists lured by the prospect of seeing wolves and grizzly bears, generated USS334 million and created more than 4800 jobs for the surrounding communities (Stynes, 2011). In 2009, visitors to Yoscmitc National Park created 4597 jobs in the area, and generated USS408 million in

sales revenues, USSI30 million in labor income, and USS226 million in value added (Cook, 2011). • Loss of basic services in many communities. Around the world, indigenous and rural com- munities depend on the populations of more than 25,000 species for food, medicine, and shelter (Dirzo and Raven, 2003).

Studies go aff- marine ecoystems are only resilient if there is strong biodiversityGoulletquer 14 (Philippe, PhD in Biologic Oceanography at West Britain University and head of biodiversity issues at Ifremer’s Prospective & Scientific Strategy Division, Philippe Gros, Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at McGill University, his research focuses on mathematical modelling of harvested marine fish population dynamics and marine ecosystems, Gilles Boeuf, full professor at University Pierre et Marie Curie, President of the French Museum of Natural History, Jacques Weber, economist, biologist, and anthropologist, a member of the committee on Ecology, “Biodiversity in the Marine Environment,”Chapter 1: The Importance of Marine Biodiversity, page 7, Springer Books, http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/862/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-94-017-8566-2_1.pdf?auth66=1405020052_78e0c78b7b3c72ce1f138fa24ef66e87&ext=.pdf)

There is growing and compelling evidence that the sustainability of ecosystem services

depends upon diversified biotopes (reviewed by Palumbi et al. 2008). For example, using several independent

indicators of ecosystem functioning and ef- ficiency, a global-scale case study from 116 deep-sea sites showed that ecosystem functioning was exponentially related to deep-sea biodiversity (Danovaro et al. 2008, Fig. 1.3). This relationship, and those shown in related studies (Palumbi et al.

2008), indicate that greater biodiversity can support higher rates of ecosystem processes like organic matter production and biogeochemical cycling (Fig. 1.2). A loss of

biodiversity, at least in these cases, is likely therefore to bring about a marked decline in

ecosystem function. Several studies have now demonstrated that high biodiversity— including

with- in-species diversity—also supports either higher productivity, greater resilience or both, for example, for sessile invertebrates, large seaweeds and marine plants (Stachowicz et al. 2002; Allison 2004, Hughes and Stachowicz 2004; Reusch et al. 2005), grazing crustaceans (Byrnes et al. 2006), salmon populations (Hilborn et al. 2003), and

oceanic cyanobacteria (Coleman et al. 2006). Moreover, some processes which are key to ecosystem resilience, such as recovery, resistance and reversibil- ity, are enhanced by natural levels of biodiversity (Palumbi 2001; Palumbi et al. 2008, 2009). These studies indicate a strong positive relationship between biodiver- sity and ecosystem processes and services

(Fig. 1.4). The ecological mechanisms that generate such correlations are well established (Bruno et al. 2003) and include complementary resource use, positive interactions among species and the increased likelihood of keystone species being present when species richness is high. For instance, complementarity, i.e. functionally similar species which occupy differ- ent niches and play slightly different roles, is certainly widespread in the marine environment. Facilitation, whereby one species may improve the environmental conditions of another, is common in marine systems,

(e.g. coral reefs, wetlands and kelp forests) (Knowlton 1999). Species richness provides a repository of

biological options that help promote ecosystem response to perturbation and reduces the

risk of major failure.

1AC – Science Leadership Advantage

Contention ___ – Science Leadership

We’re falling behind in innovation and tech- renewed investment in research and educational enthusiasm are Akst, 14 (Jef Akst—Senior Editor at The Scientist Magazine; “Slipping from the Top?: Experts and the American public worry that the country is at risk of losing its global leadership position in scientific research”; The Scientist Magazine; http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/31845/title/Slipping-from-the-Top-/; March 14th, 14) JM

The United States is still a global leader in science and technology research, but the country must act now to avoid

losing its edge . This was the overall consensus among two panels of experts, which included National Institutes of Health

Director Francis Collins, assembled today (March 14) by Research!America, a nonprofit public education and advocacy alliance.¶ “I do think America continues to be a place where boldness and innovation and creativity are encouraged ,” Collins said. But there are “warning signs,” he added, such as the facts that the country is now ranked 6th in the world with regard to the proportion of its gross domestic product that is invested in research and development

and that young high school students score relatively poorly in math and science compared to teens in

other nations. If efforts are not taken to reverse these trends, Collins warned, “we might see America lose their commitment to supporting research at the level that it will take to maintain that competitiveness.”¶ Research! America today released the results of a national poll that suggests the American voting public is skeptical about the country’s future in scientific research. More than half (58 percent) of those polled do not believe the United States will be a world leader in science and technology in 2020, and 85 percent said they were worried about decreases in federal funding for research. “The findings reveal deep concerns among likely voters about our ability to maintain world-class status,” said Mary Woolley, president and CEO of Research!

America—something that the vast majority (91 percent) of those polled said was important, especially as other countries are increasingly investmenting in science.¶ One key point of attack highlighted by the panelists will have to be science, math, and engineering education . Flat budgets and shrinking job

markets are causing many young children to shy away from the sciences for their careers, at the peril of future generations of researchers. The poll also revealed that nearly 70 percent of Americans

believe science and math education will impact the country’s future.¶ Science advocates must also convince policymakers that science is worth the investment even in the face of economic hardship . “Every dollar we give out in grants…returns $2.21 in goods and services,” Collins said. “There aren’t too many other things that have that kind of return on investment.” One example of a successful investment in science, Collins noted, is the human genome project, which cost taxpayers nearly $4 billion, but generated some $796 billion in economic output—a return of 141 to 1, according to study released last May by Battelle, an independent science and technology

research and development organization. “If there was a genome project that came along today, would we have that same bold attitude, or would we [say], ‘We can’t afford it right now’?” Collins

wondered. “I am deeply concerned about whether we in America will capitalize on that opportunity, or whether we will give in to other pressures and lose our chance.”

Now’s the moment- deep sea exploration is necessary to advance scientific leadershipMclain 2012 Craig McClain is the Assistant Director of Science for the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, created to facilitate research to address fundamental questions in evolutionary science. He has conducted deep-sea research for 11 years and published over 40 papers in the area. Deepsea.com, “We Need an Ocean NASA Now Pt.1, Pt2, Pt3”http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-1/

The Ghost of Ocean Science Present Our nation faces a pivotal moment in exploration of the oceans. The most remote regions

of the deep oceans should be more accessible now than ever due to engineering and technological advances. What limits our exploration of the oceans is not imagination or technology but funding. We as

a society started to make a choice: to deprioritize ocean exploration and science. Budget Cuts Green Road Sign image courtesy of Shutterstock In general, science in the U.S. is poorly funded; while the total number of dollars spent here is large, we only rank 6th in world in the proportion of gross domestic product invested into research. The outlook for

ocean science is even bleaker. In many cases, funding of marine science and exploration, especially for the deep sea, are at historical lows. In others, funding remains stagnant, despite rising costs of

equipment and personnel. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a committee comprised of leading ocean scientists, policy makers, and former U.S. secretaries and

congressmen, gave the grade of D- to funding of ocean science in the U.S. Recently the Obama Administration proposed to

cut the National Undersea Research Program (NURP) within NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a move supported by the Senate. In NOAA’s own words, “NOAA determined that NURP was a lower-priority function within its portfolio of research activities.” Yet, NURP is one of the main suppliers of funding and equipment for ocean exploration, including both submersibles at the Hawaiian Underwater Research Laboratory and the underwater habitat Aquarius. This cut has come despite an overall request for a 3.1% increase in funding for NOAA. Cutting NURP saves a meager $4,000,000 or 1/10 of NOAA’s budget and 1,675 times less than we spend on the Afghan war in just one month. One of the main reasons NOAA argues for cutting funding of NURP is “that other avenues of

Federal funding for such activities might be pursued.” However, “other avenues” are fading as well. Some funding for ocean exploration is still available through NOAA’s Ocean

Exploration Program. However, the Office of Ocean Exploration, the division that contains NURP, took the second biggest cut of all programs (-16.5%) and is down 33% since 2009. Likewise, U.S. Naval

funding for basic research has also diminished. The other main source of funding for deep-sea science in the U.S. is the National Science

Foundation which primarily supports biological research through the Biological Oceanography Program. Funding for science within this program remains stagnant, funding larger but fewer grants. This trend most likely reflects the ever increasing costs of personnel, equipment, and consumables which only larger projects can support. Indeed,

compared to rising fuel costs, a necessity for oceanographic vessels, NSF funds do not stretch as far as even a decade ago. Shrinking funds and high fuel costs have also taken their toll on The University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) which operates the U.S. public research fleet. Over the last decade, only 80% of available ship days were supported through funding. Over the last two years the gap has increasingly widened, and over the last ten years operations costs increased steadily at 5% annually. With an estimated shortfall of $12 million, the only solution is to reduce the U.S. research fleet size. Currently this is expected to be a total of 6 vessels that are near retirement, but there is no plan of replacing these lost ships. The situation in the U.S. contrasts greatly with other

countries. The budget for the Japanese Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) continues to increase,

although much less so in recent years. The 2007 operating budget for the smaller JAMSTEC was $527 million, over $100 million dollars more than the 2013 proposed NOAA budget. Likewise, China is increasing funding to ocean science over the next five years and has recently succeeded in building a new deep-sea research and

exploration submersible, the Jiaolong. The only deep submersible still operating in the US is the DSV Alvin, originally built in 1968. The Ghost of Ocean Science Past 85% of Americans express concerns

about stagnant research funding and 77% feel we are losing our edge in science . So how did we get here? Part of the answer lies in

how ocean science and exploration fit into the US federal science funding scene. Ocean science is funded by

numerous agencies, with few having ocean science and exploration as a clear directive. Contrast to this to how the US traditionally dealt with exploration of space. NASA was recognised early on as the vehicle by which the US would establish and maintain international space supremacy, but the oceans have always had to compete with other missions. What lies below? The sun and the sea image courtesy of Shutterstock. We faced a weak economy and in tough economic times we rightly looked for areas to adjust our budgets. Budget cuts lead to tough either/or situations: do we fund A or B? Pragmatically we choose what appeared to be most practical and yield most benefit. Often this meant we prioritized applied science because it was perceived to benefit our lives sooner and more directly and, quite frankly, was easier to justify politically the expenditures involved. In addition to historical issues of infrastructure and current economic woes, we lacked an understanding of the importance of basic research and ocean exploration to science, society, and often to applied research. As example, NOAA shifted funding away from NURP and basic science and exploration but greatly increased funding to research on applied climate change research. Increased funding for climate change research is a necessity as we face this very real and immediate threat to our environment and economy. Yet, did this choice, and others like it, need to come at the reduction of our country’s capability to conduct basic ocean exploration and science and which climate change work relies upon? Just a few short decades ago, the U.S. was a pioneer of deep water exploration. We are the country that in 1960 funded and sent two men to the deepest part of the world’s ocean in the Trieste. Five years later, we developed, built, and pioneered a new class of submersible capable of reaching some of the most remote parts of the oceans to nimbly explore and conduct deep-water science. Our country’s continued commitment to the DSV Alvin is a bright spot in our history and has served as model for other countries’ submersible programs. The Alvin allowed us to be the first to discover hydrothermal vents and methane seeps, explore the Mid-Atlantic ridge, and countless other scientific firsts. Our rich history with space exploration is dotted with firsts and it revolutionized our views of the world and universe around us; so has our rich history of ocean exploration. But where NASA produced a steady stream of occupied space research vehicles, Alvin remains the only deep-capable research submersible in the service in the United States. We are at a time for renewed commitment to ocean exploration and science. As stated by the Joint Ocean Commission, “Ocean programs continue to be chronically underfunded, highlighting the need for a dedicated ocean investment fund.” Captain Don Walsh, one of three men to visit the deepest part of the ocean, recently stated it best: “What we need is an Ocean

NASA.” We borrow and modify John F. Kennedy’s famous speech at Rice University on the decision to go to the moon: In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world’s leading ocean-faring nation…We set sail because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used

for the progress of all people. There is much to be gained from creating NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA). Every dollar we commit to science returns $2.21 in goods and services. Meeting the scientific, technological, logistical, and administrative demands of scientific exploration creates jobs and requires substantial personnel beyond just scientists and engineers. The materials purchased for this cause support even further employment. As with NASA, meeting these scientific and engineering challenges will disseminate ideas, knowledge, applications, and technology to rest of

society. This knowledge gained from basic research will form the backbone for applied research and economic gain later. And much like NASA

has, OSEA will inspire the next generation of scientist and engineers , instilling in the young a renewed appreciation for the

oceans of which we are all stewards: our oceans. It will provide a positive focus for society in a time where hope is often lacking and faith in science is low. OSEA will be the positive message that renews interest in our oceans and their conservation.

2 specific internal links1. Ocean exploration directly leads to new technological capabilities and

helps the economyCousteau 2012 Philippe Cousteau, a correspondent for CNN,CNN: “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap,”

http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/

Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean . Filmmaker James Cameron sets out to explore the

deepest part of the ocean You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau " introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since,

we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy . Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to

OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge . In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods . In addition to new discoveries, we also have the opportunity to course correct when it comes to stewardship of our oceans . Research and exploration can go hand in glove

with resource management and conservation. Over the last several decades, as the United States has been exploring space, we’ve exploited and polluted our oceans at an alarming rate without dedicating the needed time or resources to truly understand the critical role they play in the future of the planet. It is not trite to say that the oceans are the life support system of this planet, providing us with up to 70 percent of our oxygen, as well as a primary source of protein for billions of people, not to mention the regulation of our climate. Despite this life-giving role, the world has fished, mined and trafficked the ocean's resources to a point where we are actually seeing dramatic changes that is seriously impacting today's generations. And that impact will continue as the world's population approaches 7 billion people, adding strain to the

world’s resources unlike any humanity has ever had to face before. In the long term, destroying our ocean resources is bad business with devastating consequences for the global economy , and the health and sustainability of all creatures - including humans . Marine spatial planning, marine sanctuaries, species conservation, sustainable fishing strategies, and more must be a part of any ocean exploration and conservation

program to provide hope of restoring health to our oceans. While there is still much to learn and discover through space exploration, we also need to pay attention to our unexplored world here on

earth. Our next big leap into the unknown can be every bit as exciting and bold as our pioneering work in space. It possesses the same "wow" factor: alien worlds, dazzling technological feats and the mystery of

the unknown. The United States has the scientific muscle, the diplomatic know-how and the entrepreneurial spirit to lead the world in exploring and protecting our ocean frontier . Now we need the public demand and political will and bravery to take the plunge in order to ensure that the oceans can continue to provide life to future generations . Today is a big step in that direction and hopefully it is just the beginning.

2. The plan’s k2 STEM majors and the future of US Science Shubel, McNutt, McNutt 2013, Jerry Schubel, President and CEO, Aquarium of the Pacific; Marcia McNutt, Editor in Chief, Science Magazine; Robert Detrick, Assistant Administrator for NOAA Research, NOOA“The Report of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,” July 19th – 21st, http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdfIn the current competitive global economy, the United States faces a distinct disadvantage.

Only 16 percent of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in STEM careers. And among those who do pursue college degrees in STEM fields, only half choose to work in a STEM-related career . The benefits of STEM

education are clear. By 2018, the U.S. anticipates more than 1.2 million job openings in STEM-related occupations, including fields as diverse as science, medicine, software development, and engineering. STEM workers, on

average, earn 26 percent more than their non-STEM counterparts, and experience lower unemployment rates than those in other fields. In addition, healthy STEM industries are critical to maintaining a quality of life in the United States . A national program of ocean and Great Lakes exploration provides myriad ways to capture public imagination and curiosity to support sustained involvement and more intense exposure not only to STEM topics, but also the humanities and arts. New less expensive tools, such as small ROVs, remote sensing stations, and underwater cameras, enable everyone to participate in ocean and freshwater exploration as citizen scientists. These types of public engagements around exploration, such as through the NOAA kiosks stationed in Coastal Ecosystem Learning Centers, provide a glimpse into the true nature of science : not merely

as a bundle of textbook facts, but a dynamic enterprise of investigation that is constantly changing as our understanding evolves. The effectiveness of STEM-focused programs are evident; studies have shown not only that young people enjoy inquiry-based STEM activities in and out of school settings, but also that sustained involvement and more intense exposure to STEM topics increase youth interest and confidence in their scientific abilities . By engaging the

public with ocean and Great Lakes observation, we provide people of all ages with opportunities to explore their natural aquatic environments, and to fall in love with the magic and mystery of scientific exploration.

And only the NOAA’s can solve that Ferrington and Ferrer, 10 (John W. Farrington— Editor, Committee for the Review of the NOAA Education Program—former Associate Director for Education and Dean of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Michael A. Feder—Editor, Committee for the Review of the NOAA Education Program; “NOAA's Education Program: Review and Critique”; National Academies Press, Washington D.C.; pg. 17-18; 2010)

The national need to educate the public about the ocean, coastal resources, atmosphere, and climate and to support workforce development in related fields is well established. The federal government role in addressing these needs as part of the national effort is also widely accepted.¶ NOAA’s role in education has been recognized for approximately 30 years, as evidenced by the mandates to engage in education activities given to

individual operating branches and programs, and more recently by the America COMPETES Act. The agency has a broad mandate to engage in and coordinate education and stewardship initiatives related to ocean, Great

Lakes, climate, and atmospheric science, as well as other fields related to its mission. NOAA must fulfill these responsibilities in the context of a national effort, implemented at state and local levels. The agency must use formal and informal learning environments to improve learning and under- standing of

science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and to advance environmental education.¶ Although NOAA is unique among federal agencies in its focus on stewardship and on ocean, coastal, Great Lakes, atmospheric, and climate

science, its mission overlaps with and complements the missions of other federal agencies. Many federal agencies,

institutions of higher education, and private and nonprofit organizations have additional resources that help improve the nation’s understanding and interest in the relevant sciences and that help develop strategies to care for the environment. However, coordination of these activities in a cohesive way that leverages the unique assets of each federal agency, as well as the formidable infrastructure and capabilities outside the federal

government, has proven to be a challenge.¶ NOAA can contribute to national education efforts through a variety of programs and assets, including modern and groundbreaking technologies and

discoveries; research equipment; data sets; technical staff, including sci- entists, engineers,

and researchers; stewardship and management of natural resources; specialized education

expertise; partnerships; and connections to local, regional, national, and international stakeholders and

natural resource managers. In addition, NOAA is one of the key federal agencies engaged in management and stewardship of the coasts and oceans. These natural environments can support important educational opportunities and provide the agency with connections to the surrounding communities and organizations concerned with environmental

issues.¶ NOAA’s role in education is shaped by the distributed nature of its education efforts across the five line offices and the Office of Education, the small number of agency staff involved in

education, and its small education budget. Because of their diverse missions, the line offices (some of which have individual education mandates) and the Office of Education can act independently and sometimes even in competition with each other. The majority of education programs are usually implemented by an individual or a small team at a particular location. And NOAA’s education budget is relatively small in comparison to that of other federal agencies engaged in STEM education, such as the U.S. Department of Education, the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Department of Energy.¶ Limited education resources and the inherently global nature of NOAA’s mission make strategic partnerships necessary in order for the agency to accomplish its ambitious goals. Clear education goals,

planning, and stra- tegic use of resources are critical aspects for effective partnerships.¶ NOAA can play a supporting role in state and local education systems and a leadership role in federal STEM education

endeavors specific to oceanic, coastal, Great Lakes, atmospheric, and climate sciences. Such efforts will be most productive if they align with local education needs and national education standards, because education activities and products that do not consider the needs of the potential audiences are less likely to be successful.

Ocean exploration is key to advancing modern technology and energy developmentLevin et. al., 2012 (Lisa A. Levin, Director of Center for Marine Biodiversity & Conservation (CMBC) and Distinguished Professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ardron, Erik Cordes, Dimitri Deheyn, Ron Etter, Lauren Mullineaux, Tracey Sutton, Cindy Van Dover, Amy Baco-Taylor, James Barry, Douglas Bartlett, Robert S. Carney, Amanda W.J. Demopoulos, Charles Fisher, Chris German, Kristina M. Gjerde, Anthony J. Koslow, Craig McClain, Carlos Neira, Laurie Raymundo, Greg Rouse, Lily Simonson, Craig R. Smith, Karen Stocks, Andrew Thurber, Michael Vecchione, Les Watling, Julia Whitty, Patricio Bernal, Angelo F. Bernardino, Yannick Beaudoin, Bronwen Currie, Elva Escobar, Andrew J. Gooday, Jason Hall-Spencer, Dan Laffoley, Pedro Martinez, Javier Sellanes, Paul Snelgrove, Kerry Sink, Andrew K. Sweetman; CMBC, University of California San Diego; “CMBC Comments on National Ocean Policy Implementation”; http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Search/?cx=015024451743439807884%3Ai-iebkz1azu&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=National+Ocean+Policy+Implementation+Plan; March 27th, 2012)

The deep sea holds many untapped resources – including living resources,

pharmaceuticals, energy and many minerals needed for modern technology (precious metals,

rare earth elements, phosphorites). Expanded use of these resources should be explored responsibly, with development and conservation practice progressing hand in hand. As with coastal management, an ecosystem-based approach will be required, combined with systematic

marine spatial planning. Therefore, we urge the National Ocean task force to better integrate deep-sea issues into the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (NOPIP). The comments below outline in detail several ways that the deep-sea can better considered in the context of the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (NOP-IP). To summarize, they fall into the following five categories: 1. Explicitly recognize the deep-sea in the wording of the NOP-IP. This is particularly important when considering climate change and other research

frontiers. 2. Commit to mapping the deep-sea: Including habitat mapping and biological sampling, so as to be allow scientists to

develop a biogeographic classification relevant to future spatial planning. 3. Commit to reversing the decline in US deep-sea research capabilities. While the US drastically cuts funding to our premier research institutions

such as the National Undersea Research Centers, other countries such as China and Japan are expanding

their commercial and scientific deep-sea research programs. Simply put, the US is losing its

competitive advantage . 4. Include deep-sea experts in regional planning (except for the Great Lakes), recognizing the

interconnected nature of the ocean in planning processes. 5. Include the deep-sea in education and communication efforts related to the NOP-IP. Expanded comments The following remarks focus on the implementation and application of the National Ocean Policy in US deep waters (below 200 m). The comments are generated by a diverse group of deep-sea scientists, engineers and policy experts from academic and non-governmental institutions across the USA who believe there should be greater recognition in the implementation plan of the significance and stewardship needs of the US deep ocean. Because many deep-water issues are global in reach and many living resources do not recognize national boundaries, we have included additional support for these statements in the form of international signatures. The deep ocean within the US EEZ represents a vast expanse of ocean that remains relatively understudied, but is an important economic and scientific frontier and provides significant climate regulation services. With expanding oil and gas extraction activities, 2 deep-water fishing, debris deposition, and climate change affecting deep-water habitats in the US EEZ, there is growing pressure from direct and indirect stressors. There are also pollutant impacts; mercury and halogenated hydrocarbons occur at high levels in long-lived deep-sea organisms at high trophic levels. Considerable dumping has taken place in US deep waters (radioactive waste, sewage). There are overfished deep-water fisheries (e.g., pelagic armorhead and Pacific ocean perch) and trawling impacts. We write in the belief that the National Ocean Policy implementation plan must specifically address

deep-ocean management and sustainability. Our remarks are structured around the national priority objectives.

U.S. science diplomacy capabilities are rapidly declining- plan is k2 reverse this trendTurekian 2010 [Vaugh. Director, Center for Science Diplomacy, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Keynote Address at USC Center for on Public Diplomacy Conference, 2010

Dr. Vaughan Turekian began his keynote speech at the opening dinner of Science Diplomacy and the Prevention of Conflict with the proposition that a new era of science diplomacy is emerging, one that brings together a number of relevant actors, including the public diplomacy community, scientists, NGOs, universities, foundations, and governments. In recent years we have seen the waning effectiveness of hard, soft, and smart power, and the time is ripe for an emphasis on science diplomacy. Turekian pointed out that the world appears to be becoming multipolar, with coalitions forming around specific interests and issues. Nearly every major issue, whether global or national in scale, features science and technology as either the underlying cause or ultimate cure. In setting the context for the conference, Turekian noted that the United States is currently, and for the

foreseeable future will be, the world’s major scientific center. Not only does the United States employ the most scientists in major research areas, it also spends the most money, produces the most publications, and is home to many of the world’s top ranked research universities. However, the United States’ lead is decreasing as other countries begin to see the potential for science to boost economic growth and improve standards of living. Turekian went on to explain his view of science diplomacy. Since science and diplomacy are two terms that may not always mesh coherently, he found it useful to delineate the terms in three ways. First, “science in diplomacy” explains how science can help identify and address many of the global and foreign policy issues we face today, as can be seen in the case of climate change. Second, “diplomacy for science” occurs when the science community requires access to the resources of other nations and CPD.indd 11 10/7/2010 10:20:21 AM12 Opening Night and Keynote Address must turn to the diplomatic community for assistance. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) serves as a prime example. Lastly, there exists “science for diplomacy,” commonly known as science diplomacy, which Turekian defined as: the application of international science cooperation, motivated by the desire to establish or enhance relationships between societies. Turekian addressed the concept of access in science. Scientists desire access to tangible items such as counterparts, ideas, samples, funding, equipment, and machinery, which may only be obtainable through foreign cooperation. While the science community may desire such tangible resources, the foreign policy community is primarily interested in influence. Influence may include the ability to affect how countries make decisions, how they develop, and how foreign publics view the home country. Science diplomacy is the nexus of access and influence. Turekian noted a number of important outcomes of science diplomacy. These include building infrastructure for the relationships between countries and allowing scientists in lesser-developed countries without significant access to remain involved and engaged. Turekian’s most important proposition, referenced subsequently by several other panelists, was that science diplomacy could serve as the “pilot light” of international relationships, a light that would keep burning after all other avenues were extinguished. To highlight historical precedent for the success of science diplomacy, Turekian addressed the post-war scientific relationship between the United States and Japan, the Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement with China of 1979, and the classic case of U.S. cooperation with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. As an example of the insights that science diplomacy can provide, he quoted John Negroponte’s June 1987 statement Vaughan Turekian CPD.indd 12 10/7/2010 10:20:21 AMOpening Night and Keynote Address 13 to the Subcommittee on International Scientific Cooperation of the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology: We cannot forget that we are dealing with a closed society, and that these exchanges often give us the only access to significant circles in that society, with whom we would otherwise have little or no contact. It would be shortsighted of us not to recognize that it is in our national interest to seek and expand science cooperation with the Soviet Union. Science diplomacy, therefore, has the potential to influence national audiences in ways that traditional public diplomacy cannot. Citing a 2004 Zogby poll on Arab impressions of America, Turekian pointed out that while overall public opinion of the United States remained very low, favorable attitudes towards American science and technology were upwards of 10 times higher.

Try or Die- extinction is inevitable without science diplomacySackett 2010 (Former Chief Scientist for Australia, former Program Director at the NSF, PhD in theoretical physics, the Director of the Australian National University (ANU) Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics and Mount Stromlo and Siding Spring Observatories (2002 – 07) [August 10, 2010, Penny Sackett, “Science diplomacy: Collaboration for solutions,” published in the Forum for Australian-European Science and Technology cooperation magazine)

Good afternoon and thank you for inviting me to speak today. It’s a pleasure to take a moment, in your company, to think about where Australia’s science and technology future is headed. Beyond this, to think about how that future can contribute to global security and prosperity. As members of the Australian-Israel Chamber of Commerce, you are already well versed in understanding the value of international links for the economy. Today though, I would like to talk about the value of globalized science- not only for the economy, but for all foreign policy. And I speak of this from a unique position. As Chief Scientist for Australia, I am an independent advisor for the government and an advocate for science here in Australia. I also have a responsibility to advocate for Australian science internationally – one of the many hats I wear is as science diplomat. At first glance, scientists and diplomats are not obvious bedfellows. While science is a quest for truth, Sir Henry Wotton, the 17th century English diplomat, famously pegged an ambassador as “an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.” Regardless, science diplomacy is gaining tract world wide. It is a term that captures the various roles science plays in foreign policy, with a particular emphasis on the ability of science to build partnerships between countries – partnerships that can be sustained regardless of the political winds. President Obama has made a concerted effort to improve foreign relations by using science diplomacy, appointing three ‘Science Envoys’ and making the famous ‘call to partnership’ with the Muslim community in 2009, announcing the establishment of three cooperative science centres. Likewise, the UK Foreign Secretary recently appointed for the first time, a scientific advisor to the Foreign Office, and just last week called for a much stronger role for science in foreign policy, stating “the scientific world is fast becoming interdisciplinary, but the biggest interdisciplinary leap needed is to connect the worlds of science and politics.” In international relations, science diplomacy makes a lot of sense. For centuries, science and its flow of ideas have traveled across the globe, uniting humanity in the

search for knowledge and the application of newly discovered facts, to create technologies, businesses and to form the basis of education. Now, our planet is facing several global challenges: to its atmosphere, to its resources, to its inhabitants. Wicked problems such as climate change, over-population, disease, and food, water , energy and cyber security require worldwide collaboration to find sustainable solutions. It is science that provides our understanding of these issues, and it is science that will underpin our solutions. But as the climate change ‘debate’ demonstrates, these are no longer solely scientific and technical matters. Solutions must be viable in the larger context of the global economy, global unrest and global inequality. In short, the solutions need to be based not only on sound science, but on sound politics as well. It stands to reason, then, that scientific expertise should be a fundamental part of diplomatic efforts. As single nations can neither solve them alone nor develop solutions to every problem, scientific cooperation becomes an increasing necessity. So how does Australia stack up on scientific collaboration? In Australia, we are in a unique position. Our geographical isolation and small world fraction has had two effects: on one hand it has forced us to be self reliant and develop our capacities at home. On the other, it has pushed us towards strong research collaborations in areas where we don’t have resources or capacity. In astronomy, for example, Australia, participates in the Gemini Project along with the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Chile, Brazil and Argentina. The collaboration gives Australian researchers access to optical and infra-red telescopes in Chile and Hawaii, and spares any one country the costs of having to build and maintain a facility on its own. Similarly, in marine geoscience, Australia is a partner in the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program, a partnership led by the United States, the European Union and Japan. Participation in the program gives Australian scientists direct access to seafloor drilling technology that is worth about US$1 billion and has annual running costs of about US$200 million. But even on smaller projects where collaboration isn’t built through facility necessitation, between 2002 and 2010, the number of internationally co-authored publications in Australia more than tripled. Now, just under half of all Australian scientific publications are co-authored with overseas collaborators. More than that, we have seen a shift in the way Australian scientists are engaging with the rest of the world. Historically, we have had strong ties with North America and Europe, and while that continues, there has been much faster growth with our Asian neighbors. In mathematics, engineering and chemistry for example, China is now our strongest partner in collaboration. As we enter the ‘Asian century’, and the Government continues to push Asian literacy in schools and industry, the question could very well be asked, out of science and policy, who is following whom? But there are countries with which Australia shares great similarities, and yet collaboration is weak. Israel is one such nation. In terms of arable land, climate and water supplies we are very similar, and on the global scientific stage there are even more similarities. In terms of the percentage of papers produced relative to percentage of world population, the figure is exactly the same – 9.4 for both Australia and Israel. On the global impact of our research, measured by citations, Australia and Israel share three of their top four fields: physics, plant & animal sciences and space sciences. On international collaboration, over 40% of both countries’ papers have international co-authors. And yet despite the similarities, Australia and Israel’s international collaboration together is remarkably small. Less than 4% of Israel’s international collaborations feature Australian co-authors, and only around 1% of Australia’s papers feature Israeli co-authors. And it’s not getting better. In 1995, Israel was our 14th highest collaborator but in 2010, they ranked 20th. While this Chamber might be working hard to build strong relations with Israeli business, we must also seek ways to engage more on scientific and innovative levels. If innovation drives business organization, then science, the innovation force, will have to be more closely integrated with business for the well being of both. Because, according to the OECD, whose analysis essentially echoes our own common sense, knowledge is the main source of economic growth and improvement in the quality of our lives. Nations which develop and manage effectively their knowledge assets perform better. And without collaboration, it is very hard to innovate. According to our Academy of Science, the last major Australian invention that did not involve some international input was the stump-jump plough… in 1876. Without a competitive strategy to engage with the international scientific community, ongoing innovation would be more than just a challenge. It can be hard attributing economic success directly to the outcomes of scientific research. As an example, an investigation of ocean forecasting of internal waves across Australia’s North West Shelf provides information for operators of natural gas drilling and production platforms worldwide. But how are its benefits, in terms of reduced operating down time and production efficiency gains within a multibillion-dollar industry, traced back to the original scientific collaborative work? It is a long financial bow to draw but it is real. And it is something that is recognised across the globe. The proportion of all papers worldwide with one or more international co-authors increased from about 25 per cent in 1996 to over 35 per cent by 2008. But science diplomacy goes beyond research collaborations. Another way to link foreign policy and science is through science and technological aid to developing countries. Australia’s overseas aid program – which doubled between 2005 and 2010, and is expected to double again by 2015 (although last week’s budget has extended the time period for the expansion) – aims to assist developing countries reduce poverty and achieve sustainable development, in line with Australia’s national interest. Globally there is a general consensus that giving aid is an issue of security as well as morality and fairness. It improves our regional security by helping partner governments improve law and order, recover from conflict and manage a range of transnational issues. However, there is also general consensus that at a global level at least, aid is not always working. Driven by science and technology, the world is changing at a rapid rate. The gap between rich and poor countries is widening and the problems facing the developing world continue. Science and technology must therefore, become rooted in the social fabric of developing countries. This sentiment was echoed recently in a Science and Development Network editorial which stated that: “the biggest single factor limiting developing countries’ potential for achieving sustainable economic growth – or even attaining the Millennium Development Goals – is their ability to access and apply the fruits of modern science and technology.” While the editorial acknowledged there are many obstacles – political and economic – to accessing science, it is nonetheless crucial that capacity building use science and technology be ‘at the heart of both international aid policies and broader diplomatic initiatives’. The Colombo Plan is one good example of Australia’s diplomatic aid efforts. Part of the plan involved the sponsorship of tertiary students from the Asia-Pacific region to study in Australia. Many of those students eventually returned to their own countries where they rose to high level positions within their own science and government

structures. The benefits of science diplomacy are three-fold. Firstly, strong international collaboration in science improves the capacities of our own scientists at home, giving them access to facilities they might not have otherwise had, and enabling them to build on ideas from the world stock of knowledge. Secondly, it gives our country opportunities to build relationships with nations, we might not otherwise have had, and to repair or improve our standing with those we may have tension with. Finally, in a political environment that faces the need to respond to global challenges like climate change and food security, successful science diplomacy can work to create solutions. No single nation is the sole cause or solution to these challenges. But through science collaboration, we can build bridges of trust and cooperation for the benefit of all. As Chief Scientist, I take my role as an ambassador for science seriously. I do not know whether Sir Wotton would consider me a good man, but perhaps that is ok. Because in my own diplomacy efforts, I do not have to lie to promote Australian science. We already perform strongly and bring much to the international table.

**Pharma Extensions**

Pharma Uniqueness

US Pharmaceutical spending is at an all time low – LaMattina 1/3/14 (John LaMattina is an expert in the pharma industry and a writer for Forbes. “Pharma R&D Cuts Hurting U.S. Competitive Standing” < http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2014/01/03/pharma-rd-cuts-hurting-u-s-competitive-standing/>)

A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) should send warning signals to all interested in the state of the biopharmaceutical R&D in the U.S. The article, “Asia’s Ascent – Global Trends in Biomedical R&D Expenditures”, analyzes global biomedical R&D spending for the period

between 2007 and 2012. While the article focuses on the relative rise in spending by Japan, China and India, the eye-opening data for me are the numbers from the U.S. The authors point out that the

U.S. share of this global spend has fallen from 51.2% in 2007 to 45.4% in 2012. Europe’s

investment was essentially unchanged and Asia’s increased from 18.1% to 23.8%. Further digging into the numbers revealed

the following. “The decline of $12.0 billion in the inflation-adjusted U.S. expenditures from 2007 to 2012 was therefore driven by a $12.9 billion reduction in industry’s investment in R&D. The U.S. share of global industry R&D expenditures decreased from 50.4% in 2007 to 42.3% in 2012.” The authors later say that “The decline is remarkable because the United States has provided a majority of the funding from biomedical R&D globally for the past two decades – a share that some previous analyses suggested was as high as 70 – 80%. Moreover, the decline was driven almost entirely by reduced investment by industry, not the public sector, between 2007 and 2012.” Much of the news from the pharmaceutical industry over the past five years has been about scaling back R&D. Companies like Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Merck have done just that, much to the delight of Wall Street analysts who have been urging

pharmaceutical companies to rethink reinvesting 17 – 20% of revenues into R&D and to scale this back to 10 – 14%. While such a decrease in spending can bring short-term returns with respect to higher financial returns, such policies have negative long-term consequences. Those companies that

aggressively cut their R&D budgets will ultimately experience shrinking pipelines. More importantly, for patients, these cuts will lessen the chances of coming up with new medicines for diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, etc. Ironically, this is coming at a time when new insights into the cause of disease are occurring on a daily basis. Yet, as part of these cuts, major companies are getting out of research in key areas like antibacterials, depression, schizophrenia and AIDS. While some of this work is being picked up by small biotechs and start-ups, this situation is far from ideal. Is there anything that can be done to reverse this trend? The NEJM authors suggest that: “Instead, even as it boosts NIH funding, the U.S. government might

also develop strategies to provide incentives to industry for investing in biomedical R&D.” That’s a nice suggestion, but given the current state of pharma’s reputation and the pressures on the U.S. healthcare budget, I find it hard to believe that R&D incentives for pharma will have much traction in Congress. Increased R&D spend will only occur if courageous CEOs decide to do so.

