File

WNDI 2008 1
Solar Power Aff
SOLAR POWER AFF

1AC…………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………..2-18
ADVANTAGES
Hegemony Advantage
Hegemony Advantage – Troop Re-Supply ………………………………………………..…………………………19
Hegemony Advantage – Space Radar………………………………………………………………….…………20-21
Hegemony Advantage – General ………………………………………………………………………………….…22
Soft Power Advantage…………………………………………………………………………………..……………23

Soft Power Advantage – A2 : International Opposition……………………………………………………………...24
Space Advantage
Space Advantage – General ……………………………………………………………………………………....25-26
Space Advantage – Space Science…………………………………………………………………………………....27
Space Advantage – Space / Economy…………………………………………………………………………….…..28
Energy Scarcity Advantage

Energy Scarcity Advantage – General…………………………………………………………………………….29-31
Warming / Environment Advantage

Warming Advantage 2AC………………………………………………………….…………………………………32
Warming / Environment Advantage – Cap / World Industry Shift……………………………….………………33-34

Warming / Environment Advantage – A2: Biosphere Heat…………………………………………………………..35
Nuke Power Advantage

Nuke Power Bad 2AC……………………………………………………………………...…………………………36
Economy Advantage
Economy Advantage – Jobs / R&D…………………………………………………………..………………………37
Economy Advantage – Space Manufacturing…………………………………………………………………….38-39
Economy Advantage – Biz Con / A2 : No Interest / Investment……………………………………………………..40
Economy Advantage - A2: Spending Link …………………………………………………………………….41 – 42
Economy Advantage – Farming / Economy Advantage ………………………………………………………..43 - 44
Humanitarianism / UN Advantage
Humanitarianism / UN Advantage……………………………………………..……………………………………..45
Future Tech Advantage

Future Tech Advantage……………………………………………………………………………………………….46
Solvency
Solvency – Government / Private Investment ….…………………………………………………………………….47
2AC A2 : CASE
A2 : Not Feasible – New Breakthroughs……………………………………………………………………………..48
A2 : Not Feasible – General …………………………………………………………………………….………49 – 50
A2 : New Research Necessary / No Interest………………………………………………………………... ……….51
A2 : Timeframe ………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..52
A2 : Health / Safety……………………………………………………………………………………..…………….53
A2 : Weaponization……………………………………………………………………………………………….54-58
A2 : Attacks on SBSP ………………………………………………………………………………….…………59-60
A2 : Astronomic Interference …………………………………………………………………………………..……61
A2 : Environmental Damage………………………………………………………………………………………….62
WNDI 2008 2
Solar Power Aff
SPACE BASED SOLAR POWER AFFIRMATIVE

2AC A2 : OFF - CASE
A2 : Inherency / Command & Control Counter-plan …..............................................................................................63
A2 : Ground Based Solar Power…………………………………………………………………………………..64-65
A2 : Multilateral Counter-Plan ………………………..………………………………………………………….66-67
A2 : Telecomm DA ………………………………………………………………………………………………68-70
A2 : Kritik – SBSP Movement ………………………………………………………….…………………..……….71
A2 : Kritik – Space  Consciousness Shifting …………………………………………………………………..72-73
A2 : Kririk – Space  Environmental Consciousness Shifting ……………………………………………………..74
WNDI 2008 3
Solar Power Aff
1AC Inhrency (1/1)

Although technically and economically viable, SpaceBased Solar Power has neither government financial
support or political willpower to ensure its development and survival.
development and Survival
David Boswell Monday, August 30, 2004
The idea of generating power in space has been around for a while, but has never really gotten off the
ground. Concepts for solar power satellites were being discussed in the 1960s and they have received varying
amounts of interest since then. If solar power satellites are such a great thing, why haven’t more people been
more excited about them? The theory of the concept is sound, but there are a number of hurdles that are
holding development back…Another barrier is that launching anything into space costs a lot of money. A
substantial investment would be needed to get a solar power satellite into orbit; then the launch costs would make the
electricity that was produced more expensive than other alternatives. In the long term, launch costs will need to come down before
generating solar power in space makes economic sense. But is the expense of launching enough to explain why so little progress has
been made? There were over 60 launches in 2003, so last year there was enough money spent to put
something into orbit about every week on average. Funding was found to launch science satellites to study
gravity waves and to explore other planets. There are also dozens of GPS satellites in orbit that help people
find out where they are on the ground. Is there enough money available for these purposes, but not
enough to launch even one solar power satellite that would help the world develop a new source of
energy? In the 2004 budget the Department of Energy has over $260 million allocated for fusion research. Obviously the government
has some interest in funding renewable energy research and they realize that private companies would not be able to fund the
development of a sustainable fusion industry on their own. From this perspective, the barrier holding back solar power
satellites is not purely financial, but rather the problem is that there is not enough political will to
make the money available for further development. There is a very interesting discussion on the
economics of large space projects that makes the point that “the fundamental problem in opening any
contemporary frontier, whether geographic or technological, is not lack of imagination or will, but lack
of capital to finance initial construction which makes the subsequent and typically more profitable
economic development possible. Solving this fundamental problem involves using one or more forms of
direct or indirect government intervention in the capital market.” Competing with other options Even if a
solar power system was built and launched there would still be the economic problem of producing
electricity at a cost that is comparable to other options. Government subsidies can help get this new
industry on its feet but it will need to compete in the market in order to survive. This is a challenge for all
emerging renewable energy solutions. Current non-renewable energy supplies are cheap. Even with the recent increases in the price of
oil, it is still historically low. Adjusted for inflation, gas prices are still much lower than they were during the oil crisis in the 1970s. With
current prices there is little incentive for customers or producers to pursue alternatives. Even if oil prices continue to increase, it is not
likely that this will be enough to drive demand for alternatives. Although we will eventually run out of oil, coal, and other non-
renewable energy sources, in the short term rising oil prices will simply generate more oil. There are large amounts of known reserves
that are too expensive to profitably develop when oil is below a certain price. As soon as the price increases past a certain threshold, a
given field can be developed at a profit. From an economic standpoint, energy producers will take advantage of this and will make use of
their existing infrastructure to extract, refine, and distribute as much oil as possible regardless of how high the price of a barrel of oil
goes. Again the problem is more of a political one than an economic one. There will not be a financial
reason to start creating a solar power system in space unless we reach a decision to include the hidden
environmental costs of our current non-renewable sources of energy into the equation. In the near term
we certainly can afford to keep burning more oil, but are we willing to start investing in alternatives so we
don’t have to?
WNDI 2008 4
Solar Power Aff
1AC Plan
Thus the Plan: The United States Federal Government should offer the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration all necessary funds and authority to develop and launch a sufficient number of spacebased
solar power satellites to maintain a kilometer wide band of earth orbit experiences.
WNDI 2008 5
Solar Power Aff
1AC Energy Scarcity Advantage (1/4)

Advantage One is Energy Scarcity
SBSP key to check great power conflict over dwindling energy reserves
Joseph D. Rouge, Acting Director National Security Space Officer, October 2004

The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers a long ‐ term route to alleviate the security challenges of

energy scarcity, and a hopeful path to avert possible wars and conflicts. If traditional fossil fuel
production of peaks sometime this century as the Department of Energy’s own Energy Information Agency

has predicted, a first order effect would be some type of energy scarcity. If alternatives do not come on ‐ line

fast enough, then prices and resource tensions will increase with a negative effect on the global
economy, possibly even pricing some nations out of the competition for minimum requirements. This
could increase the potential for failed states, particularly among the less developed and poor nations. It
could also increase the chances for great power conflict. To the extent SBSP is successful in tapping an
energy source with tremendous growth potential, it offers an “alternative in the third dimension” to
lessen the chance of such conflicts.
WNDI 2008 6
Solar Power Aff

In particular, if the US does not develop SPSB China will see a massive economic and social
collapse by 2020
Taylor Dinerman The Space Review 05/26/07
Now that the National Security Space Office’s (NSSO) space solar power study has been released and shows
that the technology is well within America’s grasp, a set of decisions have to be made concerning how the US
government should proceed. The idea that the government should fund a series of demonstration projects, as
the study recommends, is a good place to start. Another aspect should be to study the impact that this
technology will have on the political and economic future of the world. The biggest factor in world affairs
in the next twenty or so years is the rise of China to true great power status. Leaving aside the political
vulnerabilities inherent in any communist regime, the greatest danger to China’s future prosperity is its
huge need for energy, especially electricity. According to an International Energy Agency estimate, demand
for electricity in China will grow at an average annual rate of 4.8% from 2003 and 2025. China is already
experiencing shortages. The Yangtze Delta region, which includes Shanghai and the provinces of Jiangsu
and Zhijiang and contributes almost 20% of China’s GDP, faced capacity shortages of four to five gigawatts
during peak summer demand in 2003. In spite of a furious effort to develop new power sources, including
dam building and new coal-fired power plants, China’s economic growth is outstripping its capacity to
generate the terawatts needed to keep it going. While China may turn to widespread use of nuclear
power plants, the Communist Party leadership is certainly aware of the role that glasnost and the
Chernobyl disaster played in the downfall of another Communist superpower. Thus, China may be
reluctant to rely heavily on nuclear power plants, at least not without strong safety measures, thus making
them more expensive and more time consuming to build. Wind power and terrestrial solar power will not
be able to contribute much to meeting China’s demand and certainly not without government subsidies
which a relatively poor nation such as China will be reluctant to provide.
At some point within the next twenty or thirty years China will face an energy crisis for which it will be
almost certainly unprepared. The crisis may come sooner if, due to a combination of internal and external
pressures, the Chinese are forced to limit the use of coal and similar fuels. At that point their economic
growth would stall and they would face a massive recession. Only a new source of electrical energy will
insure that such a nightmare never happens. The global repercussions would be disastrous. In the near
term the only new source of electric power that can hope to generate enough clean energy to satisfy China’s
mid- to long-term needs is space based solar power. The capital costs for such systems are gigantic, but
when compared with both future power demands and considering the less-than-peaceful alternative scenarios,
space solar power looks like a bargain.For the US this means that in the future, say around 2025, the
ability of private US or multinational firms to offer China a reliable supply of beamed electricity at a
competitive price would allow China to continue its economic growth and emergence as part of a
peaceful world power structure. China would have to build the receiver antennas (rectennas) and connect
them to its national grid, but this would be fairly easy for them, especially when compared to what a similar
project would take in the US or Europe when the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) factor adds to the time and
expense of almost any new project.Experiments have demonstrated, at least on a small
scale, that such receivers are safe and that cows and crops can coexist with them. However,
WNDI 2008 7
Solar Power Aff