Ocean Key to Pharma

Ocean exploration is key to disease solving pharmaceuticals Haefner 03 (Haefner is the department head of the inflammatory diseases at Johnston and Johnston. “Drugs from the Deep: marine natural products as drug candiates” <http://www.researchgate.net/publication/10696056_Drugs_from_the_deep_marine_natur

al_products_as_drug_candidates/file/9c96052034555dd176.pdf>))

In recent years, marine natural product bioprospecting has yielded a considerable number of drug candidates. Most of these molecules are still in preclinical or early clinical development but some are already on the market, such as cytarabine, or are predicted to be approved soon, such as ET743 (Yondelism). Research into the ecology of marine natural products has shown that many of these compounds function as chemical weapons and have evolved into highly potent inhibitors of physiological processes in the prey, predators or competitors of the marine organisms that use them. Some of the natural products isolated from marine invertebrates have been shown to be, or are suspected to be, of microbial origin and this is now thought to be the case for the majority of such molecules. Marine microorganisms, whose immense genetic and biochemical diversity is only beginning to be appreciated, look likely to become a rich

source of novel chemical entities for the discovery of more effective drugs . More than

70% of our planet's surface is covered by oceans and life on Earth has its origin in the sea. Ln certain marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs or the deep-sea floor. Experts estimate that the biological diversity is higher than in tropical rainforests. Many marine organisms are soft bodied and have a sedentary life style necessitating chemical means of defense. Therefore, they have evolved the ability to synthesize toxic compounds or to obtain them from marine microorganisms. These compounds help them deter predators. Keep

competitors at bay or paralyze their prey. The overwhelming biological diversity of marine

microbes has so far only been explored to a very limited extent . This diversity is believed to

give rise to an equally high diversity of secondary metabolites synthesized by the marine microfauna and microflora Natural products released into the water are rapidly diluted and, therefore, need to be highly potent to have any effect. For this reason. and because of the immense biological diversity in the sea as a whole. it is increasingly recognized that a huge number of natural products and novel chemical entities exist in the oceans, with biological activities that may be useful in the quest for finding

drugs with greater efficancy and specificity for the treatment of many human disease |

l.2].

Brings new medical cures and advances DSCC 5/2/05 (Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, “Potential cancer cures from the deep sea threatened by high seas bottom trawling” <http://www.savethehighseas.org/news/view.cfm?ID=55>)

A report released by Marine Conservation Biology Institute (MCBI) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), suggests that deep sea life holds major promise

for the treatment of human illnesses (1 ). But scientists are increasingly concerned that

bottom trawling may be destroying medically beneficial species before they are even

discovered . “Scientific interest is increasingly turning to the potential medical uses of

organisms found in the deep sea, much of which lies in international waters ,” said Sara Maxwell,

conservation scientist at MCBI and principal author of the report. “These organisms have developed unique adaptations that enable them to survive the in cold, dark and highly pressurized

environment of the deep sea. Their novel biology offers a wealth of opportunities for

pharmaceutical and medical research .” 15,000 natural products have so far been discovered from marine microbes, algae, and invertebrates. (2) The report suggests that the most exciting potential uses lie in the medical realm (3). To date, most marketed marine products have come from shallow and often tropical marine

organisms, but compounds derived from both shallow and deep-sea marine species

could be used in treating Alzheimer’s disease, asthma, pain, and viral infections, among other

human ailments. Shallow water compounds have already produced pharmaceuticals being used in the treatment of

cancer, and deep sea organisms show incredible cancer-fighting promise . The majority of marine-

derived compounds are obtained from either micro-organisms or stationary bottom-dwelling organisms such as corals,

sponges, and tunicates. Unable to evade predators through movement, stationary organisms rely heavily on their chemical defense mechanisms to protect themselves – mechanisms that are proving interesting in the search for cancer treatments. Two compounds originally isolated from deep sea organisms are now in human clinical trials as anticancer compounds. Several others are in preclinical stages and show considerable promise. (4) Another compound, Topsentin, isolated from a deep-water sponge, which lives at depths of 990 to 1,980 feet (300 to 600

meters), shows promise for use as an anti-inflammatory agent to treat arthritis and skin irritations. It is also being investigated as a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease and to prevent colon cancer and is currently in preclinical evaluation. Deep sea sediment bacteria are also interesting to scientists searching for new antibiotics. 60 years of research

on soil-dwelling actinomycete bacteria resulted in the discovery of almost 70 percent of the world’s naturally occurring antibiotics. However, the rate of new discoveries has dropped dramatically and the search for new actinomycete strains and the antibiotics they produce, has been extended to new environments - including the oceans. To date interesting compounds have been isolated from marine actinomycetes and other novel microbes found at depths of up to 1,500 meters (495,000 feet). (5) More than 60 new chemical compounds have been isolated from marine actinomycetes over the last 10 years and ten new genera of

microbes have been discovered from which 2,500 new strains have been isolated. The deep sea is, therefore,

potentially a huge source of medically important compounds, a source that science has only

just begun to explore. But this potential underwater pharmacy is already being destroyed .

Just as the technology has evolved to enable scientists to slowly venture into one of the earth’s last frontiers, so the latest technology now enables the fishing industry to reach the previously unreachable. Advances in bottom trawling technology mean that it is now possible to fish the breathtaking deep sea landscapes of mountains, hills, ridges and troughs that very few of us will ever see. Equipped with more powerful engines, bigger nets, more precise mapping and advanced navigational and fish-finding electronics, deep sea bottom trawlers drag fishing gear across the ocean floor as much as two kilometres (1.2 miles) deep in search of a few

commercial fish and crustacean species. “One sweep of a bottom trawl can uproot and pulverize a thriving deep ocean ecosystem and the unique life it sustains”, said Lisa Speer of NRDC.

“ Fragile coral systems in particular stand no chance against these ruthlessly effective

underwater bulldozers. Once destroyed, slow-growing deep-sea species are either lost

forever or are unlikely to recover for decades or centuries”, Speer warned. Alarmed that species and

ecosystems are being destroyed by bottom trawling, before their potential can be tapped, in 2004 a group of 1,136 marine scientists from around the world signed a statement urging the United Nations to adopt a moratorium on high-seas bottom trawling. Now, moved by the failure of the international community to take such action, a number of these scientists, among them MCBI’s President Elliott Norse, are touring Europe in April 2005 in order to bring their concerns directly to decision

makers and underline their call for an immediate UN GA moratorium. The MCBI/NRDC report repeats the call

for an immediate moratorium until enforceable regulations to identify and protect sensitive

deep sea ecosystems are in place. “Because much of the deep sea lies beyond the zones

of national jurisdiction, it is up to the international community to act to protect and manage the deep sea,” concludes Maxwell. “All mankind should benefit from a potentially huge source of medically important compounds that science is only beginning to explore.”

Abundance of Marine Natural Products NRC 02 (National Research Council. Marine Biotechnology in the Twenty-First Century: Problems, Promise, and Products. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2002. < http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10340&page=4>)

The U.S. public is aware of the societal benefit of effective drug therapy to treat human diseases and expects that treatment will improve and become ever more accessible to the nation’s population. This expectation is predicated on a continued and determined effort by academic scientists, government researchers, and private industry to

discover new and improved drug therapies. Natural products have had a crucial role in

identifying novel chemical entities with useful drug properties. The marine environment,

with its enormous wealth of biological and chemical diversity represents a treasure trove of

useful materials awaiting discovery. Indeed, a number of clinically useful drugs,

investigational drug candidates, and pharmacological tools have already resulted from marine-product discovery programs. However, a number of key areas for future investigation are anticipated to increase the application and yield of useful marine bioproducts . The broad areas where advances could have substantial impact on drug discovery and development are (1)

accessing new sources of marine bioproducts, (2) meeting the supply needs of the drug discovery and development process, (3) improving paradigms for the screening and discovery of useful marine bioproducts, (4) expanding knowledge of the biological mechanisms of action of marine bioproducts and toxins, and (5) streamlining the regulatory process associated with

marine bioproduct development. The ocean is a rich source of biological and chemical diversity. It

covers more than 70% of the earth’s surface and contains more than 300,000 described

species of plants and animals . A relatively small number of marine plants, animals, and microbes have already yielded more

than 12,000 novel chemicals (Faulkner, 2001). Unexamined habitats must be explored to discover new species. Most of the environments explored for organisms with novel chemicals have been accessible by SCUBA (i.e., to 40 meters). Although some novel chemicals have been identified at high latitudes, such as the fjords of British Columbia and under the Antarctic ice, the primary focus of marine biodiversity

prospecting has been the tropics. Tropical seas are well-known to be areas of high biological diversity

and, therefore, logical sites of high chemical diversity . Much of the deep sea is yet to be

explored , and very little exploration has occurred at higher latitudes. With rare exceptions

(e.g., the analysis of deep-sea cores to identify unusual microbes), marine organisms from the deep-sea floor, mid-water habitats, and high-latitude marine environments and most of the sea surface itself have not been studied. The reason for this deficiency is primarily financial: oceanographic expeditions are expensive, and neither federal nor pharmaceutical-industry funding has been available to support oceanographic exploration and discovery of novel marine resources. The potential for discovery of novel bioproducts from yet-to-be discovered species of marine macroorganisms and microorganisms (including symbionts) is high (see Carter, p. 47 in this report; de Vries and Beart, 1995; Cragg and Newman, 2000; Mayer and Lehmann, 2001). To optimize identification of marine resources with medicinal potential, the best tools for discovery must be used at all stages of exploration: in new locations, for collection of

organisms never before sampled, and for the identification of chemicals with

pharmaceutical potentia l. Increased sophistication in the tools available to explore the deep

sea has expanded the habitats that can be sampled and has greatly improved the opportunities for discovery of new species and the chemical compounds that they produce. New and improved vehicles are being developed to take us farther and deeper in the ocean. These platforms need to be equipped with even more sophisticated and sensitive instruments to identify an organism as new, to assess its potential for novel chemical constituents, and if possible, to nondestructively remove a sample of the organism. Tools and sensors that have been developed for space exploration and

diagnostic medicine need to be applied to the discovery of new marine resources .

Perhaps the greatest untapped source of novel bioproducts is marine microorganisms .

Although new technologies are rapidly expanding our knowledge of the microbial world, research to date suggests that less than 1% of the total marine microbial species diversity can be cultured with commonly used methods (see Giovannoni, p. 65 in this report). That means chemicals produced by as many as 99 percent of the microorganisms in the

ocean have not yet been studied for potential commercial applications. These

organisms constitute an enormous untapped resource and opportunity for discovery of new

bioproducts with applications in medicine, industry, and agriculture. Developing creative

solutions for the identification, culture, and analysis of uncultured marine microorganisms is a critical need. With the enormous potential for discovery, development, and

marketing of novel marine bioproducts comes the obligation to develop methods for supplying these products without disrupting the ecosystem or depleting the resource. Supply is a major limitation in the development of marine. In general, the natural abundance of the source organisms will not support development based on wild harvest. Unless there is a feasible alternative to harvesting, promising bioproducts will remain undeveloped. Some options for sustainable use of marine resources are chemical synthesis, aquaculture of the source organism, cell culture of the macroorganism or microorganism source, and molecular cloning and biosynthesis in a surrogate organism. Each of these options has advantages and limitations; not all methods will be applicable to supply every marine

bioproduct, and most of the methods are still in development. Understanding the fundamental biochemical pathways by which bioproducts are synthesized is key to most of these techniques. Molecular approaches offer particularly promising alternatives not only to the supply of known natural products but also to the discovery of novel sources of molecular diversity. Manipulation of heterologously expressed secondary metabolite biosynthetic genes to produce novel compounds having potential pharmaceutical utility is at the forefront of current scientific achievements and has tremendous potential for creation of novel chemical entities. In approaches parallel to those used for terrestrial soils, efforts need to be made to clone useful secondary metabolite biosynthetic pathways from natural assemblages of marine microorganisms (e.g., “cloning of the ocean’s metagenome”). Use of these approaches to provide solutions to natural-product supply and resupply problems should be increased.

Deep ocean has most diverse chemical and drug potential in the worldDell’Amore 5/14/09 (Christine Dell'Amore is a writer and editor for National Geographic. “Marine Bioprospecting for Novel Drugs” < http://www.genengnews.com/gen-articles/marine-bioprospecting-for-novel-drugs/1958/>)

As leads for new drugs on land dry up, medicine hunters are plunging into the ocean in search of the next blockbuster pharmaceutical. Harvesting ocean organisms for medicinal purposes—called marine bioprospecting—has accelerated in recent years

as scientists seek new antibiotics and cancer treatments. "Bottom line , the marine microbial

environment is very rich, because it's never been exploited before, " said Kobi Sethna, president of the

small biotech company Nereus Pharmaceuticals, which specializes in marine microbes. Though the blue part of the planet was largely ignored during the drug rush of the past half century, it's a

natural place to look, experts say. Of the 36 known phyla—a taxonomic rank below kingdom— 17 occur

on land and 34 live in the ocean, making the seas "by far the highest biodiversity

environment on the planet ," said William Fenical, distinguished professor of oceanography and pharmaceutical

science at University of California, San Diego. " It would be difficult to overlook such a massive resource

for chemical diversity and drug discovery," Fenical said. Close to 25 drugs derived from

marine life—such as bacteria, sponges, and tunicates—are currently in clinical trials . In 1928, British bacteriologist Sir Andrew Fleming realized that a rare spore of fungus—Pencillium notatum—had floated

from another lab through the air and landed in his culture plate of bacteria, killing some of it. That early discovery of what would become the widespread antibiotic penicillin spurred an intensified effort to explore Earth's forests and wild places, which have proven to be repositories for some of today's major drug advances.Fifty percent of drugs made for humans are derived in some way from nature, Fenical said. But by the 1970s, scientists had realized that terrestrial microorganisms had been thoroughly

explored, prompting a few early "pioneers" to turn their gaze seaward, Fenical said. These pioneers were attracted by unique ocean organisms with special chemical properties not seen on land. For instance, the severe ocean environments of little to no light and extremely cold temperatures have given rise to unusual—and mostly unstudied—survival

strategies in ocean creatures, scientists say . Such survival strategies coincidentally fight

diseases in people as well . For instance, some marine organisms produce population-control compounds that, when

given to a person, work in a similar way: Instead of reducing the number of offspring, the compounds inhibit the growth of malignant tumors. So "rather than inventing the wheel," people can benefit from millions of years of evolution, Nereus's Sethna said. Though

opposition from conservationists has often dogged companies that scour rain forests for the next miracle drug, marine

bioprospecting shouldn't impact the ocean environment, experts say.

Resources used for pharmaceuticals and bioremediation – twice as high success rate than land resources Zewers 08 ( Kirsten Zewers is a former WIPO intern, currently studying law at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minnesota. April 2008, “Debated Heroes from the Deep Sea - Marine Genetic Resources” < http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2008/02/article_0008.html>)

Most of the organisms from which these new marine genetic resources derive are found near hydrothermal vents – or “black smokers” – on the deep sea bed. These areas are highly volatile, associated with tectonic and volcanic activity that constantly reform the sea floor. Extreme changes in temperature (up to 400° C), pressure and hydrothermal fluid create difficult environments for sustainable life. Yet many organisms have adapted to such demands by converting hydrothermal vent fluid into

useful chemical energy; a characteristic that makes marine genetic resources of particular

value, especially in combating human diseases . A number of marine genetic resources

already collected, examined, and cultured, show great promise for application in

pharmaceuticals , bio-remediation (e.g. the use of organic matter to clean hazardous

waste spills) and cosmetics . Proteins coded by DNA and RNA derivatives extracted

from marine genetic resources have, for example, been found to have therapeutic uses, including antioxidant, antiviral, anti-inflammatory, anti-fungal, antibiotic properties, as well as specific activity against HIV, some forms of cancer, tuberculosis and malaria. However, the development of new pharmaceuticals is an uncertain, lengthy and expensive process, often spanning many years and costing millions. So far, less than 1 percent of marine genetic resource derivatives have succeeded in reaching the final stage of

clinical trials.2 Yet the ratio of potentially useful natural compounds has been found to be

significantly higher in marine organisms than in land organisms , and the success rate

regarding the development of potential anti-cancer agents is reportedly twice as high as for any land-based samples.3

Unique species NSF 4/10/14 (National Science Foundation, “Into the abyss: Scientists explore one of Earth's deepest ocean trenches” <http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=131038>)

Once thought devoid of life, trenches may be home to many unique species. There is growing evidence that food is plentiful there. While it is still unclear why, organic material in the ocean may be transported by currents and deposited into the trenches. In addition to looking at how food supply varies at different depths, the researchers will investigate the role energy demand and metabolic rates of trench organisms play in animal community structure. "The energy requirements of hadal animals have never been measured," says Drazen, who will lead efforts to study distribution of food supply and the energetic demands of the trench organisms. How animals in the trenches evolved to withstand high pressures is unknown, but Shank's objective is to compare the genomes of trench animals to piece together how they can survive there. "The challenge is to determine whether life in the trenches holds novel evolutionary pathways that are distinct from others in the oceans," he says. Water pressure, which at depths found in ocean trenches can be up to 1,100 times that at the surface, is known to inhibit the activity of certain proteins. Yancey will investigate the role that piezolytes--small molecules that protect proteins from pressure--play in the adaptation of trench animals. Piezolytes, which Yancey discovered, may explain previous findings that not all deep-sea proteins are able to withstand high pressures. "We're trying to understand how life can function under massive pressures in the hadal zone," says Yancey. "Pressure might be the primary factor determining which species are able to live in these extreme environments." Evidence also suggests that trenches act as carbon sinks, making the research relevant to climate change studies. The V-shaped topography along trench axes funnels resources--including surface-derived organic carbon--downward. "The bulk of our knowledge of trenches is only from snapshot visits using mostly trawls and camera landers," Shank says. "Only detailed systematic studies will reveal the role trenches may play as the final location of where most of the carbon and other chemicals are sequestered in the oceans."

Chemical diversityNelson 12/14/12 (Emily Rose Nelson is University of Miami Marine Conservation Intern, “Drugs from the deep: Ocean bioprospecting” < http://rjd.miami.edu/conservation/drugs-from-the-deep-ocean-bioprospecting>)

Oceans cover over 70% of the earth’s surface. Some of the greatest biological diversity in the world is found in the seas. Over 200,000 species of invertebrates and algae have been identified, and this number is estimated to be only a small fraction of what is yet

to be discovered. This immense biodiversity yields great chemical diversity . When

working with potential pharmaceuticals this becomes extremely important, more chemically diverse substances are more suitable. The field of marine natural products is just

over 40 years old and already over 15,000 chemical compounds have been identified as having biological function. Many of these chemicals have cancer fighting potential. Many sessile organisms emit chemicals to prevent others from evading their space. Often times these chemicals are used to slow and prevent cell growth of surrounding sponges, etc. It is believed that the same chemicals these organisms let out when competing for space can be used to stop the uncontrolled division of cancer cells. Cancer treatment compounds have advanced quite a bit due to funding from the National Cancer Institute. Discodermolide is a polypeptide isolated from deep water sponges (Discodermia). This substance stops the reproduction of cancer cells by disrupting the microtubule network (partially responsible for movement of cells). Bryostatin, a substance released by some bryozoans, is believed to be particularly useful against leukemia and melanoma. The Caribbean mangrove tunicate produces a compound (Ecteinascidin-743 or ET-743) that has been tested in humans for the treatment of breast and ovarian cancers and found to be effective. A depicts untreated cancer cells. B shows the cells treated with a common anti-cancer drug. C shows the cells treated with discodermolide. B and C show similar results, however the discodermolide presents much more pronounced results (Pomponi,

Shirley A. Image by Dr. Ross E. Longley) While cancer fighting treatments have received the most

attention, discoveries have been made in many areas . Increased understanding of the

highly specified modes of activity of these chemicals and their roles in the natural world allows scientists to better understand their use to humans. Many of these compounds are on the route to approval, and in the near future we will start to see a surge of marine pharmaceuticals. Filter feeders are constantly circulating water and small organisms through their system, thus they are continually exposed to parasites and disease causing bacteria. The chemicals they use to defend themselves could also be of use to humans. Ziconotide, a cysteine rich peptide, has been found to fight against neuropathic pain. These toxins, derived from the cone snail, are approximately 1,000 times more powerful than morphine. The sponge Petrosia contignata produces a strong anti-inflammatory with the potential for asthma treatment. Another group of anti-inflammatories comes from Caribbean soft corals and sea whips. These are used to reduce swelling and skin irritation. The use of marine chemical resources does not stop with pharmaceuticals. They can also be found in nutritional supplements, cosmetics and more. Toxins from cone snails have been found to fight against neuropathic pain. It is clear that the ocean has enormous medicinal potential. Unfortunately there are a number of obstacles preventing this potential to be reached in full. One of the biggest problems is simply the lack of supply. Underwater compounds are more difficult to reach than those on land. SCUBA and submersibles make it easier to access these resources, however, oceanographic expeditions are quite expensive. Also, in order to use these compounds effectively collections need to be done in very large quantities. Large scale harvests are often deemed ecologically unsound. Because collection is almost always not an option alternatives such as aquaculture and chemical synthesis can be used. Aquaculture has been completed successfully, however it is difficult because little is known about the invertebrates. Chemical synthesis is thought to be the ideal solution, giving pharmaceutical companies ultimate control. However, this process is extremely costly, complex, and has a very low yield. Another complication deals with political boundaries. The most diverse regions are located in areas of developing countries. These are precisely the areas that the more developed nations wish to explore. Developing nations are often nervous about being used, and thus hesitant to allow exploration. National and international regulations regarding access and extraction of natural resources are then discussed. This presents difficulty when placing value on a natural resource, including any value added to the resource through its use as a pharmaceutical and the value it has initially in the ecosystem. Because of these difficulties, many

pharmaceutical candidates remain untouched. On the bright side, currently there are large databases of chemical compounds. Our understanding of biological activity linked to these compounds is increasing. At the same time knowledge of human diseases is

increasing at rapid speed. We can combine this knowledge and apply it to drug discovery and disease treatment

We’ve only dipped our toes in!!!Morelle 5/8/14 (Rebecca Morelle is a Science correspondent for BBC News in Scotland. “Ocean medicine hunt: A Wild West beneath the waves?” < http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27295159>)

In the crystal clear waters off the west coast of Scotland a hunt is under way.

Divers glide through forests of brown seaweed, passing sea urchins and shark eggs.

It's an unlikely spot to be at the forefront of cutting-edge medical research, but scientists

say the oceans could hold the key to finding the next generation of life-saving drugs. The

divers finally emerge and bring their haul up on to the boat. They've carefully selected a few starfish, which thrive in the waters around Oban. Some species contain anti-inflammatory chemicals that could be developed for new treatments for asthma and arthritis. But they're just one of the organisms being investigated for their medical potential. Scientists say unusual compounds and gene sequences in some marine creatures and plants could lead to anything from much-needed new antibiotics to cancer drugs. Dr Andrew Mogg is a scientific diver at the Scottish Association for Marine Science (Sams). The organisation is part of a consortium called Seabiotech that's received more than £6.2m from the European Union to scour the depths. He says: "The reason we look at these novel bioactive compounds, especially from the sea, is because nature is a fantastic designer - it's constantly making new things and testing them, it's been doing it for eons." The oceans cover more than two thirds of Earth's surface, yet

we've only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to our understanding of this vast expanse - just 5% has so far been explored. And it's this untapped potential that is sparking a medical gold rush. Investment in this area is growing steadily. In the next phase of the European Union's research budget, 145m euros is heading for the seas. Dr John Day, a marine scientist from Sams, says much of what is "findable" on land has already been found. But he adds: "Historically (the ocean) isn't a place that people have looked, so they haven't exploited it. "In addition there's a whole raft of new technologies allowing one to screen more methodically and more scientifically and produce more useful data that can point you towards a final product. "And of course a political will - we're looking to how can we exploit other parts of the planet to produce new industries and technologies."

Deep sea sponges are valuable and need to be explored – proved with cancer drugsLander 1/3/11 (Peter Landers is a writer for the Wall Street Journal. “New Breast Cancer Drug Found Deep in the Sea”

<http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704111504576059772498413328>)

Amid a dry spell for breakthrough cancer drugs, recent U.S. approval of Eisai Co.'s Halaven represents some vindication for a small group of researchers who believe, contrary to recent pharmaceutical fashion, that molecules from nature hold promise

against hard-to-treat diseases. The Food and Drug Administration's approval of Halaven in November for

treating late-stage breast cancer was a triumph of chemistry and tenacious research . Its

path, extending nearly three decades from the first studies, demonstrates not only potential benefits but also some of the hurdles in the hunt within nature's bounty for drugs of the future. Primitive creatures developed many clever ways to kill each other after billions of years of evolution, and some can be turned to human use. "Weapons of mass destruction are alive and well on a coral reef," says David Newman of the National Cancer Institute, who has studied the subject for decades. Halaven derives from halichondrin B, a substance identified

in a black sponge that lives off the coast of Japan. Studies showed it has a powerful effect on tumors, blocking cell division in a way that scientists hadn't previously thought of. Yoshito Kishi, a Harvard University chemistry professor, synthesized halichondrin B with funding from the National Cancer Institute. His work galvanized researchers at Eisai of Japan, who identified the active part of the molecule and, working with Dr. Kishi, went on to create the drug. Chemists say Halaven is among the most complex small-molecule drugs ever made commercially. Dr. Kishi fears younger researchers are ignoring Halaven's lesson. Eisai Co., led by the founder's grandson since 1988, stuck with the Halaven research despite nearly dropping it more than once. "If the CEO changes every 10 years, then this type of project couldn't go through," Dr. Kishi says.

Deep sea exploration can uncover new resources Koebler 11/15/12 (Jason Koebler is a science and technology reporter for U.S. News & World Report. “Two Thirds of Ocean Life Remains Undiscovered” < http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/11/15/two-thirds-of-ocean-life-remains-undiscovered->)

Up to two thirds of the plant and animal species in the world's oceans may be undiscovered ,

according to the largest study of the oceans' biodiversity ever conducted. The new

estimate, which suggests that there may be as many as 1 million species of non-bacterial life

in the world's waterways , is based on research by 270 experts from around the world. The estimate is considered to be the most accurate yet, and is far lower than some previous estimates. "Ten years ago, we thought there were at least 10 million species in the ocean, now we think it's less than 1 million," says Ward Appeltans, a marine biologist with the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). "It means that eventually, we might be able to describe most of the unknown species. If you consider fish, we estimate there are 5,000 species still undescribed. We're discovering 150 new species of fish every year — 30 years at that rate, and it's mission accomplished." Appeltans says that previous estimates were done by a fewer number of scientists — this one took experts in specific classes of organisms and had each expert give their best estimate for the number of species remaining undiscovered in their area of expertise.

"It's never been done with such a large group of experts sitting together and coming up with a number — it's always been a small group or a single person," Appeltans says. "We asked them each individually how many species they thought were in their group of expertise only. When you pull that data together, you come up with somewhere between 700,000 and 1 million." Besides fish, the study suggests there are as many as eight undiscovered whale and dolphin species, 10 undescribed marine reptiles, and thousands of sponges, crustaceans, algae, plants, and other species still to be found. A deep water angler fish recovered 1/4 to 1/2 a mile below sea level off the North Carolina coast is displayed aboard the R/V Seward Johnson. So far, about 226,000 species have been described by scientists, with another 65,000 species waiting to be described in specimen collections. It can take years for scientists to accurately describe a new species, because they have to be compared to previously discovered species in order to determine if a new type of creature has been found. Appeltans says interest in discovering unknown species has been renewed over the past decade. During that time, 780 new crabs, 29 lobsters, 286 shrimps, four sea

snakes, three whales, and three dolphins have been found. "The rate of new discoveries in the ocean is still increasing — on land, the rate of discovery isn't increasing anymore," he says.

" There are more and more people involved with describing new species, using new

techniques and going to new habitats and places." Despite an increasing rate of species

discovery, as much as 95 percent of the world's oceans remain unexplored . "When you go to the deep sea, every time you take a sample, you'll find a new species," he says. "But we think the deep sea is less diverse than we thought previously. Most of the diversity is in the tropics and the coastlines and the small islands of the Pacific, where little exploration has been done."

New enzymes prove potentialNational Academy 09 (The National Academy is an independent research institution with advisors on science, engineering, and medicine for the world. “Ocean Exploration” < http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf>)

There are many such discoveries. An enzyme, taken from bacteria that break clown fats in cold water, has been used to improve laundry detergent. A glowing green protein from jellyfish has been widely used in medicine, helping researchers illuminate cancerous tumors and trace brain cells leading to Alzheimer's disease—an accomplishment that garnered the 2008 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for the researchers Osamu Shimomura, Martin Chalfie, and Roger Y. Tsien, who discovered

and developed this technology. Each new discovery is a reminder of how little is known about the ocean environment, which is so critically important to health and life on Earth. To enable the full exploration of the oceans and seafloor and the sustainable development of their resources, the National

Research Council report Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown (2003) recommended that the United States vigorously pursue the establishment of a global ocean exploration program. Such an effort could be modeled after the federally funded space exploration program, involving multiple federal agencies as well as international participation.

Marine organisms k2 medical innovationNOAA No date

(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administriation, “Medicines from the Sea”, < http://www.noaa.gov/features/economic_0309/medicines.html>)

A number of marine creatures have been used successfully in medical research and

testing. A Caribbean sponge has been discovered to generate compounds used in AZT

(zidovudine, Retrovir), which is used to fight the AIDS virus. Caribbean gorgonian (a soft

coral) produces a group of compounds with anti-inflammatory properties, which are

also included in an anti-wrinkle cream. A tentacled aquatic organism , called bryozoan

Bugula neritina, yields a compound being tested as a cancer drug . Skates (a flat fish

shaped like a kite) have provided clues used in treating vision loss. Corals and mollusks are used to make orthopedic and cosmetic surgical implants. Horseshoe crabs are commonly used to test for bacterial contamination. Microalgae are used in vitamins and other nutritional supplements. Bone grafts from coral skeletons, pain relievers from sea snail venom, and infection-fighting agents from shark skin are all

under study. The list is plentiful even though 95 percent of the ocean has yet to be explored. Exotic, hard-to-

reach places, such as deep-sea hot vents and seabed sediments, have barely been

documented . However, as advances in ocean exploration and underwater technology open new depths to scientists, the

ocean’s potential as a biochemical resource has become more apparent. To uncover medical mysteries of the deep, NOAA has partnered with “bioprospecting” scientists to find marine organisms with chemical compounds capable of treating human diseases. With NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer, America’s Ship for Ocean Exploration, experts ashore are connected live to the ship as it maps the ocean and collects ocean specimens, some with potential medical and economic benefits. With an increasing number of specimens collected from a variety of ocean projects, scientists may find that the ocean could become the biological focus for discovering 21st century

medicines. The Future of Marine Science In the future, marine ecosystems could represent an increasingly important source of medical treatments, nutritional supplements, pesticides, cosmetics, and other commercial products. Drugs from the ocean are without question one of the most promising new directions of marine science today.

Exploration Key to Pharma

Unexplored and pharmaceutical potential – exploration is keyNational Academy 09 (The National Academy is an independent research institution with advisors on science, engineering, and medicine for the world. “Ocean Exploration” < http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf>)

The ocean is the largest biosphere on Earth, covering nearly three-quarters of our planet's surface and occupying a volume of 1.3 billion cubic kilometers. Despite the major role of the ocean in making the Earth habitable through climate regulation, rainwater supply, petroleum and natural gas resources, and a breathtaking diversity of species

valued for their beauty, seafood, and pharmaceutical potential—humankind has entered

the 21st century having explored only a small fraction of the ocean. Some estimates

suggest that as much as 95 percent of the world ocean and 99 percent of the ocean floor are

still unexplored. The vast mid-water—the region between the ocean's surface and the

seafloor—may be the least explored, even though it contains more living things than all of Earth's rainforests combined. Similarly, the ocean floor and sediments encompass an

extensive microbial biosphere that may rival that on the continents, which is not yet

understood and remains largely unexplored. The impacts of human activities on the

ocean drive a growing urgency for its exploration before permanent and potentially harmful changes become widespread. Even events that occur far inland, such as nutrient runoff from agriculture and pollutants and debris carried by storm water, have impacts. The ocean bears a double burden from the burning of fossil fuels and associated climate change; not only is it warmer, but the additional carbon dioxide dissolves in the ocean, making it more acidic. Although mariners have traversed the ocean for centuries, exploring its inky depths is no easy task. Recent technological advances now make possible scientific investigations only dreamed of 20 years ago. The development of state-of-the-art deep-sea vehicles and a host of other technologies have opened doors for finding novel life forms, new sources of energy, pharmaceuticals, and other products, and have promoted a better understanding of the origins of life, the workings of this planet, and of humanity's past.

Exploration is key to uncovering the potential of the oceanNational Academy 09 (The National Academy is an independent research institution with advisors on science, engineering, and medicine for the world. “Ocean Exploration” < http://oceanleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Ocean_Exploration.pdf>)

Ocean exploration is at a crossroads. For the first time in history, human impacts on

the environment are affecting all reaches of the globe. Despite our realization of how

important the ocean and its myriad processes are to understanding coastal processes and the

ocean’s role in climate change, there remain great challenges to fully exploring and

understanding the ocean. Meanwhile, its living resources are threatened by habitat loss

and overharvesting, the climate of the planet is changing, and the need for new compounds

to cure human diseases and new energy sources is growing . Cutting-edge technologies and

methodologies continue to be developed by the men and women dedicated to ocean

exploration, but the potential of ocean exploration has only begun to be met. Those who

invest now in state-of-the-art undersea vehicles and infrastructure, in data management

and modeling, in transmission networks, and in the tools of modern marine biotechnology

will likely produce discoveries and breakthroughs to the benefit of humankind and all life on

this watery planet we share

Deep Sea exploration can solve Levins No date (Nicole Levins is a writer and editor at the Nature Conservation, a nonprofit organization. “Oceans and Coasts” <http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/habitats/oceanscoasts/explore/coral-reefs-and-medicine.xml>)

What are some of the things you think about when you hear the words “coral reef”?

Maybe the threats faced by these fragile ecosystems cross your mind: climate change,

ocean acidification and unsustainable fishing practices . Or maybe, if you’re more of a “glass-

half-full” type, you visualize the happy images: starfish and sea urchins, clownfish and parrotfish, sea turtles and giant clams. But you probably don’t think about medicine. It’s true — these colorful and sometimes crazy-looking underwater structures host a lot

more than just cool sea creatures . Coral reefs could hold the cures for s ome of the

human race’s most common — and most serious — ailments. By protecting these “rainforests of the sea,” The Nature Conservancy is ensuring that coral reefs will be around — and healthy enough — to facilitate future medicinal discoveries. Find out how you can

help by adopting a coral reef today. AN UNDERWATER PHARMACY Scientists have already developed many medical treatments from resources found in the world’s oceans, For instance: Secosteroids, an enzyme used by corals to protect themselves from disease, is used to treat asthma, arthritis and other inflammatory disorders. Bryozoan Bugula neritina, a common fouling organism (similar to barnacles) that’s found in both temperate and tropical climates, is a source for the anti-cancer compound bryostatin 1. The U.S. National Cancer Institute recently collected more than 26,000 pounds of the organism from docks and pilings with little impact on the population. Blue-green algae, commonly found in Caribbean mangroves, are used to treat small-cell lung cancer. The National Cancer Institute also endorsed blue-green algae for the treatment of melanoma and some tumors. Two drugs currently on the market for cancer and pain come from marine sources. Twenty-five more marine-derived

medicines are being evaluated in human trials right now. Yondelis®, the first new treatment in 30 years for soft-tissue sarcoma, is extracted from the sea squirt, a sac-like

filter feeder. And with just a few more years of research, it seems likely that scientists will

uncover even more therapeutic secrets in the sea : A series of organic chemicals isolated

from a soft coral called the Caribbean sea whip seem to have an impressive anti-inflammatory effect on human skin. Bioactive molecules produced by marine invertebrates such as sea sponges, tunicates and sea hares have displayed potent anti-viral, anti-tumor and antibacterial activity. Researchers are studying bivalves, a class of mollusks, to learn more about aging processes, including metabolic activity and

environmental stressors. In fact, one coral reef ecologist says that we’re 300 to 400 times

more likely to find new drugs in the oceans than on land . PROTECTING REEFS FOR HUMAN

AND MARINE HEALTH Climate change is already affecting the health of coral ecosystems. Microbial communities — where many new drugs could likely be found — are especially susceptible to these changes, and some are already beginning to

decline or migrate. “ An estimated 95 percent of the world’s oceans remain unexplored, so

it’s possible that we might lose significant marine organisms without ever knowing they

existed in the first place,” explains Stephanie Wear, a marine scientist on the Conservancy’s

Global Marine Team . “A devastating loss of biodiversity could mean that fewer species will

be around for future medicinal research and biomedical studies.” By protecting marine

environments through the creation of marine protected areas and the development of

adaptation strategies, the Conservancy is safeguarding marine biodiversity. People and

nature are already benefitting in so many ways from these marine protected areas . Just

imagine what medical benefits may still lay undiscovered beneath the

sea.

NSS 5/21/12 (Natural Sciences Sector, “Deep sea: the last frontier” <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/ioc-oceans/single-view-oceans/news/the_last_frontier/#.U7R09I1dXtA>)

The marine habitat is unique for the diversity of its living organisms. Of the main taxonomic groups (phyla), almost all are found in the oceans and half are exclusively marine. If bioprospecting will be crucial to improving human well-being, it is in the oceans that bioprospecting’s greatest potential lies. Marine biodiversity is amazingly dense in certain parts of the world. In the lndo-Pacific Ocean, for example, there are as many as 1000

species per square metre. In this highly competitive and sometimes harsh environment, marine species have had to develop strategies for survival, such as resistance to the toxicity, extreme temperature, hyper-salinity and pressure that characterize the deep seabed. We know from experience that there is a higher probability of selecting active compounds of potential interest to the health and other industries from marine organisms than from terrestrial organisms. This means that, statistically, marine organisms are of greater commercial interest than terrestrial ones. It is hardly surprising then that many pharmaceutical firms have marine departments. One could cite the examples of Merck, Lilly, Pfizer, Hoffman—Laroche and Bristol—Myers Squibb.