there are persistent doubts and it would be wise to plan for a world in which rectenna placement on land will
be as politically hard as putting up a new wind farm or even a nuclear power plant.China, like its neighbors
Japan and Korea, has a land shortage problem. This may seem odd when one looks at a map, but the highly
productive industrial regions of China are confined to a limited coastal area. These areas also overlap with
some of the nation’s most fertile agricultural lands. Conflicts caused by hard choices between land use for
factories and housing and for food production are now common. Building the rectennas at sea would help
alleviate some of these disputes. China and its neighbors could compete to see who could build the most
robust and cost-effective sea-based rectennas. They would also be able to export these large systems: a
system that can survive the typhoons in the South China Sea can also handle the monsoons of the Bay of
Bengal or the hurricanes of the Caribbean. In spite of the major advances that China has made in
developing its own space technology, it will be many years before they can realistically contemplate
building the off-Earth elements of a solar power satellite, let alone a lunar-based system. Even if NASA
administrator Mike Griffin is right and they do manage to land on the Moon before the US gets back there in
2020, building a permanent base and a solar panel manufacturing facility up there is beyond what can
reasonably be anticipated. If the US were to invest in space-based solar power it would not be alone. The
Japanese have spent considerable sums over the years on this technology and other nations will seek the same
advantages described in the NSSO study. America’s space policy makers should, at this stage, not be looking
for international partners, but instead should opt for a high level of international transparency. Information
about planned demonstration projects, particularly ones on the ISS, should be public and easily accessible.
Experts and leaders from NASA and from the Energy and Commerce departments should brief all of the
major spacefaring nations, including China. Our world’s civilization is going to need all the energy it can get,
especially in about fifty years when China, India, and other rising powers find their populations demanding
lifestyles comparable to those they now see the West enjoying. Clean solar power from space is the most
promising of large-scale alternatives. Other sources such as nuclear, wind, or terrestrial solar will be useful,
but they are limited by both physics and politics. Only space solar power can be delivered in amounts large
enough to satisfy the needs of these nations. As a matter of US national security it is imperative that this
country be able to fulfill that worldwide demand. Avoiding a large-scale future war over energy is in
everyone’s interest.
WNDI 2008 8
Solar Power Aff
Chinese instability means global nuclear conflict.

Michael May, Engineering-Economic Systems at Stanford, Washington Quarterly, Summer 97
The unpalatable facts, to Europeans and North Americans, are that Asia has about half of the world's people,
that it is growing faster than other parts of the world, and that, by mid-century, it will probably have more than
half the population of the developed world and more than half of its money. Energy consumption, economic
influence, and military power will be distributed in proportion. That is the rosy scenario. The dark scenario is
that of a war that would, in all likelihood -- because nuclear weapons can be procured and deployed by any
of these countries at a fraction of the cost of peaceful development --leave most of the civilized world
devastated.
WNDI 2008 9
Solar Power Aff
1AC Space Advantage (1/7)

Advantage 2 is Space Colonization
Deployment of SPSB is the only way to ensure human colonization and survival in space.
G. Harry Stine Space Power 1981
It's a natural and almost trivial forecast to anticipate that the ready availability of space power would
result in an increased demand for space transportation.But it was not so obvious that the development of
cheap space transportation from Earth to orbit would bring in its wake the relocation of earthbound industries
and hence 60% of the United States baseload electrical requirements into space. And few forecasters and
planners have yet discovered that the availability of cheap and abundant electricity from the SPS system
creates a climate for the development, phase-in and operation of totally new forms of space
transportation other than the chemical rocket. To some extent, this is presaged by the deep space
freighter, a module consisting of an electric rocket engine that would be powered by the solar electric
output of the SPS photovoltaic array that it propels from the LEO Base construction site up to the GEO Base
assembly site. Electric rocket engines have been around for several decades but have generally taken a back seat in the public mind. The
requirement for rocket power has been for large, high-thrust rocket engines capable of performing what has been and will continue to be
the most difficult and energy-consuming portion of space flight: the boost from the Earth's surface to low Earth orbit where the space
vehicle must fight its way against the persistent and strong pull of Earth's gravity. The high-thrust characteristics of this type of rocket
propulsion plus the absence of any well-developed technical means for transmitting energy to the rocket vehicle from any sort of a large
and permanent energy conversation facility have made it possible to use only one type of rocket propulsion system: the chemical
rocket.Everything we've launched into space to date has been flown under the thrust of a chemical rocket. Usually, the oxidizer has been
liquid oxygen (LOX) although the Titan-n and Titan-Hi launch vehicles used nitrogen tetroxide. Solid propellant rocket motors have
been used in the NASA Scout, as the third stages of all the U.S. Delta launch vehicles, and as the boosters for the Titan-HIC and the
NASA space shuttle. The solid propellants of this type of rocket normally consist of potassium perchorate as the oxidizer and some sort
of metallized synthetic rubber formulation as a fuel, both propellants being mixed together in solid form. Liquid propellant chemical
rockets have used numerous fluids as fuels. The most common of these has been RP-4 which is a form of highly refined kerosene. Other
liquid fuels have included ethyl alcohol, unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine, and the most powerful of all liquid fuels, liquid hydrogen
(LH).There have been two basic problems in the use of chemical rockets of all types using both solid and liquid propellants. First of all,
there is only so much energy that can be obtained from the combustion of a fuel and an oxidizer, and this energy shows up as exhaust
velocity (which should be as high as possible) and in the rocket performance factor called "specific impulse" (thrust produced per unit
weight of propellant consumed per second). The propellant combination with the best energy efficiency—liquid hydrogen and liquid
oxygen—is already in use, and the only way to increase its exhaust velocity and specific impulse is to burn the propellant combination in
a rocket engine at the highest possible temperature and pressure. The most energy efficient hydrogen-oxygen rocket engines used to date
are the main engines of the NASA space shuttle orbiter. These Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME's) operate with a combusion pressure
of 3000 pounds per square inch. This pressure is equivalent to that used for the storage of welding gases in those heavy steel tanks that
accompany every gas welding outfit. The high combustion pressure—the highest that's ever been used in a large rocket engine system—
creates difficult engineering problems in the design of pumps and turbines which have to deliver these exotic super-cold propellants to
the rocket engine at these pressures. With what rocket engineers and propellant chemists know today, the SSME's represent the absolute
ultimate in liquid propellant chemical rocket engines. At pressures and temperatures only slightly higher than those in the SSME's,
dissociation of the combustion product—water—takes place, thus robbing the system of any additional energy that's gained by
increasing combustion pressures and temperatures. We've just about reached the end of the road insofar as being able to increase the
exhaust velocity and specific impulse of chemical rocket engines. Secondly, every space vehicle propelled by chemical rocket engines
must carry along with it all the propellants required to complete the vehicle's flight. For Earth-to-orbit space vehicles, this means that
more than 90% of the vehicle's launch weight must be made up of rocket propellants. Deep space vehicles can operate with less of a
percentage of their mass being required by rocket propellants. However, regardless of whether the space vehicle is a shuttle or a deep
spacer, the common and primary part of a chemical rocket's design and structure is its large, bulky, and heavy propellant storage tanks.
The same two drawbacks also affect the nuclear rocket engine. Because of the nuclear test ban treaty of August 5, 1963 that prohibits
nuclear tests or explosions in the Earth's atmosphere, under water, and in space, the extensive development carried out on the nuclear
rocket engine by the United States Atomic Energy Commission and NASA slowly wound down and come to a halt in the early 1970's.
Billions of dollars of research and development had been poured into the nuclear rocket engine project for more than twenty years and
had resulted in a series of successful nuclear rocket engines beginning with the experimental Kiwi-I and culminating with a nuclear
rocket engine designed for flight, the Nerva, which would have delivered 250,000 pounds of thrust with a specific impulse 2.5 times that
of the SSME's. Basically, the method of operation of a nuclear fission rocket engine is simple. A nuclear reactor is used to heat hydrogen
—carried as liquid hydrogen aboard the space vehicle. The hot hydrogen at more than 4500-degrees Fahrenheit is then expelled through
a rocket nozzle to produce thrust. The nuclear rocket engine, had its development been permitted to continue, would have made possible
extensive space operations above the Earth's atmosphere. It's still in contention for possible future use in space where there is no
possiblity that its exhaust could contaminate the Earth's atmosphere. However, even though a nuclear rocket engine need carry along
only one propellant—liquid hydrogen as "working mass"—it still must carry along its own energy source. And secondly, its specific
impulse is limited to only about four times that of chemical rocket engines. Because of its extremely high exhaust velocity, the electric
rocket engine has a very high specific impulse in terms of thrust produced per unit weight of propellant consumed per second. The
electric rocket principle is the same, regardless of the category of the electric rocket engine—arc, plasma, or ion. Electricity is used to
WNDI 2008 10
Solar Power Aff
produce charged particles such as electrons or ions which are then accelerated to very high velocities by electromagnetic or electrostatic
fields and ejected from the rocket engine to produce thrust. But electric rockets don't generate very much thrust and must operate in a
vacuum. To date, electric rocket engines have been used on satellites and manned space craft as attitude control thrusters because high
thrust is not required for this application. Elec-- trie rockets will be used both in the Deep Space Freighters of the SPS program and on
the SPS units themselves in order to provide attitude control of the big photovoltaic arrays. Here again, high thrust is neither desired nor
required, but high efficiency is. And, unlike chemical rocket engines, the electric rocket engines that will be
used in the SPS program do not require that all their energy supplies be carried along in the form of
propellants; they can get their energy directly from the Sun itself via the solar arrays of the SPS. This
makes the electric rocket very efficient for deep space use once the SPS system is in place. Deep space
flight from orbit to orbit in the Earth-Moon system doesn't require high thrust rocket engines; it just
requires steady, persistent, highly efficient thrust such as that produced by the electric rocket engine.
In fact, deep space flight with constant electric rocket thrust, even at a fraction of one-gee acceleration,
can result in trip times that are significantly shorter in duration than the usually-considered sort of
rocket flight—a short period of high thrust followed by a long period of coasting flight terminated by a
final short duration flight phase of high thrust to match velocities with the destination. Electric rockets
have been confined to such prosaic uses as attitude control to date because there's been a major
technical problem of providing the electric rocket with a low-mass, high-efficiency electric energy source
in space. The SPS provides such an energy source. The SPS also means that the deep space vehicle doesn't
have to carry along the electric energy source, only a small amount of reactive mass such as argon or whatever the electric rocket
engine uses to produce its charged particles that are accelerated to produce thrust. Furthermore, a lot of electric energy can be provided,
permitting the use of much larger electric rocket engines than formerly possible.We have visualized the solar power satellite thus far
only as an energy source for Earth. But the same technology and the same design could also be used and will be used as a space power
source. We've alluded to the forecast that industries would begin moving into space in the early 21st century because of the abundant and
low-cost energy available in space from an SPS system. This means that some SPS units won't be directing their power beams toward
rectennas on Earth but toward rectennas in space. And instead of a single SPS projecting a single power beam, it will be projecting
several from a multitude of transmitting antennas to a large number of smaller space rectennas mounted on space facilities . . . and on
space vehicles propelled by electric rockets. Naturally, it isn't absolutely necessary that a large, centralized system such as an SPS be
used. Solar electric energy could be obtained by space facilities and space vehicles from large photovoltaic collectors that are integral
with their design. It's just that the large SPS unit is more efficient and will provide power at a lower cost to space facilities and vehicles,
at least in the Earth-Moon system during the early years of the 21st century. Now it becomes possible for deep
space vehicles to venture as far as lunar orbit carrying only one working propellant—and not very
much of that—for its electric rocket motors. The system could be built today, but it can be operated only in space after the
SPS system is in part a reality. The SPS unit would have a small, steerable transmitting antenna. The space vehicle would carry its own
rectenna— and it can be much smaller and use a higher density power beam that is possible for Earth use—as well as a pilot beam that
would tell the SPS where the ship is and where and how to direct the individual beam that's providing electric power for the ship. It also
means several SPS units—probably originally fabricated from terrestrial materials but later built from extraterrestrial materials—that are
dedicated to providing electric energy exclusively to space facilities and vehicles. This ready availability of cheap solar electric energy
also makes possible the use of several other types of propulsion systems. This includes one that doesn't use any propellant mass
whatsoever. The first suggestion of using a catapult device to propel a vehicle in space probably was discussed by none other than the
French author, Jules Verne, in his book, De la Terra a la Lune, (From the Earth to the Moon), first published in 1870. Although Verne's
book wasn't the first to talk about travel in space, it was the first to be written using the known science and technology of the day as its
background. Verne's catapult was a huge cannon, the Columbiad. The space vehicle that was launched by the Columbiad carried no
propulsion systems; all the energy for the circumlunar flight was imparted by the cannon's propellant charge, a fulminate of
nitrocellulose Verne called "pyroxyle.'' The Columbiad was a space catapult. Robert A. Heinlein, in his 1947 Saturday Evening Post
short story, "Space Jockey," and in his 1949 novella "The Man Who Sold the Moon,'' suggested the use of an electric-powered Earth-
surface catapult running up the east face of Pikes Peak in Colorado as a means of eliminating the need for a two-stage Earth-to-orbit
shuttle in favor of a catapult-launched SSTO shuttle. In his 1966 novel, "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress," Heinlein postulates the use and
consequences of a solar-electric lunar surface cargo catapult. However, space catapults didn't begin to receive intense attention until Dr.
Gerald K. O'Neill became involved in his work on space colonization at Princeton University in the early 1970's. Dr. O'Neill publicized
the concept of the "mass driver," a solar-electric space catapult that could be used both on the lunar surface and in deep space. Since
1976, Dr. O'Neill and his associates at Princeton have carried out additional research work on the "mass driver" which is based upon the
established technology of the linear electric motor or sequential solenoid, both of which have been widely used in industry for decades.
Today, space advocates use the term ' 'mass driver,'' most of them not knowing that this is an old concept. Perhaps the biggest difference
between the historic space catapults and Dr. O'Neill's mass driver is
WNDI 2008 11
Solar Power Aff
the size and frequency of the pay loads launched. Classic space catapults have considered launching multi-ton space vehicles or cargo
payloads much like the catapults used to launch aircraft from warships. Dr. O'Neill's mass driver would launch payloads of about 2
kilograms every few seconds in a constant stream toward the destination. The biggest problem with space catapults and mass drivers is
not the energy required to make them work, that energy will be readily available from an SPS system. It's the question of manipulating
the catapult's payload when it reaches its destination, especially if said payload has no on-board propulsion system. An Earth-to-orbit
catapult launching an SSTO shuttle doesn't have that problem because the SSTO shuttle has propulsive energy to match orbits with its
LEO destination. A lunar surface catapult designed to lob unmanned payloads to Earth doesn't have that problem because the payload or
its container can be designed to be slowed down by atmospheric entry and land in the ocean. But everywhere a space catapult or mass
driver might be considered for use in the early years of its deployment, there is a problem of catching the payload. An unmanned,
unpowered payload of any size launched from orbit to orbit or from lunar surface to orbit simply returns to the launch site unless an
additional change of energy is imparted to it at the proper time and place in its trajectory. It's like a cannon shell. It's like the manned
projectile launched from Jules Verne's Columbiad. Technically, the problem of catching the payload or of imparting an energy change to
it can be solved. Dr. O'Neill has designed a catcher for his two-kilogram mass driver payloads. With abundant energy available from an
SPS system, there are several approaches that can be taken toward imparting an energy change to an unmanned, unpowered payload to
permit it to arrive at its space destination with zero velocity difference between it and the destination. One of the most interesting
potential solutions comes from something that was the brainchild of Dr. Arthur Kantrowitz, formerly with AVCO and now at the Thayer
School of Engineering at Dartmouth College. It's also an interesting potential propulsion system for use anywhere in the Inner Solar
System where the energy of the Earth-orbit SPS system can be used. Dr. Kantrowitz proposed the concept of the laser-energized rocket
in the late 1970s when the potential of the high-powered lasers being developed for possible military uses was under discussion by many
people. The laser rocket would use a tightly-focused beam of energy from a high-energy laser situated as a fixed facility on a planetary
body or in space. The laser beam would be directed at the rear end of a space vehicle where the energy of the beam would vaporize a
solid material to provide a gaseous reaction mass to be expelled in rocket fashion from the vehicle. This is similar in concept to the SPS-
energized electric rocket except for the fact that the laser rocket would be simpler and would eliminate many of the energy conversion
steps of the SPS-electric rocket. Because of the ability of a laser to generate an energy beam that can be tightly focused, thus preventing
the dissipation of the beam over long distances and the increased possibility of reception of a majority of the beam's energy at extreme
distances, the laser rocket offers great promise as a propulsion system for use in the initial phases of exploitation of the planetoid belt for
extraterrestrial materials. The energy for the power laser in Earth orbit would come, of course, from an SPS unit. The laser could provide
energy for a space vehicle all the way out to the planetoid belt and perhaps to the planet Jupiter. In fact, such a laser method of squirting
energy over long distances could be used to provide the necessary energy from established facilities in Earth orbit for manned facilities
and vehicles throughout the Inner Solar System during the first decades of the 21st century. Laser power beaming may, in the final
analysis, be the optimum method for beaming SPS power to the Earth's surface. Again, we discover that we're dealing with a "boot strap
system"—it becomes possible to build systems upon systems to create synergistic multiplication of capabilities far beyond that which we
could hope to achieve with one system alone. With the energy available from the expanded SPS system in
geosynchronous Earth orbit, it now becomes possible for us to provide energy for our use anywhere in
the Inner Solar System. This will make it much easier to travel from point to point in space, and it will
make it much, much easier to maintain populated facilities wherever we wish to put them. We have just
extended our concept of energy and its relationship to social organization from its original earth-bound application. We've
extended it into the Solar System. Where we have energy, people can live and work. Where we have energy, we can travel. Where we
have energy, we can alter the natural order to make it more useful to us as human beings.With the propulsion devices made possible by
the SPS system in Earth orbit and the consequence that we will be able to travel to and work in any part of the Inner Solar System where
it's possible to use solar energy, before the 21st century is half over we will have reached the point where we no longer have to depend
upon SPS units in GEO for energy beamed to the Earth. We will be able to construct extremely large Solar Power Satellites at the
terrestrial-solar libration points where they will be able to beam power to the Earth-Moon system. A libration point is a "special solution"
to the old "Three Body Problem" of celestial mechanics. Sir Isaac Newton in his classic 1687 statement of the laws of motion and
gravitation, Principia, showed us the solution to the problem of the gravitational interaction of two bodies. But there is no known
general mathematical solution to the behavior of three celestial bodies of sizes such that their individual gravitational fields affect the
other bodies in the three-body system. There are, however, five "special solutions" to the three-body problem. Figure 1 shows the Earth-
Moon system drawn to scale. The location of geosynchronous orbit is shown so that we can get some perspective on distances—but not
travel energies and times required. There are five points in the Earth-Moon system where another object ranging from a small satellite up
to a Moon-sized celestial body could be theoretically located and retain its position with respect to both the Earth and the Moon. In these
five locations, the gravity fields of all three bodies would be in balance. These five locations are known as "libration points." Actually,
they are regions rather than precise locations. They are also known as "Lagrangian points" in honor of Joseph Louis Lagrange (1736-
1813), the French geometer and astronomer who first suggested this special solution to the three-body problem. The First Lagrangian
Point, shown as L-1 on the drawing, is located on a line between the Earth and the Moon and approximately 76,000 kilometers from the
Moon. The Second Lagrangian Point, L-2, is also located on a line from the Earth to the Moon but is about 71,000 kilometers outside the
orbit of the Moon. The Third Lagrangian Point, L-3, is on the Earth-Moon line but located in lunar orbit 180-degrees away from the
Moon on the other side of the Earth. The first three Lagrangian Points are "unstable"—any object placed at these Lagrangian Points will
eventually wander away from them because of fact that the orbit of the Moon isn't exactly circular and because of the gravitational pull
of the Sun. But this isn't the case with the Fourth and Fifth Lagrangian Points, L-4 and L-5. The Fourth Lagrangian Point is located in
the lunar orbit 60-degrees ahead of the Moon, while the Fifth Lagrangian Point is also in lunar orbit but 60-degrees behind the Moon. L-
4 and L-5 are stable libration points and are also known as the "Trojan Points." We know that L-4 and L-5 are stable because the
discovery of the Trojan planetoids (named after the heroes of Homer's Illiad) at the L-4 and L-5 points in Jupiter's orbit about the Sun.
The Trojan planetoids have obviously been there for a long time. Thus, the Trojan Points are super-stable locations, but they are not the
only stable orbital locations even in the Earth-Moon system. Technically, it would be possible to put any number of objects in lunar
WNDI 2008 12
Solar Power Aff
orbit or any other orbit and have them stay in place for a long period of time—hundreds of years or more in some cases—with only
minor orbital adjustments with electric thrusters. Any number of satellites can occupy a given orbit; the rings of Jupiter, Saturn, and
Uranus are proof of this. (Earth has no rings; Dr. Clyde W. Tombaugh proved this as part of his extensive search for small natural
satellites of the Earth in 1953-1959.) As implied, Lagrangian libration points exist for every major body in the Solar System and for
every planet-satellite orbit as well. There are equivalent Lagrangian Points in the Sun-Earth system, the most stable (because of the
tremendous mass and strong gravity field of the Sun) being the Sun-Earth Trojan Points. There are mercurian Trojan Points, venerian
Trojan Points, aerean Trojan Points, etc. The Trojan Points in the Inner Solar System are going to be occupied in the first half of the 21st
century. Among the many things that will be located at the various Trojan Points are Solar Power Satellites of very large size, fabricated
from extraterrestrial materials, and sending their energy to various locations on radio and laser beams. The Trojan Points in the Sun-
Earth system are attractive as locations for such large SPS units because the relationship between the Sun and the SPS and between the
Earth and the SPS remain reasonably constant. This means that a Trojan Point SPS doesn't need to be continually re-oriented to keep its
photovoltaic panels pointed toward the sun or its energy transmitter aimed toward its consumer's rectenna.The Trojan Point SPS system
of the 21st century is only a dream today. But by 2050 or 2060, such a system could be supplying the Earth-Moon system with whatever
power it needed from SPS units in the Earth-Moon Trojan Points. Additional energy would be coming from SPS units in the two Sun-
Earth Trojan Point locations. The Trojan Point SPS system would also include units whose job is to provide in-flight energy to deep
space vehicles via power beams, and these transportation-dedicated SPS units would have several transmitting antennas or use a single
antenna with special phasing circuitry. (Antenna design borders on black magic although it is a very solid technology based firmly on
mathematical foundations. It's possible to get antennas to do a number of magic tricks depending upon their design. For example, one
antenna can transmit to several receiving units, each receiver being illuminated by a separate antenna beam. And, since a good
transmitting antenna is also a good receiving antenna, a single antenna can be used for both purposes by multiplexing or rapid
switching.) All that is necessary is to be willing to accept the risks, expend the capital resources,
organize the effort, and get started in the 1980 decade on the development work necessary to prove out
the essential technologies of the first SPS system in geosynchronous orbit. Once we have started that
task in order to solve the energy crunch, the consequences are so attractive and the potentials are so
enormous that the entire Inner Solar System is opened up to utilization by the human race.
WNDI 2008 13
Solar Power Aff