Biotechnology companies are also interested in marine products, as the related licenses can be sold not only to pharmaceutical companies but also to industry. Nowadays, it is biotechnology companies, which tend to be small, flexible and adaptive

structures, which are responsible for most of the discoveries, whereas ‘big pharmaceuticals’ tend mostly to license the latter. Marine bioprospecting of the deep seabed is developing rapidly. An analysis of Patent Office databases reveals that several organisms have been used for commercial purposes. These inventions relate to the genomic features of deep seabed species but also encompass techniques developed to determine these features or to isolate active compounds. These techniques are not inventions, sensu stricto, but are nevertheless considered as such under the current international property rights regime. Other patents deal with the isolation of enzymes important for industrial processes, the isolation of cellular compounds that guarantee unique properties (such as resistance to extreme pressure and salinity) and the discovery of mechanisms ensuring resistance to extreme temperatures and toxicity, these

extreme properties being of interest for both biomedical and industrial applications. There is no consensus on the financial benefits derived from worldwide sales of biotechnology-related products

taken from all types of marine environments but these are estimated to represent a

multibillion dollar market . A marine sponge compound used to treat herpes, for example, generates earnings of US$50—l00 million a year; and the value of anti-cancer agents taken from marine organisms is estimated at close to US$l billion a year. What sources of energy are available to communities living in dark zones? Biochemists have long demonstrated that different forms of energy can sustain life. Light is probably the first to spring to mind, as this serves as the basis for photosynthesis (from photo meaning light), but methane, sulphideszl, oil, etc. are also forms of energy. Where there is no light, as in the deep sea, creatures rely on chemical energy (or chemosynthesis). The hydrothermal vents, cold seeps and methane vents we shall shortly discover are all ecosystems which depend on chemical energy. In the absence of light, life in dark waters can also depend on organic substances — dead or alive — reaching the depths of the ocean. Thus, the composition of benthic communities (the term indicates a dependency on the bottom) will rely partly on the availability of organic substances falling all the way down to the seabed. Whale bones for example are known to constitute an excellent surface on which benthic

communities deprived of local sources of energy can settle and develop. Hydrothermal vents are home to communities capable of withstanding extremely high temperatures; at their source, these temperatures can be nearly as hot as 400°C, in immediately adjacent waters, they can be as hot as 120°C or more. Vents are typically inhabited by a well-developed microbial community. Deep clams, worms, crabs and other macro-organisms feed on this community, which comes at the bottom of the food chain. Both micro- and macro-organisms at vent locations can

withstand extreme toxicity and pressure. The deep ocean also inhabits areas that tend to be currently geologically inactive but biologically very active, namely seamounts. These form the basis of a typical community of organisms made up of cold corals, sponges and the like. They also provide a habitat for fish and other species of ecological and commercial interest, such as orange roughy, swordfish, tuna, sharks, turtles and whales. Seamounts are home to a particularly high number of endemic species. If exploitation has only just begun of life forms found in hydrothermal vents, cold seeps and similar deep-sea formations like mud volcanoes and brine pools, the same cannot be said for seamounts. Destructive fishing methods have been used on the rich fauna of seamounts for

several years now, including bottom trawling . It is probably fair to say that deep-sea

research today is equally important to both pure and applied research, since the discovery of

new species not only nurtures basic knowledge but is also likely to lead to the identification

of new chemicals, which in turn tend to lead to new applications and new economic markets.

Pharma Key to Economy

Pharmaceutical Industry is key to the overall economy PhRMA 5/5/14 (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, founded in 1958, is a trade group representing the pharmaceutical research and biopharmaceutical companies in the United States. “One Prescription for U.S. Economic Growth” http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/brand-connect/wp/enterprise/one-prescription-for-u-s-economic-growth/>)

After withering under six years of financial storm clouds, the U.S. economic forecast

appears to be showing new life. But leaders in government and business have work

to do if they want to create an environment that not only encourages continued

growth, but accelerates it versus global competitors . One area ripe for harvest:

U.S. biopharmaceuticals . The U.S. currently leads the world in biopharmaceutical invention. And according to a new report by the Pharmaceutical Research and

Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and the Battelle Technology Partnership Practice, this pioneering role and investment in innovation not only creates a favorable environment for improved patient outcomes and the development of new

medicines , it could also help spur the U.S. economy by adding more than 300,000 jobs in the

next 10 years. The report looks at two possible 10-year trajectories. One examines a future of continued investment and growth, while the other imagines the U.S. falling behind competitor nations, including Brazil, Singapore and China, which are investing in their own biopharmaceutical industries. Germany, Japan and the United

Kingdom have been longstanding competitors in this sector as well. The differentiator?

Whether or not the U.S. embraces advanced policies. If current trends continue, industry leaders cited in the report predict the next 10 years will bring only modest growth, and biopharmaceutical companies could lose nearly 150,000 jobs, according

to the report . A lack of investment in innovation could have major implications for both the

overall economy and the biopharmaceutical industry, which generates nearly $790 billion in

the U.S. each year, supports more than 3 million jobs and helps improve the quality of life for

millions of Americans . “The message is clear: the continued success of the biopharmaceutical industry — both in delivering life-saving and life-enhancing medicines to patients and in contributing to U.S. economic growth — is dependent on

thoughtful, forward-looking policies that prioritize innovation,” says John J. Castellani,

President and CEO of PhRMA. What are the factors that promote growth? The report outlines a number of recommendations, including the following: Increase understanding around the costs of new product development. Ensure appropriate protection for intellectual property and promote access to innovative medicines to give biopharmaceutical companies the incentive they need to continue to develop cutting-

edge therapies . Ensure that startup efforts have the private financial backing they need to

develop new medicines. Revise the drug-approval process to help get new medications to

market more quickly. Back educational efforts to create a strong workforce. Provide economic innovation incentives to fuel growth. The current regulatory climate without these changes may stifle growth and have a negative effect on innovation. “This report vividly illustrates the inextricable link between a healthy biopharmaceutical R&D system and the health care policy environment,” says Robert J. Hugin, PhRMA Immediate Past Chairman and CEO of Celgene Corporation, in a written release. “ Sustainable, market- based access and reimbursement for innovative medicines today is essential to incentivize the long-term, high-risk investment needed for new medical innovations

in the future.” The ability to innovate quickly is becoming the most important determinant

of economic growth and a nation’s ability to compete and prosper in the 21st century global knowledge-based economy. As this new report indicates, the U.S. must focus squarely on ensuring that its policies help encourage such invention, not hinder it.

Marine research and preservation have remarkable financial benefits Alexander 11 (Constantine Alexander is currently working for the establishment of a management plan for the Andros Island EU Special Protection Area (SPA) and a Northern Cycladic marine protected area. Mr. Alexander is a former Managing Director for H.J. Meyers investment banks in California, USA; a consultant to the Commission of the European Union in Brussels, Belgium; and project coordinator of the EU LIFE-Nature Project on Tilos, Greece. He has spoken about marine environmental issues at conferences organized by the European Commission, UN Environmental Program, Mugla University in Turkey, Washington State University and other international organizations. In 2007, he was appointed as an Ambassador of the EU Natura 2000 Networking Program for exemplary environmental management of an EU Special Protection Area (SPA). “The Economic Value of Ocean Research” <http://global-oceans.org/site/2011/10/the-economic-value-of-ocean-research/>)

The deep sea is teeming with life, most of which is yet undiscovered or about which little is known. And although the intrinsic value of the oceans to every living being can never be quantified, values can be ascribed to the goods and services provided by the marine environment – but only to the extent that scientists have conferred upon us the benefit of knowledge about our marine world and all that it continues to offer. While marine scientific research and conservation may be regarded by some as disassociated from economic pragmatism and the application of sound investment principles, global data analysis has revealed some surprising conclusions to the contrary.

Marine research has allowed us to evaluate and prioritize the remarkable benefits we derive

from oceanic “suppliers” of which we have long been unaware . A 2008 study supported by

Conservation International and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported the total net benefit per year provided by the world’s coral reefs alone at $29.8 billion, including coral reef contribution to coastal protection valued at $9 billion and fisheries valued at $5.7 billion. Marine research has also uncovered the value of sharks, once viewed as threats rather than resources. According to the Australian Institute for Marine Science, a single reef shark can contribute $1.9 million in its lifetime to the economy of the Republic of Palau through the country’s shark diving industry that generates $18 million annually. That represents 8% of Palau’s gross domestic product and contributes as much as 14% of the

country’s business tax revenue. Marine research has also revealed that sharks are particularly resistant to cancer, which has been attributed to the presence of squalamine, a

molecule in the liver that is currently being researched to determine its application in the treatment of brain tumors. Marine research has therefore led us to the realization that the severe shark population depletion is highly detrimental to a multitude of interests, including even commercial shellfish fisheries as the population rise of traditional shark prey – skates and rays – is resulting in the loss of more commercially-raised oysters,

scallops and clams. As marine research leads to our valuation of ecosystem components, products and services, we can prioritize financial decision-making, develop sustainable resource extraction policies and determine where ecosystem services can be provided at a lower cost than man-made alternatives – including carbon storage, coastal erosion protection, food resources, water purification and flood control. These issues are becoming increasingly critical as our world population approaches 7 billion people. The Global

Oceans Solution The procurement of such indispensable marine research data has long been hampered by the disproportionately high cost and frequent unavailability of highly fuel consumptive marine research vessels that are burdened with excess capacity and equipment. This problem has reduced the number, scope, productivity, geographical reach and frequency of marine research projects, rendering many to be cost prohibitive.

Timeframe

Exploring now is KEY – mining is already taking place and destroying the ocean – exploration needs to happen before its all gone Goldenberg 3/1/14 (Suzanne Goldenberg is an enviormental correspondant. “Marine mining: Underwater gold rush sparks fears of ocean catastrophe” < http://www.theguardian.com/profile/suzannegoldenberg>)

This is the last frontier : the ocean floor, 4,000 metres beneath the waters of the central Pacific, where mining

companies are now exploring for the rich deposits of ores needed to keep industry humming and smartphones switched on. The prospect of a race to the bottom of the ocean – a 21st-century high seas version of the Klondike gold rush – has alarmed

scientists. The oceans, which make up 45% of the world's surface, are already degraded by overfishing, industrial waste, plastic debris and climate change, which is altering their chemistry. Now comes a new extractive industry – and scientists say governments are not prepared. "It's like a land grab," said Sylvia Earle, an oceanographer and explorer-in-residence for National Geographic. "It's a handful of individuals who are giving away or letting disproportionate special interests have access to large parts of the planet that just happen to be under water." The vast expanses of

the central Pacific seabed being opened up for mining are still largely an unknown, she said. "What are we sacrificing by looking at the deep sea with dollar signs on the few tangible materials

that we know are there? We haven't begun to truly explore the ocean before we have

started aiming to exploit it. " But the warnings may arrive too late. The price of metals is rising. The ore content of

the nodules of copper, manganese, cobalt and rare earths strewn across the ocean floor promise to be 10 times greater than the richest seams on land, making the cost of their retrieval from the extreme depths more attractive to companies. Mining the

ocean floor of the central Pacific on a commercial scale is five years away, but the beginnings of an underwater gold rush are under way The number of companies seeking to mine beneath international waters has tripled in the last three or four years. "We have already got a gold rush, in a way," said Michael Lodge, deputy secretary general of the International Seabed Authority, which regulates the use of the sea floor in international waters. "The amount of activity has expanded exponentially." The Jamaica-based agency has granted 26 permits to date to explore an area the size of Mexico beneath the central Pacific that had been set aside for seabed mining – all but eight within the last three or four years. Britain is leading the way in a project led by Lockheed Martin, but Russia, China, Japan, and South Korea all have projects in play. This year alone, companies from Brazil, Germany and the Cook Islands have obtained permits to explore tracts of up to 75,000 sq km on the ocean floor for copper, cobalt, nickel and manganese, and the rare earth metals that help power smartphones, tablets and other devices. Other areas of the Pacific – outside international waters – are also opening up for mining. Papua New Guinea has granted permission to a Canadian firm, Nautilus Minerals, to explore a site 30km off its coast for copper, zinc and gold deposit worth potentially hundreds of millions of dollars. Lodge expects the pace to continue, with rising demand for metals for emerging economies, and for technologies such as hybrid cars and smart phones. Extracting the metals will not require drilling. The ore deposits are in nodules strewn across the rolling plains of sediment that carpet the ocean floor. Oceanographers say they resemble knobbly black potatoes, ranging in size from a couple of centimetres to 30cm. Mining companies say it may be possible to scoop them up with giant tongs and then siphon them up to vessels waiting on the surface. The problem is much remains unknown – not just about what exists on the ocean floor but how ocean systems operate to keep the planet habitable. The ocean floor was once thought to be a marine desert, but oceanographers say the sediment is rich in

marine life, with thousands of species of invertebrates at a single site. "It's tampering with ecosystems we hardly understand that are really at the frontier of our knowledge base," said Greg Stone, vice-president for Conservation International. "We are starting mining extracting operations in a place where we don't fully

understand how it works yet. So that is our concern – disturbing the deep sea habitat." Most of the models rely on being able to produce 1 million tonnes of ore a year. Stone said the seabed authority was putting systems in place to protect the ocean floor, but other scientists said there still remained enormous risks to the sediment and the creatures that live there. "It is going to damage vast areas of the sea floor," said Craig Smith, an oceanographer at the University of Hawaii who served as an adviser to the International Seabed Authority. "I just don't see any way [in] mining one of these claims that whole areas won't be heavily damaged." Earle expressed fears about how mining companies will deal with waste in

the high seas. "Mining is possible," she said. "But the 20,000ft question is what do you do with the tailings? All of the proposals involved dumping the tailings at sea with profound impacts on the water column and the sea floor below. The Seabed Authority initially proposed to set aside 1.6m sq km of the ocean floor as protected areas, or about 20% of its territory. But those reserves are under review. As economic pressures rise, there are fears that commercial operations would begin to erode

those protected areas. "I think it is certain that within a year or two there will be more claims covering these areas and there won't be enough room left to develop these scientifically defensible protected areas," Smith said. Some have argued that with all the unknowns there should be no mining at all – and that the high seas should remain out of bounds for mineral extraction and for shipping. José María Figueres, a former president of Costa Rica and co-chair with the former British foreign secretary, David Miliband, of the Global Ocean Commission, an independent entity charged with developing ideas for ocean reform, suggested leaving all of the

high seas as a no-go area for commercial exploitation (apart from shipping). "Do we know enough about the seabed to go ahead and mine it?" said Figueres. "Do we understand enough about the interconnection between the seabed, the column of water, the 50% of the oxygen that the ocean produces for the world, the 25% of the carbon that it fixes in order to go in and disrupt the seabed in way that we would if we went in and started mining? I don't think so, not until we have scientific backing to determine whether this is something good or bad for the planet." World leaders are now mobilising to address concerns, not just about seabed mining, but about how to safeguard ocean systems which are increasingly recognised as critical to global food security and a healthy planet. US secretary of state John Kerry, in a video address delivered to a high-level ocean summit hosted by the Economist and National Geographic last week, invited leaders to a two-day summit in Washington that will seek ways of protecting fishing stocks from overexploitation and protecting the ocean from industrial pollution, plastic debris and the ravages of climate change. The stakes have never been higher, scientists said. The oceans are becoming increasingly important to global food security. Each year more than a million commercial fishing vessels extract more than 80m metric tonnes of fish and seafood from the ocean. Up to three billion people rely on the sea for a large share of their protein, especially in the developing world. Those demands are only projected to grow. "If you look at where food security has to go between now and 2030 we have to start looking at the ocean. We have to start looking at the proteins coming from the sea," said Valerie Hickey, an environmental scientist at the World Bank. That makes it all the more crucial to crack down on illegal and unregulated fishing, which is sabotaging efforts to build sustainable seafood industries. Two-thirds of the fish taken on the high seas are from stocks that are already dangerous depleted – far more so than in those parts of the ocean that lie within 200 miles of the shore and are under direct national control. Estimates of the unreported and illegal catch on the high seas range between $10bn and $24bn a year, overwhelming government efforts to track or apprehend the illegal fishing boats. The illegal fishing also hurts responsible fishing crews. Figueres and Miliband suggested fitting all the vessels operating on the high seas with transponders to track their movements. That would single out rogue fishing vessels, making it easier for authorities to apprehend the vessels and their catch. It's not a perfect solution. A diplomat who has negotiated international agreements to control illegal fishing said captains – already cagey about revealing their favourite fishing routes – would simply flip off the transponders. United Nations officials were also sceptical of the idea of a high-seas police force. "It sounds a little bit like science fiction for me at this particular moment," said Irina Bokova, the director general of Unesco, which manages 46 marine sites. "What kind of police? Who is going to monitor? How is it founded? It's a very complicated issue." But the debate was a sign of growing momentum in

an international effort to protect the oceans – before it's too late. When it comes to the ocean floor, that process is at the very early stages. But given the multiple disasters humans have made with the ocean so far, the stakes are high for getting it right. "There is no doubt there are huge mineral resources to be extracted at some point in the future," Lodge said. "It's also true we don't know enough about the impact on biodiversity and the impact on marine life once the mining takes place." As the ultimate custodian, said Michael Lodge, the International Seabed Authority had two responsibilities; making sure companies access that vast mineral wealth in an environmentally responsible way, and then sharing it out equitably. "We have a huge challenge to devise a fiscal regime so that

humankind as a whole gets a fair share. That's an enormous challenge, he said. "If we end up giving it away to industry, then we have failed in our missions." And the costs of such a failure are already becoming painfully evident in the greater ocean.

Increased rush for resources in deep sea water now is destroying valuable organisms – we must explore now before we lose the opportunity Harvey 8/30/13 (Gemima Harvey is a writer for the diplomat, and an expert in Asian pacific studies. “The Deep Sea Resources Rush” < http://thediplomat.com/2013/08/the-

deep-sea-resources-rush/1/>)

Insatiable demand for minerals and rare earth elements, coupled with dwindling

resources on land have stakeholders across the world looking to a new frontier : the

deep sea . Advancing mining technologies are making the prospect of exploiting seafloor

minerals—including gold, copper, zinc, cobalt and rare earth elements (REEs)—not only possible but also imminent, with commercial licenses to be granted by the International Seabed Authority from 2016. China has a stronghold on REEs, controlling a staggering 97% of global production. These finite elements and other precious minerals are used in the creation of a massive range of electronics devices, emerging green technologies and weapon systems, triggering a strategic scramble to exploit new sources. In what has

been described as a global race , governments and companies are keenly eyeing this

emerging mining arena, eager to get their slice of the next “gold rush” as it’s made increasingly economically viable. In 2010, there were eight exploration licenses, currently there are 17 in the high seas of the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans. There is also significant interest in the ocean’s resources within territorial waters, particularly in the Pacific Ocean, where more than 1.5 million sq km of the seafloor is currently under exploration license. This is an area roughly comparable to the state of Queensland in Australia. The president of the International Marine Minerals Society, Dr. Georgy Cherkashov, was quoted last year linking the rush for licenses to the reality of “first come, first get,” saying the shuffle to secure the most

promising sites represents “the last redivision of the world.” Three types of deep sea mineral deposits have drawn interest. These are seafloor massive sulphides (SMS), manganese nodules and cobalt-rich crusts. In the Pacific Ocean, currently the most

commercially feasible are SMS, which are created by the activity of deep sea

hydrothermal vents. Canadian company Nautilus Minerals has more than 500,000 sq km licensed in Papua New Guinea (PNG), Tonga, Fiji, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands and New Zealand. Nautilus Minerals (NM) is forging the way for others in this frontier, already holding a 20-year license for the world’s first commercial seabed mining operation, 1.6 km beneath the Bismarck Sea in PNG. The company’s flagship Solwara 1 project involves exploiting SMS to extract ore containing copper and gold at a site 30km from the coast of New Ireland Province and about 50km from the town of Rabaul in East New Britain. Between 2005 and 2011 the company spent $80 million USD on

exploration programs for its PNG venture. Greenpeace-report For environmentalists and

activists the idea of this emerging mining enterprise coming to fruition is concerning. Greenpeace released a detailed report last month stating that less than 1% of high seas (international waters) and 3% of oceans are protected. Little is known about the biodiversity that exists deep below; some scientists suggest it would take 10-15 years of extensive research before we can even begin to understand this ecosystem.

Hydrothermal vents , where SMS deposits form, are said to support one of the rarest and

most unique ecological communities known to science, including creatures like two- meter long tube worms and armor-plated snails. An independent study of the

Solwara 1 site found 20 new species and experts are worried that species will be

eliminated from the mining site before they have been discovered.

**Biofuels Extensions**

Top Level

What are marine hydrothermal vents?NOAA No Date (“A hydrothermal vent forms when seawater meets hot magma,” NOAA, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/vents.html//PL)

Underwater volcanoes at spreading ridges and convergent plate boundaries produce hot springs known as hydrothermal vents. Scientists first discovered hydrothermal

vents in 1977 while exploring an oceanic spreading ridge near the Galapagos Islands. To their amazement, the scientists also found that the hydrothermal vents were surrounded by large numbers of organisms that had never been seen before. These biological communities depend upon chemical processes that result from the interaction of seawater and hot magma associated with underwater volcanoes. Hydrothermal vents are the result of seawater percolating down through fissures in the ocean crust in the vicinity of spreading centers or subduction zones (places on Earth where two tectonic plates move away or towards one another). The cold seawater is heated by hot magma and reemerges to form the vents. Seawater in hydrothermal vents may reach temperatures of over 340°C (700°F). Hot seawater in hydrothermal vents does not boil because of the extreme pressure at the depths where the vents are formed.

Aquatic algae energy can solve multiple U.S challenges- potential is there, but the plan is keyMuhs et al. 2009 (“A Summary of Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Needs: Algae Biofuels & Carbon Recycling,” May 2009, Utah State University, http://www.utah.gov/ustar/documents/63.pdf//PL)

IV. The Promise of Algae Energy Systems Aquatic (algae) energy systems have the unique potential to address all five of the interdependent challenges facing the United States today . They can domestically-produce renewable transportation fuels and recycle carbon and do so in a way that is potentially affordable, environmentally-sustainable, and does not interfere with food supplies. Although there is no single answer to reduce atmospheric carbon levels or end our dependence on foreign oil, aquatic- based algae energy systems represent a possible partial solu- tion to both challenges. Growing algae, the most productive of all photosynthetic life, and

converting it into plastics, fuels, and or secondary feedstocks, could significantly help

mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, reduce energy price shocks, reclaim wastewater,

conserve fresh water (in some scenarios), lower food prices, reduce the transfer of U.S.

wealth to other nations, and spur regional economic development (Figure 5). Because of its

high lipid (i.e., oil) content, affinity for (and tolerance of) high concentrations of C02, and photosynthetic efficiency, algae cultivation results in higher arcal yields and liquid fuels with a higher energy density than alternatives, see Table 1 and Figure 6, respectively. For example, Figure 7 shows the extent to which soybeans are planted each year across the United States. If all the soybeans grown and harvested in the U.S. each year were con- verted into biodiesel, the resultant fuel supply would accommodate less than 10% of our annual

diesel fuel consumption. Conversely, if an area roughly equating to 1/10th the land area of Utah were developed into algae energy systems, algae could supply all of America's diesel fuel needs. Thus, algae are an ideal feedstock for replacing petro- leum-based diesel and jet-fuel, which have a combined U.S. market ap- proaching 100 billion gallons per year. Likewise, because algae cultivation systems do not need fertile soil or rainfall, they can be sited virtually any- where that five fundamental inputs (Fig-ure 8) are present or can be transported. Since some algae and cyanobacteria species have a high affinity for C02, siting algae energy systems near centralized C02 emitters is a very attrac- tive option. Research has demonstrated that algal yields can be improved dramatically using enhanced concentrations of CO2.

Energy Independence Ext.

Current biofuel sources are inefficient- plan’s research is key to overcome algal biofuel barriersJones and Mayfield 2012 (Carla S. Jones, the San Diego Center for Algae Biotechnology, University of California San Diego. Stephen P. Mayfield, Division of Biological Sciences, University of California San Diego.)(“Algae biofuels: versatility for the future of bioenergy,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology Volume 23, Issue 3, June 2012, Pages 346–351 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958166911007099//PL)

Sustainable sources of bioenergy Photosynthetic organisms such as higher plants, algae, and cyanobacteria are capable of using sunlight and carbon dioxide to produce a variety of organic molecules, particularly carbohydrates and lipids. These biomolecules can be used to generate biomass or more directly through extraction as a source of fuel known as biofuels. The value of biofuels to meet energetic needs of the future, particularly transportation fuels, has continued to play a role in the formation of US policy for a number of years, including the recent establishment of the Renewable Fuels Standard in 2009 mandating the production of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022 to displace petroleum in our transportation fuels mix [8 and 9•]. Two of the most common biofuels currently produced are ethanol produced from corn or sugarcane and biodiesel produced from a variety of oil crops such as soybeans and oil palm [9•]. Ethanol production has flourished in the US, rising 25% between 2000 and 2008 due to its use as a gasoline additive and due to federal mandates and tax incentives to fuel blenders. Today 30% of the corn currently grown is used for ethanol production [9• and 10]. If corn ethanol was the sole source used to achieve the 2020 federal mandates for renewable fuel, than 100% of the corn currently available in the US would be required. To meet these mandates and maintain today's 30% corn crop utilization would require an increase in corn harvest by 423%, a number unlikely to be achievable in the next 10 years [8 and 9•]. The dedication of significantly higher amounts of the US corn crop to fuel production could have devastating effects on food availability around the world where about 1.02 billion people are already undernourished [11]. This food versus fuel dilemma and the limited environmental savings associated with corn ethanol production led policymakers to specify that a significant portion of the biofuels (21 billion gallons) in the renewable fuels mandates be derived from noncorn starch products [8, 9• and 12]. One source of these biofuels may be ethanol derived from sugarcane; however, although the domestic production cost of sugarcane ethanol is 24% lower than corn ethanol, the transportation cost and the coproduct credits associated with corn ethanol make sugarcane ethanol 17% more costly. Thus, sugarcane ethanol is also an unlikely candidate for the displacement of significant amounts of fossil fuels [10]. The high cost of sugarcane ethanol and the competition with food from corn ethanol leave a large gap between the current feasible production levels of ethanol and the fuel requirements for the RFS2 mandate. To overcome these limitations, lignocellulosic feedstocks are also being developed as sources for the production of ethanol [3•]. Lignocellulosic feedstocks come in a wide range of different plants, including agricultural waste products such as corn stover, woody sources such as aspen and dedicated energy

crops such as hybrid poplar and switchgrass [13]. Recent research has focused on understanding how the biochemical composition of these crops, mainly the ratios of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin, impact the efficiency of ethanol production, and on methods to lower the costs of the enzymes and pretreatments needed to release the fermentable sugar components [11 and 13]. Currently, no commercial scale cellulosic ethanol plants are in operation largely due to the high price of production, almost twice that of corn ethanol [13 and 14]. The displacement of transportation fuels by biofuels is not limited to ethanol. Oil-seed plants such as soybean, rapeseed, or palm oil, also offer the opportunity to produce biodiesel. However, once again these traditional oil crops are used as food, and hence using them as fuel has an impact on food availability [15]. Another source of biodiesel that has recently had a lot of media exposure is Jatropha curcas. J. curcas is a small tree that is considered drought-tolerant and produces seeds that contain 20–40% nonedible oil, therefore being noncompetitive with food sources and agricultural land [ 16]. Although there is not an agronomically developed strain of J. curcas for biodiesel production, research and breeding programs are focused on using many modern techniques such as transcriptomics and near-infrared spectroscopy to identify traits valuable in making this plant a dedicated oil-seed energy crop [ 17 and 18]. In recent years, algae have become a focus in both academic and commercial biofuels research. These photosynthetic organisms are known to produce high oil and biomass yields, can be cultivated within non-freshwater sources including salt and wastewater, can be grown on nonarable land, do not compete with common food resources, and they

very efficiently use water and fertilizers for growth [19]. However, the true hallmark of

these microscopic organisms is in fact their versatility (Figure 1). Algae can tolerate and

adapt to a variety of environmental conditions, and are also able to produce several different types of biofuels.

Oil consumption and prices are set to increase and only the plan can prevent political instability- Brazil proves plan can stop oil dependenceAdagha 2009 (Ovo Adagha, University of Calgary, Environmental Design.)(“Biofuels: Prospects, Positives, and Barriers,”January 2009, https://www.academia.edu/741519/Biofuels_Prospects_Positives_and_Barriers//PL)

3.3. Peak oil and Energy security Analysts expect global oil consumption to continue to in- crease over the next 30 years - from 85 million barrels per day (mmb/d) in 2006 to 118 mmb/d in 2030 (Hester, 2006; EIA-DOE, 2007), and also predicted world oil production to peak between 2010 and 2020 (Kerr, 1998). The combination of insatiable global demand with expected production de- clines has obvious implications for energy security. Already seven of the world's 10 largest oil consumers are not produc- ing enough oil to meet their domestic needs (Fig. 3; EIA-DOE, 2008a). Even Promethean optimists (Dryzek, 2005) who believe that technological

advancements would ensure a longer last- ing oil supply agree that the economic costs of

extraction, and hence prices, are likely to increase (Penner, 1998, 2000; Ulgiati, 2001). Over

the last few years, oil prices have indeed risen from -US$25 per barrel in January 2000 to over US$140 per barrel in June 2008 (EIA-DOE, 2008a). Political instability in oil-rich regions, tighter oil supplies, and rising oil prices have prompted many countries to diversify their energy portfolio. Biofuels have gained popularity as they allow both a reduced dependency on oil imports and can be promoted as 'clean energy’ alternatives, thereby satisfying both energy security and environment (i.e., climate change) agendas. Large-scale biofuel production was pioneered in Brazil where the biofuel industry was born of necessity - amidst the oil crises of the 1970s, when oil prices were high and sugar prices low (De Oliveira, 2002; Brazil Institute, 2007). To counter its dependence on foreign oil supplies, the (then military) gov- ernment introduced mandatory ethanol-gasoline blending requirements and offered subsidies for the production of sug- arcane-based bioethanol. It also spent billions of dollars to develop distilleries and distribution infrastructures, as well as to promote the production of E-100 fueled (pure ethanol- burning) vehicles. Since the late 1980s, Brazil has deregulated its biofuel sector (e.g., by eliminating direct subsidies) and pursued a less intrusive approach based on two key policy measures - a 20% blending requirement, and tax incentives favoring the use of bioethanol and flex-fuel vehicles (FFV; Bra- zil Institute, 2007). FFVs are a key element of bioethanol's success in Brazil because these vehicles can run on any blend of gasoline and bioethanol, giving the driver great flexibility at the pump (Hester, 2006). Today, over 80% of all vehicles sold in Brazil are FFVs that are served by ~33,000 gas stations offering both gasoline and bioethanol. Through the develop- ment of its bioethanol industry, Brazil was able to reduce its oil import bill by an estimated US$33 billion between 1976 and 1996 (Fulton et al., 2004; Sims et al., 2006). More impor- tantly, the use of bioethanol, which now accounts for 40% of Brazil's transport

fuel market, helped the country achieve self sufficiency in oil consumption (Hester, 2006).

Algae is an effective source of fuel that military can use- that takes us away from foreign oil dependencyDanigole 2007 (Mark S. Danigole, Lt Col, USAF.)("Biofuels: An Alternative to U.S Air Force Petroleum Fuel Dependency," The Center for Strategy and Technology, December 2007 , http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA474843&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf//PL)

Algae Fuel Production Just like terrestrial plants, algae can be grown to produce oil. The

National Renewable Energy Laboratory has extensive experience cultivating and manipulating microalgae to produce lipids or oils.80 According to the NREL, "The recipe for getting microalgae to produce lipids sounds like a daydream for using underutilized resources: put them in salty water unfit for other use, expose them to the sun in areas unsuitable for growing crops, feed them power plant or other exhaust gas that threatens the world climate, and deny them certain vital nutrients." Microalgae naturally store oil when denied nutrients used for growth and energy. "By manipulating nutrients and other growth conditions and by selecting and genetically engineering algae strains to increase oil production, NREL researchers were able to attain remarkably high lipid production

levels."82 An advantage of producing oil with algae is that unlike terrestrial-based plants, algae do not require precipitation or good soil, all they require is carbon dioxide, sunlight and saline water in which to grow. Figure 9 illustrates the two-step process by which algae can be used to produce hydrocarbon jet fuel. NREL is proposing to work with U.S. petroleum refiners and the USAF to: 1) genetically engineer strains that can achieve the required lipid yields to meet DoD's needs, and 2) develop the downstream processing technology for converting the lipids to energy dense hydrocarbon jet fuel in a conventional petroleum refinery. It is also possible to refine the lipids to diesel and gasoline for use in other military or civilian vehicles. These refined finished products would contain near-zero oxygen, and would have a chemical composition more like a petroleum product than a biomass-derived product. While it is technically possible to carry out the second step (lipid refining) with plant-based lipids, e.g. soybean oil or rapeseed oil, the quantity of oil feedstocks required to meet DoD's need exceeds the available supply of these plant-based oils. Algae oil offers a solution since they can produce oil under conditions that are unsuitable for traditional agriculture. Although areas like the desert Southwest or seashore are unsuitable for typical crop growth, by making use of man-made cultivation ponds, algae can flourish in these otherwise sparse environments.85 It was originally believed that inexpensive shallow ponds provided the most cost-effective way to grow algae. Table 3 shows a comparison of oil production from traditional biological sources. With the research NREL is proposing, it may be possible to achieve lipid productivities per acre that far exceed terrestrial plants. Algae oil production of more than 50 times that per acre of traditional oilseed crops may be achievable, yielding as much as 15.000 gallons of oil per year.8 In addition to closed ponds, the low cost of plastic containers offers the possibility of growing algae in closed such as transparent tubes with even greater yield rates possible.87

Specifically, the plan can make algae fuel a more sustainable alternative to petroleum for the United States Navy..Fudge 2013 (Tom Fudge, News Editor for KPBS at the San Diego State University..)(“Algae Fuel Could Help Solve The Navy’s Oil Dependence,” KPBS, 1/17/13 http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/jan/17/algae-fuel-could-help-solve-navys-oil-dependence//PL)

SAN DIEGO — When Captain Jim Goudreau describes the U.S. Navy's goal of cutting in half its use of fossil fuels by 2020, he uses words like “daunting” and “challenging.” Goudreau is director of the Navy’s Energy Coordination Office. And another word he uses to describe the goal is “necessary.” He said the Navy needs to end its heavy dependence on

petroleum. An ambitious goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels looks to algae as a way to

power the fleet. "And sometimes we buy it from counties that may or may not have the

same interests as us. But we need the fuel to operate,” he said, adding that it would be “prudent” to develop a domestic source that gives the Navy assured mobility. “We must always have something that allows us to go forth and do our mission as tasked by the nation," said Goudreau. The Navy ships and aircraft in San Diego still run

predominantly on petroleum. But that may change soon. In fact, though Goudreau works at the Pentagon, he said he was standing on a pier in San Diego last fall to see a Navy ship pull away under the power of biofuel. What’s more, one of the alternatives the Navy is testing is algae fuel, which San Diego scientists are working to develop. Goudreau said the Navy's search for alternative fuels has shown that some are far from ideal. He said biodiesel can damage equipment and gum up filters. Another alternative, ethanol, has low energy density. Fill a ship's tank with that, he said, and it will go only half as far. What the Navy needs are fuels that can literally take the place of petroleum. The Navy calls them drop-in fuels. "The key for us is to get an operational fuel that will go straight into our aircraft and straight into our ships,” said Goudreau, “without having to change any of the engineering inside the ships, and without having to change any of the storage or distribution infrastructure. It's got to be a true drop-in fuel." And this is where algae comes in. Algae fuel is an alternative the Navy is testing. UC San Diego molecular biologist Steve Mayfield is a founder of Sapphire Energy, a San Diego-based company that is already producing algae fuel at its demonstration plant in New Mexico. Some of it has been converted for use as jet fuel. Mayfield now serves on the company's science advisory board. He said the Navy has a proud history of transitioning between energy sources. "This is the group that took us from wind power to coal, from coal to petroleum, and from petroleum to nuclear power,” said Mayfield. “They just have a fantastic history of a can-do approach to... ‘Our adversaries have new technology and we've got to up the game.’ And they do." Mayfield said algae makes an ideal drop-in fuel because it's basically the same as the petroleum we have pumped out of the ground. "(Petroleum) was simply ancient algae that had been covered over by shallow seas and then was covered over by silt and dirt,” said Mayfield. “The algae’s proteins and carbohydrates degraded away, leaving the fat, which we call crude oil. So the algae we produce in ponds today makes the same stuff." Mayfield said while the Navy's primary concern is national security it should also worry about global warming, since it would have to deal with the mess that is created by rising sea levels and refugees fleeing drought-stricken areas. But if algae fuel is the same stuff as petroleum, why would it be any better for stopping global warming? Mayfield said when you use algae there's no net gain in greenhouse emissions in the atmosphere. That’s because when you grow algae it consumes the same carbon it produces when you burn its oil. Some people wonder whether the Navy’s calculation would change if American production of shale oil increases to the point where the Navy could get enough oil from domestic sources? Naval Secretary Ray Mabus has said even if that happened, oil is still a world commodity and it's still subject to shortages and price shocks the US cannot control. Despite the glowing reviews of a possible algae solution, the fuel is still in the testing phase and there’s not nearly enough out there to launch a thousand ships. Captain Goudreau said, for the Navy, cost will be an issue. "We're not going to buy large quantities for normal operations until it's a cost-competitive product," he said. Mayfield responded by saying that means the industry has to move beyond simply building demonstration plants and start building commercial facilities. "And by going to that commercial size," he said, "you can demonstrate the reduction of costs you get from economies of scale."

Economy Ext.

Biofuel use spurs the agriculture sector to increase production through jobs and higher wagesAdagha 2009 (Ovo Adagha, University of Calgary, Environmental Design.)(“Biofuels: Prospects, Positives, and Barriers,”January 2009, https://www.academia.edu/741519/Biofuels_Prospects_Positives_and_Barriers//PL)

2.3. Rural development The recent biofuel-led increases in food prices should come as no surprise to some proponents of biofuels. In fact, those who see biofuel use as benefiting rural development would be counting on food prices to rise. Even before concerns of a food crisis surfaced in mid-2007 (James et al., 2008; Josserand, 2008; Rahman et al., 2008), several simulation modeling stud- ies had projected that greater biofuel demand and production would lead to higher world prices not only for biofuel feed- stocks but also for other food or feed crops that compete for the same agricultural land (Raneses et al., 1998; Walsh et al., 2002; Koizumi, 2003; Fulton, 2004; Westcott, 2007), although it should be noted that other factors also contribute to high food prices (see Section 3.3). Analysts anticipate that higher prices of food and feed commodities would spur the agricul- tural sector to respond by increasing production (De La Torre Ugarte, 2006).

This would translate to higher employment rates and wages for the rural poor (farmers) ,

particularly in many developing countries where agricultural activities are labor-intensive. There is some evidence to support this: small-scale farmers in Jambi, Sumatra, for example, are investing in oil palm (for edible oil or biodiesel) and rubber (in response to increasing demand for natural rubber due to high price for oil from which synthetic rubber is derived) (P. Levang, personal communications; and J.G., personal observa-tions). Furthermore,

greater investments into agriculture could help improve yield and production efficiencies (De

La Torre Ugarte, 2006; Rosegrant et al., 2006; Pickett et al., 2008). In this way, the rural poor could become major benefi- ciaries of greater biofuel use both directly and indirectly. However, most analysts acknowledge that landless poor con- sumers in both rural and urban areas may ultimately suffer as a result of higher food prices (see Section 3.2).