But, even if it didn’t work the development of Space Based Solar Power and Government Investment into it
Would Spur Private Investment into Energy Equality and Enhance Space Exploration.
Leonard David Senior Space Writer, October 17, 2001
In summary, the NRC panel members noted that for any SSP program to churn out commercially competitive
terrestrial electric power, breakthrough technologies are required. That being said, even if the ultimate goal
of supplying competitive energy is not attained, the experts added: "…the technology investments
proposed will have many collateral benefits for nearer-term, less-cost-sensitive space applications and
for non-space use of technology advances." Hubert Davis, a committee member on the NRC study, sees
SSP as perhaps the right technology for today. Throughout the 1970s, he managed future programs for the
NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, and is now an independent aerospace consultant. "In
looking at our current world situation, I believe that what is most needed is hope. Power from space may
be one of the best means for us to offer that hope," Davis told SPACE.com. Davis said that an exploratory
research, development and demonstration program for power from space is needed. It would be
accompanied by a major international aid effort using terrestrial photovoltaics. In areas where no
power exists, village "life support systems" can be established to provide potable water, lights, modern
communications, refrigeration, information, and perhaps a few sewing machines, he said. "These
complementary steps may buy us the time we need to fulfill this new hope…for everyone," Davis said.
Following on the heels of the NRC's new look at SSP is an assessment completed by Resources for the
Future (RFF) a Washington-based group that studies energy and environmental policy. It focuses on off-
planet uses of an in-orbit "power plug", or as some label it, a "solar array on steroids." The idea is to have a
filler-up facility for electrically hungry satellites, observatories, space platforms and the like. That study is
titled: An Economic Assessment of Space Solar Power as a Source of Electricity for Space-Based Activities.
RFF's Molly Macauley and James Davis of The Aerospace Corporation authored the piece. They observe that
customers of a future SSP station could be many. Commercial telecommunications and remote sensing
spacecraft, governmental research and defense satellites, space manufacturing facilities, as well as
space travel and tourism industries could draw energy from such a station. There is a potentially large
market that might benefit from this pay for power approach. Another attractiveness of a space-based power
station is leaving heavy solar panels back on Earth. Less massive spacecraft would be cheaper to orbit. That
also means more science gear could be crammed onboard a satellite."Our study argues that we could do
testing and demonstrations of in-space power sooner than for terrestrial power," Macauley told
SPACE.com. The researcher was also a member of the NRC study on SSP. Macauley and Davis surveyed
satellite designers and operators, gleaning insight about the value of having an SSP "power depot" in space.
Whisking watts of power through space to run commercial geostationary satellites looks like a very lucrative
and large market, they report. On the other hand, while the willingness of potential customers to adopt a
new power technology like SSP is promising, flight testing the idea would help boost adoption of the in-
space energy idea. Early on, supplying power from an SSP could gain greater acceptance as a supplement,
rather than a substitute for, an existing power system on a spacecraft, Macauley and Davis note. Macauley
said that in future years the space-based
WNDI 2008 14
Solar Power Aff
power market could be really big in dollar terms. Still to be determined is where to place an SSP, or whether
or not there's need for a constellation of SSP satellites. "Given our estimate of the market, can SSP designers
create an SSP that's financially attractive? We also realize that other technological innovation in spacecraft
power is proceeding apace with SSP," Macauley said. "So SSP advocates need to 'look over their shoulders'
to stay ahead of those innovations and to capitalize on those that are complementary with SSP," she said.
"The ownership and financing of SSP may be handled as a commercial venture," Macauley and Davis
report, "perhaps in partnership with government during initial operation but then becoming a
commercial wholesale cooperative." Once an SSP is fully deployed, the private sector is likely to be a far
more efficient operator of the power plug in space, the researchers said.
WNDI 2008 15
Solar Power Aff

Space Colonization is key to prevent extinction
James Oberg, space writer and a former space flight engineer based in Houston, 1999, Space Power Theory,
http://www.jamesoberg.com/books/spt/new-CHAPTERSw_figs.pdf
We have the great gift of yet another period when our nation is not threatened; and our world is free from
opposing coalitions with great global capabilities. We can use this period to take our nation and our fellow
men into the greatest adventure that our species has ever embarked upon. The United States can lead, protect,
and help the rest of [hu]mankind to move into space. It is particularly fitting that a country comprised of
people from all over the globe assumes that role. This is a manifest destiny worthy of dreamers and poets,
warriors and conquerors. In his last book, Pale Blue Dot, Carl Sagan presents an emotional argument that our
species must venture into the vast realm of space to establish a spacefaring civilization. While acknowledging
the very high costs that are involved in manned spaceflight, Sagan states that our very survival as a
species depends on colonizing outer space. Astronomers have already identified dozens of asteroids
that might someday smash into Earth. Undoubtedly, many more remain undetected. In Sagan’s opinion,
the only way to avert inevitable catastrophe is for mankind to establish a permanent human presence in
space. He compares humans to the planets that roam the night sky, as he says that humans will too wander
through space. We will wander space because we possess a compulsion to explore, and space provides a truly
infinite prospect of new directions to explore. Sagan’s vision is part science and part emotion. He hoped that
the exploration of space would unify humankind. We propose that mankind follow the United States and our
allies into this new sea, set with jeweled stars. If we lead, we can be both strong and caring. If we step back,
it may be to the detriment of more than our country.
WNDI 2008 16
Solar Power Aff
1AC Hegemony / Competitiveness Advantage (1/3)
Advantage Three is Hegemony
SBSP is the only way to cement US competitiveness and economic growth
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP directly addresses the concerns of the Presidential Aerospace
Commission which called on the US to become a true spacefaring civilization and to pay closer
attention to our aerospace technical and industrial base, our “national jewel” which has enhanced our
security, wealth, travel, and lifestyle. An SBSP program as outlined in this report is remarkably consonant
with the findings of this commission, which stated: The United States must maintain its preeminence in
aerospace research and innovation to be the global aerospace leader in the 21st century. This can only be achieved
through proactive government policies and sustained public investments in long
‐ term research and RDT&E

infrastructure that will result in new breakthrough aerospace capabilities. Over the last several decades, the U.S.
aerospace sector has been living off the research investments made primarily for defense during the Cold

War...Government policies and investments in long ‐ term research have not kept pace with the changing world
. Our
nation does not have bold national aerospace technology goals to focus and sustain federal research and related
infrastructure investments. The nation needs to capitalize on these opportunities, and the federal government
needs to lead the effort. Specifically, it needs to invest in long‐term enabling research and related RDT&E
infrastructure, establish national aerospace technology demonstration goals, and create an environment that fosters
innovation and provide the incentives necessary to encourage risk taking and rapid introduction of new products and
services. The Aerospace Commission recognized that Global U.S. aerospace leadership can only be
achieved through investments in our future, including our industrial base, workforce, long term
research and national infrastructure, and that government must commit to increased and sustained
investment and must facilitate private investment in our national aerospace sector. The Commission
concluded that the nation will have to be a space ‐ faring nation in order to be the global leader in the

21st century—that our freedom, mobility, and quality of life will depend on it, and therefore, recommended
that the United States boldly pioneer new frontiers in aerospace technology, commerce and exploration. They
explicitly recommended that the United States create a space imperative and that NASA and DoD need
to make the investments necessary for developing and supporting future launch capabilities to
revitalize U.S. space launch infrastructure, as well as provide Incentives to Commercial Space. The
report called on government and the investment community must become more sensitive to commercial
opportunities and problems in space. Recognizing the new realities of a highly dynamic, competitive and
global marketplace, the report noted that the federal government is dysfunctional when addressing 21st
century issues from a long term, national and global perspective. It suggested an increase in public
funding for long term research and supporting infrastructure and an acceleration of transition of
government research to the aerospace sector, recognizing that government must assist industry by
providing insight into its long ‐ term research programs, and industry needs to provide to government

on its research priorities. It urged the federal government must remove unnecessary barriers to international sales of defense
products, and implement other initiatives that strengthen transnational partnerships to enhance national security, noting that U.S. national
security and procurement policies represent some of the most burdensome restrictions affecting U.S. industry competitiveness. Private‐
public partnerships were also to be encouraged. It also noted that without constant vigilance and investment, vital capabilities in our
defense industrial base will be lost, and so recommended a fenced amount of research and development budget, and significantly increase
in the investment in basic aerospace research to increase opportunities to gain experience in the workforce by enabling breakthrough
aerospace capabilities through continuous development of new experimental systems with or without a requirement for production. Such
experimentation was deemed to be essential to sustain the critical skills to conceive, develop,
WNDI 2008 17
Solar Power Aff
manufacture and maintain advanced systems and potentially provide expanded capability to the
warfighter. A top priority was increased investment in basic aerospace research which fosters an efficient, secure, and safe aerospace
transportation system, and suggested the establishment of national technology demonstration goals, which included reducing the cost and
time to space by 50%. It concluded that, “America must exploit and explore space to assure national and planetary security, economic
benefit and scientific discovery. At the same time, the United States must overcome the obstacles that jeopardize its ability to sustain
leadership in space.” An SBSP program would be a powerful expression of this imperative.
WNDI 2008 18
Solar Power Aff
Even the simple development of SBSP, whether or not it succeeds, will ensures US competitiveness and
hegemony
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers a path to address the concerns over US intellectual
competitiveness in math and the physical sciences expressed by the Rising Above the Gathering Storm
report by providing a true “Manhattan or Apollo project for energy.” In absolute scale and implications, it is
likely that SBSP would ultimately exceed both the Manhattan and Apollo projects which established
significant workforces and helped the US maintain its technical and competitive lead. The committee
expressed it was “deeply concerned that the scientific and technological building blocks critical to our
economic leadership are eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength.” SBSP
would require a substantial technical workforce of high ‐ paying jobs. It would require expanded

technical education opportunities, and directly support the underlying aims of the American
Competitiveness Initiative.
WNDI 2008 19
Solar Power Aff