Biotech Add-On

These organisms can also capture CO2- the plan’s use of MHV’s leads into new biotech applicationsMinic and Thongbam 2011 (Zoran Minic, Department of Chemistry, University of Saskatchewan, 110 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5C9, Canada. Premila D. Thongbam, Biochemistry Laboratory, ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region, Umiam, Meghalaya 793103, India.)(“The Biological Deep Sea Hydrothermal Vent as a Model to Study Carbon Dioxide Capturing Enzymes,” Marine Drugs, 4/28/11, http://www.biomedsearch.com/attachments/00/21/67/38/21673885/marinedrugs-09-00719.pdf//PL)

Carbonic anhydrases (CAs), the enzymes that catalyze the conversion of CO2 to bicarbonate and the selective conversion of CO2 to a liquid phase, can separate the CO2 from other gases. Therefore, as a potential catalyst, CA could be used in capture of CO2 from combustion fuel gas streams [135,136]. Different laboratory-scale reactors have been developed

to evaluate the capture of carbon dioxide from a gas into a liquid. The capture efficiencies could be enhanced by adding base (e.g., sodium hydroxide) to form bicarbonate or carbonate, which could be further transformed into insoluble CaCCh by adding precipitating cations, like Ca2+ [137]. CaCC>3 is a thermodynamically stable mineral found in all parts of the world, and is the main component of marine shells, snails, pearls, and eggshells. Sharma et al. [138] screened diverse groups of bacteria and found the best activity for CO2 conversion was obtained with a 29 kDa CA extracted from Enterobacter taylorae. Bhattacharya et al. [139] have developed a spray reactor coated with immobilized CA for CO2 capture and storage. They obtained a decrease in CO2 of almost 70%, and observed stability of CA at 40 °C. Novozymes Inc has a patent application for the cloning and purification of CA for CO2 storage [140]. The cloning of CA from Methanosarcina thermophila (Archaea) was performed using the bacterium Bacillus halodurans, and expressed enzymes were then purified by chromatography. Carbon Sciences Inc. has developed a method for synthetic precipitation of calcium carbonate (PCC) that can be used for various applications, e.g., paper, medicine and plastics production, and in a technology to transform CO2 emissions into the basic fuel building blocks required to produce gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel and other fuels.

CO2 Solution Inc. has developed a method by which CO2 emissions from cement factories can be captured and converted into bicarbonate ions. These ions are then used to produce limestone, a raw material that can be reintroduced into the cement manufacturing process [141]. However, existing CAs are expensive due to high manufacturing costs, low activity

and stability. The majority of enzymes exhibit very low, or no, activity when the temperature exceeds 50 °C [134]. Most industrial processes to eliminate CO2 occur at elevated temperatures, and immobilization techniques to retain biocatalyst activity will need to be performed at relatively higher temperatures [142]. In the environments of deep sea hydrothermal vents, many microorganisms have adapted to high temperatures, toxic substances

such as H2S and heavy metals. For these reason, biomolecules from these organisms might be

of great value in different biotechnological strategies [17]. Therefore, the exploration of

carbonic anhydrases for carbon capture from these environments could be attractive for use

in new biotechnological applications.

The organisms in the deep ocean can contribute to the biotechnology industry, reduce warming, and fosters biofuel production~underwater organisms can be used in biotech b/c of unique traits ~MHV’s have properties key to reducing CO2 emissions ~CO2 responsible for warming ~biotch methods using these organism are key to capture CO2 ~also help biofuels to reduce warming

Minic and Thongbam 2011 (Zoran Minic, Department of Chemistry, University of Saskatchewan. Premila D. Thongbam, Biochemistry Laboratory, ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region.)(“The Biological Deep Sea Hydrothermal Vent as a Model to Study Carbon Dioxide Capturing Enzymes,” Marine Drugs, 4/28/11, http://www.biomedsearch.com/attachments/00/21/67/38/21673885/marinedrugs-09-00719.pdf//PL)

4. Biotechnological Application Organisms that live in the environment of deep sea hydrothermal vents characterized by extreme physico-chemical conditions of temperature, pressure, pH and high concentrations of toxic heavy metals represent one of the most important sources for the development of new biotechnological applications. The biotope of hydrothermal vents harbors various and complex microbial communities adapted to different environmental conditions with unique features and characteristics and consequently these organisms could be used in biotechnology. Concerning carbon dioxide fixation and assimilation, the environment of deep sea hydrothermal vents can provide sources of unique enzymes, genes and metabolic processes important for the development of technologies related to industrial processes for reduction of atmospheric CO2, biofuels production, materials and chemical synthesis [17,119-122]. Carbon dioxide is the gas that is the major contributor to the greenhouse effect and as such is largely responsible for global warming [123-125]. This gas has been extensively released during the past 100-150 years into the atmosphere due to human activities. Over the

past 150 years atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased approximately by 30% [126]. To overcome the effects of global warming there is an urgent need to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content. Biotechnological methods have been used to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content at two levels; the biological fixation using microorganisms, and the capture of carbon dioxide via enzyme (carbonic anhydrase). Some microalgae like Cyanophyceae (blue-green algae),

Chlorophyceae (green algae), Bacillariophyceae (including diatoms) and Chrysophyceae (including golden algae) are known to be very efficient in utilizing atmospheric CO2 via photosynthesis [127,128].

Using genetic engineering and technology, new strains of these microalgae have been developed that can tolerate high concentrations of CO2 [127]. In addition, current technologies are being employed to examine the possibility of coupling wastewater treatment with microalgal growth for eventual production of biofuels [127]. Recently, a cyanobacterium, Synechococcus elongatus PCC7942 has been genetically engineered to produce isobutyraldehyde and isobutanol directly from CO2, increasing productivity by overexpression of ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (RuBisCO) [129]. Isobutyraldehyde is a precursor for the synthesis of other chemicals, and isobutanol can be used as a biofuel. However, a bioreactor that is able to achieve maximum productivity and maximum energy efficiency under a given set of operational costs is not yet fabricated [127]. A major problem with these reactors is related to low efficiency of carbon fixation using the Calvin cycle native to microalgae [130]. In order to develop a new reactor for enhanced microalgal CO2 fixation, it is necessary to increase the efficiency of the Calvin cycle. Genetic manipulation of RuBisCO might help to develop a new biotechnological system for large-scale carbon dioxide capture. In addition to the Calvin cycle, other CO2 fixation pathways or carboxylase enzymes could be used. These engineering alternatives for CO2 fixation strategies might be advantageous as they

may avoid the regulatory constraints and substrate limitations of native pathways [130]. Moreover, besides

microalgae other microbes, i.e., bacteria and archaea, can also contribute to biofuel

production and reduction of global warming [131]. For example, various types of bacteria that

use energy obtained from chemical oxidation under dark conditions can be efficient in CO2 fixation and can reduce CO2 to fuel. These bacteria possess the genes that encode the key enzymes of ethanol biosynthesis from pyruvate. Several studies have showed that CO2 may be converted to ethanol by Rhodobacter species under anoxygenic conditions in the light or under dark aerobic

growth conditions [132-134]. Therefore, microbes from hydrothermal deep sea vents that can fix CO2 into biomass could be of interest for development of the technologies for the production of biofuel as well as other compounds.

The plan is uniquely key to provide more biotech improvement and make biofuels more attractive for productionMinic and Thongbam 2011 (Zoran Minic, Department of Chemistry, University of Saskatchewan, 110 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5C9, Canada. Premila D. Thongbam, Biochemistry Laboratory, ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region, Umiam, Meghalaya 793103, India.)(“The Biological Deep Sea Hydrothermal Vent as a Model to Study Carbon Dioxide Capturing Enzymes,” Marine Drugs, 4/28/11, http://www.biomedsearch.com/attachments/00/21/67/38/21673885/marinedrugs-09-00719.pdf//PL)

5. Conclusions Deep sea hydrothermal vents are isolated habitats that contain many unique organisms of the three domains of life; archaea, bacteria and eukarya. Most microbial communities in these habitats have the capability to fix inorganic carbon dioxide. Five CO2 fixation pathways have been documented as important in hydrothermal habitats; the Calvin-Benson cycle, reductive tricarboxylic acid cycle, reductive acetyl-CoA pathway, dicarboxylate/4-hydroxybutyrate cycle and 3-hydroxypropionate/ 4-hydroxybutyrate cycle. Four different forms of RuBisCO, designated as I, II, III and IV, operate in different microbial communities associated with deep sea hydrothermal vents. The rTCA cycle is found in the Epsilonproteobacteria and Aquificales and the reductive acetyl-CoA pathway in the methanogens microorganisms. It appears that the 3-HP/4-hydroxybutyrate is potentially an important carbon fixation pathway for archaeal communities in deep-sea hydrothermal vent environments. In addition to these pathways for the direct fixation of carbon dioxide, carbonic anhydrase catalyzes the interconversion of CO2 and HCC>3~, and facilitates inorganic carbon dioxide uptake, fixation and assimilation. The bicarbonate formed by CA is an essential growth factor for microorganisms and is a metabolic precursor for many other

compounds. Human activities have significantly increased the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and this is an important cause of global warming. Therefore, it is of interest to find technologies for carbon dioxide capture. These technologies, combined with other efforts, could help stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere and mitigate climate change. Biological CO2 fixation has attracted much

attention as an alternative strategy. It can be done by plants and by photosynthetic and

chemosynthetic microorganisms. These biological technologies could also be attractive

for production of biofuels or other industrial products. A variety of technological solutions have been

proposed for CO2 sequestration systems. In addition, a number of technologies are currently employed or under development to separate carbon dioxide from mixed byproduct streams of large stationary anthropogenic sources. Therefore, a variety of

reactors containing an enzyme such as carbonic anhydrase have been designed to extract CO2 from mixed gas. In order to

develop and improve new technologies, it is important to search and explore enzymes from

different sources. The organisms of deep sea hydrothermal vents are well adapted to fix carbon dioxide in an unusual range of temperatures, pressure condition, pH and

metal toxicity. So, organisms from the environment could be used for engineering microbes to solve the various technology options for carbon capture and storage.

Solvency – Warming

Algae can capture CO2 and reduce current CO2 in the air- it’s net better than other land plants and has far more capabilities, but more incentives allow its advancementSayre 2010 (Richard Sayre, director of the Enterprise Institute for Renewable Fuels, at the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, in St. Louis, Missouri.)(“Microalgae: The Potential for Carbon Capture,” BioScience (2010) 60 (9): 722-727 http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/9/722.full//PL)

Microalgal biofuel systems Recently, there has been substantial interest and

investment in the development of microalgae to produce biofuels. Advantages of microalgae-based biofuels are greater production yields and available land area (compared with terrestrial crops); algae's ability to capture CO2 as bicarbonate in ponds, reducing atmospheric CO2 emissions; and reduced competition for land, particularly arable land used for food production (figure 1). Algae are estimated to produce two- to tenfold more biomass per unit land area than the best terrestrial systems (Chisti 2008, Packer 2009, Pienkos and Darzins 2009, Mata et al. 2010, Stephens et al. 2010, Weyer et al. 2010). There are several reasons for the greater biomass yields of algae versus land plants. Generally, algae have higher photosynthetic efficiency than land plants because of greater abilities to capture light and convert it to usable chemical energy (Melis 2009, Weyer et al. 2010). Under ideal growth conditions algae direct most of their energy into cell division (6- to 12-hour cycle), allowing for rapid biomass accumulation. Also, unlike plants, unicellular algae do not partition large amounts of biomass into supportive structures such as stems and roots that are energetically expensive to produce and often difficult to harvest and process for biofuel production. In addition, algae have carbon-concentrating mechanisms that suppress photorespiration (Spalding 2008, Jansson and Northen 2010). With algae, all the biomass can be harvested at any time of the year, rather than seasonally. In contrast, only a portion of the total biomass of terrestrial crops (corn cob, soybean seed) is harvested once a year. When algae are grown under stressful conditions (e.g., low nitrogen) or in the presence of supplemental reductants (sugar, glycerol), the metabolism of some species is redirected toward the production and accumulation of energy-dense storage compounds such as lipids. Many unicellular algae are facultatively capable of producing up to 60% of neutral lipids (triacylglycerol [TAG]) per gram of dry weight, making them one of the most efficient biofuel production systems known (Sheehan et al. 1998, Weyer et al. 2010). Significantly, algal biofuel production systems can be tightly controlled and optimized. Temperature, pH, and nutrient and CO2 concentrations can be monitored and optimized for maximum biomass and oil yields. In addition, it may be possible to control light quantity and quality (wavelength) by altering pond depth or using frequency-shifting fluorophores to increase photosynthetically active radiation, respectively. This level of environmental control is difficult to achieve with land plants that have fixed plant architectures in soil open environments. The major constraints facing biofuel production from algae can be divided into biomass production, harvesting, and extraction systems, and are the subject of directed research investment from the public and private sectors (box 1). Various estimates indicate

that potential oil and biomass yields from algae ponds range from 20,000 to 60,500 liters per hectare per year (2000 to 6000 gallons per acre per year) and 50,000 to 15,000 kilograms per hectare per year (140 to 420 tons per acre per year), respectively (Weyer et al. 2010). Optimization of light harvesting efficiency and enhanced metabolic flux leading to increased oil or biomass accumulation promise to boost the efficiency of biomass and oil production from algae at least two- to threefold (Wang et al. 2009,

Stephens et al. 2010). These advancements —coupled with more energy-efficient algal

harvesting and oil extraction technologies, coproduction of income-generating commodities including methane from the anaerobic digestion of delipidated biomass,

and residual biomass for animal feeds— will collectively reduce the cost of microalgal oil

production and potentially bring algal biofuel economics to parity with petroleum (Stephens

et al. 2010).

Studies prove that algae lowers U.S GHG emission compared to other fuelsLiu et al. 2013 (Xiaowei Liua, Benjamin Saydahb, Pragnya Erankia, Lisa M. Colosia, B. Greg Mitchellc, James Rhodesd, Andres F. Clarensa. Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Virginia,Sapphire Energy, Inc., Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Embori Group.)(“Pilot-scale data provide enhanced estimates of the life cycle energy and emissions profile of algae biofuels produced via hydrothermal liquefaction,” Bioresource Technology, Volume 148, November 2013, Pages 163–171, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852413013631//PL)

3. Results and discussion The energy return on investment (EROI) and GHG emissions for producing diesel and gasoline from algae using HTL are presented in Fig 2a and b, respectively. The results are benchmarked against both biofuels (conventional ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, and biodiesel) and petroleum-derived fuels. The results show that currently deployed algae-to-energy production processes using HTL (i.e., pilot-scale scenario) have energy burdens and GHG emission profiles that are comparable to or better than conventional biofuels, cellulosic ethanol and soybean biodiesel. The GHG emissions for HTL-derived algae fuels are also lower than other existing algae-to-energy processes based on transesterification as captured in the Meta-Model of Algae Bio-Energy Life Cycles (MABEL), a recent meta-analysis of previously published LCA studies pertaining to transesterification-based algae biodiesel production (Liu et al., 2012). The data for the biofuels were obtained from a variety of published meta-analyses and the estimates for petroleum-derived fuels were obtained from GREET. Energy burdens in Fig. 2 are expressed in terms of EROI because it can distill complex and integrated energy production systems into one measure of the thermodynamic yield of an energy production process. Any EROI value greater than one (indicated by the horizontal dotted line in Fig. 2) suggests that the process will generate more energy than is invested. Petroleum-derived fuels once exhibited EROI values on the order of 100, but as petroleum reserves have become depleted and reservoirs are exploited in more remote locations, EROI has dropped from ∼100 to roughly 4–5 for both gasoline and diesel (Guilfor et al., 2011). The results of this modeling effort show that the EROI of current pilot-scale HTL processes is approximately 1, but that over time, EROI could increase to between 2.5 and 3.0. EROI has a

few important limitations as a metric, primarily in that it does not prioritize useful energy and it ignores market factors that would make some energy outputs (e.g., liquid fuels) more desirable than others (e.g., CH4). Nevertheless, it represents a valuable first estimate of the

viability of different fuel production pathways relative to conventional benchmarks. For all

fuels, lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions are desirable and the values closest to zero

are most desirable. The low-sulfur petroleum diesel appears quite attractive from an

EROI perspective but it emits considerably more GHGs (94.3 g CO2e/MJ) than all the algae scenarios modeled here. This has important implications for developing climate policy objectives via low carbon fuel standards. Notably, the soybean biodiesel estimate here, which was adapted from Hill et al. (2006), does not incorporate indirect land use effects, which are increasingly regarded as important factors influencing the carbon accounting of conventional biofuels. These effects were also not considered for algae because its cultivation has not been carried out long enough to produce representative agricultural economic data. It is expected that algae’s indirect land use carbon impacts will be much smaller than those of other crops because algae can be cultivated on marginal land. Even though all the algae scenarios have GHG emission profiles that are lower than many terrestrial-derived biofuels, the industry still has significant opportunity to improve, particularly with respect to EROI. Such improvements are anticipated since well-controlled laboratory conditions cannot typically be scaled up easily to pilot conditions and algae are not yet produced in large enough quantities to benefit from efficiencies of scale. These results underscore the difficulty of extrapolating future full-scale life cycle burdens from current bench-scale or pilot-scale

parameter values. More notably, the full-scale scenario suggests that the improvements

in efficiency that the industry foresees in the coming years would go a long way toward

closing the gap between the maximally efficient processing (as captured in the laboratory

scenario) and the current state-of-the-art in the field. Interestingly, using currently

available HTL processes (represented by pilot-scale scenario) to make gasoline from algae has a considerably lower GHG footprint and a better EROI relative to conventional ethanol made from corn on a per MJ basis. This is important because corn-based ethanol is widely deployed in the United States and these data suggest that a shift to algae-derived gasoline could have immediate climate benefits even using existing technologies. In addition, given the technological improvements that the industry anticipates will occur, the benefits of algae-derived gasoline will likely improve. This is in contrast to the corn–ethanol industry, which relies almost entirely on proven technologies. The breakdown of energy use and GHG emissions by step within the supply chain is presented in Fig. 3. As shown in Fig. 2, the highest impacts are observed consistently for the pilot-scale scenario. Within the supply chain production chain for all three processes, the HTL conversion process is a significant driver of energy use and there are certainly opportunities to improve heat recapture and efficiency in this step that will have important impacts on the overall energy balance for the production process. The burdens of extracting the biocrude from the raffinate stream are relatively minor though these are sensitive to the choice of solvent (e.g., toluene or hexane). Also integral to the process supply chain are efforts to improve the efficiency of pumping and mixing as well as the biomass dewatering step. These are being explored actively by the

industry though it is likely that significant improvements in these areas will be limited, and even in full-scale systems these processes will represent an important source of the burdens in the supply chain. Much of the life cycle burden associated with all scenarios comes from the production of nutrients, which occurs upstream of the algae-to-energy facility. Nutrients are a perennial challenge to large-scale algae bioenergy deployment, and this result puts into context the underlying physical and chemical bottlenecks associated with deploying algae biofuels (Clarens et al., 2011). Current efforts to recycle nutrients within the plant are not efficient (12.5 ± 3%), and this has an important impact on the overall burdens of the HTL value chain. The nitrogen to carbon ratio in raffinate stream out of HTL unit is not suitable for efficient anaerobic digestion (Frank et al., 2013). Gasification is a technically feasible but energy intensive option for treating the raffinate and enhancing nutrient recycle. It also requires hydrogen, which would necessitate a natural gas source. It was assumed here that the raffinate could be diluted in the growth ponds and used to offset the demand for fertilizer. Since algae bioenergy producers have little control over how fertilizers are produced upstream, the emphasis must be on maximizing nutrient use efficiency to minimize this significant element of the life cycle burden. Similarly, CO2 supply is an important upstream burden that is influencing the overall life cycle. Algae cultivation facilities could significantly improve their overall GHG footprint if they could switch from using industrial CO2 (i.e., produced via natural gas scrubbing or from dedicated wells) to newer CO2 capture technologies (e.g., capture from the air (Lackner et al., 2011) or as a byproduct of other industrial processes). The technology and infrastructure (e.g., pipelines) needed to create this carbon dioxide supply chain at the scale and in the locations where it could meet the demands of algae cultivation still needs to be developed, even though there are efforts in the private sector to build this infrastructure. In parts of the US and Europe, this infrastructure is being deployed for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and other carbon utilization and storage applications. In the Netherlands CO2 is currently being collected and transported via pipeline to large industrial greenhouses where it is used to enhance plant growth. Downstream processing of the algae biocrude could also have important impacts on the overall energy and GHG profiles of algae derived biofuels produced via HTL. Processing in a conventional refinery represents the second largest source of burdens besides upstream nutrients and CO2. Again here, algae bioenergy producers will have limited influence in terms of process improvement, but when compared to petroleum-derived fuels, algal biocrude can offer several advantages due to its elemental composition, low sulfur content, and relative lack of heavy metals. Consequently, atmospheric distillation, desulfurization and heteroatom removal processes can be avoided when upgrading algae biocrude from HTL. Efforts to pre-treat or otherwise upgrade the fuel and integrate it into the refinery while simultaneously preserving the energy content of the fuel should be a top priority for refineries incorporating biocrude for the first time.

Impact Ext.

Oil dependency independently makes resource wars inevitable- the time is now to devote time towards other alternatives.Lendman 2007 (Stephen Lendman, Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization and co-host of The Global Research News Hour on the Republic Broadcasting Network.)(“Resource Wars - Can We Survive Them?,” Rense, 6/6/07, http://www.rense.com/general76/resrouce.htm)

That's what launched our road to war in 1991 having nothing to do with Saddam threatening anyone. It hasn't stopped since. The Bush (preventive war) Doctrine spelled out our intentions in June, 2002. It then became NSS policy in September getting us directly embroiled in the Middle East and Central Asia and indirectly with proxy forces in countries like Somalia so other

oil-rich African nations (like Sudan) get the message either accede to our will or you're next in the target queue. With the world's energy supplies finite, the US heavily dependent on imports, and "peak oil" near or approaching, "security" for America means assuring a sustainable supply of what we can't do without. It includes waging wars to get it, protect it, and defend the maritime trade routes over which it travels. That means energy's partnered with predatory New World Order globalization, militarism, wars, ecological recklessness, and now an extremist US administration willing to risk Armageddon for world dominance. Central to its plan is first controlling essential resources everywhere, at any

cost, starting with oil and where most of it is located in the Middle East and Central Asia. The New "Great Game" and Perils From It The new "Great Game's" begun, but this time the stakes are greater than ever as explained above. The old one lasted nearly 100 years pitting the British empire against Tsarist Russia when the issue wasn't oil. This time, it's the US with help from Israel, Britain, the West, and satellite states like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan challenging Russia and China with today's weapons and technology on both sides making earlier ones look like toys. At stake is more than oil. It's planet earth with survival of all life on it issue number

one twice over. Resources and wars for them means militarism is increasing, peace declining, and the planet's ability to sustain life front and center, if anyone's paying attention. They'd better be because beyond the point of no return, there's no second chance the way Einstein explained after the atom was split. His famous quote on future wars was : "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought,

but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." Under a worst case scenario, it's more dire than that. There may be nothing left but resilient beetles and bacteria in the wake of a nuclear holocaust meaning even a new stone age is way in the future, if at all. The threat is real and once nearly happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October, 1962. We later learned a miracle saved us at the 40th anniversary October, 2002 summit meeting in Havana attended by the US and Russia along with host country Cuba. For the first time, we were told how close we came to nuclear Armageddon. Devastation was avoided only because Soviet submarine captain Vasily Arkhipov countermanded his order to fire nuclear-tipped torpedos

when Russian submarines were attacked by US destroyers near Kennedy's "quarantine" line. Had he done it, only our imagination can speculate what might have followed and whether planet earth, or at least a big part of it, would have survived. Now we're back to square one, but this time a rogue administration, with 19 months left in office, marauds the earth endangering all life on it. It claims a

unilateral right in its Nuclear Policy Review of December, 2001 to use first strike nuclear weapons as part of our "imperial grand strategy" to rule the world through discretionary preventive wars against nations we claim threaten our security, because we said so. Orwell would love words like "security" and "stability" meaning we're boss so other countries better subordinate their interests to ours, or else. To avoid misunderstandings, we spell it out further. The May, 2000 Joint Vision 2020 claims a unilateral right to control all land, surface and sub-surface sea, air, space, electromagnetic spectrum and information systems. It gives us the right to use

overwhelming force against any nation challenging our dominance with all present and future weapons in our arsenal including powerful nuclear ones.

A switch to alternative energy sources increases our energy securityCommittee on International Relations 2002 (House of Representatives Committee)(“Oil Diplomacy: Facts and Myths Behind Foreign Oil Dependency,” Hearing before the committee on internaltional relations House of Representatives 6/20/02, http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa80291.000/hfa80291_0.htm)

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:52 a.m. in Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. Today, the Committee holds a hearing on Oil Diplomacy: The Facts and Myths Behind Foreign Oil Dependency. The national security of the United States depends on the reliable supply of energy to support our needs. Fluctuating oil prices and instability in the Middle East once again are prompting calls for energy independence for the United States. The enticing prospect of freedom from the whims of foreign rulers has been held by every President since 1973 and its infamous Arab oil boycott. Our energy security is also directly linked with the voracity of OPEC's demands.

OPEC , the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, conspires to fix prices and

restrict the supply of crude oil to the world market in order to maximize profits. We

must devise alternate sources of energy and supplies to confront this threat . Yet barring

radical changes in our lifestyles, the economy and technology, our domestic resources alone will continue to fall short of this goal. As Americans, we count on energy to protect our security, to fuel our cars, to provide heat, air conditioning, and light for our homes, to manufacture goods, and to transport supplies. In all of these needs, we, as consumers, pay the price for fluctuations in the global energy market. Gas prices are largely determined by the price of crude oil, which has fluctuated greatly in recent months. Recently, prices at the pump were as high as $1.73 per gallon for regular unleaded gasoline in Hawaii. Currently, in Chicago the same type of gas sells for on average $1.58 per gallon. The U.S. Department of Energy reports that this summer's gas prices are expected to reach the third highest on record. Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC The United States imports 52 percent of the oil it uses, and as an oil-importing nation, our energy security is inextricably linked with the political and economic security of our suppliers. Currently, the riskiest factors include: Instability in the Middle East and Venezuela; Iran's recent call to all Arab and Muslim nations to use oil as a weapon against the United States; and Iraq's recent suspension of oil exports to the U.S., currently amounting to one million barrels of oil per day. U.S. energy security is not only affected by our imports, but our domestic supplies are an important part of the equation as well. We must examine why domestic production has been falling over the past 2 decades. Are regulations so overbearing that

they place the energy security of the United States in jeopardy? By increasing our domestic

production of energy in both fuel types and efficiency, we ensure our survival in the event of

a catastrophic disruption of world oil supplies. I believe this may be accomplished through

new technology which is much more environmentally sound than in years past. I am pleased that the President's National Energy Plan calls for an increase in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as a means to address an imminent disruption in supplies and as a national defense reserve. Is energy independence possible or even advisable? Is diversification of suppliers and types of fuel the answer to the U.S. national energy security? Even if energy independence is not feasible in the short term, greater energy security certainly is. I believe that the means of achieving that lies close at hand in our own hemisphere, and I would like to suggest, here and now, the creation of the North American Energy Alliance.

Absent the plan, oil dependency leads to a decrease in hegemonyLeverett and Noel 2006 (Flynt Leverett,New America Foundation. Pierre Noël, Research Fellow, French Institute of International Relations.)("The New Axis of Oil," New America Foundation, July 2006, http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2006/the_new_axis_of_oil)

While Washington is preoccupied with curbing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, avoiding policy failure in Iraq and cheering the "forward march of freedom,"

the political consequences of recent structural shifts in global energy markets are posing the

most profound challenge to American hegemony since the end of the Cold War. The increasing control that state-owned companies exercise over the world's reserves of crude oil and natural gas is, under current market conditions, enabling some energy exporters to act with escalating boldness against U.S. interests and policies. Perhaps the most immediate example is Venezuela's efforts to undermine U.S. influence in Latin America. The most strategically significant manifestation, though, is Russia's willingness to use its newfound external leverage to counteract what Moscow considers an unacceptable level of U.S. infringement on its interests. At the same time, rising Asian states, especially China, are seeking to address their perceived energy vulnerability through state-orchestrated strategies to "secure" access to hydrocarbon resources around the world. In the Chinese case, a statist approach to managing external energy relationships is increasingly pitting China against the United States in a competition for influence in the Middle East, Central Asia and oil-producing parts of Africa.

We describe these political consequences of recent structural shifts in global energy markets by the shorthand "petropolitics." While each of these developments is challenging to U.S. interests, the various threads of petropolitics are now coming together in an emerging "axis of oil" that is acting as a counterweight to American hegemony on a widening range of issues2. At the center of this undeclared but increasingly assertive axis is a growing geopolitical partnership between Russia (a major energy producer) and China (the paradigmatic rising consumer) against what both perceive as excessive U.S. unilateralism. The impact of this axis on U.S. interests has already been felt in the largely successful Sino-Russian effort to rollback U.S. influence in Central Asia. But the real significance is being seen in the ongoing frustration of U.S. objectives on the Iranian nuclear issue. This will likely be a milestone in redefining the post-Cold War international order -- not merely because Iran is likely to end up with

at least a nuclear-weapons option, but because of what that will imply about the efficacy of America's global leadership.

Collapse risks great power war in multiple hotspots – also destroys multilateral cooperationIkenberry et. al, 13 – John Ikenberry, Ph. D in Political Science from Chicago, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute, Co-Director of Princeton’s Center for International Security Studies; William Wohlforth, Ph. D in Political Science from Yale, Webster Professor of Government at Dartmouth College; Stephen Brooks, Ph. D in Political Science from Yale, Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College, Senior Fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University; “Don’t Come Home, America: The Case Against Retrenchment”, http://live.belfercenter.org/files/IS3703_Brooks%20Wohlforth%20Ikenberry.pdf

Assessing the Security Benefits of Deep Engagement Even if deep engagement’s costs are far less than retrenchment advocates claim, they are not worth bearing unless they yield greater benefits. We focus here on the strategy’s major security benefits; in the next section, we take up the wider payoffs of the United States’ security role for its interests in other realms, notably the

global economy—an interaction relatively unexplored by international relations scholars. A core premise of deep

engagement is that it prevents the emergence of a far more dangerous global

security environment . For one thing, as noted above, the United States’ overseas presence

gives it the leverage to restrain partners from taking provocative action. Perhaps more

important, its core alliance commitments also deter states with aspirations to regional hegemony from contemplating expansion and make its partners more secure, reducing their incentive to adopt solutions to their security problems that threaten others and thus stoke security dilemmas. The contention that engaged U.S. power

dampens the baleful effects of anarchy is consistent with influential variants of

realist theory . Indeed, arguably the scariest portrayal of the war-prone world that would emerge

absent the “American Pacifier” is provided in the works of John Mearsheimer, who

forecasts dangerous multipolar regions replete with security competition, arms

races, nuclear proliferation and associated preventive war temptations, regional

rivalries , and even runs at regional hegemony and full-scale great power war . 72 How

do retrenchment advocates, the bulk of whom are realists, discount this benefit? Their arguments are complicated, but two capture most of the variation: (1) U.S. security guarantees are not necessary to prevent dangerous rivalries and conflict in Eurasia; or (2) prevention of rivalry and conflict in Eurasia is not a U.S. interest. Each response is connected to a different theory or set of theories, which makes sense given that the whole debate hinges on a complex future counterfactual (what would happen to Eurasia’s security setting if the United States truly disengaged?). Although a certain answer is impossible,

each of these responses is nonetheless a weaker argument for retrenchment than advocates acknowledge. The first response flows from defensive realism as well as other international relations theories that discount the conflict-generating potential of anarchy under contemporary conditions. 73 Defensive realists maintain that the high ex pected costs of territorial conquest, defense dominance, and an array of policies and practices that can be used credibly to signal benign intent, mean that Eurasia’s major states could manage regional multipolarity peacefully without the American pacifier. Retrenchment would be a bet on this scholarship, particularly in regions where the kinds of stabilizers that nonrealist theories point to—such as democratic governance or dense institutional linkages—are either absent

or weakly present. There are three other major bodies of scholarship, however, that might give decisionmakers pause before making this bet. First is regional expertise. Needless to say, there is no consensus on the net security effects of U.S. withdrawal. Regarding each region, there are optimists and pessimists. Few experts expect a return of intense great power competition in a post-American Europe, but many doubt European governments will pay the political costs of increased EU defense cooperation and the budgetary costs of increasing military

outlays. 74 The result might be a Europe that is incapable of securing itself from various

threats that could be destabilizing within the region and beyond (e.g., a regional conflict akin

to the 1990s Balkan wars), lacks capacity for global security missions in which U.S. leaders might want European participation, and is vulnerable to the influence of outside rising powers. What about the other parts of Eurasia where the United States has a substantial military presence?

Regarding the Middle East , the balance begins to swing toward pessimists concerned

that states currently backed by Washington— notably Israel, Egypt, and Saudi

Arabia —might take actions upon U.S. retrenchment that would intensify security

dilemmas . And concerning East Asia, pessimism regarding the region’s prospects without

the American pacifier is pronounced. Arguably the principal concern expressed by area experts is that

Japan and South Korea are likely to obtain a nuclear capacity and increase their

military commitments, which could stoke a destabilizing reaction from China . It is

notable that during the Cold War, both South Korea and Taiwan moved to obtain a nuclear weapons capacity and were only constrained from doing so by a still-engaged United States. 75 The second body of scholarship casting doubt on the bet on defensive realism’s sanguine portrayal is all of the research that undermines its conception of state preferences. Defensive realism’s optimism about what would happen if the United States retrenched is very

much dependent on its particular—and highly restrictive—assumption about state preferences; once we relax this assumption, then much of its basis for optimism vanishes. Specifically, the prediction of post-American tranquility throughout Eurasia rests on the assumption that security is the only relevant state preference, with security defined narrowly in terms of protection from violent

external attacks on the homeland. Under that assumption, the security problem is largely solved as soon as offense and defense are clearly distinguishable, and offense is extremely expensive relative to defense. Burgeoning research across the social and other sciences, however, undermines that core

assumption: states have preferences not only for security but also for prestige, status, and other aims, and they engage in trade-offs among the various objectives. 76 In addition, they

define security not just in terms of territorial protection but in view of many and varied milieu goals. It follows that even states that are relatively secure may nevertheless engage in highly competitive behavior. Empirical studies show that this is indeed sometimes the case. 77 In sum, a bet on a benign postretrenchment Eurasia is a bet that leaders of major countries will never allow these nonsecurity preferences to influence their strategic choices. To the

degree that these bodies of scholarly knowledge have predictive leverage, U.S. retrenchment would result in

a significant deterioration in the security environment in at least some of the world’s

key regions. We have already mentioned the third, even more alarming body of scholarship. Offensive realism predicts

that the withdrawal of the American pacifier will yield either a competitive regional

multipolarity complete with associated insecurity, arms racing, crisis instability,

nuclear proliferation , and the like, or bids for regional hegemony, which may be

beyond the capacity of local great powers to contain (and which in any case would

generate intensely competitive behavior, possibly including regional great power

war ). Hence it is unsurprising that retrenchment advocates are prone to focus on the second argument noted above: that

avoiding wars and security dilemmas in the world’s core regions is not a U.S. national interest. Few doubt that the United States could survive the return of insecurity and conflict among Eurasian powers, but at what cost? Much of the work in this area has focused on the economic externalities of a renewed threat of insecurity and war, which we discuss below. Focusing on the pure security ramifications, there are two main reasons why decisionmakers may be rationally reluctant to run the

retrenchment experiment. First, overall higher levels of conflict make the world a more dangerous place. Were Eurasia to return to higher levels of interstate military competition, one would see overall higher levels of military spending and innovation and a higher likelihood of competitive regional proxy wars and arming of client states—all of which would be concerning, in part because it would promote a faster

diffusion of military power away from the United States. Greater regional insecurity

could well feed proliferation cascades , as states such as Egypt, Japan, South Korea,

Taiwan, and Saudi Arabia all might choose to create nuclear forces . 78 It is unlikely that

proliferation decisions by any of these actors would be the end of the game: they would likely generate

pressure locally for more proliferation . Following Kenneth Waltz, many retrenchment

advocates are proliferation optimists, assuming that nuclear deterrence solves the security problem. 79 Usually carried out in dyadic terms, the debate over the stability of

proliferation changes as the numbers go up. Proliferation optimism rests on

assumptions of rationality and narrow security preferences . In social science, however, such

assumptions are inevitably probabilistic. Optimists assume that most states are led by rational leaders , most will overcome organizational problems and resist the temptation to preempt before feared neighbors nuclearize, and most pursue only security and are risk averse. Confidence in such probabilistic assumptions declines if the world were to move from nine to twenty, thirty, or forty nuclear states. In addition, many of the other dangers noted by analysts who are concerned about the destabilizing effects of nuclear proliferation—including the risk of accidents and the prospects that some new nuclear powers will not have truly survivable forces—seem prone to go up as the

number of nuclear powers grows. 80 Moreover, the risk of “ unforeseen crisis dynamics”

that could spin out of control is also higher as the number of nuclear powers

increases . Finally, add to these concerns the enhanced danger of nuclear leakage, and a

world with overall higher levels of security competition becomes yet more worrisome. The argument that maintaining Eurasian peace is not a U.S. interest faces a second problem. On widely accepted realist assumptions, acknowledging that U.S. engagement preserves peace dramatically narrows the difference between retrenchment and deep engagement. For many supporters of retrenchment, the optimal strategy for a power such as the United States, which has attained regional hegemony and is separated from other great powers by oceans, is offshore balancing: stay over the horizon and “pass the buck” to local powers to do the dangerous work of counterbalancing any local rising power. The United States should commit to onshore balancing only when local balancing is likely to fail and a great power appears to be a credible contender for regional hegemony, as in the cases of Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union in

the midtwentieth century. The problem is that China’s rise puts the possibility of its attaining regional hegemony on the table , at least in the medium to long term. As Mearsheimer notes, “The United States will have to play a key role in countering China, because its Asian neighbors are not strong enough to do it by them selves.” 81 Therefore, unless China’s rise stalls, “the United States is likely to act toward China similar to the way it behaved toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War.” 82 It follows that the

United States should take no action that would compromise its capacity to move to onshore balancing in the future. It will need to maintain key alliance relationships in Asia as well as the formidably expensive military capacity to intervene there. The implication is to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, reduce the presence in Europe, and pivot to Asia— just what the United States is doing. 83 In sum, the argument that U.S. security commitments are unnecessary for peace is countered by a lot of scholarship, including highly influential realist

scholarship. In addition, the argument that Eurasian peace is unnecessary for U.S. security is

weakened by the potential for a large number of nasty security consequences as well as the need to retain a latent onshore balancing capacity that dramatically reduces

the savings retrenchment might bring. Moreover, switching between offshore and

onshore balancing could well be difficult. Bringing together the thrust of many of the arguments

discussed so far underlines the degree to which the case for retrenchment misses the underlying logic of the deep engagement

strategy. By supplying reassurance, deterrence , and active management, the United

States lowers security competition in the world’s key regions, thereby preventing

the emergence of a hothouse atmosphere for growing new military capabilities .

Alliance ties dissuade partners from ramping up and also provide leverage to prevent

military transfers to potential rivals. On top of all this, the United States’ formidable

military machine may deter entry by potential rivals . Current great power military

expenditures as a percentage of GDP are at historical lows, and thus far other major powers have shied away from seeking to match top-end U.S. military capabilities . In

addition, they have so far been careful to avoid attracting the “focused en mity” of the United States. 84 All of the world’s most modern militaries are U.S. allies (America’s alliance

system of more than sixty countries now accounts for some 80 percent of global military spending), and the gap

between the U.S. military capability and that of potential rivals is by many measures

growing rather than shrinking . 85 In the end, therefore, deep engagement reduces security

competition and does so in a way that slows the diffusion of power away from the

United States . This in turn makes it easier to sustain the policy over the long term. THE WIDER BENE FITS OF DEEP

ENGAGEMENT The case against deep engagement overstates its costs and underestimates its security benefits. Perhaps its most important weakness, however, is that its preoccupation with security issues diverts attention from some of deep engagement’s most important benefits: sustaining the global economy and fostering institutionalized cooperation in ways advantageous to U.S. national interests. ECONOMIC BENE FITS Deep engagement is based on a premise central to realist scholarship from E.H. Carr to Robert Gilpin: economic orders do not just emerge spontaneously; they are created and sustained by and for powerful states. 86 To be sure, the sheer size of its economy would guarantee the United States a

significant role in the politics of the global economy whatever grand strategy it adopted. Yet the fact that it is the

leading military power and security provider also enables economic leadership . The

security role figures in the creation, maintenance, and expansion of the system. In part

because other states—including all but one of the world’s largest economies—were heavily dependent on U.S. security protection during the Cold War, the United States

was able not only to foster the economic order but also to prod other states to buy

into it and to support plans for its progressive expansion. 87 Today, as the discussion in the

previous section underscores, the security commitments of deep engagement support the global economic order by reducing the likelihood of security dilemmas, arms racing,

instability, regional conflicts and, in extremis, major power war. In so doing, the strategy

helps to maintain a stable and comparatively open world economy —a long-standing

U.S. national interest. In addition to ensuring the global economy against important sources of insecurity, the extensive set of U.S. military commitments and

deployments helps to protect the “global economic commons.” One key way is by

helping to keep sea-lanes and other shipping corridors freely available for commerce .

88 A second key way is by helping to establish and protect property/sovereignty rights in the oceans. Although it is not the only global actor relevant to protecting the global economic commons,

the U nited S tates has by far the most important role given its massive naval

superiority and the leadership role it plays in international economic institutions . If

the United States were to pull back from the world, protecting the global economic

commons would likely be much harder to accomplish for a number of reasons:

cooperating with other nations on these matters would be less likely to occur;

maintaining the relevant institutional foundations for promoting this goal would be

harder ; and preserving access to bases throughout the world—which is needed to

accomplish this mission—would likely be curtailed to some degree.

**Ecosystems Extensions**

Uniqueness – Ocean Ecosystems

Ocean oxygen levels, acidification, and overfishing are worsening at unprecedented ratesHuffington Post 13 (Christian Cotroneo “Ocean Acidification: State Of Seas In 'Fast Decline' According To Report “ Huffington Post, 10/4/14, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/04/ocean-acidification-state_n_4044759.html)//BLOV

The sea is singing a sad song these days. Last month, a UN-sponsored panel expressed "extreme confidence" that the world is in the throes of climate change — a situation that sees oceans bear much of the brunt. And now, a review from an international team of the world's leading scientists suggests emerging dead zones may be stirring up mass extinctions in the world's oceans. “We have been taking the ocean for granted," a study from the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) claims. "It has been shielding us from the worst effects of accelerating climate change by absorbing excess

CO2 from the atmosphere. “Whilst terrestrial temperature increases may be experiencing a pause, the ocean continues to warm regardless." The alleged culprit? A global phenomenon whose existence is still

too widely denied — despite a raft of reports indicating otherwise. Climate change. More specifically, the report's

authors — a non-governmental group of scientists — suggest the burning of fossil fuels has ramped up carbon dioxide emissions. By heating the atmosphere, these greenhouse gases have

continued to heat the oceans, while boosting acidity to unprecedented levels. In doing so, the IPSO

report suggests, commercial fish stocks are being pushed to the Earth's poles, while other marine species face extinction. “The health of the ocean is spiraling downwards far more rapidly than we had thought,"

Alex Rogers, a professor in the UK and IPSO's scientific director said. "We are seeing greater change, happening faster , and the effects are more imminent than previously anticipated. The situation should be of the gravest concern to everyone since everyone will be affected by changes in the ability of the ocean to support life on

Earth." As reported in National Geographic, heat-trapping carbon dioxide has raised the average global temperature by 0.6 degrees Celsius over the past century — a rate that oceans have not kept pace with.

Instead, the world's seas have heated by 0.1 degrees Celsius — a change mostly affecting areas

from the surface to a depth of some 700 metres. In other words, where marine life typically flourishes. In its

review, IPSO pointed out several areas of imminent concern : The oceans are running out of air. By 2100, researchers predict oxygen content will dwindle by anywhere from 1 per cent to seven percent — a deadly combination of global warming and runoff from sewage and agriculture. In fact, Scientific American

points out dead zones -- stretches of water that don't have enough oxygen to support fish -- is likely caused by surges in chemical nutrients (read: agricultural run-offs). These added nutrients spike algae blooms, which in turn soak up all the oxygen. Acid levels are surging. Carbon dioxide concentrations are expected

to rise over the next 30 to 50 years with grave consequences for ocean life. In fact, the IPSO report states ocean acidity has reached a 300-million-year high. Ocean warming will abide. In fact, it shoulders much of the burden that is global warming. And that spells ebbing ice levels, even less oxygen and increasingly

unlivable conditions for sea life. Oh, and thanks for all the over-fishing. Really. The report stressed that the world governments have severely mismanaged this issue to the point where species that are vital to the ocean's food chain may be in

irreversible decline "What these latest reports make absolutely clear is that deferring action will increase costs in the future and lead to even greater, perhaps irreversible, losses," Dan Laffoley, a

professor and member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the worldest largest and oldest environmental organization. "The UN climate report confirmed that the ocean is bearing the brunt of human-

induced changes to our planet. These findings give us more cause for alarm — but also a roadmap for action. We must use it."

Oceans on the brink- overfishing, pollution and energy explorationEastern Tribune 6/26/14 (The Eastern Tribune is a global online newspaper published from Chicago“Oceans to collapse as overfishing and pollution increase” Eastern Tribune, 6/26/14, http://www.theeasterntribune.com/story/6251/collapse-of-ocean-nearing-as-overfishing-and-pollution-increases/#sthash.7rrRfcp2.dpuf)//BLOV

NEW YORK: Oceans were facing the biggest threat in the world and requires immediate action. According to the reports of the Global Ocean Commission (GOC), the Ocean needs to be saved from the overfishing and pollution. However, the committee also mentioned that the action required should be immediate and should be implemented within five years. The committee said that Oceans are

in heave of danger due to the high seas fishing and pollution. The committee that is comprised of many politicians said the energy exploration in the high seas is also a dangerous practice and can cause collapse of the ocean. United States, European Union, China and Japan and other six countries are responsible for unregulated and illegal fishing in the high seas. The high seas is the area which is outside the area of National Coastal Zone, and according to the GOC, it covers almost half of the globe. If reports are to be believed then every year, some 10

million fishes are caught, worth around $16 million. David Miliband, former British Foreign Secretary said,

“The oceans are a failed state . A previously virgin area has been turned into a plundered part of the planet.” He also co-chairs the GOC. President Barack Obama recently had taken some sincere steps to create the largest water sanctuary of the world. Jose Maria Figueres, who also co-chairs the commission, said, “The Ocean provides 50 percent of our oxygen and fixes 25 percent of global carbon emissions. Our food

chain begins in that 70 percent of the planet.” Sensing the importance of the issue, the committee is going to take all the measures so that the collapse of the Ocean can be restricted.

Decline needs to stop- anything else pushes it past the brinkIPSO 13 (The International Programme on the State of the Ocean in conjunction with IUCN: The International Union for Conservation of Nature, “Press Release Greater , Faster, Closer Latest Review Of Science Reveals Ocean In Critical State From Cumulative Impacts” 10/3/13 http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/IPSO-PR-2013-FINAL.pdf)//BLOV

Professor Alex Rogers of Somerville College, Oxford, and Scientific Director of IPSO said : “The

health of the ocean is spiraling downwards far more rapidly than we had thought . We are

seeing greater change, happening faster, and the effects are more imminent than previously

anticipated. The situation should be of the gravest concern to everyone since everyone will be affected by changes in the

ability of the ocean to support life on Earth.” The findings , published in the peer review journal Marine Pollution Bulletin, are part of an ongoing assessment process overseen by IPSO, which bring s together scientists from a range of marine disciplines. The body’s previous 2011 report, which warned of the threat of ‘globally significant’ extinctions of marine specie s, received global media attention an d has been cited in hearings at the United Nations

, US Senate and European Parliament as well as the UK Parliament , Among the latest assessments of factors affecting ocean health , the panel identified the following areas as of greatest cause for concern:De - oxygenation : the evidence is accumulating that the oxygen inventory of the ocean is progressively declining. Predictions for ocean oxygen content suggest a decline of between 1% and 7% by 2100. This is occurring in two way s: the broad trend of decreasing oxygen levels in tropical oceans and areas of

the North Pacific over the last 50 years; and the dramatic increase in coastal hypoxia (low oxygen) associated with

eutrophication. The former is caused by global warming, the second by increased nutrient runoff from agriculture and sewage. • Acidification : If current levels of CO 2 release continue we can expect extremely serious consequences for ocean life , and in turn food and coastal protection ; at CO 2 concentrations of 450 - 500 ppm (projected in 2030 - 2050) erosion will exceed calcification in the coral reef building process, resulting in the extinction of some species and decline in biodiversity overall . • Warming : As made clear by the IPCC, the ocean is taking the brunt of warming in the climate system, with direct and well - documented physical and biogeochemical consequences. The impacts which continued warming is projected to have in the decades to 2050

include: reduced seasonal ice zones, including th e disappearance of Arctic summer sea ice by ca. 2037;

increasing stratification of ocean layers, leading to oxygen depletion; increased venting of the GHG methane from the Arctic seabed (a factor not considered by the IPCC) ; and increased incidence of

anox ic and hypoxic (low oxygen) even t s . • The ‘ deadly trio’ of the above three stressors - acidification, warming and

deoxygenation - is seriously effecting how productive and efficient the ocean is, as temperatures, chemistry, surface stratification, nutrient and oxygen supply are all implicated, meaning that many organisms will find

themselves in unsuitable environments. These impa cts will have cascading consequences for marine biology , including altered food web dynamics and the expansion of pathogens . •

Continued overfishing is serving to further undermine the resilience of ocean systems, and

contrary to some claims, despite some i mprovements largely in developed regions, fisheries management is still failing to halt the decline of key species and damage to the ecosystems on which marine life depends. In 2012 the UN FAO determined that 70% of world fish populations are unsustainably exploited, of which 30% have biomass collapsed to less than 10% of unfished levels. A recent global assessment of compliance with Article 7 (fishery management) of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, awarded 60% of countries a “fail” g rade, and saw no country identified as being overall “good

Solvency – Plastics

Exploration and scientific research is key to solve micro plastic pollutionCole et al 9 (Matthew, scientist for Plymouth Marine Laboratory and Unviersity of Exeter, Pennie Lindeque, researcher for High North Research Centre for Climate and the Environment in Norway, Claudia Halsband, Senior scientist for the Fram Centre for Climate and the Environment, specializing in plankton biodiversity and ecosystem functions, holds a Phd in Biological Oceanography from the Universite Pierre and Marie Curie Paris, Tamara S. Galloway, professor of Ecotoxicology at the School of biosciences at the University of Exeter, her research focuses mainly on the effects of marine pollutants, “Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review,” Marine Pollution Bulletin, http://www.adventurescience.org/uploads/7/3/9/8/7398741/_cole_et_al_2011_mar_poll_bull..pdf)

Over the past decade, increased scientific interest has produced an expanding knowledge

base for microplastics. Nevertheless, fundamental questions and issues remain unresolved. An

evolving suite of sampling techniques has revealed that microplastics are a ubiqui- tous and widespread marine contaminant,

present throughout the water column. However, disparity in the size definitions of micro- plastics and lack of comparability of microplastic sampling methodologies hinder our ability to cross-examine quantitative studies to better determine spatial and temporal patterns of this contaminant. The highest abundance of microplastics is typically

associated with coastlines and mid-ocean gyres, but the fate of these microplastics is elusive. It is

hypothesised that microplastics sink following biofoul- ing, fragment into smaller and smaller polymer fragments and/or are ingested by marine biota. Fully testing such hypotheses is impeded by the complexity of sampling the ocean depths and the dif- ficulty of routinely sampling and detecting smaller-sized fractions of microplastics (including nanoplastics). Laboratory and field-stud- ies have shown the consumption of microplastics in a range of mar- ine biota, although it remains unclear whether microplastic ingestion alone will result in adverse health effects (e.g. mortality, morbidity and reproductive success)

or whether such a contaminant can routinely be passed up the food chain. The transfer of toxic chemicals to

biota via microplastic ingestion is a significant concern. However, few existing studies have

conducted toxicity-studies using microplastic vectors. Looking to the future, here we

present a list of knowledge gaps we believe deserve further attention from the scientific

community (Table 2).

Solvency – PAH

Deep ocean exploration is key to a better understanding of plastic pollutants including PAHsFarrington and Takada 14( John W., former Associate Director for Education and Dean of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution , former President of the Ocean Sciences Section of the American Geophysical Union, publisher of 119 peer reviewed scientific articles, holds Phd in Oceanography from University of Rhode Island, Adjunct professor of Oceanography at UMass-Dartmouth, and Hideshige, Environmental Organic Geochemist, Professor at Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology and Founder of International Pellet Watch, “Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), and Plastics: Example of the Status, Trend, and Cycling of Organic Chemicals of Environmental Concern in the Ocean,” Oceanography, Volume 27, Number 1, page 196-213, A quarterly journal of the Oceanography Society http://www.tos.org/oceanography/archive/27-1_farrington1.pdf)

*user notes: POPs= persistent organic pollutants, PAHs=polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, OCEC= organic chemicals of environmental concern which is an umbrella term for types of plstic pollutants

The research to date and assessments of POPs and PAH provide a reasonable basis for

developing further understanding of the inputs, cycling, and fates of OCEC , including both legacy

and emerging contaminant chemicals. The coastal ocean and interactions at the atmosphere/surface

ocean interface are much better understood than are continental margin waters and the open

ocean below the mixed layer. (End Paragraph) The response time of the nearshore coastal ocean to legacy pollutants such

as PCBs and DDT as assessed by bivalve sentinel organism programs and measurements in sediments confirms fears and predictions of the late 1960s and the 1970s that these POPs would persist in such ecosystems for many decades, if not a century or more. Ross et al. (2009) provides an example of the growing concerns regarding emerging contaminants (or perhaps they should now be designated emerged contaminants/pollutants) for polybrominated diphenyl ethers in the

Canadian environment. (End paragraph) There is continuing and intensifying concern about the atmospheric and oceanic processes that transport POPs and possibly other OCEC to places far removed from sources of input, such as the polar regions, especially the Arctic. We have provided only brief reference to this topic and refer the reader to Bidlcman et al. (2005) for a compilation of papers on the subject. (End paragraph) Several emerging or emerged OCEC are not as hydrophobic as the POPs and PAH, and their possible differences from known rates of OCEC solubility in sea- water and partitioning between dissolved and particulate phases should be taken

into account in studies of biogeochemical cycles in the marine environment (see Field et al., 2006b). (End Paragraph) While the technology exists to obtain high-quality water samples for dissolved and

particulate OCEC measurements in the deep sea, very few measurements have been

made even though the deep ocean appears to be a large sink for OCEC on time scales

of centuries or longer. This is especially true if we con- sider deposition and accumulation in sediments and interaction with overlying deep waters. Vertical transport processes involving large and small particulate matter remove OCEC

from the surface waters to the deep ocean. There are indications that horizontal transport from continental shelf and slope areas, especially via submarine canyons, may transport OCEC to the deep ocean. The quantitative importance of such processes for regional- and ocean-

scale biogeochemical balances of OCEC remains poorly understood. (End Paragraph) The

lack of detailed hydrographic profiles for these POPs and other OCEC compared to those obtained for

elements as reported elsewhere in this special issue needs to be rectified . Surely, if bright minds can develop

devices to sample and measure toxins and microbes in the field (Scholin et al., 2009), and in situ mass spectrometers can be deployed on autonomous underwater vehicles to detect aromatic hydrocarbons such as

benzene and naphthalene (Camilli et al., 2010), then the development and deployment of new field

sampling and measurement devices and sensors for OCEC is also feasible and in order.

Solvency – Bioremediation

Bioremediation of marine bacteria has huge potential to solve environmental problemsDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Application of marine bacteria in bioremediation The use of marine bacteria for biodegradation of various natural and synthetic substances and thereby reducing the level of hazardous

compounds is increasingly drawing attention because of the huge potential of these

isolates for environmental restoration. Marine bacteria possess a wide variety of

bioremediation potentials which arc beneficial from both environmental and economic point of view (Amidei 1997). The bioremediation and biotransformation methods have been employed to tap the naturally occurring metabolic ability of marine

microorganisms to degrade , transform, or accumulate toxic compounds including hydro-

carbons, heterocyclic compounds, pharmaceutical substances, radionuclides, and toxic

metals (Karigar and Rao 2011).

The aff utilizes the metabolic potential of microorganisms to clean contamination from the ecoystemsDas et al 13 (Hirak R. Dash, Researcher for National Institute of Technology Rorkela in Department of Life Sciences, Neelam Mangwani, research scholar at National Institute of Technology Science, Jaya Chakraborty junior research fellow at National Institute of Technology Rorkela, Surajit Das, holds a Phd and assistant professor at the National Institute of Technology, Supriya Kumari, research at NIT, “Marine Bacteria: Potential Candidates for Enhanced Bioremediation,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (peer reviewed journal),Volume 97, Issue 2, Springer Publishing via Northwestern University Library, http://download.springer.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/static/pdf/677/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00253-012-4584-0.pdf?auth66=1404590028_619b98de5591ae96c8a405938f3a8d79&ext=.pdf)

Bioremediation technology utilizes the metabolic potential of microorganisms to clean the contaminated environments. It is the metabolic ability of the microorganisms

to mineralize or transform organic contaminants into less harmful substances which can

be integrated into natural biogeochemical cycles. Bioremediation is an attempt to accelerate naturally occurring degradation by optimizing the limiting conditions which is nondestructive, treatment-, and cost-effective as well as with a logistically favorable clean-up technology (Margesin and Schinner 2001). However, the sole obstacle in bioremediation in

situ is the unfavorable conditions of the environments. Most of the environments are characterized by elevated or low temperature, alkaline or acidic pH, high pressure, or

high salt concentration. Marine bacteria are such a group of bacteria which get exposure to

such unfavorable conditions naturally. Hence, any marine bacteria having the potential for

bioremediation can become the ideal candidates for the biological treatment of polluted

extreme habitats. This review summarizes the recent discoveries regarding the exclusive characteristics of marine bacteria, their physiologic and genetic adaptation in the dynamic environmental condition, biogeography and diversity, and the role of marine bacteria in various remediation aspects to establish that marine bacteria can be utilized in enhanced bioremediation. (End Paragraph) Characteristic features of marine bacteria Marine environment is the largest habitat on the earth which accounts for more than 90 % of total biosphere volume and the microorganisms present in that are responsible

for more than 50 % of the global primary production and nutrient cycling (Lauro et al. 2009). These marine bacteria can be isolated from the marine water, sediments, and mangroves associated with the marine habitats, normal flora of the marine organisms, and deep sea hydrothermal vents. They usually require sodium and potassium ions for their growth and to maintain osmotic balance of their cytoplasm (MacLeod and Onofrcy 1957). This requirement for Na* ion is an exclusive feature of the marine bacteria which is attributed to the production of indole from tryptophan (Pratt and Happold 1960), oxidation of i.-arabinosc. mannitol, and lactose (Rhodes and Payne 1962) as well as transport of substrates into the cell (Hase ct al. 2001). Other physical characters imputed to marine bacteria include facultative psychrophilicity (Bedford 1933), higher tolerance to pres- sure than their terrestrial counterparts (Zobell and Morita 1957), capacity to survive in scawater, mostly Gram- negative rods (Buck 1982), and motile spore formers (Buerger ct al. 2012) which distinguishes them from the terrestrial bacteria. (3-aminoglutaric acid or |3-glutamatc which is rare in nature is present in higher amounts in marine sediments and is utilized by

the marine bacteria as osmolytcs (Robertson ct al. 1990). Some of the thermophilic marine bacteria isolated from the deep sea hydrothermal vents arc also capable of nitrogen fixation (Ruby and Jannasch 1982). (End Paragraph) The most unique feature of a photosynthctic marine bacte- rial genome is the presence of rhodopsin which contains 2,197 genes, far lower than any other genes (Newton et al. 2010). In addition to that, marine cyanobactcria also harbor a similar pattern of gene contents which arc correlated with their isola- tion sources (Martiny ct al. 2009). The sole cause behind the diverse genetic level in marine microbes is due to the acqui- sition of alternative mechanism for obtaining carbon and energy. Copiotrophs from marine habitats have higher genetic potential to

sense, undergo transduction, and integrate extra- cellular stimuli. These characteristics are likely to be crucial for their ability to fine-tune and rapidly respond to the changing environmental conditions like sudden nutrient influx or depletion (Lauro ct al. 2009). (End Paragraph)

Impact – Marine Biodiversity Key

Marine Biodiversity is key to overall biodiversity and further exploration is key to conservationGoulletquer 14 (Philippe, PhD in Biologic Oceanography at West Britain University and head of biodiversity issues at Ifremer’s Prospective & Scientific Strategy Division, Philippe Gros, Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at McGill University, his research focuses on mathematical modelling of harvested marine fish population dynamics and marine ecosystems, Gilles Boeuf, full professor at University Pierre et Marie Curie, President of the French Museum of Natural History, Jacques Weber, economist, biologist, and anthropologist, a member of the committee on Ecology, “Biodiversity in the Marine Environment,”Chapter 1: The Importance of Marine Biodiversity, page 1-2, Springer Books, http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/862/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-94-017-8566-2_1.pdf?auth66=1405020052_78e0c78b7b3c72ce1f138fa24ef66e87&ext=.pdf)

There are several salient features of marine biodiversity , i.e. the exceptional bio- diversity in our oceans,

its importance in ecosystem functioning and the fast- growing series of threats to which marine taxa are exposed. Oceans encompass approximately 72% of the planet's surface and more than 90% of habitats occupied by life forms. The diverse habitats there support 31 phyla of animals, 12 of them endemic to the marine realm. In comparison, there are 19 phyla from terrestrial habitats (Angel 1992; Boeuf 2007, 2010a, 2011;

Boeuf and Kornprobst 2009). High species and phylogenetic diversity is commensurate with a plethora of life- styles, from floaters and swimmers, to those which can withstand partial aerial ex-posure in intertidal zones or inhabit deep-sea hydrothermal vents at > 2,800 m. Marine species diversity is lower than on land, estimated today at fewer than 240,000 species, the equivalent of 13% of total species known today (1.9 million) (Census of Marine Life 2010; Boeuf 2008). We know that life originated in the seas, so marine taxa have been evolving for more than 3 billion years longer than their terrestrial counterparts. This means

that the marine environment is inhabited by archaic groups which can provide interest- ing and useful biological models to support basic research and for use for pharma- ceutical purposes (Boeuf 2007, 2011). Almost all extant phyla have marine representatives, compared to

slightly less than two-thirds having terrestrial representatives (Ray 1991). As advanced taxonomic methods become available (Savolainen 2005) and new technologies enable pre- viously inaccessible habitats to be explored, many new marine species are discovered on a regular basis (e.g. Santelli et al. 2008). These include both microscopic and microbial taxa (Venter et al. 2004; Gomez et al. 2007) as well as more familiar larger organisms such as fish, crustaceans, corals and molluscs (Bouchet and Cayre 2005). An example of this is the marine bryozoan Celleporella hyaUna, thought to be a single cosmopolitan species. But DNA barcoding and mating tests revealed that geographic isolates comprised >20 numerous deep, mostly allopatric genetic lin- eages (Gomez et al. 2007).

Moreover, these reproductively isolated lineages share very similar morphology, indicating rampant cryptic speciation. The extent of this hidden diversity is exemplified by recent discoveries in Aus- tralian seawaters where over 270 new species of fish, ancient corals, molluscs, crustaceans and sponges have been discovered on seamounts and in canyons off Tasmania1. During the Lifou (Loyalty Islands) expedition in 2002, more than 4,000 species were found in an area of slightly over 300 ha (Bouchet and Cayre 2005). Unexpected microbiodiversity, invertebrates and four new species of groupers were discovered around the small island of Clipperton (Pacific Ocean) in 2007. The phenomenon has also been observed in marine transition zones between biogeographical provinces (e.g. between the Lusitanian and boreal provinces, Maggs et al. 2008). It is estimated that new species are currently being discovered and described at a rate of 16,000-18,000 per year, including 1,600 marine species (Bouchet 2006). All but one of the cosmopolitan diatom species investigated to date are composed of multiple cryptic species

(see review in Medlin 2007). Even in especially well-studied taxonomic groups, our overall

understanding of the state of biodiversity is poor. For example, about 60% of known fish species live perma- nently in the sea and 11,300 of them are found in coastal waters

down to depths reaching 200 m (Nelson 1993). However, Reynolds et al. (2005) showed that in-

formation about conservation status was available for less than 5% of the world's marine fish

species.

Deep sea ecosystems are key to biodiversity and tech is need to accurately study themLlodra et al 6 (Eva Ramirez, Phd in biology and works for the Institue of Marine Scinces in Barcelona, and David S. M. Billett, works for National Oceanography Centre in Southhapton, UK, edited by Carlos M. Duarte, full professor in the school of Plant biology at the University of Western Australia, “The Exploration of Marine Biodiversity: Scientific and Technological Challenges,” Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/77247/1/03%2520Ramirez_Llodra.pdf

The DEEP SEA is the largest ecosystem on Earth , with approximately 50% of the surface of the

Earth covered by ocean more than 3,000 metres deep. It sup- ports one of the largest

reservoirs of biodiversity on the planet, but remains one of the least studied ecosystems

because of its remoteness and the techno- logical challenges for its investigation. The HMS

Challenger Expedition (1872-1876) marked the beginning of the "heroic" age of deep-sea exploration, and our knowledge has

progressed since in parallel with technological devel- opments. The deep-sea floor extends from around 200 m depth down the continental slope to the abyssal plains (3,000-6,000 m) and reaches the deepest part of the oceans in the Marianas Trench (11,000 m). These ecosystems arc characterised by the absence of light, increasing pressure with depth and low temperature waters (with some exceptions). The deep sea contains extremely large habitats such as abyssal plains (millions km-) and mid-ocean ridges (65,000 km long). At the same time, it encloses relatively small, localised geological features such as canyons, seamounts, deep-water coral reefs, hydrothermal vents and cold seeps, which support unique

microbial and animal communities. State-of-the-art technology is essential for the

study of deep-sea ecosystems, providing the necessary tools for the location, mapping

and study of the dif- ferent habitats and their associated fauna. These include, amongst

others, high definition sea-floor mapping, manned submersibles, remote operated vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles, decp-towed vehicles and sampling equip- ment, landers, hydro-acoustic instruments and isothermal and isobanc cham- bers as well" as laboratory techniques such as new molecular tools. Internation- al collaborations for

sharing of equipment, expertise and human resources arc crucial in driving deep-sea investigations. The deep sea also includes important biological and geological resources. Therefore, industries such as deep-water fishing or oil and gas exploration arc rapidly moving into deep-water areas. Scientists arc working together with industries, conservation agencies and decision makers to develop conservation and management options for an envi- ronment that is still one of the great unknowns of our planet.

Impact – Biodiversity Impact Ext.

Independently, biodiversity loss makes their impacts inevitableBarnosky et al 14 (Anthony D, professor of Integrative Biology at UC Berkeley, recipient of multiple National Science Foundation awards for his work studying ecosystems and biodiversity, James H Brown, Distinguished Professor of Biology at the University of New Mexico, recipient of Robert H. MacArthur Award for Ecological Society of America, Gretchen C Daily, senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Rodolfo Dirzo, a Bing Professor in Environmental Science at Stanford, Anne H Ehrlich, associate director of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford, Paul R. Ehrlich, Stanford professor in Environmental Science, Jussi T. Eronen, Phd in environmental sciences, Mikael Fortelius, professor of Evolutionary Palaeontology at University of Helsinki, Elizabeth A Hadly, Paul S. and Billie Achilles Chair of Environmental Biology, Estella B Leopold, professor emeritus of Biology at the University of Washington, Harold A Mooney, Paul S. Achilles Professor in Environmental Biology at Stanford, John P Meyers, chief scientist of Environmental Health Sciences, Rosamond L Naylor, professor of environmental earth system science at Stanford, Stephen Palumbi, PhD in marine ecology from University of Washington, Nils Chr Stenseth, leader of centre for ecological and evolutionary synthesis and chief scientist at Norwegian Institute of Marine Research, Marvalee H. Wake, professor of biology at UC Berkeley, “Introducing the Scientific Consensus on Maintaining Humanity’s Life Support Systems in the 21st Century: Information for Policy Makers,” The Anthropocene Review, March 18th, 2014, accessed via Sage Publication, http://anr.sagepub.com/content/1/1/78)

People have basic needs for food, water, health, and a place to live, and additionally have to pro-

duce energy and other products from natural resources to maintain standards of living

that each culture considers adequate. Fulfilling all of these needs for all people is not possible in the

absence of a healthy, well-functioning global ecosystem. The "global ecosystem' is basically the complex

ways that all life forms on Earth — including us — interact with each other and with their physical environment (water, soil,

air, and so on). The total of all those myriad interactions compose the planet's, and our, life support systems. Humans have been an integral part of the global ecosystem since we first evolved; now we

have become the dominant species in it. As such, we strongly influence how Earth's life support systems

work, in both positive and negative ways. A key challenge in the coming decades is to ensure that the negative

influences do not outweigh the positive ones, which would make the world a worse place to live. Robust scientific evidence confirms that five interconnected negative trends of major concern have emerged over the past several decades: Disrupting the climate that we and other species depend upon. Triggering a mass extinction of biodiversity.

Destroying diverse ecosystems in ways that damage our basic life support systems. Polluting our land, water, and air with harmful contaminants that undermine basic biologi- cal processes, impose severe health costs, and undermine our ability to deal with other problems. Increasing human population rapidly while relying on old patterns of production and consumption. These five trends interact with and exacerbate each other, such that the total impact becomes worse than the

simple sum of their parts. Ensuring a future for our children and grandchildren that is at least as

desirable as the life we live now will require accepting that we have already inadvertently

pushed the global ecosystem in dangerous directions, and that wc have the knowledge and

power to steer it back on course — if we act now . Waiting longer will only make it harder , if

not impossible, to be successful, and will inflict substantial, escalating costs in both monetary

terms and human suffering . The following pages summarize the causes of each of the five dangerous trends, why

their con- tinuation will harm humanity, how they interact to magnify undesirable impacts, and broad-brush solutions necessary to move the human race toward a sustainable, enjoyable future.

**Science Leadership Extensions**

Hegemony

Scientific leadership k2 soft and hard power Coletta 2009, Damon Coletta, Duke University, “Science, Technology, and the Quest for International Influence” http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA536133&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

After the industrial revolution, science leadership has been associated with increased national capability through superior

commercial and military technology. With the rising importance of soft power and transnational bargaining, when America‘s hard power cannot be deployed everywhere at once, maintaining leadership in basic science as the quest to know Nature may be key to curbing legitimate resistance and sustaining America‘s influence in the international system . The catch is that American democracy imposes high demands on the relationship between science, state, and

society. Case studies of the Office of Naval Research and U.S. science-based relations with respect to Brazil, as telling examples of U.S. Government science policy via the mission agency, reveal how difficult it is for a democratic power to strike the right balance between applied activities and fundamental research that establishes science leadership. To discover sustainable hegemony in an increasingly multipolar world, American policy makers will need more than the Kaysen list of advantages from basic science. Dr. Carl Kaysen served President John Kennedy as deputy national security adviser and over his long career held distinguished professorships in Political Economy at Harvard and MIT. During the 1960s, Kaysen laid out a framework with

four important reasons why a great power, the United States in particular, should take a strategic interest in the basic sciences. 1. Scientific discoveries provided the input for applied research, which in turn produced technologies crucial for wielding economic and military power. 2. Scientific activity educated a cadre of operators for leadership in industries relevant to government such as health care and defense. 3. Science proficiency generated the raw elements for mounting focused, applied efforts

such as the Manhattan Project during World War II to build the first atomic bomb. 4. Scientific progress built a basic research reserve that when necessary could move quickly to shore up national needs .1 * I would like to thank Col Cheryl Kearney, Department Head of

Political Science, and Dr. Jim Smith of the Institute for National Security Studies at the U.S. Air Force Academy for sponsoring portions of this research. The following persons were extraordinarily generous with their time: Dr. Clay Stewart, Dr. John Zimmerman, Dr. Jim DeCorpo, Dr. Melissa Flagg, Mr. Bill Melton, Mr. Richard Driscoll, Mr. Jeremy Long, Col Ronald Lewandowski, Prof. Zulmira Lacova, Prof. José Monserrat Filho, and Dr. Ronald Cintra Shellard. Drafts also benefitted from reviews at the ABRI-ISA Joint Meeting, Rio de Janeiro, and commentary from members of the host institution, Pontifical Catholic University, Rio (PUC-Rio). Portions of this paper were presented at ABRI-ISA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, July 22-24, 2009. This article does not represent official opinion of the United States Air Force or the United States Government. After the industrial revolution, science leadership has been associated with increased national capability through superior commercial and military technology.

With the rising importance of soft power and transnational bargaining, when America‘s hard power cannot be deployed everywhere

at once, maintaining leadership in basic science as the quest to know Nature may be key to

curbing legitimate resistance and sustaining America‘s influence in the international system. The catch is that American democracy imposes high demands on the relationship between science, state, and society.

Hegemony prevents nuclear war- science and scholarship prove

Brooks, Ikenberry, and Wohlforth 13[Stephen G. Brooks is Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College.G. John Ikenberry is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University in the Department of Politics and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He is also a Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University.William C. Wohlforth is the Daniel Webster Professor in the Department of Government at Dartmouth College. “Don't Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment”, Winter 2013, Vol. 37, No. 3, Pages 7-51, http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/ISEC_a_00107]

A core premise of deep engagement is that it prevents the emergence of a far more dangerous global security

environment . For one thing, as noted above, the U nited S tates’ overseas presence gives it the leverage to

restrain partners from taking provocative action . Perhaps more important, its core alliance commitments also

deter states with aspirations to regional hegemony from contemplating expansion and make its partners more secure, reducing their incentive to adopt solutions to their security problems that threaten others and thus stoke security dilemmas. The contention that engaged U.S. power dampens the baleful effects of anarchy is consistent with influential variants of realist theory. Indeed, arguably the scariest portrayal of the war-prone world that would emerge absent the “American Pacifier” is provided in the works of John Mearsheimer, who forecasts dangerous

multipolar regions replete with security competition, arms races, nuclear proliferation and associated

preventive war temptations, regional rivalries, and even runs at regional hegemony and full-scale great power war.

72 How do retrenchment advocates, the bulk of whom are realists, discount this benefit? Their arguments are complicated, but two capture most of the variation: (1) U.S. security guarantees are not necessary to prevent dangerous rivalries and conflict in Eurasia; or (2) prevention of rivalry and conflict in Eurasia is not a U.S. interest. Each response is connected to a different theory or set of theories, which makes sense given that the whole debate hinges on a complex future counterfactual (what would happen to

Eurasia’s security setting if the United States truly disengaged?). Although a certain answer is impossible, each of these responses is nonetheless a weaker argument for retrenchment than advocates acknowledge. The first response flows from defensive realism as well as other international relations theories that discount the conflict-generating

potential of anarchy under contemporary conditions. 73 Defensive realists maintain that the high expected costs of territorial conquest, defense dominance, and an array of policies and practices that can be used credibly to signal benign intent, mean that Eurasia’s major states could manage regional multipolarity peacefully without the America n pacifier .

Retrenchment would be a bet on this scholarship , particularly in regions where the kinds of stabilizers that nonrealist

theories point to—such as democratic governance or dense institutional linkages—are either absent or

weak ly present . There are three other major bodies of scholarship, however, that might give decisionmakers pause before making this bet. First is regional

expertise. Needless to say, there is no consensus on the net security effects of U.S. withdrawal . Regarding each region, there are optimists and pessimists. Few experts expect a return of intense great power competition in a post-American Europe, but many doubt European governments will pay the

political costs of increased EU defense cooperation and the budgetary costs of increasing military outlays. 74 The result might be a Eur ope that is incapable of securing itself from various threats that could be destabilizing within the region and beyond (e.g., a regional conflict akin to the 1990s Balkan wars), lacks capacity for global security missions in which U.S. leaders might want European participation, and is

vulnerable to the influence of outside rising powers. What about the other parts of Eurasia where the United States has a substantial military presence? Regarding the Middle East, the balance begins to swing toward

pessimists concerned that states currently backed by Washington — notably Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia—might take actions upon U.S. retrenchment that would intensify security dilemmas. And

concerning East Asia, pessimism regarding the region’s prospects without the American pacifier is pronounced. Arguably the principal concern expressed by area experts is that Japan and South Korea are likely to obtain a

nuclear capacity and increase their military commitments, which could stoke a destabilizing reaction from China . It is

notable that during the Cold War, both South Korea and Taiwan moved to obtain a nuclear weapons capacity and were only constrained

from doing so by a still-engaged United States. 75 The second body of scholarship casting doubt on the bet on defensive realism’s sanguine portrayal is all of

the research that undermines its conception of state preferences. Defensive realism’s optimism about what would happen if the U nited S tates retrenched is very much dependent on its particular—and highly restrictive—assumption about state preferences; once we relax this assumption, then much of its basis for optimism vanishes. Specifically, the prediction of post-American tranquility throughout Eurasia rests on the assumption that security is the only relevant state preference , with security defined narrowly in terms of protection from violent external attacks on the homeland. Under that assumption, the

security problem is largely solved as soon as offense and defense are clearly distinguishable, and offense is extremely expensive relative to defense. Burgeoning research across the social and other science s , however, undermines that core assumption: states have preferences

not only for security but also for prestige, status, and other aims, and they engage in trade-offs among the various

objectives. 76 In addition, they define security not just in terms of territorial protection but in view of many and varied milieu goals. It follows that even states that are relatively secure may nevertheless engage in highly competitive behavior.