Lack of US competitiveness and primacy means the global nuclear conflict and the end of
civilization.
Robert J. Lieber, Professor of Government and International Affairs @ Georgetown University. The American
Era: Power and Strategy for the 21st Century. 2005. Pg. 53-54.
Withdrawal from foreign commitments might seem to be a means of evading hostility toward the United
States, but the consequences would almost certainly be harmful both to regional stability and to U.S.
national interests. Although Europe would almost certainly not see the return to competitive balancing
among regional powers (i.e., competition and even military rivalry between France and Germany) of the kind
that some realist scholars of international relations have predicted,2’ elsewhere the dangers could increase. In
Asia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan world have strong motivation to acquire nuclear weapons —
which they have the technological capacity to do quite quickly. Instability and regional competition could
also escalate, not only between India and Pakistan, but also in Southeast Asia involving Vietnam,
Thailand, Indonesia, and possibly the Philippines. Risks in the Middle East would be likely to increase,
with regional competition among the major countries of the Gulf region (Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq) as well
as Egypt, Syria, and Israel. Major regional wars, eventually involving the use of weapons of mass
destruction plus human suffering on a vast scale, floods of refugees, economic disruption, and risks to oil
supplies are all readily conceivable. Based on past experience, the United States would almost certainly be
drawn back into these areas, whether to defend friendly states, to cope with a humanitarian
catastrophe, or to prevent a hostile power from dominating an entire region. Steven Peter Rosen has
thus fittingly observed, “If the logic of American empire is unappealing, it is not at all clear that the
alternatives are that much more attractive.”22 Similarly, Niall Ferguson has added that those who dislike
American predominance ought to bear in mind that the alternative may not be a world of competing great
powers, but one with no hegemon at all. Ferguson’s warning may be hyperbolic, but it hints at the perils that
the absence of a dominant power, “apolarity,” could bring “an anarchic new Dark Age of waning
empires and religious fanaticism; of endemic plunder and pillage in the world’s forgotten regions; of
economic stagnation and civilization’s retreat into a few fortified enclaves.”23
WNDI 2008 20
Solar Power Aff
Hegemony Advantage – Troop & Re-Supply
SBSP critical to enhance military readiness, ensure stable resupply conduits and cut troop death
The SBSP Study Group found that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has a large, urgent and critical
need for secure, reliable, and mobile energy delivery to the war
‐ fighter.
When all indirect and support
costs are included, it is estimated that the DoD currently spends over $1 per kilowatt hour for electrical
power delivered to troops in forward military bases in war regions. OSD(PA&E) has computed that at a
wholesale price of $2.30 a gallon, the fully burdened average price of fuel for the Army exceeds $5 a gallon.
For Operation IRAQI FREEDOM the estimated delivered price of fuel in certain areas may approach $20
a gallon.Significant numbers of American servicemen and women are injured or killed as a result of
attacks on supply convoys in Iraq. Petroleum products account for approximately 70% of delivered
tonnage to U.S. forces in Iraq—total daily consumption is approximately 1.6 million gallons. Any estimated
cost of battlefield energy (fuel and electricity) does not include the cost in lives of American men and
women. • The DoD is a potential anchor tenant customer of space‐based solar power that can be reliably
delivered to U.S. troops located in forward bases in hostile territory in amounts of 5‐50 megawatts
continuous at an estimated price of $1 per kilowatt hour, but this price may increase over time as world
energy resources become more scarce or environmental concerns about increased carbon emissions from
combusting fossil fuels increases.
WNDI 2008 21
Solar Power Aff
Hegemony Advantage – Space Radar (1/2)

Even small developments into SBSP spur Space Radar and US Intel
One of the great showstoppers for the Space Radar (SR) program, formerly known as Space Based Radar,
is power. It takes a lot of energy to transmit radar beams powerful enough to track a moving target on Earth
from space. What is called the Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) is what makes SR so much better
than other space radar systems, such as the recently-launched German SAR-Lupe or the NRO’s Lacrosse
system. While many of the details are classified, the power problem seems to be the main reason that the
US Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has been extremely reluctant to fund this program.In order to
achieve the power levels needed for an effective GMTI system using current technology, very large solar
arrays would be needed. Even if these were to use the new Boeing solar cells that, according to the company,
are more than 30% efficient, the arrays would still be much bigger than anything on any operational satellite.
Such large arrays would make the SR spacecraft easy targets for enemy antisatellite weapons and would also
produce so much drag while in low Earth orbit (LEO) that their lifespan would be shorter—perhaps much
shorter—than current-generation reconnaissance satellites. Why, then, does such a system need to rely 100%
on its own power? If solar power satellites (SPS) were available in geosynchronous orbit and could beam
electricity to the SR satellites in LEO, this might allow the radar satellites to have as much power as their
power control systems and heat radiators could handle. Power could be transmitted by a tightly focused laser
or microwave beam to one or two receptors, integrated into the spacecraft’s bus. If the radar antenna were
integrated into the skin of the satellite the way it is on a B-2 bomber, such satellite would be difficult to
detect and track. Using power from an SPS, such a satellite would be able to liberally use its ion engines to
change its orbit. These engines would never be powerful enough to make the kind of quick responsive
maneuvers that some space operations commanders would like to see in future LEO-based spacecraft, but
they would be a step in the right direction. The demise of the E-10 program that had been intended to
replace the Air Force’s JSTARS and AWACS surveillance aircraft has left a hole in future US
situational awareness capabilities that neither unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), such as the Predator and
Global Hawk, nor existing satellite programs can possibly fill. Space Radar could do so, but only if the
program is restructured to make it at once more ambitious in terms of future capability and less ambitious in
terms of near-term operations.The first steps in such a program would be to begin work on an
experiment to prove that power transmission in space via laser is possible. Already lasers are being used
for communications in civil and military applications; taking this one step beyond to encompass power
should be within the state of the art. At the same time the US Defense Department and NASA could begin
joint work on a new generation of high-capacity power systems for future spacecraft. The power
management and thermal control needs of a spacecraft that will carry a human crew to Mars may not be all
that different from those of an SPS or an SR satellite. The bulk of the development work on the radars
themselves can be left until later in the program. Meanwhile, the US could profitably study less ambitious
space radar programs such as Canada’s Radarsat. Launching one or two modest technology development
satellites over the next five or ten years would be a helpful way to set the stage for a new SR program. In the
long term, say, by around 2010, the GMTI radar could be replaced and supplemented by an Air Moving
Target Indicator (AMTI), which would need even more power.
WNDI 2008 22
Solar Power Aff
Hegemony Advantage – Space Radar (2/2)
Instead of using a single large antenna or multiple smaller ones on the same spacecraft, a future stealthy SR
could use radars on multiple satellites. Formation flying is now commonplace and coordinating multiple
beams from two or three satellites in different orbits should not be that hard. The biggest problem will be to
prove to Congress that the technology is ready for prime time. Almost all of America’s major military space
programs are too far along to effectively incorporate the lessons of China’s ASAT test. SR, due to repeated
budget cuts, is the great exception. Other satellite programs that could be modified to incorporate the needs
of the new space warfare requirements include the T-SAT Transformational Communications project and the
possibly the NRO’s problem-plagued Future Imagery Architecture (FIA).The stealthiness and robustness of
all these programs, or their successors, would benefit from being able to draw electricity from a set of
SPSs in GEO. The solar power satellites themselves would not necessarily have to be owned by the US
government. They could be built privately based on a contract that promises that the Defense Department
would buy a given amount of power at a predetermined price. This would be similar to the “power by the
hour” contracts that are sometimes signed with jet engine manufacturers or the privately-financed initiative
that the British RAF has established with a consortium for a new squadron of Airbus refueling tanker aircraft.
In GEO an SPS is a large and conspicuous target. A realistic new space architecture would have to find ways
to give both active and passive protection to such valuable assets. At the same time, these measures must not
detract from the commercial profitability of the operation. The Civil Reserve Air Fleet system is a possible
model; airlines buy some planes that are modified for possible military use in an emergency and the
government compensates them for the extra weight they carry while in normal commercial use.Space solar
power is, in the long run, inevitable. The Earth’s economy is going to need so much extra power over the
next few decades that every new system that can be shown to be viable will be developed. If the US were to
develop space solar power for military applications it would give the US civilian industry a big head start. As
long as the military requirements are legitimate, there is no reason why this cannot be made into a win-win
outcome
WNDI 2008 23
Solar Power Aff
Hegemony Advantage
Continued innovation and technological dominance is key to heg
Zalmay Khalilzad, RAND, “Losing the Moment?” The Washington Quarterly 1995
U.S. superiority in new weapons and their use would be critical. U.S. planners should therefore give higher
priority to research on new technologies, new concepts of operation, and changes in organization, with the
aim of U.S. dominance in the military technical revolution that may be emerging. They should also focus on
how to project U.S. systems and interests against weapons based on new technologies. The Persian Gulf
War gave a glimpse of the likely future. The character of warfare will change because of advances in
military technology, where the United States has the lead, and in corresponding concepts of operation and
organizational structure. The challenge is to sustain this lead in the face of the complacency that the current
U.S. lead in military power is likely to engender. Those who are seeking to be rivals to the United States
are likely to be very motivated to explore new technologies and how to use them against it. A determined
nation making the right choices, even though it possessed a much smaller economy, could pose an
enormous challenge by exploiting breakthroughs that made more traditional U.S. military methods less
effective by comparison. For example, Germany, by making the right technical choices and adopting
innovative concepts for their use in the 1920s and 1930s, was able to make a serious bid for world
domination. At the same time, Japan, with a relatively small GNP compared to the other major powers,
especially the United States, was at the forefront of the development of naval aviation and aircraft carriers.
These examples indicate that a major innovation in warfare provides ambitious powers an opportunity
to become dominant or near-dominant powers. U.S. domination of the emerging military-technical
revolution, combined with the maintenance of a force of adequate size, can help to discourage the rise of a
rival power by making potential rivals believe that catching up with the United States is a hopeless
proposition and that if they try they will suffer the same fate as the former Soviet Union.
WNDI 2008 24
Solar Power Aff
Soft Power Advantage
SBSP development would massively enhance US soft power

The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers significant opportunities for positive international
leadership and partnership, at once providing a positive agenda for energy, development, climate,
and space. If the United States is interested in energy, sustainable development, climate change, and
the peaceful use of space, the international community is even hungrier for solutions to these issues.
While the US may be able to afford increased energy prices, the very availability and stability of energy
is a threat to other countries’ internal stability and ability for development. SBSP offers a way to
bypass much terrestrial electrical distribution infrastructure investment and to purchase energy
from a reliable source at receiver stations that can be built by available domestic labor pools without
significant adverse environmental effects, including greenhouse gas emissions.
WNDI 2008 25
Solar Power Aff
Soft Power Advantage – A2: International Opposition
SBSP development would massively enhance US soft power evaporating any international opposition and the
status quo shows only overwhelming support for a SBSP program
The SBSP Study Group found that no outright policy or legal showstoppers exist to prevent the
development of SBSP. Full-scale SBSP, however, will require a permissive international regime, and
construction of this new regime is in every way a challenge nearly equal to the construction of the satellite
itself. The interim review did not uncover any hard show-stoppers in the international legal or regulatory
regime. Many nations are actively studying Space-Based Solar Power. Canada, the UK, France, the
European Space Agency, Japan, Russia, India, and China, as well as several equatorial nations have
all expressed past or present interest in SBSP. International conferences such as the United Nations-
connected UNISPACE III are continually held on the subject and there is even a UN-affiliated non-
governmental organization, the Sunsat Energy Council, that is dedicated to promoting the study and
development of SBSP. The International Union of Radio Science (URSI) has published at least one
document supporting the concept, and a study of the subject by the International Telecommunications
Union (ITU) is presently ongoing. There seems to be significant global interest in promoting the
peaceful use of space, sustainable development, and carbon neutral energy sources, indicating that
perhaps an open avenue exists for the United States to exercise “soft power” via the development of
SBSP. That there are no show-stoppers should in no way imply that an adequate or supportive regime is in
place. Such a regime must address liability, indemnity, licensing, tech transfer, frequency allocations,
orbital slot assignment, assembly and parking orbits, and transit corridors. These will likely involve
significant increases in Space Situational Awareness, data-sharing, Space Traffic Control, and might include
some significant similarities to the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) role for facilitating
safe international air travel. Very likely the construction of a truly adequate regime will take as long as the
satellite technology development itself, and so consideration must be given to beginning work on the
construction of such a framework immediately.
WNDI 2008 26
Solar Power Aff
Space Advantage
SBSP will ensure massive expansions in space exploration within the decade.
A well-established SPS space transportation system that allows inexpensive, reliable, and available
transportation from LEO to GEO contains within itself the capability to travel further into space than
geosynchronous Earth orbit.The maintenance of a thousand people in GEO Base to build the SPS units
means that many of the problems of living in space will have been tranferred over into that
technological ledger column entitled, "State of the Art." This means that suitable life support systems will
have been developed and proven in GEO Base, systems that can recycle carbon dioxide and organic
wastes into oxygen and potable water. The only thing that can't theoretically be recycled is the nitrogen that
will inevitably be lost in continuing small amounts from LEO Base and GEO Base. But cost requirements
alone will demand that life support engineers working for the SPS project companies come up with the
partly-closed life support system that can recycle oxygen and water; it's expensive to continue hauling life
support consumables up from Earth. It becomes more economical to recycle them. With the partially-closed
life support system technology of GEO Base, it becomes possible for a modified deep space passenger
ship to go anywhere in the Inner Solar System, including the planetoid belt between the orbits of Mars
and Jupiter.It is also possible for the electric-powered deep space freighter modules to do the same and
to bring things back economically from the planetoid belt.There are two very simple reasons for this. The
principles go back to the science of celestial mechanics started by Johannes Kepler: (a) it isn't the distance
that's important, it's the energy required to traverse that distance that counts, and (b) the time required to
traverse the distances in the Solar System isn't important for non-living cargo as long as there's a load
arriving at the terminal end with regularity. Insofar as people go, once even the partially-closed life support
system becomes available, the time required isn't as important any more because things that were formerly
consumed by the life support system operation are now recycled, meaning there's considerably less mass
that's required to be carried along to keep people alive. Travel to the Moon and the planetoid belt can
begin to take place in the opening decades of the 21st Century because the capability will exist within
the SPS transportation system. But why bother to go out to the planetoid belt when all the action's
taking place in LEO and GSO around the Earth? Answer: To obtain more economical materials for
building more SPS units at a lower cost. Reason: Until the SPS space transportation system builds itself to
the "takeoff" point where it can "boot strap" itself into a Solar System transportation system, it has to lift
every pound of every 42,000 ton SPS unit up from the Earth's surface through a very powerful gravitational
field to orbit. It takes energy to do this. Energy costs money. It takes less energy to go the planetoid belt,
set up mining operations there, and send SPS construction materials back to Earth orbit than it does to
haul those same materials up from the Earth's surface to GEO.
WNDI 2008 27
Solar Power Aff
Space Advantage
SBSP development catalyzes and reduces the cost of space access for the US
The SBSP Study Group found that the SBSP development would have a transformational, even
revolutionary, effect on space access for the nation(s) that develop(s) it. SBSP cannot be constructed
without safe, frequent (daily/weekly), cheap, and reliable access to space and ubiquitous in‐space
operations. The sheer volume and number of flights into space, and the efficiencies reached by those high
‐ changing.
volumes is game By lowering the cost to orbit so substantially, and by providing safe and
routine access, entirely new industries and possibilities open up. SBSP and low ‐ cost, reliable space

access are co ‐ dependent, and advances in either will catalyze development in the other.

SBSP development catalyzes US space development and exploration

But the most important synergism of the SPS program comes from the fact that, in buying the SPS
system to provide us with safe, clean, and abundant electrical energy from a renewable source, we are
also paying for the transportation system that enables us to build, man, and maintain the SPS system.
It's going to be a big one, the first true space transportation system we've possessed. It will permit us to
send large payloads and large numbers of people into LEO and GEO. It will enable us to establish and
maintain very large space facilities in LEO and GSO capable of housing hundreds of people at a
time.Out of this SPS space transportation system will come explosive progress in space science, space
manufacturing, and development of extraterrestrial material resouces.
WNDI 2008 28
Solar Power Aff
Space Advantage – Space Science

SBSP development catalyzes US space development and exploration
As this is being written, space scientists are engaged in the incredible attempt to appropriate the entire
non-military space mission capability and schedule of the NASA space shuttle. They do not want the
NASA space shuttle's "limited" capability to be used for any space industrialization research and
especially not for any development work on such programs as the SPS. Basically, a paraphrase of what
they 're saying is as follows: "We stood aside m the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo manned space programs
and let them be conducted as engineering missions because of the national prestige involved. Now we do not
intend to permit the space shuttle to be pre-empted by commercial and industrial interests. We have
subordinated our own interests in doing space science long enough. We want the non-military activities of the
space shuttle devoted to space science as first priority with commercial and industrial engineering
development work secondary to our requirements."This attempt to pre-empt the space shuttle for the
exclusive non-military pursuit of basic scientific research in space has some justification: We should be
doing more space science research—much more of it. Basic scientific research serves to keep the cupboard
of knowledge full of information which can later be used by those people developing the engineering
technologies for products and profit.But the way to get a lot more scientific research done in space isn't to
attempt to grab all the space shuttle missions.The way to insure that there will be copious space science
done in the 1990 decade is to back the use of the space shuttle for SPS development work to prove out
the unknown areas of engineering and technology. This, when accomplished, can lead to lowered risk
and justifiable capital investment which, in turn, leads to a commitment to the SPS program. This, in
its own turn, requires the development and operation of the very large space transportation
system.The SPS space transportation system is so large and so flexible that it contains within its scope
the capability to support more space scientific research than the space scientists will be able to find
funds to carry out—even if the scientists are given a free ride on the coattails of the SPS space
transportation system's capabilities!With the ability to lift a million pounds to orbit every day, there will
be the inevitable volume and weight "holes'' in the payload schedule that can easily accomodate
"payloads of opportunity" for space science. With a passenger shuttle taking seventy-five people into
space and back every two weeks, there will be inevitable open slots in the passenger manifests that space
scientists can take advantage of in order to go into space themselves to conduct their work on site,
rather than by remote control as they're forced to do today. With the SPS project's ability to sustain more
than a hundred people at LEO Base and almost a thousand people at GEO Base, space scientists will be able
to live out there with their experimental apparatus for months at a time.We've been talking about putting
a maximum of seven people into space at a time on a weekly basis with the NASA space shuttle, and only
three of these "crew slots" may be available for space scientists. We have a totally different game when
we're shuttling ten times that number of people into space weekly and keeping a hundred times that number
alive and working in space facilities.The SPS program is going to provide space scientists with a
Golconda of opportunities to do so much space science that they'll have "wall to wall" data.
WNDI 2008 29
Solar Power Aff
Space / Economy Advantage

SBSP development would massively expand US growth and ensure a human presence in space
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP directly supports the articulated goals of the U.S.National Space
Policy and Vision for Space Exploration which seeks to promote international and commercial
participation in exploration that furthers U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests, and extends
human presence across the solar system .No other opportunity so clearly offers a path to realize the
Vision as articulated by Dr.Marburger, Science Advisor to the President: “As I see it, questions about
the vision boil down to whether we want to incorporate the Solar System in our economic sphere, or
not. Our national policy, declared by President Bush and endorsed by Congress last December in theNASA
authorization act, affirms that, ‘The fundamental goal of this vision is to advance U.S.scientific,
security, and economic interests through a robust space exploration program.’ So at least for now the
question has been decided in the affirmative.” No other opportunity is likely to tap a multi-trillion
dollar market that could provide an engine to emplace infrastructure that could truly extend human
presence across the solar system and enable the use of lunar and other space resources as called for in
the Vision.
WNDI 2008 30
Solar Power Aff
SBSP key to check great power conflict over dwindling energy reserves

The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers a long ‐ term route to alleviate the security challenges of

energy scarcity, and a hopeful path to avert possible wars and conflicts. If traditional fossil fuel
production of peaks sometime this century as the Department of Energy’s own Energy Information Agency

has predicted, a first order effect would be some type of energy scarcity. If alternatives do not come on ‐ line

fast enough, then prices and resource tensions will increase with a negative effect on the global
economy, possibly even pricing some nations out of the competition for minimum requirements. This
could increase the potential for failed states, particularly among the less developed and poor nations. It
could also increase the chances for great power conflict. To the extent SBSP is successful in tapping an
energy source with tremendous growth potential, it offers an “alternative in the third dimension” to
lessen the chance of such conflicts.
WNDI 2008 31
Solar Power Aff
SBSP would provide enough energy to power the entire earth forever
The SBSP Study Group found that by providing access to an inexhaustible strategic reservoir of
renewable energy, SBSP offers an attractive route to increased energy security and assurance. The
reservoir of Space ‐ Based Solar Power is
almost unimaginably vast, with room for growth far past the
foreseeable needs of the entire human civilization for the next century and beyond. In the vicinity of
Earth, each and every hour there are 1.366 gigawatts of solar energy continuously pouring through every
square kilometer of space. If one were to stretch that around the circumference of geostationary orbit, that 1
km‐wide ring receives over 210 terawatt‐years of power annually. The amount of energy coursing through
that one thin band of space in just one year is roughly equivalent to the energy contained in ALL
known recoverable oil reserves on Earth (approximately 250 terawatt years), and far exceeds the
projected 30TW of annual demand in mid century. The energy output of the fusion ‐ powered Sun is

billions of times beyond that, and it will last for billions of years—orders of magnitude beyond all other
known sources combined. Space‐Based Solar Power taps directly into the largest known energy resource in
the solar system. This is not to minimize the difficulties and practicalities of economically developing and
utilizing this resource or the tremendous time and effort it would take to do so. Nevertheless, it is important
to realize that there is a tremendous reservoir of energy—clean, renewable energy—available to the human
civilization if it can develop the means to effectively capture it.
WNDI 2008 32
Solar Power Aff