Empirical studies show that this is indeed sometimes the case. 77 In sum, a bet on a benign postretrenchment Eurasia is a bet that leaders of major countries will never allow these nonsecurity preferences to influence their strategic choices. To the degree that these bodies of scholarly knowledge have predictive leverage,

U.S. retrenchment would result in a significant deterioration in the security environmen t in at least some

of the world’s key regions. We have already mentioned the third, even more alarming body of scholarship. Offensive realism predicts that the withdrawal of the American pacifier will yield either a competitive regional multipolarity

complete with associated insecurity, arms racing, crisis instability, nuclear prolif eration , and

the like, or bids for regional hegemony, which may be beyond the capacity of local great powers to contain (and which in

any case would generate intensely competitive behavior, possibly including regional great power war ). Hence it is unsurprising that retrenchment

advocates are prone to focus on the second argument noted above: that avoiding wars and security dilemmas in the world’s core regions is not a U.S. national interest. Few doubt that the United States could survive the return of insecurity and conflict among Eurasian powers, but at what cost? Much of the work in this area has focused on the economic

externalities of a renewed threat of insecurity and war, which we discuss below. Focusing on the pure security ramifications, there are two main reasons why

decisionmakers may be rationally reluctant to run the retrenchment experiment. First, overall higher levels of conflict make the world a more dangerous place. Were Eurasia to return to higher

levels of interstate military competition , one would see overall higher levels of military spending and innovation and a higher

likelihood of competitive regional proxy wars and arming of client states—all of which would be concerning, in part because it would promote a faster diffusion of military power away from the United States. Greater regional insecurity could well feed proliferation cascades, as states such as Egypt, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Saudi

Arabia all might choose to create nuclear forces. 78 It is unlikely that proliferation decisions by any of these actors would be

the end of the game: they would likely generate pressure locally for more proliferatio n . Following Kenneth Waltz, many retrenchment advocates are proliferation optimists, assuming that nuclear deterrence solves the security problem. 79 Usually carried out in dyadic terms, the debate over the stability of proliferation changes as the numbers go up. Proliferation optimism rests on assumptions of rationality and narrow security preferences. In social science, however, such assumptions are inevitably probabilistic. Optimists assume that most states are led by rational leaders, most will overcome organizational problems and resist the temptation to preempt before feared neighbors nuclearize, and most pursue only security and are risk averse. Confidence in such probabilistic assumptions declines if the world were to move

from nine to twenty, thirty, or forty nuclear states. In addition, many of the other dangers noted by analysts who are concerned about the destabilizing effects of nuclear proliferation—including the risk of accidents and the prospects that some new nuclear powers will not have truly survivable forces—seem prone to go up as the number of nuclear powers grows. 80 Moreover, the risk of “unforeseen crisis dynamics ” that could spin out of control is

also higher as the number of nuclear powers increases. Finally, add to these concerns the enhanced danger of nuclear leakage, and a world with overall

higher levels of security competition becomes yet more worrisome . The argument that maintaining Eurasian peace is not a

U.S. interest faces a second problem. On widely accepted realist assumptions, acknowledging that U.S. engagement preserves peace dramatically narrows the difference between retrenchment and deep engagement . For many supporters of retrenchment, the optimal strategy for a power such as the United States, which has attained regional hegemony and is separated from other great powers by oceans, is

offshore balancing: stay over the horizon and “pass the buck” to local powers to do the dangerous work of counterbalancing any local rising power. The United States should commit to onshore balancing only when local balancing is likely to fail and a great power appears to be a credible contender for regional hegemony, as in the cases of

Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union in the midtwentieth century. The problem is that China’s rise puts the possibility of its attaining regional hegemon y on the table, at least in the medium to long term. As Mearsheimer notes, “ The U nited S tates

will have to play a key role in countering China , because its Asian neighbors are not strong enough

to do it by themselves.” 81 Therefore, unless China’s rise stalls, “the United States is likely to act toward China similar to the way it behaved toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War.” 82 It follows that the U nited States should take no action that would

compromise its capacity to move to onshore balancing in the future. It will need to maintain key alliance relationships in Asia

as well as the formidably expensive military capacity to intervene there . The implication is to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, reduce

the presence in Europe, and pivot to Asia— just what the United States is doing. 83 In sum, the argument that U.S. security commitments are unnecessary for peace is countered by a lot of scholarship, including highly influential realist scholarship. In addition, the argument that Eurasian peace is unnecessary for U.S. security is weakened by the potential for a large number of nasty security consequences as well as the need to retain a latent onshore balancing capacity that dramatically reduces the savings retrenchment might bring.

Moreover, switching between offshore and onshore balancing could well be difficult. Bringing together the thrust of

many of the arguments discussed so far underlines the degree to which the case for retrenchment misses the underlying logic of the deep engagement strategy. By

supplying reassurance, deterrence, and active management, the U nited S tates lowers

security competition in the world’s key regions, thereby preventing the emergence of a

hothouse atmosphere for growing new military capabilities. Alliance ties dissuade partners from ramping up and also provide leverage to prevent military transfers to potential rivals . On top of all this,

the United States’ formidable military machine may deter entry by potential rivals. Current great

power military expenditures as a percentage of GDP are at historical lows, and thus far other major powers have shied away from seeking to match top-end U.S. military capabilities. In addition, they have so far been careful to avoid attracting the “focused enmity” of the United States. 84 All of the world’s most modern militaries are U.S. allies (America’s alliance system of more than sixty countries now accounts for some 80 percent of global military spending), and the gap between the U.S. military capability and that of potential rivals is by many measures growing rather than shrinking. 85

And the pursuit of hegemony is inevitable- empirics and political climate

Brooks, Ikenberry, Wohlforth 13 – *Stephen G. Brooks is Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College, **John Ikenberry is Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University and Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University in Seoul, **William C. Wohlforth is Daniel Webster Professor of Government at Dartmouth College (“Lean Forward: In Defense of American Engagement”, January/February 2013, Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138468/stephen-g-brooks-g-john-ikenberry-and-william-c-wohlforth/lean-forward)

Since the end of World War II, the U nited States has pursued a single grand strategy: deep engagement . In an effort to protect its security and prosperity, the country has promoted a liberal economic order and established close defense ties with partners in Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East. Its military bases cover the map, its ships patrol transit routes across the globe, and tens of thousands of its troops stand guard in allied countries such as

Germany, Japan, and South Korea.¶ The details of U.S. foreign policy have differed from administration to administration, including the emphasis placed on democracy promotion and humanitarian goals, but for over 60 years, every president has agreed on the fundamental decision to remain deeply engaged in the world , even as the rationale for that strategy has shifted. During the Cold War, the United States' security commitments to Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East served primarily to prevent Soviet encroachment into the world's wealthiest and most

resource-rich regions. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the aim has become to make these same regions more secure, and thus less threatening to the U nited S tates, and to use these security partnerships to foster the cooperation necessary for a stable and open international order.¶ Now, more than ever, Washington might be tempted to abandon this grand strategy and pull back from the world. The rise of China is chipping away at the United States' preponderance of power, a budget crisis has put defense spending on the chopping block, and two long wars have left the U.S. military and public exhausted. Indeed, even as most politicians continue to assert their commitment to global leadership, a very different view has taken hold among scholars of international relations over the past decade: that the United States should minimize its overseas military presence, shed its security ties, and give up its efforts to lead the liberal international order.¶

STEM

K2 STEM and the economy Bidwell 2013 Allie, education respondent for US News and World report, quoting Jerry

Schubel, president and CEO of the Aquarium of the Pacific, “Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean Exploration Program” http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/25/scientists-release-first-plan-for-national-ocean-exploration-program

"In coastal areas at least, given some of these new low-cost robots that are available, they could actually produce data that would help us understand the nation's coastal environment," Schubel says.

Expanding the nation's ocean exploration program could lead to more jobs , he adds, and could also serve as an opportunity to engage children and adults in careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM . "I think what we need to do as a nation is make STEM fields be seen by young people as exciting career trajectories," Schubel says. "We need to reestablish the excitement of science and engineering, and I think ocean exploration gives us a way to do that." Schubel says science centers, museums and aquariums can serve as training grounds to give children and adults the opportunity to learn more about the ocean and

what opportunities exist in STEM fields. "One thing that we can contribute more than anything else is to let kids and families come to our

institutions and play, explore, make mistakes, and ask silly questions without being burdened down by the kinds of standards that our formal K-12 and K-14 schools have to live up to," Schubel

says. Conducting more data collection and exploration quests is also beneficial from an economic standpoint because explorers have the potential to identify new resources, both renewable and nonrenewable. Having access to those materials, such as oils and minerals, and being less dependent on other nations, Schubel says, could help improve national security. Each time explorers embark on a

mission to a new part of the ocean, they bring back more detailed information by mapping the sea floor and providing high-resolution images of what exists, says David McKinnie, a senior advisor for

NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and Research and a co-author of the report. On almost every expedition, he says, the scientists discover new species.

Leads to STEM jobs Witten 2011 By Alexandra Bell Witten, Katherine L.C. Bell, Amy O’Neal,

Katrina Cubina, Jennifer Argenta, and Eleanor smalley, The Oceanography Society: “Education and outreach Exploration Vessel Nautilus” http://www.tos.org/oceanography/archive/25-1_supplement.pdf

In addition to its role as a platform for innovation in technology and ocean exploration, the Nautilus Exploration Program provides a vehicle for developing education and outreach programs to engage people of all ages. These

programs encompass broad-scale outreach, K–12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs,

undergraduate and graduate internships, and on-the-job training. Nautilus inspires the explorer in almost everyone. Several

organizational partners, including the National Geographic Society, Sea Research Foundation, and the JASON Project, present our work to the public using numerous types of media, including the Internet, film, television, magazines, and books, as well as live theater shows at aquariums and museums, to reach the broadest audience

possible. These moments of discovery displayed through the various media allow us to capture

the imaginations of millions of people , with the ultimate goal of leading them further down the path

of higher education. In total, we estimate that we have reached approximately 14 million people since Nautilus first set sail in 2009. Educators at Sea

The Educators-at-Sea Program is an effort to address the shortage of students entering STEM fields by

bringing the excitement of ocean exploration to audiences of all ages . The program embeds two

educators in each cruise to support all of our educational activities. During the 2011 field season, a total of 19 Educators-at-Sea joined expedition teams. They came from museums, aquariums, and public and private schools across the United States. Educators-at-Sea posted 65 blogs and over 500 photographs on the Nautilus Live website, depicting everything from scientific activities, to vehicle operations and maintenance, to daily life and living conditions aboard Nautilus, and the many faces, personalities, and careers integral to the exploration program. Educators participated in 482 shows with the Nautilus Live Theater at Mystic Aquarium, and in live interactions with over 3,500 people around the world. Back on shore, the educators continue to work directly with over 2,000 of their own students, sharing their experiences on board Nautilus.

Expanding coordinated exploration key to STEM—makes ocean policy sustainable ORAP and NOPP, 02 (Ocean Research Advisory Panel—formed to provide independent recommendations to Federal Government regarding ocean policy; National Oceanographic Partnership Program—an innovative collaboration of U.S. federal government agencies that fund research partnerships in academia, government, industry, and non-governmental organizations; “A National Strategy To Improve Ocean Literacy And Strengthen Science Education Through An Improved Knowledge Of The Oceans And Coasts”; NOPP; pg. 1-3; http://www.nopp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/national-strategy-01.pdf; September 2002) JM

Quality of life, economic health, and security for people of our nation and the world are increasingly dependent upon the areas of s cience, technology, engineering, and mathematics. A well-informed,

scientifically literate populace, capable of making judicious decisions, serves as the vanguard of our society.

Yet many recent studies suggest that the general American public is not as knowledgeable about scientific and technical concepts as modern society requires, indicating the need for improved methods to address public education. Too few public education campaigns, severe shortages of well-trained teachers in scientific and technical subjects, and failure to substantially increase the numbers of underrepresented and underserved groups working in the fields of science, technology,

engineering, and mathematics, pose significant obstacles to achieving broad science literacy. Coordinated national efforts

are needed to address these obstacles and ensure the health of the education and research enterprises that fuel the prosperity of our nation.¶ The oceans and coasts are naturally fascinating to humans and have a vast impact on their lives. Ocean- related concepts and technologies offer captivating methods for educating the

public about aspects of s cience, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and can serve as powerful tools for

strengthening scientific literacy. There is, however, an equally important, intrinsic need for ocean literacy itself. Within the realm of the oceans and coastal environment, the interdependence among public need, policy decisions, and scientific

and technical knowledge is particularly compelling. It is essential that the public be made aware of the many ways in which the systems of Earth, in particular, the oceans, affect everyday life, as well as the significant influence that people have on the

health of the oceans and their coasts. The public must:¶ • Understand the role of the coupled ocean-atmosphere-

cryosphere system that drives our weather and climate;¶ • Appreciate that environmental pressures

introduced on land have consequences that extend through the coasts to the ocean;¶ • Comprehend how oceanic

conditions nurture the continued existence of marine ecosystems and maintenance of sustainable fish stocks; and,¶ •

Encourage exploration into promising new biotechnologies and other yet-to-be-discovered societal benefits uniquely existing within the oceans.¶ Increasingly, scientific research in the oceans is focused on efforts to deploy observing systems that can monitor those processes of greatest impact on mankind. The use of such systems will require a better public understanding of ocean processes so that the public may use the information

effectively, as well as ensure the availability of the technically trained workforce needed to operate these systems.¶ Public education2 must be used to achieve the complementary goals of improving ocean literacy and

strengthening scientific literacy across every facet of the socio-economic spectrum. Museums, aquariums, science centers, and public/cable television programming offer enriching opportunities for reaching large audiences; and, promoting lifelong learning about science and technology, and communicating the relevance of each to daily life. Existing initiatives promoting systemic reform and further implementation of the National Science Education Standards 3 (NSES) offer promising opportunities for increased

public knowledge of the oceans and coasts. The inherently multidisciplinary nature of coastal and ocean systems offers an exciting context in which to teach fundamental concepts of physics, biology, chemistry, geology, and

mathematics. Ideally, increased exposure to the oceans and coasts using myriad approaches will both increase public support for ocean and coastal research programs and encourage more students from diverse educational and cultural backgrounds to consider pursuing careers in ocean-related professions.¶ In the United States, many individuals and institutions employ ocean and coastal

sciences in the broader context of improving public understanding of science; however, these efforts have not been well coordinated on a national scale . To address this need, several recent meetings have been convened to consider a

nationally coordinated effort, or “National Agenda”, for improving education about our coasts and oceans. Important programs initiated within the NOPP agencies offer many of the essential building blocks for a successful national program. Further, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew Oceans Commission are actively

engaged in assessing the status of national research and education as they relate to the oceans and coasts. Through the efforts of these intra-agency programs and Commission initiatives, a consensus is rapidly emerging that is catalyzing coordination of efforts to reform public education in the ocean and coastal sciences. The NOPP is a Congressionally established umbrella organization linking the many agencies engaged in ocean sciences

research and education. NOPP is thus ideally positioned to play a leadership role in the articulation and sustained implementation of this National Agenda for improving ocean literacy and strengthening scientific literacy through the use of ocean and coastal concepts.

**Backline Materials**

Uniqueness – Exploration Needed

Expansion of further exploration needed now—search for Flight 370 provesHelvarg, 14 (David Helvarg—an American journalist and environmental activist; “Op-Ed It's no surprise we can't find Flight 370”; LA Times; http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0401-helvarg-flight-370-ocean-exploration-20140401-story.html; April 1st, 2014) JM

Jet aircraft are large, but not compared with the ocean. The weeks-long search for some physical sign of

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is not something we should wonder at, considering the frontier nature of our blue planet.¶ The 29% of our planet that is land is inhabited by more than 7 billion of our species, at least a few of whom would have reported a crash or hijacked aircraft. By contrast, the ocean that covers 71% of the Earth's surface and 97% of its living habitat rarely has more than a few million people on or about its surface. These include commercial mariners, fishermen, cruise ship passengers, sailors aboard the world's military fleets, offshore oil and gas workers, research scientists and the odd sea gypsy.¶ One reason we've not colonized the ocean, as science-fiction writers (and at least one senator, the late Claiborne

Pell, of Rhode Island) once imagined, is that the ocean is a far rougher and more difficult wilderness than any encountered by terrestrial explorers, or even astronauts traveling in the consistent vacuum of space, with its occasional

meteorites and space junk to avoid.¶ The sea pummels us with an unbreathable and corrosive liquid medium; altered visual and acoustic characteristics; changing temperatures, depths and pressures; upwellings; tides; currents; gyres; obscuring marine layers; sudden storms and giant rouge waves; and life forms than can sting, poison or bite.¶ Even accounting

for more than 70 years of classified military hydrographic surveys, we've still mapped less than 10% of the ocean

with the resolution we've used to map all of the moon, Mars or even several moons of Jupiter.¶ Obviously, our ability to search for a missing aircraft at sea has come a long way since Amelia Earhart disappeared while

trying to cross the Pacific in 1937. But the patched-together satellite data and electronic-signals processing that has so far pointed the Flight 370 search to an area 1,800 miles from Perth, Australia, is no more than a crisis-mode, jury-rigged, extraordinary effort. Consider this: If you're a drug smuggler and you enter U.S. coastal waters in a speedboat at night, and then go dead in the water during the day, with a blue tarp thrown over your vessel, odds are that you'll

successfully deliver your contraband.¶ Our investment in ocean exploration, monitoring and law enforcement efforts is at a 20-year low in the United States and not much better elsewhere. Our chances of quickly finding the missing Malaysian flight would have been improved if we had invested more money and effort on our planet's last great commons, with observational tools such as in-situ labs and wired benthic observatories, remote and autonomous underwater vehicles and gliders, forward-looking infrared cameras and multi-beam shipboard, airborne (and space-deployed) scanning systems, and other smart but woefully underfunded sea technologies.¶ The fact remains that while hundreds of people have gone into space, only three humans have ventured to the lowest point on our planet seven miles down in the Mariana Trench, and the latest of these — filmmaker explorer engineer James Cameron — had to self-fund his 2012 mission.¶

Meanwhile, when it comes to exploring the cosmos, NASA — even in its diminished state — outspends NOAA's ocean exploration program roughly 1,000 to 1. Yet when we get to Mars, the first thing we seek as proof of life is water. Meanwhile, we have a whole water planet that remains a challenge we've once again discovered to be far greater than we thought.¶

Whatever the final resolution of the Flight 370 tragedy, that challenge is bound to become greater as our food and coastal security, marine transportation systems, even our basic ecosystem processes such as the oxygen generated by ocean plankton, are

increasingly stressed through overfishing, pollution, loss of coastal habitat and ocean impacts from climate change.¶ Investing in the exploration and understanding of our planet's largest habitat should be a given. Perhaps that will be a lesson learned from our latest human disaster. Unfortunately, while the sea is still vast,

our ability to act wisely in our own interests is often limited.

Current systems of exploration are not enough to fully understand the ocean

USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy-¶ Governors' Draft; “Executive Summary”; http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/exec_summary.pdf; April 20th, 2004) SW

To be effective, U.S. ocean policy should be grounded in an understanding of ecosystems, and our management approach should be able to account for and address the complex interrelationships among the ocean, land, air, and all living creatures, including humans,

and consider the interactions among multiple activities that affect entire systems. An ecosystem-based management approach should overcome the challenges inherent in addressing complex issues that

cross traditional jurisdictional boundaries, and it must be able to continually adapt to new scientific information and improved management tools. The existing fragmented system for managing our oceans and coasts is unable to meet these goals. The Commission has identified a number of needed changes based upon three fundamental and crosscutting themes: (1) creating a new national ocean policy framework to improve decision- making; (2) strengthening science and generating high-quality, accessible information to inform decision makers; and (3) enhancing ocean education to instill

future leaders and informed citizens with a stewardship ethic. A New National Ocean Policy Framework to Improve Decision-Making To improve decision-making and move toward an ecosystem-based

management approach, the Commission recommends a new National Ocean Policy Framework. This framework consists of several components and is designed to produce strong, high-level leadership, more effective coordination of the many federal agencies with ocean management responsibilities , and strengthened involvement in decisionmaking at the state, territorial, tribal, and local levels. National Ocean

Council and Related Elements A central component of the proposed National Ocean Policy Framework is the establishment, within the Executive Office of the President, of a National Ocean Council, chaired by an Assistant to the President and composed of all the cabinet secretaries and independent agency directors with ocean-related responsibilities. A Presidential Council of Advisors on Ocean Policy, consisting of nonfederal representatives from state, territorial, tribal, and local governments and nongovernmental, academic, Create a New National Ocean Policy Framework o

Improve federal leadership and coordination. o Strengthen federal agency structure to enable effective implementation of national ocean policy and enhance the ability of agencies to address links among ocean, land, and air . o Enhance opportunities for state, territorial, tribal, and local entities to

develop regional goals and priorities, improve responses to regional issues, and improve coordination . and private sector entities with ocean interests, would also be

created to ensure a formal structure for nonfederal input on ocean and coastal policy matters. A small Office of Ocean Policy would provide staff support. The Commission recommends that this structure be established immediately by Congress. Pending congressional action, the President should put this structure in place

through an Executive Order. Strengthened Federal Agency Structure Improved federal coordination is necessary, but not sufficient

to bring about the depth of change needed to modernize our ocean governance system. As part of the new National Ocean Policy Framework, the existing federal agency structure should be made less redundant, more effective, and better suited to an

ecosystembased management approach. As an initial step, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be reconfigured and strengthened to better enable it to execute its many ocean- and coastalrelated responsibilities. The second step will be consolidation of overlapping ocean and coastal programs where appropriate. Over the long-term, more fundamental changes to the federal agency structure will be needed that recognize the links among the ocean, land, and air and that support a unified approach to resource use and conservation. Enhanced Opportunities for Regional Coordination Improving the ability of state, territorial, tribal, and local entities to participate in ocean policy-making and implementation is another critical component of the National Ocean Policy Framework. Many of the nation’s most pressing ocean and coastal issues are regional in nature and require input on planning and management by state and local policy makers and other relevant stakeholders. Therefore, one of the priority tasks for the National Ocean Council will be to establish and facilitate a flexible process for creating nonregulatory regional ocean councils, to start immediately as pilot projects in regions where interest and capacity are strong. These councils would improve the ability of regional interests to work with federal entities, respond to issues and opportunities that

cross jurisdictional boundaries in a timely fashion, and address the connections and conflicts among watershed, coastal, and offshore resources and their uses. Strong Science for Wise Decisions Effective policies should be based on unbiased, credible, and up-to-date scientific information. This requires a significant investment, an adequate infrastructure for data collection and management, and the ability to effectively

translate scientific findings into useful and timely information products for policy makers, managers, educators, and the public. High quality, accessible information is critical to making wise decisions about ocean and coastal resources and their uses to guarantee sustainable social, economic, and environmental benefits from the sea. Strengthen Science Over the past two decades, the declining health of our oceans and coasts has become evident. In those same two decades, however, federal investment in ocean research has stagnated, while funding for other scientific program areas has increased.

Ocean research efforts have fallen from 7 percent of the total federal research budget 25 years ago to just 3.5 percent today. Insufficient ocean science funding in the United States, combined

with increased capacity in other nations, has lessened U.S. pre-eminence in ocean research, exploration, and technology

development. Chronic under-investment has left much of our ocean related scientific infrastructure in woefully poor condition. Current funding is well below the level needed to take advantage of our capacity, remain a world leader in ocean science and marine technology, and meet today’s ocean and coastal information needs. Furthermore, as we move

toward an ecosystem-based management approach, managers’ requirements for additional scientific information will only grow. The federal investment in ocean and coastal research must be significantly increased to at least doubl e today’s $650 million annual

investment, over the next five years. Additional investments in technology development and ocean exploration are also needed.

Uniqueness – Funding Needed

Federal investment key—specifically, vessels need funding

USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy-¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 27: Enhancing Ocean Infrastructure And Technology

Development http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter27.pdf; April 20th, 2004)

Surface Vessels Despite the increasing availability of moored instruments, drifters, gliders, and satellites to collect ocean data, the need remains for traditional ships to conduct

research, exploration, and education. But insufficient vessel capacity, vessel deterioration, and outdated shipboard equipment and technology hinder the conduct of vessel-based science. In some cases, these conditions also present safety issues and increase costs. The nation’s existing surface vessels for research are spread across federal and state agencies, universities, private research institutions, and private industry. The four largest U.S. government fleets conducting global, coastal, and nearshore research are operated by NOAA, the Navy, EPA, and the U.S. Department of the Interior. The University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) is an organization of sixty-two academic institutions and national laboratories involved in oceanographic research that coordinates oceanographic ship schedules. There are currently twenty-seven UNOLS research vessels— owned by the Navy, NSF, or individual research institutions—located at twenty operating CHAPTER 27: ENHANCING OCEAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT institutions. Most coastal states also own and operate vessels of various sizes and mission capabilities to satisfy state research needs. A significant and growing number of privately owned vessels are also being used by federal and state agencies and academic institutions through contract or lease arrangements, particularly for highly specialized work. The U.S. Coast Guard operates three icebreakers in coordination with UNOLS, which provide polar research capabilities. This fleet was recently updated with a new vessel specifically designed for research, but two of these ships will reach the end of their service life within the next four to seven years. NOAA has enlarged its fleet by refitting surplus Navy vessels and launching a ten-year plan to build four specialized fishery research ships at a price of $52 million per vessel.5 Two of the ships are under construction, but funding has not been finalized for the remaining two.

While all of the agency research fleets would benefit from upgrades, the UNOLS fleet is in need of immediate attention. Twelve of the seventeen largest UNOLS ships will reach the end of their service life over the next fifteen years, and almost all UNOLS ships require significant enhancements.6 The National Ocean Partnership Program’s Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee, comprised of representatives from thirteen federal organizations and one representative from UNOLS, was established to oversee oceanographic facility use, upgrades, and investments. The Committee’s 2001 plan for recapitalization of the UNOLS academic research fleet is an excellent example of successful interagency planning at the national level.7 Unfortunately, its plan has not yet been funded or implemented. Furthermore, as the international Integrated Ocean Drilling Program gets underway, the United States has pledged to provide a modernized non-riser drilling vessel with enhanced coring and drilling capabilities at an estimated cost of $100 million.8 Modern research ships are designed as flexible platforms that can accept different instrument systems to suit particular projects. However, the built-in instrumentation (such as sonars, mapping systems, and computer labs) must be considered part of the vessel. These onboard technologies typically require much

more frequent maintenance and upgrades than the vessels themselves. Thus, fleet planning strategies need to consider the costs of maintaining existing instrumentation and integrating emerging technologies.

US has deep sea tech- just needs funding

Mclain 2012 (Craig McClain—Assistant Director of Science for the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center; Deep Sea News; “We Need an Ocean NASA NowPt.1”; http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-1/; October 16th, 2012)

Our nation faces a pivotal moment in exploration of the oceans . The most remote regions of the deep oceans should be more accessible now than ever due to engineering and technological advances. What limits our exploration of the oceans is not imagination or technology but funding. We as a society started to make a choice: to deprioritize ocean exploration and science. Budget Cuts Green Road Sign image courtesy of Shutterstock In general, science in the U.S. is poorly funded; while the total number of dollars spent here is large, we only rank 6th in world in the proportion of

gross domestic product invested into research. The outlook for ocean science is even bleaker. In many cases, funding of marine science and exploration, especially for the deep sea , are at historical lows. In others, funding remains stagnant,

despite rising costs of equipment and personnel. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a committee comprised of leading ocean

scientists, policy makers, and former U.S. secretaries and congressmen, gave the grade of D- to funding of ocean science in the U.S. Recently the Obama Administration proposed to cut the National Undersea Research Program (NURP) within NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a move supported by the Senate. In NOAA’s own words, “NOAA determined that NURP was a lower-priority function within its portfolio of research activities.” Yet, NURP is one of the main suppliers of funding and equipment for ocean exploration, including both submersibles at the Hawaiian Underwater Research Laboratory and the underwater habitat Aquarius. This cut has come despite an overall request for a 3.1% increase in funding for NOAA. Cutting NURP saves a meager $4,000,000 or 1/10 of NOAA’s budget and 1,675 times less than we spend on the Afghan war in just one month. One of the main reasons NOAA argues for cutting funding of

NURP is “that other avenues of Federal funding for such activities might be pursued.” However, “other avenues” are fading as well. Some funding for ocean exploration is still available through NOAA’s Ocean Exploration Program. However, the Office of Ocean Exploration, the

division that contains NURP, took the second biggest cut of all programs (-16.5%) and is down 33% since 2009. Likewise, U.S. Naval funding for basic research has also diminished. The other main source of funding for deep-sea science in the U.S. is the National Science Foundation which primarily supports biological research through the Biological Oceanography Program.

Funding for science within this program remains stagnant, funding larger but fewer grants.

Federal support needed to revamp deep-sea infrastructure—funding solves

USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy-¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 27: Enhancing Ocean Infrastructure And Technology

Development http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter27.pdf; April 20th, 2004)

A Federal Commitment to Scientific Infrastructure Coordinated federal support for ocean science infrastructure in all the areas

discussed above is urgently needed to build or upgrade critical facilities and acquire related instrumentation and equipment. Improved coordination of similar equipment purchases, where feasible, can achieve significant economies of scale . NSF has traditionally been the lead federal agency for supporting academic infrastructure. NSF can propose

funding for large research facilities (those costing hundreds of millions of dollars) through its Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction account, while small infrastructure projects (costing millions of dollars or less) have generally been funded through the regular disciplinary science programs. In 1997, NSF launched the Major Research Instrumentation program to provide additional support for instrumentation ranging in cost from $100,000 to $2 million, although funding for this program falls far short of the needs. There is currently no NSF program dedicated to funding mid-size facilities (costing millions to tens of millions of dollars). Recommendation 27–4 Congress should create a mechanism to ensure a dedicated funding stream for critical ocean science infrastructure and

technology needs. Spending priorities should be based on the National Ocean Council’s ocean and coastal infrastructure and technology strategy. High-priority areas for funding include the following: • the renewal of the University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System fleet and other essential air fleets and

deep-submergence vehicles. • the completion of the third and fourth dedicated fishery research vessels. • the acquisition of vessels and infrastructure needed for an expanded national ocean exploration program. • the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program non-riser drilling vessel. • the refurbishment or replacement of two U.S. Coast

Guard polar ice breakers. • the ongoing modernization of existing assets , including telecommunications assets, laboratories, and other

facilities. Other Essential Infrastructure and Technology Components Ocean-related agencies maintain the infrastructure needed to carry out their responsibilities in resource management, navigation and safety, enforcement, and environmental protection and response.

United States Key

U.S. research infrastructure is key – even if the counterplan effectively collects data, it has no hope of analyzing that data and transforming the results into effective application. Only the Aff has a huge risk of driving the breakthroughs and innovations needed to solve our advantagesKurtzman, 2014 (Joel, “America Unleashed: Why We’ll Be Number One Once More”, PBS Newshour, January 22, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/america-unleashed-well-number-one/)

The Force of America’s Creativity If you take a walk through the Kendall Square area of Cambridge, Mass., you get a sense of

what I mean by the force of America’s unsurpassed creativity. In a one-square-mile area around the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, there are dozens of large biotech and life sciences companies, dozens of startups and one of the most vibrant (if not the most vibrant) academic research centers in the world. As a result, Novartis, a giant Swiss pharmaceutical company, moved nearly its entire research center to Cambridge from Switzerland to take advantage of expertise located in that one square mile. And the French pharmaceutical company Sanofi recently paid $17 billion to buy Genzyme, an American biotech

pioneer, to get into Cambridge and gain access to its brains, its CEO said. At the same time, billions of dollars have been spent building new research centers linked to MIT and nearby Harvard, like the Broad Institute, the McGovern Institute for Brain Research, the Whitehead Institute and many others. These research centers are doing pioneering

work in genetics and medicine. No other country has anything quite like that one square mile of

Cambridge real estate. But in the United States, we also have other centers of creativity that rival Cambridge — the areas around Stanford, in San Francisco, around San Diego, in Austin and Seattle, at the Research Triangle, along the I-95 corridor in New Jersey, in Houston, and in many other areas. And this is just biotech and the life sciences. We also have other

world-leading clusters of creativity focusing on robotics, advanced manufacturing, computing, software, telecommunications, entertainment, materials science and many other scientific and technological areas. And, because America is entrepreneurial, these clusters also produce companies — lots of them, which is why ideas coming out of our labs end up on our desks, in our phones, attached to our eyeglasses and in our cars, offices and homes so quickly.

These centers of creativity are creating measurable value and are unique to the United States.

Reliance on foreign facilities means domestic researchers don’t get access to new technology and data National Research Council, 2008 (Ocean Studies Board, Biennial Report 2006-2008, http://www.dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/osb/miscellaneous/osb-biennial-report.pdf)

The nation’s research infrastructure forms the backbone of scientific enterprise and is essential for the application of scientific knowledge to societal needs. However, significant components of the U.S. ocean infrastructure are aged or obsolete, and in some areas, the capacity is insufficient to meet the

needs of the ocean community. There has been concern that the growing technology gap in facilities

will lead to the decline of the nation’s leadership in marine technology development. This could result in increasing reliance on foreign facilities, potentially reducing the access of domestic researchers to new technology and observational data.

The U.S. is key to our Aff dawg –

A) Expertise in scientific ocean drilling USAC, 2008 (US Advisory Committee for Scientific Ocean Drilling, “Scientific Ocean Drilling: Contributing to the Nation’s Ocean Research Priorities”, USAC White Paper, November, http://usssp-iodp.org/wp-content/uploads/IODP_and_ORPP_White_Paper.pdf)

Deep beneath the ocean floor, scientists are sampling ancient sediments and volcanic rocks for clues about our planet’s future. With the support

of the National Science Foundation, the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) continues to play an important role in advancing ocean, climate, and geologic research. The United States has been a world leader in scientific ocean drilling for almost forty years and is poised to maintain its position with a newly refurbished and updated U.S. drilling vessel, the JOIDES Resolution. From early success in establishing evidence for plate tectonics, the program continues to illuminate the frontier of the earth sciences. Recent expeditions have sailed to the vastly unexplored Arctic Ocean where scientists recovered 50 million years of climate history from near the North Pole, and sailed to the Pacific Ocean off the U.S. coast where scientists began determining the nature and extent of methane hydrates. In 2007, the federal government released the Ocean Research Priorities Plan to set science priorities and chart the course for ocean research over the next 10 years.

Scientific ocean drilling has compiled a priceless database of materials and measurements from the world’s oceans that has facilitated the study of the natural climatic, tectonic, and oceanic systems, as well as the natural phenomena that can affect these systems. By providing insights into the natural world, the continuing contributions of scientific ocean drilling, now

accomplished by the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program, are a vital resource for accessing the data necessary to address the nation’s ocean science priorities.

B) Unique collaboration between government/education/and industry USCOP, 2004 (US Commission on Ocean Policy, “Creating a National Strategy for Increasing Scientific Knowledge, Chapter 25, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter25.pdf)

Since the mid-1900s, the U.S. government has assumed a leadership role in ocean science and technology. Today, fifteen federal agencies support or conduct diverse activities in ocean research, assessment, and management. The heads of these agencies direct

the National Oceanographic Partnership Program (NOPP), which coordinates national oceanographic research and education. NOPP has provided a useful venue for agencies to support selected ocean science and technology projects, but it has not realized its full potential as an overarching mechanism for coordination among federal agencies or between federal activities and those of state, local, academic, and private entities. Under the new National Ocean Policy Framework proposed in Chapter 4, the National Ocean Council (NOC) will serve as the federal coordinating body for all ocean-related activities and the NOC’s Committee on Ocean Science, Education, Technology, and Operations (COSETO) will assume leadership of NOPP. This new structure will allow for the design and implementation of a national strategy to promote ocean research, education, observation, exploration, and marine operations. NOPP’s existing offices and committees will be incorporated within this structure (Figure 25.1). Ocean.US, the lead office for planning the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), and the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee, which provides advice related to oceanographic facilities, will both report to COSETO. An additional planning and coordinating body, Ocean.IT should be added to COSETO to provide stronger integration for information technology activities. (The creation of Ocean.IT is discussed in Chapter 28.) ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL STRATEGY The United States does not have a national strategy for ocean and coastal research, exploration, and marine operations that can integrate ongoing efforts, promote synergies among federal, state, and local governments, academia, and the private sector, translate scientific and technological advances into operational applications, and establish national goals and objectives for addressing high-priority issues. Instead, for the most part, each federal ocean agency independently addresses its own specific information needs. A national strategy can help meet the ocean resource management challenges of the 21st century and ensure that useful products result from federal investments in ocean research.

Moving toward ecosystem-based management approaches will require a new generation of scientific understanding. Specifically, more needs to be known about how marine ecosystems function on varying spatial scales, how human activities affect marine ecosystems and how, in turn, these changes affect human health. Ecosystem-based management will also require a deeper understanding of biological, physical, chemical, and socioeconomic processes and interactions. For example, as coastal population growth feeds a demand for new construction,

managers will need to know which activities may cause rapid erosion of the beach, increased turbidity that harms a coral reef, or economic disruption. In another example, fishery conservation can be promoted by protecting spawning grounds and other essential habitat; to make this possible, scientists and managers must understand the fundamental biology of the fish species. Maintaining overall ecosystem health also requires an improved understanding of biological diversity on different levels, including genetic diversity (the variety of genetic traits within a single species), species diversity (the number of species within an ecosystem), and ecosystem diversity (the number of different ecosystems on Earth). The largest threats to maintaining diversity on all three scales are human activities, such as overfishing, pollution, habitat alteration, and introductions of non-native species. The extent of marine biological diversity, like so much about the ocean, remains unknown. But based on the rate at which new species are currently being discovered, continued exploration of the ocean is almost certain to result in the documentation of many additional species that can provide fresh insights into the origin of life and human biology. A national strategy should promote the scientific and technological advances required to observe, monitor, assess, and predict environmental events and long-term trends. Foremost in this category is climate change. The role of the ocean in climate, although critical, remains poorly understood. The ocean has 1000 times the heat capacity of the freshwater lakes and rivers, ocean circulation drives the global heat balance, and ocean biochemistry plays a primary role in controlling the global carbon cycle. The process of climate change should be examined both on geologic time scales, such as the transitions between ice ages, and over shorter periods of time. The buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will increase the melting of polar ice, introducing large quantities of fresh water into the North Atlantic. Many researchers now believe that could drastically change ocean circulation and weather patterns in the span of a couple of years.1 In particular, the Gulf Stream could slow or stop, causing colder temperatures along the eastern seaboard of the United States and ramifications around the globe. It is in man’s interests to learn more about the processes that lead to abrupt climate changes, as well as their potential ecological, economic, and social impacts. Even as we try to comprehend the role of the ocean in climate change, we need also to understand the effects of climate change on ocean ecosystems. If temperatures around the globe continue to warm, sea level will continue to rise, putting many coastal residents at greater risk from storm surges and erosion. For individual ecosystems, even small changes in ocean temperature can put the health and lives of sea creatures and humans at risk. Ocean monitoring, through programs like the IOOS, will be essential for detecting and predicting changes more accurately, thereby improving prospects for minimizing harmful effects. Some large initiatives, such as the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Census of Marine Life, have been launched in the last couple of years to study large-scale research topics. However, many of the issues most relevant to the needs of coastal managers do not occur on such global scales. Due to the regional nature of many ocean and coastal ecosystem processes, regional-scale research programs are also needed. Currently, insufficient emphasis is placed on this kind of research. The regional ocean information programs discussed in Chapter 5 are designed to close this gap and increase our understanding of ocean and coastal ecosystems by prioritizing, coordinating, and funding research that meets regional and local management needs. At the state level, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Sea Grant College Program can make essential contributions to achieving research goals. The state Sea Grant programs have the organization and infrastructure necessary to fund research and conduct educational activities that will expand understanding of ocean ecosystems up and down our coasts. Sea Grant’s current strategic plan

focuses on promoting ecosystem-based management and on involving constituencies from government, universities, the public and the private sector, all of whom are needed to strengthen the U.S. research enterprise.2 It is time for the United States to establish a national strategy for ocean research investments, and oversee implementation and funding of programs throughout the ocean science community. This plan should address issues at the global, regional, state, and local levels. It should emphasize ecosystem-based science to help resolve the current mismatch between the size and complexity of marine ecosystems and the fragmented nature of science and the federal structure. Better coordination and integration will help provide the information needed to sustain resources, protect human lives and property, identify and nurture new beneficial uses, and resolve issues that result from competing activities. A unified national approach to ocean research, exploration, and marine operations, structured around national investment priorities, will also result in wiser and more efficient use of resources.