Even a Single SBSPS Would provide enough energy to power the entire planet and stave off
oil conflict within the next fifty years
Consistent with the US National Security Strategy, energy and environmental security are not just problems for
America, they are critical problems for the entire world. Expanding human populations and declining
natural resources are potential sources of strategic and local conflict in the first half of the 21st Century.
Conflict prevention is of particular interest to security‐providing institutions such as the U.S. Department of Defense. Equitable
access to sufficient quantities of clean, reliable, and affordable energy fundamentally enables the
technical and policy solutions that can prevent future resource conflicts while still providing
opportunities for prosperous growth. Every energy resource opportunity, including those from space, must be fully explored
to determine its ability to contribute toward solving mankind’s looming energy supply and security dilemma. A single kilometer‐
wide band of geosynchronous earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year (approximately 212
terawatt‐years) to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional
oil reserves on Earth today (approximately 250 TW‐yrs). The enormous potential of this resource demands an examination of
mankind’s ability to successfully capture and utilize this energy within the context of today’s technology, economic, and policy realities,
as well as the expected environment within the next 25 years. Study of space‐based solar power (SBSP) indicates that there is
enormous potential for energy security, economic development, advancement of general space faring,
improved environmental stewardship, and overall national security for those nations who construct
and possess such a capability.
WNDI 2008 33
Solar Power Aff
Warming Advantage 2AC
SBSP key to check warming and emits less carbon than any other alternative fuel source
The SBSP Study Group found that to the extent the United States decides it wishes to limit its carbon
emissions, SBSP offers a potential path for long
‐ term carbon mitigation.
This study does not take a
position on anthropogenic climate change, which at this time still provoked significant debate among
participants, but there is undeniable interest in options that limit carbon emission. Studies by Asakura et al in
2000 suggest that SBSP lifetime carbon emissions (chiefly in construction) are even more attractive than
nuclear power, and that for the same amount of carbon emission, one could install 60 times the
generating capacity, or alternately, one could replace existing generating capacity with 1/60th the
lifetime carbon emission of a coal ‐ fired plant without CO2 sequestration.

Risks of runaway warming threaten all life on the planet

ECES, 2002, ”documenting the collapse of a dying planet”, Earth crash earth spirit
http://eces.org/ec/globalwarming/oceans.shtml#090301, 8/11/03
Global warming risk assessment is complex, unlike risk assessment associated with the ozone depletion
problem. Ozone depletion is represented by one main variable: chlorine and bromine from
halocarbons. The higher these chemical concentrations, the lower the ozone concentrations. It is a
proven process, and the thinning ozone layer can be measured. Measurements in recent years, in fact,
have shown that atmospheric scientists have consistently underestimated the pace and extent of ozone
depletion. What if the scientific community's underestimation of ozone depletion proves to apply to global
warming as well? Bad as the broad-consensus, best-estimate IPCC prognosis is, what might the worst-case
analysis of global warming be? The main worry is that a coalescing pattern of positive feedbacks might be
awakened and continue unchecked by negative feedbacks. Some of nature's carbon reservoirs are so huge
that they could become involved, in principle, in a runaway greenhouse effect. The world would simply
go on warming, placing a viable future for human and animal life on the planet at risk.
WNDI 2008 34
Solar Power Aff
Warming/Environment Advantage – Cap/World Industry Shift (1/2)
SBSP development will cause a massive shift of all industry to space ensuring zero
environmental damage and zero emissions
Regardless of the future scenario that's chosen—short of the one that prognosticates all-out general war
with massive thermonuclear warhead exchanges—the SPS program and its consequences begin to have
growing effects on earthbound activities starting approximately five years after the program goes into
high-gear, building two 10-gigawatt SPS units in space every year. One of these consequences is the
increasing assumption of the baseload energy demand by the SPS system approximately ten to fifteen
years after the program starts. If SPS units can be built at a faster rate than two per year, the SPS system is able to assume a
greater percentage of the baseload demand; if the program start is delayed, the SPS system is able to pick up a reduced percentage of the
baseload demand because of the catch-up game characteristics of energy demand. But, with the inevitable introduction of extraterrestrial
materials into the SPS program and the resulting reduced costs of SPS construction—perhaps dropping as low as $500 per kilowatt
installed, which is a very attractive cost figure—an increased number could be built in Earth orbit, eventually to the point where we've
ringed the Earth with SPS units in GSO. How many SPS units could be placed in GSO? If all SPS units are placed in the equatorial
geosynchronous orbit at a distance of 35,890 kilometers (22,400 miles) from Earth, if each SPS unit occupies an area of fifty square
kilometers in that orbit, and if we allow for a spacing of fifteen kilometers between SPS units, it's possible to place 17,700 SPS units in
GSO. That would supply a total space power capacity of 177,000 gigawatts. That's almost eighty-seven times the total forecast U.S.
energy demand for the year 2025, which is as far as we dared to take our demand forecast. We'll never build 17,700 SPS units. We may
never have to build more than two hundred SPS units to supply the U.S. demand. This is because a strange consequence
falls out of the SPS program after approximately twenty years. With a mature SPS technology
functioning in space along with the accompanying space transportation system that permits low-cost
industrial operations in space, plus the availability of extraterrestrial materials, we could look forward
to seeing the relocation of an increasing amount of industrial activity into space. This includes the
strong possibility of relocation of even the "heavy industries'' of Herman Kahn's secondary industrial
category, the refinement category. More and more companies are going to find it attractive to locate the
new industrial facilities in space for one or all of a number of reasons. Among these reasons are the
following: Energy will cost less in space, and the cost of energy is a critical item in many industrial
operations. On Earth energy comes primarily from the combusion of fossil fuels. By the early 21st century,
there will be severe social pressures to conserve these non-renewable resources by using them for chemical
feedstocks instead of sending them up the stack as combustion products. Space has no biosphere to pollute.
And industrial operations in space cannot possibly pollute the terrestrial environment. Even rocket
operations providing transportation to the space facilities from the Earth's surface will produce only carbon
dioxide and water in their exhausts . . . and there's no way that enough rocket vehicles can be launched to
even equal the pollutant volume that's being vented into the atmosphere in 1980 by industry everywhere, in
spite of pollution controls. And by the early 21st century, social pressures are going to create some very
difficult and demanding antipollution laws. It's going to be cheaper and easier for industry to move
from an expensive site where their operations may harm the ecology out to a place where there is no
ecology to damage. Raw materials will be easier and cheaper to obtain in space than on Earth. Most of the
high-grade ore bodies on Earth have been worked-out or are reaching the point where it's possible to forecast
that they will be exhausted within a finite period of time. Our industrial civilization is based on iron, and
there is plenty of iron in space. There are also aluminum, magnesium, and other basic metals available in the
Solar System because we've
WNDI 2008 35
Solar Power Aff
Warming/Environment Advantage – Cap/World Industry Shift (2/2)

already sampled the Moon and Mars and because we can make a very intelligent estimate of the composition
of the rocks in the planetoid belt as a result of studying the composition
of the meteorites that have fallen to Earth from space. There is also a very good chance that the most critical
element, nitrogen, will be available in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter. For a more detailed discussion of
extraterrestrial materials, see The Third Industrial Revolution and The Space Enterprise. The ready
availability of low-cost energy and abundant raw materials along with the absence of any need to
worry about pollution are three very serious and attractive factors that will cause industry to move
into space, and these three factors become attractive as a consequence of the SPS program. As industry
moves into orbit in the first two to three decades of the 21st century, the relocation activity begins to have a
profound impact upon terrestrial activities, specifically upon energy consumption. In 1980, more than 60% of
the energy demand of the United States is used for industrial purposes. Only about 40% is used for domestic
purposes to provide heat and light for commercial and domestic activities. If we can shift even 50% of the
baseload energy demand into space by making it more attractive for industrial operations to be relocated
there during the first half of the 21st century, the total baseload demand of the United States can be reduced.
The upward trend of energy demand shown unmistakably in Table I of the previous chapter can either be
stabilized or reversed by the year 2050. At that point, all of the United States' energy demand can come from
the SPS system, from decentralized terrestrial passive solar systems, from geothermal sources, from
hydroelectric plants, and from wind turbines. All of the old electrical plants that used fossil fuels can be
retired and dismantled as they reach the end of their design lifetimes.All of the nuclear reactor electric plants
will have been shut down long before this as they, too, reach the end of their depreciated lifetimes and can be
written off. No new nukes will be required in order to maintain the baseload capacity dictated by demand.
We will have completed a major shift in direction of our high-technology culture by converting to
renewable energy resources without severe energy shortages and with the minimum amount of
dislocation in our culture because we will have done it sensibly over a long enough period of time to permit
people to be retired without having to be retrained, a new generation of people to be educated and trained to
work with the new systems, and existing facilities to be depreciated over their design lifetimes with little
financial dislocation. We will have made the shift to space power. And it will cost the same as trying to
stay on Earth, build new facilities to eke out another fifty years' worth of energy from non-renewable
resources, modify or build new industrial facilities to meet a growing trend of concern for a safe and
healthy environment, and search the Earth for new sources of raw materials from an ever-decreasing
storehouse of mineral wealth.Big as the Planet Earth may be, it is still finite, and the activities of the
human race are rapidly making the world a smaller and smaller place for a growing number of things.
Staying on Earth and trying to "make the best of it" by conservation is no long-term solution and we do not
know what the long-term consequences may be. However, we suspect that some of the short-term
consequences may be fatal.Continual technological progress and its corollary of expansion into the Solar
System offers a better chance for the future because we know that progress and expansion have been
historically workable. Granted that there are problems with progress and expansion, but these problems can
be solved. Better the Devil we know than the Devil we know not.
WNDI 2008 36
Solar Power Aff
Warming Advantage – A2: Biosphere Heat
SBSP heat radiation is far less than any other sources and all of that heat is diffused outside
the biosphere
The final global effect is not obvious, but also important. While it may seem intuitively obvious that SBSP
introduces heat into the biosphere by beaming more energy in, the net effect is quite the opposite. All
energy put into the electrical grid will eventually be spent as heat, but the methods of generating
electricity are of significant impact for determining which approach produces the least total global
warming effect. Fossil fuel burning emits large amounts of waste heat and greenhouse gases, while
terrestrial solar and wind power also emit significant amounts of waste heat via inefficient conversion.
Likewise, SBSP also has solar conversion inefficiencies that produce waste heat, but the key difference
is that the most of this waste heat creation occurs outside the biosphere to be radiated into space. The
losses in the atmosphere are very small, on the order of a couple percent for the wavelengths considered.
Because SBSP is not a greenhouse gas emitter (with the exception of initial manufacturing and launch fuel
emissions), it does not contribute to the trapping action and retention of heat in the biosphere
WNDI 2008 37
Solar Power Aff
Nuke Power Bad Advantage 2AC