C) Research Infrastructure and Human Capital USCOP, 2004 (US Commission on Ocean Policy, “Report of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy”, Report for Congress, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-108shrg93902/html/CHRG-108shrg93902.htm)

The United States has a wealth of ocean research expertise spread across a network of government and industry laboratories and world-class universities, colleges, and marine centers. With strong federal support, these institutions made the United States the world leader in oceanography during the 20th century. However, a leader cannot stand still. Ocean and coastal management issues continue to grow in number and complexity, new fields of study have emerged, new interdisciplinary approaches are being tried, and there is a growing need to understand

the ocean on a global and regional scale. All this has created a corresponding demand for high-quality scientific information.

D) Competitive exploration and research environment Connaughton and Marburger, 2007 (James L., Chair of the Committee on Ocean Policy, John H., Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Charting the Course for Ocean Science in the United States For the Next Decade”, NSTC Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, January 26, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/nstc-orppis.pdf)

Scientific discovery, driven by competitive, peer-reviewed investigations, is the foundation of the nation’s research enterprise and is an intrinsic and highly valued component of the ocean research portfolio . Fundamental research that expands the scientific frontier

enhances and deepens our understanding of the ocean and its role in the Earth system. It is essential that the nation cultivate and investigate new ideas about the ocean and new approaches for exploring the marine environment that may challenge existing interpretations. In doing so, society should recognize and even encourage

risk-taking in supporting the most exciting and promising ideas for making progress in understanding the ocean. Progress requires the continued support of both systematic measurements of the ocean’s properties and the freedom to pursue new ideas and technology. Discipline-oriented research focuses on examining the intricacies of one facet of science, while interdisciplinary collaborations capitalize on this focus to investigate connections and feedbacks between diverse elements. Both of these efforts need to be enhanced in parallel to enable comprehensive understanding of the

ocean and its place in the Earth system. The path ahead as presented in this document necessarily includes the need for “creative individuals to pursue the kind of fundamental scientific research that can lead to unforeseen breakthroughs”3. The ability to access all aspects of the ocean environment, made possible by fostering scientific and technological innovation, will enable breakthroughs in basic understanding of ocean biology, chemistry, geology, and physics and the connections among these disciplines. Improved access to the open ocean, coasts, coastal watersheds, and Great Lakes depends on advances in infrastructure and technology, from advanced sensors to satellites and unmanned vehicles. The development of innovative tools, from remotely operated and autonomous vehicles, to molecular techniques and genetic sequencing, to physical, chemical, and biological sensors, will facilitate novel experiments and permit the study of processes ranging from isolated episodes to global cycles. Observing and understanding ocean processes that operate on different temporal and spatial scales and in different regions requires a balanced combination of in situ observing platforms, a robust fleet of ships, remotely operated autonomous vehicles, satellites, and land-based marine laboratories supporting specialized equipment and instrumentation. The reach of ocean science research can be significantly expanded by leveraging the capabilities of other disciplines, including nanotechnology, genomics,

and robotics, enabling new access to and perspectives on the ocean environment. A workforce eager to push the limits of scientific knowledge and technological innovation will support the scientific discoveries necessary to address fundamental scientific questions and to advance the use of scientific research for operational activities to help meet national needs . The research community identifies many promising areas for scientific investment through workshops and other planning activities. The National Research Council and other community groups also publish analyses of promising new directions in funda- mental ocean research that are used by funding agencies to guide investments4. Attempt- ing to prioritize research efforts driven by new ideas and the desire for discovery would constrain these creative and visionary activities critical to the research enterprise. By definition, unforeseen breakthroughs and paradigm shifts cannot be planned. Therefore, this document focuses on underscoring—rather than attempting to define or enumer- ate comprehensively—the fundamental research efforts that provide the foundation for understanding the ocean. This document emphasizes the research efforts with particular anticipated societal applications, while invoking the fundamental research that provides the foundation for those applications.

E) Dynamic economy with the ability to absorb start-up costsWeller, 1997 (Nick, The Thresher Online – Rice University, “U.S. Fails to Effectively Lead U.N’s Environmental Reform”, April 11, http://www.rice.edu/projects/thresher/issues/84/970411/Opinion/Story05.html)

There are a number of factors which make it feasible for the United States to serve as a leader in environmental changes. First, the United States has a tremendous research infrastructure. This gives the U.S. an unsurpassed ability to investigate renewable energy sources as well as to improve current uses of fossil fuels. Second, the United States trades extensively on the world market. If the United States gives foreign companies market incentives to sell "green" products, foreign countries would also produce cleaner goods. In addition, U.S. companies could be given incentives to produce and market "green" goods for both domestic use and foreign trade.Trading these goods in foreign markets as well as marketing them heavily will increase their availability

worldwide, and begin to reduce environmental impact. Third, the United States has a developed, dynamic economy that can sustain the initial start-up costs of environmentally-friendly production. It is not

clear whether this type of production will necessarily cost more than older production methods. Regardless, the United States has an economy that can conceivably bear some increases in marginal production costs. Although accepting these costs may not be ideal, it needs to be done if we want to reduce the impact on climate change and problems such as air pollution. It may seem that these costs would bear down disproportionately on the United States, but it is important to remember the tremendous contribution the United States makes to global climate change. No other country uses fossil fuels at nearly the levels the United States does.

F) Unlimited resources and unique global model In Focus, 2004 (National Academies In Focus Magazine, Exploration of the Deep Blue Sea: Unveiling the Ocean’s Mysteries, 4.1, Winter/Spring, http://www.infocusmagazine.org/4.1/env_ocean.html)

Already a world leader in ocean research, the United States should lead a new exploration endeavor by example. "Given the limited resources in many other countries, it would be prudent to begin with a U.S. exploration program that would

include foreign representatives and serve as a model for other countries," said John Orcutt, the committee chair for one of the reports and deputy director, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego. "Once programs are established elsewhere, groups of nations could then collaborate on research and pool their resources under international agreements." Using new and existing facilities, technologies, and vehicles, proposed efforts to understand the oceans would follow two different approaches. One component dedicated to exploration would utilize ships, submersibles, and satellites in new ways to uncover the ocean's biodiversity, such as the ecosystems associated with deep-sea hydrothermal vents, coral reefs, and volcanic, underwater mountains. A second component -- a network of ocean "observatories" composed of moored buoys and a system of telecommunication cables and nodes on the seafloor -- would complement the existing fleet of research ships and satellites. The buoys would provide information on weather and climate as well as ocean biology, and the cables would be used to transmit information from sensors on fixed nodes about volcanic and tectonic activity of the seafloor, earthquakes, and life on or below the seafloor. Also, a fleet of new manned and unmanned deep-diving vehicles would round out this research infrastructure. Education and outreach should be an integral part of new ocean science efforts by bringing discoveries to the public, informing government officials, and fostering collaborations between educators and the program's scientists, the reports say. These activities will expand previous international programs. For example, the observatory network will build on current attempts to understand the weather, climate, and seafloor, such as the Hawaii-2 Observatory -- which consists of marine telephone cables running between Oahu and Hawaii and the California coast -- and the Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array, which contains about 70 moorings in the Pacific and was key to predicting interannual climate events such as El Niño. The National Oceanographic Partnership Program, an existing collaboration of 14 federal agencies, would be the most appropriate organization to house the ocean exploration program, which would cost approximately $270 million the first year, and about $100 million annually thereafter, according to the Research Council. The National Science Foundation is expected to fund the observatory network program, which would cost about $25 million per year, and provide funds for the construction and operation of at least one new manned submersible and possibly several remotely operated vehicles.

Data collection is insufficient – must effectively translate into application Connaughton and Marburger, 2007 (James L., Chair of the Committee on Ocean Policy, John H., Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Charting the Course for Ocean Science in the United States For the Next Decade”, NSTC Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, January 26, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/nstc-orppis.pdf)

Common among the societal themes is the need to develop the tools necessary to pursue research and to effectively translate the results of that research in ways that are useful to resource managers, policy-makers, and the general public. Society’s ability to knowledgeably address key ocean-related societal issues depends on technological and intellectual innovation, incorporating many infrastructure assets, including ocean-observing and modeling capabilities. A healthy relationship

between society and the ocean depends on having the scientific foundation to develop and implement new

strategies to educate and instill a sense of stewardship in the public and translate research results into effective decision-making tools.

Transforming research into usable information is key – only the plan solves Connaughton and Marburger, 2007 (James L., Chair of the Committee on Ocean Policy, John H., Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Charting the Course for Ocean Science in the United States For the Next Decade”, NSTC Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, January 26,

Research translation—transforming research results into readily understandable and usable information, whether for decision-makers, resource managers , educators, or poten- tial

workforce participants—requires a common set of skills, currently embodied in many existing organizations. Building on existing mechanisms will be a critical component of moving research results into the broader community for use in education, management, and decision-making processes. Some organizations have begun to work together on topics such as ocean observing and workforce development, and provide a foundation for prototyping broader activities for research translation and expanding such activities. Translating research results into decision-support and information products will arm resource managers and other decision-makers with the most accurate, research-based information possible. Mechanisms to do this translation already exist

in some cases, and can be adapted and expanded. Federal entities, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, currently assist the nation’s coastal-

resource management and emergency-management communities by providing access to information, technology, and training, and by producing new tools and approaches that often are applied nationwide. State and local organizations, as well as regional councils and associations, can also serve to provide data, information, and products on marine and estuarine systems deemed necessary by user groups.

Implementing preliminary exploration through the US key to broader international supportKearney and Pages, 04 (Bill Kearney—Deputy Executive Director, & Director of Media Relations, National Academies; Patrice Pages—Former Media Relations Officer at National Academies; InFocus Magazine: National Academies; “Exploration of the Deep Blue Sea: Unveiling the Ocean's Mysteries”; http://www.infocusmagazine.org/4.1/env_ocean.html; Winter/Spring 2004) JM

Already a world leader in ocean research, the United States should lead a new exploration endeavor by example. "Given the limited resources in many other

countries, it would be prudent to begin with a U.S. exploration program that would include foreign representatives and serve as a model for other countries," said John Orcutt, the committee chair for one of the reports and deputy director, Scripps Institution of

Oceanography, University of California, San Diego. "Once programs are established elsewhere, groups of nations could then collaborate on research and pool their resources under international agreements."Deep submergence vehicle Alvin being hoisted aboard

research vessel Atlantis following a dive, ©Craig Dickson, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution¶ Using new and existing facilities, technologies, and vehicles, proposed efforts to understand the oceans would follow two different approaches. One component dedicated to exploration

would utilize ships, submersibles, and satellites in new ways to uncover the ocean's biodiversity, such as the ecosystems associated with deep-sea hydrothermal vents, coral reefs, and volcanic, underwater mountains.¶ A second component -- a network of ocean "observatories" composed

of moored buoys and a system of telecommunication cables and nodes on the seafloor -- would complement the existing fleet of research ships and satellites. The buoys would provide information on weather and climate as well as ocean biology ,

and the cables would be used to transmit information from sensors on fixed nodes about volcanic and tectonic

activity of the seafloor, earthquakes, and life on or below the seafloor.¶ Also, a fleet of new manned and unmanned deep-diving vehicles would round out this research infrastructure.¶ Education and outreach should be an integral part of new ocean science efforts by bringing discoveries to the public, informing

government officials, and fostering collaborations between educators and the program's scientists, the reports say.¶ These activities will expand previous international programs. For example, the observatory network will build on current attempts to understand the weather, climate, and seafloor, such as the Hawaii-2 Observatory -- which consists of marine telephone cables running between Oahu and Hawaii and

the California coast -- and the Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array, which contains about 70 moorings in the Pacific and was key to predicting interannual climate events such as El Niño.¶ The National Oceanographic Partnership Program, an existing collaboration of 14 federal agencies, would be the most appropriate organization to house the ocean exploration program, which would cost approximately $270 million the first year, and about $100 million annually thereafter, according to the Research Council. The National Science Foundation is expected to fund the observatory network program, which would cost about $25 million per year, and provide funds for the construction and operation of at least one new manned submersible and possibly several remotely operated

vehicles.¶ "Over the next decade, new international collaborations dedicated to ocean exploration and research will most likely lead to new discoveries that could increase public awareness of the oceans as a common global bond, highlighting their importance in our lives," Orcutt said. -- Patrice Pages & Bill Kearney

US program serves as a model for international participation—limited resources in other areasAguilera, 03 (Mario Aguilera—Assistant Director of Scripps Communications; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego; “Major Ocean Exploration Effort Would Reveal Secrets of the Deep”; https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/2678 ; November 6th, 2003) JM

WASHINGTON - A new large-scale, multidisciplinary ocean exploration program would increase the pace of

discovery of new species, ecosystems, energy sources, seafloor features, pharmaceutical products, and artifacts, as well as improve understanding of the role oceans play in climate change, says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies' National Research Council. Such a program should be run by a nonfederal organization and should encourage international participation, added the committee that wrote the report.¶ Congress, interested in the possibility of an international ocean exploration program, asked the Research Council to

examine the feasibility of such an effort. The committee concluded, however, that given the limited resources in many other countries, it would be prudent to begin with a U.S. program that would include foreign representatives and serve as a model for other countries. Once programs are established elsewhere, groups of nations could then collaborate on research and pool their resources under international agreements . "The United States should lead by example," said committee chair John Orcutt, professor of geophysics and deputy director, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego.¶ "In developing this report it became graphically clear

how poorly we've explored the southern hemisphere and particularly the Southern Ocean," said Orcutt. "Entire areas of the seafloor as large as Oklahoma have never been mapped. Oceanographic vessels from the U.S., Japan, and Europe rarely visit the southern hemisphere and our knowledge of processes critical to the health of the planet have gone unstudied and large volumes of the oceans unexplored."¶ Vast portions of the ocean remain unexplored. In fact, while a dozen men have walked on the moon, just two have traveled to the

farthest reaches of the ocean, and only for about 30 minutes each time, the report notes. "The bottom of the ocean is the Earth's least explored frontier, and currently available submersibles -whether manned, remotely operated, or autonomous-cannot reach the deepest parts of the sea," said committee vice chair Shirley A. Pomponi, vice president and director of research at Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Fort Pierce, Fla.¶ Nonetheless, recent discoveries of previously unknown species and deep-sea biological and chemical processes have heightened interest in ocean exploration. For example, researchers working off the coast of California revealed how some organisms consume methane seeping through the sea floor, converting it to energy for themselves and leaving hydrogen and carbon dioxide as byproducts. The hydrogen could perhaps someday be harnessed for fuel cells, leaving the carbon dioxide-which contributes to global warming in the atmosphere-in the sea. Likewise, a recent one-month expedition off Australia and New Zealand that explored deep-sea volcanic mountains and abyssal plains collected

100 previously unidentified fish species and up to 300 new species of invertebrates.¶ Most current U.S. funding for ocean research, however, goes to projects that plan to revisit earlier sites or for improving understanding of known processes, rather than to support truly exploratory oceanography, the report says. And because the funding bureaucracy is discipline-based, grants are usually allocated to chemists, biologists, or physical scientists, rather than to teams of researchers representing a variety of scientific fields. A coordinated, international ocean exploration effort is not unprecedented, however; in fact, the International Decade of Ocean Exploration in the 1970s was considered a great success.¶

US exploration key—best equipmentApps and Hepher, 14 (Peter Apps—political risk correspondent for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, covering a range of stories on the interplay between politics, economics and markets; Tim Hepher—Reuters Global Aerospace Correspondent; “Analysis

- Geopolitical games handicap Malaysia jet hunt”; Reuters; http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/28/uk-malaysia-airlines-geopolitics-analysi-idUKBREA2R1OQ20140328; March 28th, 2014)

RADAR POKER¶ Malaysia's acting transport minister Hishammuddin Hussein, who is also the country's defence minister, has defended the international effort to find the jet.¶ "All countries involved are displaying unprecedented levels of cooperation, and that has not changed," he said.¶ But while Kuala Lumpur has been forced to reveal some of the limits and ranges of its air defences, the reluctance of Malaysia's neighbours to release sensitive radar data may have obstructed the investigation for days.¶ At an ambassadorial meeting in the ad hoc crisis centre at an airport hotel on March 16, Malaysia formally appealed to countries on the jet's possible path for help, but in part met with polite stonewalling, two people close to the talks said.¶ Some countries asked

Malaysia to put its request in writing, triggering a flurry of diplomatic notes and high-level contacts.¶ "It became a game of poker in which Malaysia handed out the cards at the table but couldn't force others to show their hand," a person from another country involved in the talks said.¶ It was not until a week later that Malaysia announced a

list of nations that had checked their archives.¶ Beijing, meanwhile, was dramatically upping its game.¶ Its ability to

deploy forces deep into the southern hemisphere is particularly striking. Beijing has sent several deployments into southern waters in recent months, including warship visits to New Zealand and South America, while its icebreaker

"Snow Dragon" helped rescue personnel from a trapped Russian icebreaker in the Antarctic late last year.¶ "China are deploying because that's what great powers do, and there must be a political expectation for them to (do so)," said one former Western military officer. "How well they do it, only the USA will currently know (through surveillance and signals intelligence), and time will tell."¶ CHINESE CLOUT¶ With five Chinese ships heading to a new search area in the Indian Ocean on Friday, experts say China is revealing military capabilities it lacked just a handful of years ago.¶ Chinese officials have also spoken of the growing number of satellites it has put to the task, a sensitive topic nations rarely disclose.¶ "A decade ago, China wouldn't even have been in this game at all," says Christopher Harmer, a former U.S. naval aviator and search-and-rescue pilot, now senior fellow at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington DC. "It really shows how far they have come, much,

much faster than most people expected."¶ Ultimately, the only country with the technical resources to recover the plane - or at least its black box recorder, which could lie in water several miles deep - may be the United States. Its deep-sea vehicles ultimately hauled up the wreckage of Air France 447 after its 2009 crash in the South Atlantic.¶ So far, Washington has sent two Poseidon maritime reconnaissance aircraft to the southern Indian Ocean search as well as an underwater drone and its Towed Pinger Locator, specifically designed to detect the signals from black boxes.¶ As in the northern Indian Ocean, where Chinese forces operate alongside other nations to combat Somali piracy, current and former officials say all sides are almost certainly quietly spying on and monitoring each other at the same time.¶ Military secrets, meanwhile, remain the last thing on the minds of those still hoping for news of missing relatives.¶ "I don't care about the secrets. I just want my son to return," Liu Guiqiu, mother of missing passenger Li Le, told China Central Television.

New exploration will start within areas under US jurisdiction

NOAA, 12 (National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration; Ocean Exploration’s Second Decade; “Summary”; http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/about-oer/program-review/2012-12-12-FINAL-OE-Review-Report.pdf; December 2012)

• The Ocean Exploration Program has had success in science, mapping, data management, education, politics, and diplomacy • But vast unexplored regions remain, including the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and the Extended Continental Shelf • Ocean exploration is part of American greatness and spirit Summary Consistent with the Congressional Oceans Acts of 1999 and 2000, in June 2000 in an

Executive Directive, President Clinton requested the Secretary of Commerce to convene a Panel of leading ocean explorers, scientists, and educators to develop a national strategy for exploring the oceans and the Great Lakes. The 2000 Panel’s report (pp.

252-326 at http:// explore.noaa.gov/about-oer/ under the “Program Review” tab, “Guiding Documents” link) Discovering Earth’s Final Frontier: A U.S. Strategy for Ocean Exploration, delivered in October 2000, recommended: The U.S. undertake a national program in ocean exploration in which discovery and the spirit of challenge are the cornerstones. Multidisciplinary exploration approaches, covering all three dimensions of space, as well as the fourth

dimension of time, should include natural and social sciences as well as the arts. The U . S. Ocean Exploration Program should be global in scope, but

concentrated initially in areas under U.S. jurisdiction. Results must be carefully documented and widely disseminated; the program must be innovative and bold. The 2000

Panel recommended the U.S. government establish the Ocean Exploration Program for an initial period of 10 years, with new funding at the level of $75 million per year , excluding capitalization costs. The 2000 Panel’s recommendations are listed to the right.• Interdisciplinary voyages of discovery within high-priority areas, including the U.S . Exclusive Economic Zone ( EEZ ) and the continental margin, the

Arctic, and poorly known areas of the southern oceans and inland seas . The U.S. inventory of the living and

nonliving resources in the ocean should be second to none, particularly within our own EEZ and continental margins. • Platform, communication, navigation and instrument development efforts, including the capitalization of major new assets for ocean exploration, in order to equip our

explorers with the very best in marine research technology . • Data management and

dissemination, so that discoveries can have maximum impact for research, commercial,

Federal Government Key

Federal Leadership key to integrating ocean exploration

USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy -¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 25: Creating A National Strategy ¶ For Increasing Scientific Knowledge”; http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter25.pdf; April 20th, 2004) SW

Problems in the current system for awarding federal research grants make it difficult to conduct the kind of interdisciplinary, ecosystem-based research required to understand the ocean environment. Short-term

research grants of two- to five-years duration are now typical. This type of funding is useful for research on discrete topics of limited scope, and has the advantage of giving agencies the flexibility to adjust quickly to changing priorities. However, it is not adequate to acquire the continuous data sets that will be essential for examining environmental changes over time. In addition, a variety of mechanisms are used by federal agencies to review proposed ocean research grants. Some of these mechanisms work better than

others. Grant review systems that are not open to all applicants or that do not use an objective review process for ranking proposals are unlikely to produce the highest quality research. Systems that favor established researchers to the detriment of young scientists, whether intentionally or not, are also flawed, stifling diversity and limiting the infusion of new ideas. When all research proposals, including those from scientists working at federal labs, are subject to the same rigorous review process, tax dollars are more likely to support the best science. Streamlined grant application and review processes will also help get more good science done in a timely way.

The ocean science community includes many scientists outside academic and federal labs. Although coordination among sectors has steadily improved, the process remains mainly ad hoc, without the backing of a national strategy and leadership . A

clearer understanding of the respective strengths and roles of the different sectors could lead to productive new research partnerships, foster intellectual risk-taking,

leverage funding, and encourage participation in large multi-sector research efforts valuable to the nation. There is also a need to gain feedback from managers at state and federal levels and from the private sector that can guide new research directions and technology development. The regional ocean information programs recommended in Chapter 5 will provide an

excellent mechanism for gaining input on user needs and regional research priorities. A mechanism is required to coordinate federally funded ocean research (both basic and applied), support long-term projects, and create partnerships throughout all agencies and sectors. Transparent and Preliminary Report Chapter 25: Creating a National Strategy for Increasing Scientific

Knowledge 309 comprehensive research plans would achieve these goals and ensure that research results can be translated into operational products in a timely manner. Recommendation 25–2. The National Ocean Council should develop a national ocean research strategy that reflects a long-term vision, promotes advances in basic and applied ocean science and technology, and guides relevant agencies in developing ten-year science plans and budgets.

Federal government key to expanding exploration of deep-sea areas—coordination of agencies Levin et. al., 2012 (Lisa A. Levin, Director of Center for Marine Biodiversity & Conservation (CMBC) and Distinguished Professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ardron, Erik Cordes, Dimitri Deheyn, Ron Etter, Lauren Mullineaux, Tracey Sutton, Cindy Van Dover, Amy Baco-Taylor, James Barry, Douglas Bartlett, Robert S. Carney, Amanda W.J. Demopoulos, Charles Fisher, Chris German, Kristina M. Gjerde, Anthony J. Koslow, Craig McClain, Carlos Neira, Laurie Raymundo, Greg Rouse, Lily Simonson, Craig R. Smith, Karen Stocks, Andrew Thurber, Michael Vecchione, Les Watling, Julia Whitty, Patricio Bernal, Angelo F. Bernardino, Yannick Beaudoin, Bronwen Currie, Elva Escobar, Andrew J. Gooday, Jason Hall-Spencer, Dan Laffoley, Pedro Martinez, Javier Sellanes, Paul Snelgrove, Kerry Sink, Andrew K. Sweetman; CMBC, University of California San Diego; “CMBC Comments on National Ocean Policy Implementation”; http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Search/?cx=015024451743439807884%3Ai-iebkz1azu&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=National+Ocean+Policy+Implementation+Plan; March 27th, 2012) JM

Deep-sea habitats require special consideration in the context of management and ¶ policy decisions. The goal of advancing fundamental scientific knowledge through ¶ exploration and research (Action 1) is

arguably more critical and more challenging in the ¶ deep sea than other marine habitats because

of our lack of knowledge of deep waters ¶ and the difficulty accessing them. To maintain effective and fiscally responsible access ¶ to

the deep sea it is essential that governmental agencies coordinate the use and ¶ support of ocean-going

vessels, deep submergence vehicles and seafloor monitoring ¶ systems. These facilities should be managed to

complement each other and cover ¶ essential functions , thereby optimizing research opportunities. An

example of a problem ¶ caused by the lack of coordinated agency oversight of access to the deep sea is the ¶

recent threat to eliminate NURP facilities, including human-occupied deep submergence ¶ vehicles. If this happens, it would severely curtail the ability of US scientists to access ¶ critical deep-sea regions , many of which are high priority research areas for multiple ¶ other agencies (NSF, DOD, EPA, NASA, Sea Grant). As anthropogenic impacts are ¶

expanding in the deep sea they are increasingly affecting areas for which there are no ¶ data. Funding support for research specifically aimed at exploration and conservation in ¶ the deep sea is key to acquiring baselines and assessing impacts.

Federal control key—only way to ensure state coordinationOcean Foundation, 08 (Ocean Foundation—organization whose person is to support, strengthen, and promote those organizations dedicated to reversing the trend of destruction of ocean environments around the world; Presidential Climate Action Project 2012; pg 9; “A Coastal and Ocean Policy for the next Administration”; http://www.climateactionproject.com/docs/nonpartisan_ocean_policy_9_3_08.pdf#search=A Coastal and Ocean Policy for the next Administration; September, 3rd, 2008) JM

A healthy ocean requires recognition of the importance of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes to the ¶ economic and ecological well being of our nation, and a commitment to a coordinated and ¶ comprehensive national approach for ocean and atmospheric research, conservation, management, ¶ education, monitoring, and assessment. A national ocean policy would serve to unify and guide the ¶

decision-making and actions of a multitude of federal agencies with ocean management responsibilities ¶ and to bring greater coherency to the numerous federal ocean laws by establishing a common goal. ¶ Such a policy would also greatly enhance the ability of states to work together to address common ¶

concerns off their shores. A national ocean policy is also important in the face of an unprecedented ¶

number of proposed activities in the ocean—activities such as aquaculture, wind and wave energy ¶ facilities, and

liquefied natural gas terminals. To manage these new uses alongside existing commercial ¶ and recreational uses, while

also protecting and preserving ocean life, requires a common vision and a ¶ coordinated and comprehensive management approach to offshore activities. ¶ Much of the progress in addressing the problems facing our oceans is happening at the state and ¶ regional level, with innovative ocean management and governance mechanisms developing in ¶ individual states such as Washington State, California, New York, and Massachusetts. In regions such ¶ as the Great Lakes, West Coast, and Gulf Coast, states are collaborating in multi-state initiatives that ¶ enable them to more effectively identify

regional issues and priorities and improve responses to ¶ regional ecosystem needs, uses and services. The efforts by regions and states in developing and ¶ implementing ocean governance mechanisms require committed and

sustained participation and ¶ support to ensure long-term success. In addition, a purposeful and coordinated federal role is needed ¶ to facilitate and support these activities . This federal role must support

regional approaches and ¶ collaborations and enable coordinated and integrated management approaches that involve federal, ¶ state, tribal, local governments, as well as the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, and ¶ academic institutions.

Expansion of ocean exploration by federal means key to comprehensive coordination of agencies—TFORT solvesKohanowich and Midson, 13 (Karen M. Kohanowich—Co-Chair, TFORT¶ Acting Deputy¶ Office of Ocean Exploration and Research National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Brian Midson—Co-Chair, TFORT¶ Technical Operations Specialist Submersible Support Program Division of Ocean Sciences National Science Foundation; “Task Force for Ocean Exploration and Research Technology and Infrastructure (TFORT)¶ Five Year Goals and Priorities Plan FY 2013 - FY 2017”; NOAA; http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf; August 5th, 2013) JM

The Task Force on Ocean Exploration and Undersea Research Technology and Infrastructure (TFORT) is charged under Public Law 111-11, Title XII-Oceans, Subtitle

A-Ocean Exploration, Part I Exploration, Section 12004 (33 USC 3404) to develop and implement a strategy:¶ (1) to facilitate transfer of new exploration and undersea research technology to the programs authorized under this part and part II of this

subtitle;¶ (2) to improve availability of communications infrastructure, including satellite capabilities, to such

programs;¶ (3) to develop an integrated, workable, and comprehensive data management information processing

system that will make information on unique and significant features obtained by such programs available for research and management purposes;¶ (4) to conduct public outreach activities that improve the public understanding of ocean science, resources, and processes, in conjunction with relevant programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and other agencies; and¶ (5) to

encourage cost-sharing partnerships with governmental and nongovernmental entities that will

assist in transferring exploration and undersea research technology and technical expertise to the programs.¶ BUDGET COORDINA TION.-The task force shall coordinate the development of agency budgets and identify the items in their annual budget that support the activities identified in the strategy developed under subsection (a).¶ The TFORT will also support the priorities of the National

Ocean Policy Implementation Plan of April, 2013, especially to "Advance technologies to explore and better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere, ice, biological, and social interactions on a global scale." This strategic priorities plan

describes this strategy and intentions for its implementation over the time period FY 2013 - 2017, and will be updated annually.¶ Background¶ The Task Force on Ocean Exploration and Undersea Research Technology and Infrastructure (TFORT) was established under the interagency Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (SOST) Interagency Working Group on Ocean Partnerships (IWG-OP) and is guided by Terms of Reference approved by the IWG-OP co-chairs Nov 23,2012. It is co- chaired by Karen Kohanowich of NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and Research and Brian Midson of the National Science Foundation, Division of Ocean Sciences, and consists of representatives from USGS, BOEM, NASA, USN, and NOAA's Ocean Observation and Fisheries Advanced Technology Programs.

Plan can collaborate with independent contractors and is inexpensive—spurs creativity and success Aguilera, 03 (Mario Aguilera—Assistant Director of Scripps Communications; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego; “Major Ocean Exploration Effort Would Reveal Secrets of the Deep”; https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/2678 ; November 6th, 2003) JM

The new program proposed in the report would complement more traditional oceanographic research, and should be operated

by a nonfederal contractor chosen through a competitive bidding process, the committee said. Having an independent organization manage the program has many benefits, including the creativity, cost savings, and performance incentives that the competitive bidding process inspires. Contractors also can receive funding from multiple government agencies as well as private contributors. Federal agencies are more frequently turning to independent

contractors to carry out special projects, the committee noted. It recommended that any ¶ contractor chosen to run the ocean exploration program should be subjected to regular external review.¶ The most appropriate part of the federal government to house the ocean exploration program and oversee the

contractor is the N ational O ceanographic P artnership P rogram, an existing collaboration of 14 federal agencies, the committee decided. Before this can happen, however, Congress needs to revise the partnership program charter so it can receive direct and substantial appropriations of federal funds. If this funding issue is not¶ resolved, the ocean exploration program could be sponsored by the National Science Foundation or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.¶ Implementing the proposed program would cost approximately $270 million the first year, and about $100 million annually thereafter, the committee estimated. A less extensive program could be run for about $70 million a year, the report notes.

USFG key- leverages private investment

Gaffney, 13 (Paul G. Gaffney—Retired Second Vice Admiral –President Emeritus, Monmouth University; Ocean Exploration 2020 Conference Report; “First Principles for a Maritime Nation”; pg. 22; http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf; September 2013) SW

There are a few, scattered ocean exploration efforts within our nation. Federal agencies do make new discoveries

incidental to their separate missions. And, privately funded citizen explorers are getting excited about the ocean. While this collection of small efforts survives, each for its own purpose, the Congress expected more. The nation needs more to ensure maritime

strength. A broad, coordinated national program envisioned by Congress in PL 111-11 could help prioritize cross-agency oceanographic campaigns, strainfrom mission and research-driven expeditions and private excursions those bits of information that are of new-discovery-quality and guarantee that it will be archived within

government and shared with an increasingly excited group of American citizen explorers. It is government’s role to set the nation’s priorities , create and maintain the information backbone, and carry out comprehensively over the long term a program to understand the opportunity and dangers

in an ocean system in whose middle America sits. Only after it has demonstrated this commitment to leadership can it fully leverage investments from the private sector .

Solvency – Effective Exploration

Expansion and coordination of federal resources through a comprehensive program results in effective ocean explorationUSCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; Ocean Lea; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy -¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 25: Creating A National Strategy ¶ For Increasing Scientific Knowledge”; pg. 304; http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter25.pdf; April 20th, 2004)

Improved coordination through a National Ocean Council is necessary, but not sufficient to bring about the depth of change needed. Some restructuring of existing federal agencies will be needed to make government less redundant, more flexible, more responsive to the needs of states and

stakeholders, and better suited to an ecosystem-based management approach. Because of the significant hurdles involved, a phased approach is suggested.¶ The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is the nation’s primary

ocean agency. Although it has made significant progress in many areas, there is widespread agreement that the agency could manage its activities more effectively. In addition, many of the recommendations in this report call

for NOAA to handle additional responsibilities. A stronger, more effective, science-based and service-oriented ocean

agency is needed— one that works with others to achieve better management of oceans and coasts through an ecosystem-

based approach.¶ As an initial step in a phased approach, Congress should pass an organic act that codifies the

existence of NOAA. This will strengthen the agency and help ensure that its structure is consistent

with three primary functions: management; assessment, prediction, and operations; and research and education. To support the move toward a more ecosys- tem-based management approach within and among federal

agencies, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should review NOAA’s budget within its natural resource

programs directorate, rather than the general government programs directorate. This change would make it easier to reconcile NOAA’s budget with those of the other major resource-oriented departments and agencies, all of which are reviewed as natural resource programs at OMB.¶ As a second step in the

phased approach, all federal agencies with ocean-related responsibilities should be reviewed and strengthened and overlapping programs should be considered for consolidation. Programmatic overlaps can be positive, providing useful checks and balances as agencies bring different perspectives and experiences to the table. However, they can also diffuse responsibility, introduce unnecessary redundancy, raise administrative costs, and interfere with the

development of a comprehensive management regime. The Commission recommends that program consolidation be pursued in areas such as area-based ocean and coastal resource management, invasive species, marine mammals, aquaculture, and satellite-based Earth observing. The Assistant to the

President, with advice from the National Ocean Council and the President’s Council of Advisors on Ocean Policy, should review other federal ocean, coastal, and atmospheric programs, and recommend additional opportunities for consolidation.¶ Ultimately, our growing understanding of ecosystems and the inextricable links among the sea, land, air, and all living things, points to the need for more fundamental reorganization of the federal government.

Consolidation of all natural resource functions, including those involving oceans and coasts, would enable federal agencies to move toward true ecosystem-based management.

Expanding comprehensive exploration of ocean key to sustain role as leaderMcNutt et. al., 01 (Dr. Marcia McNutt-- an American geophysicist, editor-in-chief of the journal Science, former Director of Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute; Dr. Vera Alexander, Mr. Jesse Ausubel, Dr. Robert Ballard, Mr. Thomas Chance, Mr. Peter Douglas, Dr. Sylvia Earle, Dr. James Estes, Dr. Daniel J. Fornari, Dr. Arnold L. Gordon, Dr. Fred Grassle, Dr. Sue Hendrickson, Ms. Paula Keener-Chavis, Dr. Larry Mayer, Dr. Arthur E. Maxwell, Dr. William J. Merrel, Dr. John Morrison, Dr. John Orcutt, Dr. Ellen

Pikitch, Dr. Shirley Pomponi, Ms. Ursula Sexton, Dr. Jeffery Stein, Dr. George Boehlert, Dr. Joan Cleveland, Dr. Thomas Curtin, Dr. Robert Embley, Dr. Eric Lindstrom, Dr. Michael Purdy, Dr. Michael Reeve, Dr. William Schwab, Dr. Michael Sissenwine, and Dr. Richard Spinrad; President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration; “Earth’s Final Frontier: Strategy for Ocean Exploration”; Executive Summary; PDF; pg. 3-4; January 2001)

Partnerships are essential if the full benefits of ocean exploration are to be realized. Mechanisms must be developed for forming appropriate partnerships between federal, state, local, ¶ and tribal governments, industry, academic institutions, formal and informal educators, mass media and nongovernmental organizations. These partnerships will greatly expand the opportunities to undertake voyages of discovery, technology development, and educational out- reach. The Panel recognizes that the framework for accommodating collaboration in ocean exploration depends upon its broader organizational strategy. Therefore, recommendations concerning

partnerships must also consider larger organizational issues.¶ The President of the United States should instruct the White

House Science Advisor and appropriate¶ Cabinet officials to design the management structure for this program.

Elements of governance should include:¶ — Designating a lead agency to be in charge of the program and accountable for its success using benchmarks appropriate for ocean exploration, such as the number of new discoveries,

dissemination of data, and the impact of educational outreach.¶ — Using existing interagency mechanisms to ensure

federal cooperation among agencies.¶ — Establishing an Ocean Exploration Forum that would include commercial,

academic, private, and nongovernmental organizations, and government stakeholders in ocean exploration, to encourage partnerships and promote communication.¶ New technologies will enable the next generation of ocean

exploration, but if the U.S. is to be a leader in this area, we must make a commitment ¶ to provide the very best technology. Of particular importance are the development of: 1) Under- water navigation and communication technologies; 2) State-of-the-art sensors; and 3) Deployment strategies for multidisciplinary, in-situ and remote- sensing measurements of biological, chemical, physical and geological processes at all levels in the ocean. Therefore,

recommendations concerning new technologies must consider:¶ — Undertaking the development

of underwater platforms, communication systems, navigation, and a wide range of sensors, including the capitalization of major new assets for ocean exploration.¶ The Panel was also charged with recommending mechanisms to ensure that information gathered through ocean exploration is referred to the newly established Marine Protected Areas Center and to

appropriate commercial interests for possible research and development. The President can ensure that knowledge gathered during ocean exploration is effectively made available for informed decision-making relative to Marine Protected Areas

by:¶ — Assigning leadership in this activity to an appropriate federal agency.¶ — Establishing a broad-based task force to design and implement an integrated, workable, and comprehensive data management information processing

system for information on unique and significant features.¶ With respect to assuring that potential opportunities for developing new resources into useful products to benefit mankind are encouraged, the Panel recommends that U.S. laws

be re- examined to provide proper incentives for potential commercial users of ocean discoveries.¶ Examples of some areas

in which policies could encourage the appropriate use of exploration results include:¶ — Enhancing funding within federal agencies to support early-phase research on discoveries with commercial potential.¶ —

Providing incentives to private industry to encourage the funding of research and development of discoveries with

commercial potential.¶ — Designing mechanisms whereby those who directly profit from the exploitation of

marine resources support research on their environmentally sustainable use.¶ The Panel advocates a new

national Ocean Exploration Program to permit exploratory expeditions for two reasons: 1) The initial phase of oceanographic

discovery ended before a significant portion of the oceans was visited¶ in even a cursory sense; and 2)

Marvelous new tools now exist that permit exploration in spatial and temporal dimensions that were

unachievable 50 years ago. For these reasons, we must go where no one has ever gone before, “see” the oceans through a new set of technological “eyes,” and record these journeys for posterity.

Interagency program key to achieve effective ocean explorationNRC, 03 (National Research Council, National Academies—private, nonprofit institution that provides expert advice on some of the most pressing challenges facing the nation and the world; Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown; The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.; pg. 39-41; 2003)

A NEW PROGRAM OF OCEAN EXPLORATION IS NECESSARY¶ Systematic, or coordinated, ocean exploration is not a current practice within the United States. New discoveries about the oceans are often the result of serendipitous

circumstances, for instance, the inadvertent discovery of entirely new ecosystems at hydrothermal vents. Exciting discoveries about the oceans occur frequently, but the rate could be greatly enhanced by

pursuing new research topics in new regions of the oceans. ¶ A limited national ocean exploration effort has recently begun and is operated through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Since 2001, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Ocean Exploration has sought to “...explore and better understand our oceans. The office supports expeditions, exploration projects, and a number of related field campaigns for the purpose of discovery and documentation

of ocean voyages” (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003a). It is the committee’s sense that this fledgling national effort is too limited in scope. The education and outreach efforts are laudable, and the office has made the important step of committing 10 percent of their budget to those activities. However, uncertainty in the annual budgeting process makes long-term planning difficult, and the funding levels to date hover at $14 million. As no future vision for the program has yet been released it is difficult for this committee to determine whether this young program can be adapted to fill the role outlined in this report, but the program has not capitalized on much of the scientific expertise in the United States and relies on heavily

leveraging funds and assets against other oceanographic research programs.¶ Currently the pursuit of ocean data is largely an independent, researcher- driven effort with only scattered attempts at public education.

As a largely publicly-funded endeavor, oceanographers have a responsibility to communicate their findings clearly not only to the funding agencies, but to the broader public. Large numbers of people live near oceans

and many depend on it for their sustenance or livelihood, but few understand the complexity of the ocean ecosystem or its importance to society. Although efforts to educate the public in both formal and informal settings are increasing through programs such as the National Science Foundation’s Centers for Ocean Science Education Excellence program, outreach and education in the marine sciences is largely uncoordinated. Few members of the public appreciate the role the oceans play in our lives, and the relationship between the oceans, atmosphere, and land. Good public policy demands that the public engage in the excitement of ocean research, exploit public interest through education about the wealth and limitations of the ocean, and pro- mote citizen and decision-makers understanding about ocean issues and policy. Chapter 7 discusses some of the outreach and education possibilities in more detail.¶ Finding: Oceans provide food, energy and mineral resources, products capable

of treating human disease, and affect climate and global responses to changes in climate. A new large-scale program

devoted to ocean exploration is necessary to: ¶ • coordinate efforts in ocean discovery and

capitalize on the wide array of available data;¶ • provide new resources and facilities for access by researchers;¶ • establish support for and promote interdisciplinary approaches to¶ ocean investigations;¶ • develop outreach and public education tools to increase public¶ awareness and understanding of the oceans;¶ • discover the living and nonliving resources of the oceans; and¶ • provide a multidisciplinary archive of ocean data to serve as a¶ source of basic data upon which to develop

hypotheses for further investigation.¶ Recommendation: A coordinated , broadly-based ocean exploration

effort that meets the highest standards of scientific excellence should be aggressively

pursued . An ocean exploration program should be¶ initiated and exhibit the following characteristics, which can also be used to

gauge its ultimate success:¶ • The program should be global and multidisciplinary.¶ • The program must receive international support.¶ • The program should consider all three spatial dimensions as well as ¶ time .¶ • The program should seek to discover new living and nonliving ¶ resources in the ocean.¶ • The

program should include developments of new tools, probes,¶ sensors, and systems for multidisciplinary ocean

exploration.¶ • The program should reach out to increase literacy pertaining to ocean science and management issues for learners of all ages to maximize the impact for research, commercial, regulatory, and¶ educational benefits.¶ • The program should standardize sampling, data management, and¶ dissemination.

Deep Sea Exploration program would unlock potential

Mayer 2013 (Larry Mayer—Director, Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping/NOAA-UNH Joint Hydrographic Center; The Report of Ocean Exploration 2020; “Exploration as Discovery”; http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf; September 2013)

It is even more frightening to recognize that despite our current efforts to understand the ocean and despite tremendous advances in technology, we continue to make new and startling discoveries that radically change our view of how our planet works. The discovery of deep-sea vents and the remarkable life forms associated with them, the discovery of many new species of plants and animals, and the discovery of new mountain systems and deep passages on the seafloor that control the circulation of deep sea currents (that in turn control the distribution of heat on the planet) are but a few examples of important ocean discoveries that have changed our understanding of ocean processes but were not part of the planned scientific process. Just last week, I returned from a mapping cruise off northwestern Greenland. We were looking for a wreck in 300 to 600 meters of water in an area that was supposed to be relatively flat and too deep to be impacted by iceberg keels. What we found was nothing like the preconceived notions. We found a seafloor that had hundreds of meters of relief, we found evidence that iceberg keels had dragged across the bottom to depths well beyond 400 meters and we found surprising passages for warm waters from the continental shelf to enter the fjords and affect the melting of the Greenland icecap. This is not an isolated incident—it happens almost every time

we take a close look at the ocean with the right tools. It is difficult for scientists to admit—but we have to admit—that there is so much more that we DON’T KNOW about the oceans. We must put our pride aside and

realize that given our limited understanding of the ocean we must extend our study of the ocean to include not only the scientific process of testing specific hypotheses, but also a program of EXPLORATION—a program that is specifically designed to significantly increase the chances of making new discoveries. It will only be after many years of systematic exploration that we will begin to be able to say that we indeed do understand the wondrous ocean system that is so fundamental to sustaining us .

Exploration through an interagency program can be achieved regardless of current shortcomings NRC, 03 (National Research Council, National Academies—private, nonprofit institution that provides expert advice on some of the most pressing challenges facing the nation and the world; Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown; The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.; pg. 7-8; 2003)

There has been continued support for and success from oceanographic research in the United States, and

a large-scale international exploration program could rapidly accelerate our acquisition of knowledge of the world's oceans. The current ocean-research-funding framework does not favor such exploratory proposals. Additional funding for exploration without a new framework for management and investment is unlikely to result in establishment of a successful exploration program. A new program, however, could provide the resources and establish the selection processes needed to develop ocean exploration theme areas and pursue new research

in biodiversity, processes, and resources within the world's oceans. The current effort of the Office of Ocean Exploration

at NOAA should not be expected to fill this role .¶ After weighing the issues involved in oversight and funding,

perhaps the most appropriate placement for an ocean exploration program is under the auspices of the interagency NOPP, provided that the problems with routing funds to NOPP-sponsored projects is solved. This solution has the best chance of leading to major involvement by NOAA, NSF, and other appropriate organizations such as the Office of Naval Research. The committee is not prepared to support an ocean exploration program within NOAA unless major shortcomings of NOAA as a lead agency can be effectively and demonstrably overcome. A majority of the committee members felt that the structural problems limiting the effectiveness of NOAA's current ocean exploration program are insurmountable. A minority of the committee

members felt that the problems could be corrected. If there is no change to the status quo for NOPP or NOAA, the committee recommends that NSF be encouraged to take on an ocean exploration program. Although a program within NSF would face the same difficulties of the existing NOAA program in attracting other federal (and nonfederal) partners, NSF has proven successful at managing international research programs as well as a highly-regarded ocean exploration program that remained true to its

founding vision. Finding: After exhaustive deliberation, the committee found that an ocean exploration program could be sponsored through NOPP, or through one of the two major supporters of civilian ocean research

in the nation: NOAA or NSF.¶ Recommendation: NOPP is the most appropriate placement for an ocean exploration

program, provided the program is revised to accept direct appropriations of federal funds. If those funding issues are not resolved, NOAA (with consideration to the comments above) or NSF would be appropriate alternatives.

Exploring oceans offers unique potential—tech innovation, economic growth, biodiversity

Cousteau, 12 (Philippe Cousteau—correspondent for CNN; “Why exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap”; CNN; http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/; March 13th, 2012)

Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean. Filmmaker James Cameron sets out to explore the deepest part of the ocean You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father

Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA

system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau " introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy . Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived

from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet

untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods. In addition to new discoveries, we also have the opportunity to course correct when it comes to stewardship of our oceans . Research and

exploration can go hand in glove with resource management and conservation. Over the last several decades, as the United States has been exploring space, we’ve exploited and polluted our oceans at an alarming rate without dedicating the needed time or resources to truly understand the critical role they play in the future of the planet. It is not trite to say that the oceans are the life support system of this planet, providing us with up to 70 percent of our oxygen, as well as a primary source of protein for billions of people, not to mention the regulation of our climate. Despite this life-giving role, the world has fished, mined and trafficked the ocean's resources to a point where we are actually seeing dramatic changes that is seriously impacting today's generations. And that impact will continue as the world's population

approaches 7 billion people, adding strain to the world’s resources unlike any humanity has ever had to face before. In the long term, destroying our ocean resources is bad business with devastating consequences for the global economy , and the health and sustainability of all creatures - including humans . Marine spatial planning, marine sanctuaries, species conservation, sustainable fishing strategies, and more must be a part of any ocean exploration and conservation

program to provide hope of restoring health to our oceans. While there is still much to learn and discover through space exploration, we also need to pay

attention to our unexplored world here on earth. Our next big leap into the unknown can be every bit as exciting and bold as our pioneering work in space. It possesses

the same "wow" factor: alien worlds, dazzling technological feats and the mystery of the unknown. The United States has the scientific muscle, the diplomatic know-how and the entrepreneurial spirit to lead the world in exploring and protecting our ocean frontier. Now we need the public demand and political will and bravery to take the plunge in order to ensure that the oceans can continue to provide life to future generations . Today is a big step in that direction and hopefully it is just the beginning.

Increasing exploration from current levels key—expanse of resources and untapped potential of ocean Levin et. al., 2012 (Lisa A. Levin, Director of Center for Marine Biodiversity & Conservation (CMBC) and Distinguished Professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ardron, Erik Cordes, Dimitri Deheyn, Ron Etter, Lauren Mullineaux, Tracey Sutton, Cindy Van Dover, Amy Baco-Taylor, James Barry, Douglas Bartlett, Robert S. Carney, Amanda W.J. Demopoulos, Charles Fisher, Chris German, Kristina M. Gjerde, Anthony J. Koslow, Craig McClain, Carlos Neira, Laurie Raymundo, Greg Rouse, Lily Simonson, Craig R. Smith, Karen Stocks, Andrew Thurber, Michael Vecchione, Les Watling, Julia Whitty, Patricio Bernal, Angelo F. Bernardino, Yannick Beaudoin, Bronwen Currie, Elva Escobar, Andrew J. Gooday, Jason Hall-Spencer, Dan Laffoley, Pedro Martinez, Javier Sellanes, Paul Snelgrove, Kerry Sink, Andrew K. Sweetman; CMBC, University of California San Diego; “CMBC Comments on National Ocean Policy Implementation”; http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Search/?cx=015024451743439807884%3Ai-iebkz1azu&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=National+Ocean+Policy+Implementation+Plan; March 27th, 2012)

The deep sea is often overlooked in discussion of economic resources, but it ¶ represents a largely untapped reservoir of commercially important mineral and biological ¶ products. Recent trends in prices of precious metals and rare earth elements have ¶ made mining of hydrothermal sulfide mounds and manganese nodules and crusts ¶

economically feasible. Mining is about to be initiated in the western Pacific, and the US ¶ has hydrothermal deposits in its EEZ off OR. Unusual adaptations of deep-sea ¶ organisms make them ideal targets in the search for novel pharmaceuticals, enzymes, ¶ natural products, and microbial biochemical

pathways. Sustainable use of deep-sea ¶ resources will require the same types of management and policy

decisions as used for ¶ coastal systems . In cases where the resources are in international waters, there is the ¶ added

complication of coordination of policy and decision-making on the global level. Research in deep water is essential for

the safety and security of the US public ¶ because of the potential devastating effects to human life, as well as commerce and ¶ communication, of deep ocean earthquakes and their resulting tsunamis, seafloor eruptions, and turbidity flows.

Monitoring and database development targeted ¶ specifically at deep-sea habitats are necessary to understand these processes, design ¶ response and evacuation plans, and develop a predictive

capability. ¶ The ‘wow’ factor of exploration in the deep sea, and the visually striking nature of the ¶ creatures

(enormous red-plumed gutless tubeworms at hydrothermal vents or fields of ¶ lacy red corals on deep seamounts), make the deep ocean an ideal subject for outreach ¶ and education . This week’s trip by James Cameron to the Challenger Deep at the ¶ ocean’s greatest depth, illustrates the power of human presence in capturing public ¶ imagination about

the deep sea. The deep sea can serve to engage students and the ¶ public into becoming literate about the ocean. Relevant information about the deep sea ¶ should be incorporated into science standards for K-12 education, and used to develop ¶ displays and content for informal learning platforms in aquariums, museums, national ¶ monuments and parks (Action 6).

Solvency – Technology

Tech solves—data Holdren, 13 (John P. Holdren— Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology; “Science For An Ocean Nation: Update Of The Ocean Research Priorities Plan”; Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology National Science and Technology Council; pg. 70-71; http://www.innovation.ca/sites/default/files/Rome2013/files/US%20NSTC%20Ocean%20Research%20Plan%202013-17.pdf; February 2013)

Effective observing capabilities should provide essential physical, chemical, and biological data on various ecosystem types ranging from terrestrial watersheds to productive coastal and continental shelf regions to the deep, pelagic realms.

Collection of such data will require extensive infrastructure including research vessels, automated buoys, and

autonomous vehicles for short- and long-term sampling of water-column properties; satellite-based assessment of surface characteristics (e.g., temperature, biogeochemical properties, ocean color, surface currents, wave heights); in situ observatories in the ocean and

across the land–water interface; shore-based facilities for sample analysis, experimental manipulation, and observing system maintenance; and a range of survey (e.g., mapping) capabilities.¶ Improvements in, and maintenance of,

information technology and infrastructure are essential to ensure that data assimilation, analysis, and modeling

tools are available to accommodate and enable the integration of ecosystem and socioeconomic data. For example, ocean color is an important ocean parameter, which contributes to information on a variety of ocean-related issues, including sea surface temperature and ocean acidification.

Maintaining capabilities for satellite observations of ocean color and other parameters is a priority, even when national and

international commitments to satellite coverage are uncertain.¶ Understanding the causality of observed changes in ecosystems

informs an adaptive management approach. Implementing adaptive management measures in response to observed changes will

improve success and enable stronger linkages between science and the beneficial social outcomes of ecosystem- based management. It is critical that we develop end-to-end systems, based on collaboration between academic and operational agencies, to develop tools (such as the IEA program) to support ecosystem decision relative to local and regional issues, such as nutrient management, fisheries management, and

marine planning. Four-dimensional visualization tools are needed to provide geospatial information supporting decisions based in science and a thorough understanding of the“downstream”consequences of action or inaction. Such tools are data-intense, with particular emphasis on time series as key to model validation. Effective management of vast amount of data from multiple sources and with variable levels of sophistication is a key element in the inter-operation and functionality of ecosystem-based models.¶ Fundamental to all research progress is human

capital. Ensuring an effective and adaptive ecosystem- based research and management approach ¶ requires an investment not only in technology and infrastructure, but also in education ¶ systems to produce the scientists and managers needed to implement this approach. Collecting and analyzing data, conducting monitoring and assessments, and observing changes in ecosystems are all tasks that should be accomplished by a dedicated and knowledgeable workforce. Ecosystem research requires collaboration between aquatic and terrestrial natural sciences (e.g., biogeochemistry, taxonomy, systematics) and social sciences (e.g., sociology, economics) as well as individuals who can transform data into information products for end users.

Tech solves—diverse instrumentationLewis, 13 (Tanya Lewis—a staff writer for Live Science, a science news website based in New York; Live Science; “Incredible Technology: How to Explore the Deep Sea”; http://www.livescience.com/38174-how-to-explore-the-deep-sea.html; July 13th, 2013)

To monitor the oceans for extended periods, scientists need instruments capable of sampling the marine

milieu continuously. Scientists have developed a suite of sensors to do everything from measure water temperature and acidity, to image plankton, to record whale calls.¶ "The ocean is big, it's dynamic, and it changes a lot," said Steve

Etchemendy, director of marine operations at MBARI. "It's hard to see what's going on unless we can stay with a body of water."¶ Profiling buoys can travel down to 330 feet (1,000 m) and drift freely, measuring chemical signatures and then ascending to the surface to transmit data back via satellite. MBARI uses these to monitor the health of the Southern Ocean, near Antarctica. The Southern Ocean produces the bulk of the oxygen

that Earth gets from the ocean, Etchemendy told LiveScience.¶ Large, anchored moorings also provide measurements of the

ocean's health. These continuously take measurements on the ocean surface, relaying data back via radio.¶ Underwater observatories offer perhaps the most permanent way of studying the deep sea. For instance, MBARI has one called MARS, the Monterey Accelerated Research System, which sits on the seafloor 3,200 feet (980 m) deep. Instruments can be plugged into ports in the observatory to monitor seismic faults,

for example.¶ All of these technologies — from submersible vehicles to underwater observatories — are meant to provide access to the ocean, Bowen said. As with any unexplored frontier, "persistence in the ocean is something that’s really important," Bowen said.

Exploration solves—diverse use of underwater vehicles, data communication, and advanced equipmentAguilera, 03 (Mario Aguilera—Assistant Director of Scripps Communications; Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego; “Major Ocean Exploration Effort Would Reveal Secrets of the Deep”; https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/2678 ; November 6th, 2003) JM

The report also says that the program's dedicated flagship should be given a name that the public will come to associate

with the program, much as Jacques Cousteau's Calypso became a household term. In addition, satellites and the Internet could be used

to maintain real-time communications between the vessel and classrooms or the general public.¶ In addition to a main

expedition ship, the ocean exploration effort will need a fleet of new manned and unmanned submersibles. The manned subs should be capable of diving to at¶ least 6,500 meters, while remotely operated

vehicles should be designed to reach depths of 7,000 meters or more. Additional a utonomous u nderwater v ehicles that are ¶ programmed to travel a specific route, collecting information along the way with sensors and cameras, also are needed.¶ An upcoming National Research Council report will discuss plans to replace Alvin, the 35-year-old manned submersible that was used for groundbreaking

research, such as the discovery of deep-sea hydrothermal vents, and took the first human visitors to the wreck of the Titanic.¶ The ocean exploration study was mandated by Congress and sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The National Research Council is the principal operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering. It is a private, nonprofit institution that provides science and technology advice under a congressional charter. A committee roster follows.

Effective US exploration structure in place—vehicles solveLevin et. al., 2012 (Lisa A. Levin, Director of Center for Marine Biodiversity & Conservation (CMBC) and Distinguished Professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ardron, Erik Cordes, Dimitri Deheyn, Ron Etter, Lauren Mullineaux, Tracey Sutton, Cindy Van Dover, Amy Baco-Taylor, James Barry, Douglas Bartlett, Robert S. Carney, Amanda W.J. Demopoulos, Charles Fisher, Chris German, Kristina M. Gjerde, Anthony J. Koslow, Craig McClain, Carlos Neira, Laurie Raymundo, Greg Rouse, Lily Simonson, Craig R. Smith, Karen Stocks, Andrew Thurber, Michael Vecchione, Les Watling, Julia Whitty, Patricio Bernal, Angelo F. Bernardino, Yannick Beaudoin, Bronwen Currie, Elva Escobar, Andrew J. Gooday, Jason Hall-Spencer, Dan Laffoley, Pedro Martinez, Javier Sellanes, Paul Snelgrove, Kerry Sink, Andrew K. Sweetman; CMBC, University of California San Diego; “CMBC Comments on National Ocean Policy Implementation”; http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Search/?cx=015024451743439807884%3Ai-iebkz1azu&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=National+Ocean+Policy+Implementation+Plan; March 27th, 2012)

The Federal Oceanographic Fleet is clearly identified in the Implementation Plan as a critical component of the Federal Infrastructure. The assessment of capabilities and status of the Fleet (Action 1) is an essential step in planning for future needs in deep ocean exploration, monitoring, and research . As the milestones are achieved, we will discover any major

gaps in our capabilities.¶ One of these gaps lies in the availability of global class ships equipped with deep- submergence vehicles for deep-sea research. The number of these assets in the U.S. Fleet has declined over the last few decades . Many of these assets were previously managed by the

National Undersea Research Centers, which have all but disappeared due to budget cuts. The loss of the Johnson Sea-Link submersibles from Harbor Branch Oceanographic

Institution and the impending loss of the Pisces submersibles from the Hawaii Undersea Research Labs have worsened the situation for the deep-sea community. The prolonged absence of the DSV Alvin for the addition of a new personnel sphere, although an excellent upgrade for this vehicle, has left the U.S. with a complete lack of human-occupied submersibles. There is a conspicuous lack of mention of human-occupied submersibles in the National Ocean Policy. Although we agree that much of the exploration and monitoring of the deep sea is equally suited to unmanned vehicles, there remains a significant place for human-occupied submersibles in the experimental work of deep-sea research, in the spatial understanding of deep-sea ecosystems, and to inspire the next generation of scientists. We feel that

this is a significant omission that should be corrected.¶ Despite this omission, we agree that an increased reliance on the latest technologies in

unmanned vehicles could provide us with a better exploratory tools and an increased understanding of the deep-sea environment and resources (Action 2). These vehicles include remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater

vehicles (AUVs), including the gliders mentioned. The new dedicated ship for Ocean Exploration, the NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer will fill a niche in terms of pure exploration of the deep ocean. The

excellent deep-water mapping capabilities of this ship and the open-access model of its mode of operations set an excellent precedent for the development of additional deep-water assets in the Federal Fleet . However, vehicles with

sampling capabilities are urgently needed to provide understanding beyond observations. In addition to targeted mapping of specific areas, systematic mapping of the outer¶ 4¶ continental shelf and slope during the transit of any capable oceanographic vessel should become standard practice. The milestones in Actions 5 and 6 address this need for mapping, but fail to extend these priorities to the deep waters of

the U.S. EEZ.¶

Tons of potential- federal lead key to explore and utilize discoveries Levin et. al., 2012 (Lisa A. Levin, Director of Center for Marine Biodiversity & Conservation (CMBC) and Distinguished Professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ardron, Erik Cordes, Dimitri Deheyn, Ron Etter, Lauren Mullineaux, Tracey Sutton, Cindy Van Dover, Amy Baco-Taylor, James Barry, Douglas Bartlett, Robert S. Carney, Amanda W.J. Demopoulos, Charles Fisher, Chris German, Kristina M. Gjerde, Anthony J. Koslow, Craig McClain, Carlos Neira, Laurie Raymundo, Greg Rouse, Lily Simonson, Craig R. Smith, Karen Stocks, Andrew Thurber, Michael Vecchione, Les Watling, Julia Whitty, Patricio Bernal, Angelo F. Bernardino, Yannick Beaudoin, Bronwen Currie, Elva Escobar, Andrew J. Gooday, Jason Hall-Spencer, Dan Laffoley, Pedro Martinez, Javier Sellanes, Paul Snelgrove, Kerry Sink, Andrew K. Sweetman; CMBC, University of California San Diego; “CMBC Comments on National Ocean Policy Implementation”; http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/Search/?cx=015024451743439807884%3Ai-iebkz1azu&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=National+Ocean+Policy+Implementation+Plan; March 27th, 2012)

The deep sea holds many untapped resources – including living resources,

pharmaceuticals, energy and many minerals needed for modern technology (precious metals,

rare earth elements, phosphorites). Expanded use of these resources should be explored responsibly, with development and conservation practice progressing hand in hand. As with coastal management, an ecosystem-based approach will be required, combined with systematic

marine spatial planning. Therefore, we urge the National Ocean task force to better integrate deep-sea issues into the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (NOPIP). The comments below outline in detail several ways that the deep-sea can better considered in the context of the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (NOP-IP). To summarize, they fall into the following five categories: 1. Explicitly recognize the deep-sea in the wording of the NOP-IP. This is particularly important when considering climate change and other research

frontiers. 2. Commit to mapping the deep-sea: Including habitat mapping and biological sampling, so as to be allow scientists to

develop a biogeographic classification relevant to future spatial planning. 3. Commit to reversing the decline in US deep-sea research capabilities. While the US drastically cuts funding to our premier research institutions

such as the National Undersea Research Centers, other countries such as China and Japan are expanding

their commercial and scientific deep-sea research programs. Simply put, the US is losing its

competitive advantage . 4. Include deep-sea experts in regional planning (except for the Great Lakes), recognizing the

interconnected nature of the ocean in planning processes. 5. Include the deep-sea in education and communication efforts related to the NOP-IP. Expanded comments The following remarks focus on the implementation and application of the National Ocean Policy in US deep waters (below 200 m). The comments are generated by a diverse group of deep-sea scientists, engineers and policy experts from academic and non-governmental institutions across the USA who believe there should be greater recognition in the implementation plan of the significance and stewardship needs of the US deep ocean. Because many deep-water issues are global in reach and many living resources do not recognize national boundaries, we have included additional support for these statements in the form of international signatures. The deep ocean within the US EEZ represents a vast expanse of ocean that remains relatively understudied, but is an important economic and scientific frontier and provides significant climate regulation services. With expanding oil and gas extraction activities, 2 deep-water fishing, debris deposition, and climate change affecting deep-water habitats in the US EEZ, there is growing pressure from direct and indirect stressors. There are also pollutant impacts; mercury and halogenated hydrocarbons occur at high levels in long-lived deep-sea organisms at high trophic levels. Considerable dumping has taken place in US deep waters (radioactive waste, sewage). There are overfished deep-water fisheries (e.g., pelagic armorhead and Pacific ocean perch) and trawling impacts. We write in the belief that the National Ocean Policy implementation plan must specifically address

deep-ocean management and sustainability. Our remarks are structured around the national priority objectives.

Investment now needed to sustain U.S.’ standing as leader in ocean exploration USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries;

Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy -¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 25: Creating A National Strategy ¶ For Increasing Scientific Knowledge”; pg. 307; http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter25.pdf; April 20th, 2004) JM

The United States has a wealth of ocean research expertise spread across a network of government and ¶ industry

laboratories and world-class universities, colleges, and marine centers. With strong federal support, ¶ these institutions made the United States the world leader in oceanography during the 20th century .

However, ¶ a leader cannot stand still . Ocean and coastal management issues continue to grow in number and complexity, ¶ new fields of study have emerged, new interdisciplinary approaches are being tried,

and there is a growing ¶ need to understand the ocean on a global and regional scale. All this has created a

corresponding demand for ¶ high-quality scientific information. ¶ Federal investments during the cold war years of

the 1960s and 1970s enabled scientists to help promote our ¶ national economy and security through research into the fundamental physical, chemical, biological, and ¶ geological properties of the oceans. During that period, ocean

research funding constituted 7 percent of the ¶ federal research budget. However, the federal investment in ocean research began to stagnate in the early ¶ 1980s, while investments in other fields of science continued to grow

(Figure 25.2).3 As a result, ocean ¶ research investments comprise a meager 3.5 percent of today’s federal portfolio. The current annual federal investment of approximately $650 million in marine science is well below the level ¶ necessary to address adequately the nation’s needs for coastal and ocean information. Unless funding ¶ increases sharply, the gap between requirements and resources will continue to grow and the United States ¶ will lose its position as the world’s leader in ocean research.

Solvency – ROVs & AUVs

ROVs and AUVs solve—key to exploring seafloor

Chadwick, 10 (Bill Chadwick—Volcanologist, Oregon State University; NOAA; “Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs)”; http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/02fire/background/rovs_auvs/rov_auv.html; June 25, 2010)

Exploring the seafloor—a deep, dark, and cold environment—is extremely challenging. Because the vents are so deep, scientists cannot

simply don wet suits and use SCUBA gear to explore deep-sea hydrothermal vent systems in person. Instead, scientists use high-tech robots to conduct surveys of the seafloor. Two kinds of robots used in deep-sea research are remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). Both are marvels of engineering. The vehicles can carry instruments, take samples and conduct surveys, while allowing scientists to follow their progress from the safety of a ship. The main difference between the two is that while ROVs are physically connected to the ship by a cable, AUVs are not connected to the ship . Schematic image of ROPOS and its full

complement of support equipment Schematic image of ROPOS and its full complement of support equipment used during a deep-water deployment. Click image for larger view and more information.

Because the two kinds of vehicles have different capabilities and strengths, we will use both during our expedition to Explorer Ridge. With present technology, AUVs are best for surveys that can be programmed ahead of time and accomplished without supervision. ROVs are better suited for complex manipulations and sampling on the seafloor . One AUV used frequently in deep-sea explorations is named ABE, which stands for Autonomous Benthic Explorer. ABE is operated by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Cape Cod, Mass. It runs

on batteries, and at present, can survey the seafloor on dives lasting more than a day in length. ABE is unattached and completely independent of the ship, and houses a sophisticated computer. Before

each dive, it is pre-programmed to conduct specific tasks, and is then lowered over the side of the sh ip to begin its mission. This independence allows the ship to move around and do other things while ABE is diving, and increases the efficiency of the expedition. After a dive, ABE

returns to the surface to be recovered by the ship. The information ABE collects is extremely valuable in deep-sea research. On the expedition to Explorer Ridge, for example, ABE will be used to create detailed maps of the vent areas and to measure water properties, such as temperature and salinity, which will provide guidance on where to deploy the ROV ROPOS (Remotely Operated Platform for Ocean Science) for more detailed investigations. ROPOS and some of its instrumentation ROPOS and some of its instrumentation. Click image for larger view and more information. ROPOS is attached to the ship by a fiber optic cable and is controlled by a pilot on board the ship. The cable provides power and communication to ROPOS and allows live video and other data to be sent back to the ship as it is being collected. ROPOS is well-equipped to explore deep-sea environments; it is capable of diving to a depth of 5,000 m (almost three miles).

AUV and ROV tech key

USCOP, 04 (US Commission on Ocean Policy—a preliminary research commission established to obtain findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy; University of North Texas Libraries; Preliminary Report ¶ of the ¶ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy-¶ Governors' Draft; “Chapter 27: Enhancing Ocean Infrastructure And Technology

Development http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/prelimreport/chapter27.pdf; April 20th, 2004)

Undersea Vehicles Scientists working in the deep ocean have made fundamental contributions to understanding ocean and

planetary processes and the nature of life itself. Further scientific breakthroughs are likely if more regular access to the ocean depths can be provided. Ninety-seven percent of the ocean floor can be accessed by existing undersea vehicles with depth capabilities of around 20,000 feet. The remaining 3 percent—an additional 16,000 feet of ocean depth—remains largely inaccessible, although it includes most of the deep ocean trenches and comprises an area the size of the continental United States, Alaska, and about half of Mexico combined. Human-occupied deep submersible vehicles came into operation in the late 1950s, followed by tethered remotely operated vehicles, and later by autonomous underwater vehicles. All three types of vessels are still used, and this variety allows researchers to choose the best tool for their needs, based on factors such as task, complexity, cost, and risks. Today French, Russian, and Japanese human-occupied submersibles regularly work at depths of 20,000 feet or more. The last such vehicle owned by the United States was the Sea Cliff, which was retired in 1998 and not replaced. U.S. capability today is limited to the Alvin, built in 1964, which can only descend to 15,000 feet and stay submerged for relatively short periods. The University of Hawaii operates two submersibles that have the next deepest capabilities in the United States. The Pisces IV and Pisces V can dive to about 6,500 feet, with missions lasting seven to ten hours. For missions of long duration, the United States relies on the Navy’s NR-1 nuclear research submarine, which can stay submerged for thirty days but has a maximum depth of only 3,000 feet. The NR-1 was constructed in 1969, and its service life will end in 2012.

The United States has a well-developed remotely operated vehicle (ROV) industry, and ROVs

are readily available for academic and industrial purposes. The last twenty-five years have witnessed extraordinary advances in the field of subsea robotics, developed mainly for the oil and gas industry, and there is a wide array of ROVs available with working depths of 9,800 feet. Current U.S. ROV capabilities are led by Jason II, with a maximum operating depth of 21,325 feet, but it is the only vehicle in the federal fleet capable of reaching

this depth. Federal funding has expedited the development of ROVs that can dive to 23,000 feet and

deeper, but a concerted effort will be needed to make deep-water capabilities more economical and accessible. Submersibles in the federal research fleet, including Alvin and Jason II, are currently housed at the National Deep Submergence Facility at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The facility is funded through a partnership among NSF, the Office of Naval Research (ONR), and NOAA. In addition, the NOAA-funded Undersea Research Program provides scientists with tools and expertise needed to work in the undersea environment. The vehicles owned and operated by the Undersea Research Program are divided into six regional centers that choose research missions based on a

peer review process. The U.S. autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV ) industry has just begun to emerge from the research, development, and prototype phase. Over the past decade, close to 60 development programs have been initiated throughout the world, producing approximately 175 prototypes. About twenty of these programs remain active, with at least eight in the United States. While the primary financial drivers of AUV development in the United States have been the U.S. military and the oil industry, significant programs are in place at a few academic institutions and private institutes. Nevertheless, a 2003 report by the National Research Council found that the scientific demand for deep-diving vehicles is not

being met.9 The report suggests a mix of vehicles to support current and future research needs . Recommendations include: setting aside funds at the National Deep Submergence Facility to gain access to vehicles outside the federal fleet for specific missions; acquiring a second ROV to join Jason II by

2005, at a Dramatic advances in submergence vehicle technologies and instruments will help foster a revolution in our ability to measure the chemical, biological, and physical processes that occur in the oceans. —

Use of both AUVs, ROVs, and hybrids solve—offers human observation and access to great depths Lewis, 13 (Tanya Lewis—a staff writer for Live Science, a science news website based in New York; Live Science; “Incredible Technology: How to Explore the Deep Sea”; http://www.livescience.com/38174-how-to-explore-the-deep-sea.html; July 13th, 2013)

Even so, some aspects of ocean exploration are best left to robots. Remotely operated vehicles, or ROVs, are unmanned vessels controlled by scientists onboard a ship, via a tether cable. WHOI's ROV Jason is a two-part system. Pilots send commands and power to a vehicle called Medea, which relays them to Jason. Jason sends back data and live video to the ship. The ROV contains sonar equipment, video cameras and still cameras. Jason has manipulator arms for collecting samples of rock, sediment or ocean life to return to the surface. The

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) in California has two similar ROVs, Ventana and Doc Ricketts, which researchers there use to survey underwater volcanoes and study as-yet-unseen marine life. [In Photos: Spooky Deep-Sea Creatures]¶ deep-sea-hydrothermal-vents-crabs-

101007-02Pin It The hydrothermal vent crab Segonzacia on a mound that is covered with white bacteria and mineral precipitates.¶ Credit: MARUMView full size image¶ Autonomous underwater vehicles, or

AUVs, are another vitally important class of oceangoing robots. These vehicles can navigate vast distances and collect scientific data without any human control . WHOI's AUV, Sentry, can survey the mid-ocean or explore the seafloor, descending as far

as 19,700 feet (6,000 m). The vehicle can generate detailed maps of the seafloor using sonar, and take photographs of mid-ocean ridges, deep-sea vents and cold seeps (regions where methane and sulfide-rich fluids leak from the seafloor). AUVs also measure

physical characteristics of the ocean, such as temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen.¶ Bluefin RoboticsPin It The Bluefin-21 autonomous underwater vehicle used sonar to take pictures in the search for pieces

of Amelia Earhart's plane.¶ Credit: Bluefin RoboticsView full size image¶ ¶ Now, engineers are developing hybrid robotic vehicles, like WHOI's Nereus,

that can function as either a remotely operated vehicle or autonomous underwater vehicle. Nereus' first mission was to explore the Challenger Deep, the deepest stretch of the Mariana Trench (a region deeper below sea level than the height of Mount Everest).Using AUVs, MBARI scientists mapped volcanic features in the Gulf of California, Mexico. They also detected several expanding oxygen minimum zones — low-oxygen regions that drastically affect biological communities — in Monterey Bay, Calif., and other places. One of the institute's AUVs is currently being deployed to the Canadian Arctic, where it will study the release of greenhouse gases from icelike solids called gas hydrates in the seafloor sediment, which accelerate global warming.¶ While robotic vehicles provide a singular view of the ocean, they only see a snapshot of the ocean environment.