SBSP checks mass nuclear proliferation
The SBSP Study Group found that in the long run, SBSP offers a viable and attractive route to decrease
mankind’s reliance on fossil fuels, as well as provides a potential global alternative to wider proliferation
of nuclear materials that will almost certainly unfold if many more countries in the world transition to
nuclear power with enrichment in an effort to meet their energy needs with carbon neutral sources. To
the extent mankind’s electricity is produced by fossil fuel sources, SBSP offers a capability over time to
reduce the rate at which humanity consumes the planet’s finite fossil hydrocarbon resources. While presently
hard to store, electricity is easy to transport, and is highly efficient in conversion to both mechanical and
thermal energy. Except for the aviation transportation infrastructure, virtually all of America’s energy could
eventually be delivered and consumed as electricity. Even in ground transportation, a movement toward plug‐
in hybrids would allow a substantial amount of traditional ground transportation to be powered by SBSP
electricity. For those applications that favor or rely upon liquid hydrocarbon fuels, America’s national labs are
pursuing several promising avenues of research to manufacture carbon‐neutral synthetic fuels (synfuels) from
direct solar thermal energy or radiated/electrical SBSP. The lab initiatives are developing technologies to
efficiently split energy‐neutral feedstocks or upgrade lower‐grade fuels (such as biofuels) into higher energy
density liquid hydrocarbons. Put plainly, SBSP could be utilized to split hydrogen from water and the carbon
monoxide (syngas) from carbon dioxide which can then be combined to manufacture any desired hydrocarbon
fuel, including gasoline, diesel, kerosene and jet fuel. This technology is still in its infancy, and significant
investment will be required to bring this technology to a high level of technical readiness and meet economic
and efficiency goals. This technology enables a carbon‐neutral (closed carbon‐cycle) hydrocarbon economy
driven by clean renewable sources of power, which can utilize the existing global fuel infrastructure without
modification. This opportunity is of particular interest to traditional oil companies. The ability to use
renewable energy to serve as the energy feedstock for existing fuels, in a carbon neutral cycle, is a “total game
changer” that deserves significant attention. Both fossil and fissile sources offer significant capabilities to our
energy mix, but dependence on the exact mix must be carefully managed. Likewise, the mix abroad may
affect domestic security. While increased use of nuclear power is not of particular concern in nations
that enjoy the rule of law and have functioning internal security mechanisms, it may be of greater
concern in unstable areas of rouge states. The United States might consider the security challenges of
wide proliferation of enrichment ‐ based nuclear power abroad undesirable.
If so, having a viable
alternative that fills a comparable niche might be attractive. Overall, SBSP offers a hopeful path toward
reduced fossil and fissile fuel dependence.
Proliferation causes nuclear war

Samuel Totten, Associate Professor in the College of Education at the University of Arkansas, The
Widening Circle of Genocide, 1994, p. 289
There are numerous dangers inherent in the spread of nuclear weapons, including but not limited to the
following: the possibility that a nation threatened by destruction in a conventional war may resort to the
use of its nuclear weapons; the miscalculation of a threat of an attack and the subsequent use of
nuclear weapons in order to stave off the suspected attack; a nuclear weapons accident due to carelessness or
flawed technology (e.g., the accidental launching of a nuclear weapon); the use of such weapons by an unstable
leader; the use of such weapons by renegade military personnel during a period of instability (personal,
national or international); and, the theft (and/or development) and use of such weapons by terrorists. While it is
unlikely (though not impossible) that terrorists would be able to design their own weapons, it is possible that they could do so with the
assistance of a renegade government.
WNDI 2008 38
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage – Jobs/R&D
SBSP will ensure long term US economic growth – promotes massive job growth and R& D
The SBSP Study Group found that while the United States requires a suite of energy options, and while
many potential options exist, none offers the unique range of ancillary benefits and transformational
capabilities as SBSP. It is possible that the world’s energy problems may be solved without resort to
SBSP by revolutionary breakthroughs in other areas, but none of the alternative options will also
simultaneously create transformational national security capabilities, open up the spacefrontier for
commerce, greatly enable space transportation, enhance high ‐ paying, high
‐ tech jobs, and turn

America into an exporter of energy and hope for the coming centuries.
Employment drives the economy

William Hawkins, Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council, January
30, 2002, http://www.tradealert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=205, accessed 2/3/03
President Bush struck the same note in his State of the Union address, saying. "When America works,
America prospers; so my economic security plan can be summed up in one word: jobs." He then stated
"the way to create jobs, is to grow the economy by encouraging investment in factories and
equipment." But why would any firm build new factories or buy new equipment, if it faced the specter of
being driven out of business by imports?
WNDI 2008 39
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage – Space Manufacturing (1/2)

Space Based Solar Power would massively expand US business and growth via Space
Manufacturing and Space Pharmaceuticals
Another good example of this in addition to the increased space science capability is the golden
opportunities the SPS space transportation system offers to space manufacturing.As of 1980, we know
that there are products that we can make in space that cannot be made here on Earth, and products
that can be made better in space. This is because of two major characteristics of orbital space around the Earth: (a)
weightlessness or apparent lack of gravity, and (b) the good vacuum of orbital space.Although the latter—good vacuum—can be
obtained in terrestrial laboratories at a very high cost, the weightless characteristics of space cannot be duplicated for more than a minute
without going into orbit. We know this to be so because of preliminary research and investigations that have been made by American
astronauts in the Apollo and Skylab programs. We know this to be so because the Soviet Union's cosmonauts have already carried out
the manufacture of special materials in the long-duration flights they've made in the 1977-1980 time period aboard the Soviet space
station, Salyut-6. The weightlessness available in orbit permits the use of many manufacturing processes that cannot be carried out with
gravity pulling on them. It also permits the manufacture of many materials that can't be produced when gravity is present. For example,
perfect crystalline materials can be produced in orbit because gravity doesn't exert a strain on the crystalline structure and cause
imperfections and dislocations between the atoms and molecules that make up the crystal. So what? Why should anybody except
crystallographers be interested in the perfect crystals that can be produced in space? The answer is that modern
microscopic electronic circuits are made on crystalline bases. These crystalline structures must be perfect because any
imperfection leads either to a high rate of rejects of completed parts or the necessity to make microelectronic circuits in a series of small
units on pieces of small, perfect crystals cut from larger crystals with the imperfect portions being discarded. Separate microelectronic
circuits are more costly than circuits that are more highly integrated. Components and materials that must be rejected after long and
expensive fabrication's been completed adds to expense. General Electric has already determined that the manufacture of near-perfect
crystalline materials in space could reduce the cost of microelectronic parts by a factor of ten or more. Space crystals would not only
reduce price, but also reduce reject rates and permit larger and more complex electronic circuits to be made on larger crystal chips.
Microbiology will benefit from the weightlessness of space. The absence of gravity means that there are no differences in density
between materials. Oil and vinegar salad dressing won't stay mixed on Earth because the oil is less dense than the vinegar and therefore
weighs less, therefore, it immediately goes to the top of the salad dressing bottle after you've finished shaking it. In orbit, the oil and
vinegar would stay mixed because there is no gravity to separate them. Because of the total absence of density effects on materials,
weightless processing means that it's possible to mix things that won't otherwise mix. It also means that warmer materials won't rise
because of lowered density, and therefore convection heating won't result in separation of materials. Many single-cell
products such as blood-fraction leukocytes are used today in the pharmaceutical industry to produce
drugs. There are great problems maintaining a suitable suspension of microbes, blood fractions, or single-cell materials in a nutrient
solution that will also carry off the drug element being produced by the cells. The cells will settle to the bottom of the processing
chamber. As a result, some of the cells will not get any nutrient because they're buried on the bottom of the pile, and these cells die. This
reduces the efficiency of the process and also adds impurities created by the suffocating and dead cells. The obvious answer is to keep
the cells stirred up so that they stay in suspension. But the cells usually aren't tolerant of being battered by any sort of mixing device that
will keep them stirred up; if they don't die from the physical beating they take, they often just quit working or work in a manner that
doesn't produce the end product the pharmaceutical engineer is looking for. But by putting this microbiological process in the
weightlessness of orbit, the cells will stay in suspension and cannot settle to the bottom of the processing vat. Furthermore, they aren't
being battered by a mixing machine, they can work surrounded by nutrient solution that feeds them and carries away their precious end
product which may be an important pharmaceutical. These examples are but two of the products of space manufacturing that have been
carefully researched by myself and others over the past decade. The initial research led to my book, The Third Industrial Revolution
(Ace Books, 1978) which goes into considerable detail concerning the various industrial processes that could be carried out in space.
The interest in space industrialization sparked by this book resulted in a funded study by NASA in 1977-1978 to Rockwell International
and Science Applications, Inc. (SAI). As a member of the latter team, I helped identify 147 possible space products. Careful marketing
research was carried out by the SAI team on ten of the most promising products whose production might be realized in the 1980 time
period. Total revenues for these ten examples were forecast to be as much as $10-billion by the year 2000. This NASA study identified
other areas of space utilization such as the Solar Power Satellite system as being a viable space goal in this century. The results of the
SAI and Rockwell International studies, performed independently, were part of the data I used for the follow-up book, The Space
Enterprise (Ace Books, 1980). The technical and economic potentials of space industrialization are discussed in detail in these two prior
books which should be consulted for additional information on space manufacturing processes and products. A major problem was
identified by these studies and through contacts with individuals in managerial and planning positions in a variety of non-
aerospace industrial firms.In order for space manufacturing to become a truly viable economic part of
the American industrial scene, it's necessary to reduce the cost of space transportation to $20 per
kilogram placed in LEO. Otherwise, there were some terrestrial options that appeared to be more
economical, and it would be difficult for any corporation to justify the combination of high risks and high
transportation costs. Nearly everyone with any input to these studies agreed that low-cost, reliable and
available space
WNDI 2008 40
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage – Space Manufacturing (2/2)

transportation was the important key to opening up Earth orbital space to American private enterprise
for new industrial operations. The SPS space transportation system offers the solution to this dilemma
as one consequence of its development and operation as part of the SPS prdgram. Inexpensive space
transportation will be immediately perceived as a competitive opportunity by people in domestic
industry already aware of the potentials of space manufacturing. Thus, the SPS space transportation
system satisfies a market need that currently exists. Once the opportunity has been grasped by only a
few companies, and once profitable operations have been established by these pioneer firms, the need
will grow. This is confirmed by the fact that many of the more conservative industrialists and managers who
provided inputs to the space industry studies said that they "'wanted to be kept informed of what was going
on," and that they "would probably get involved" if their competition did.In the world of private enterprise,
nobody wants to be left behind in the competitive race but almost everyone is reluctant to start running hard
immediately after the gun goes off. It's only after a couple of the more venturesome runners look like they're
going to win the whole race that the reluctant ones begin to run hard. Once the SPS transportation system
makes it possible for a few companies to show a profit on products manufactured in space, the market
will expand immensely.
WNDI 2008 41
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage – BizCon - A2: No Interest / Investment
SBSP has massive business, industry and public support all it needs is the attention and legitimacy provided
by a government investment. Plan Would jumpstart business confidence.
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP is an idea that appears to generate significant interest and
support across a broad variety of sectors. Compared to other ideas either for space exploration or
alternative energy, Space-Based Solar Power is presently not a publicly well-known idea, in part because
it has no organizational advocate within government, and has not received any substantial funding or
public attention for a significant period of time. Nevertheless, DoD review team leaders were
virtually overwhelmed by the interest in Space-Based Solar Power that they discovered. What began
as a small e-mail group became unmanageable as the social network & map-of-expertise expanded and
word spread. To cope, study leaders were forced to move to an on-line collaborative group with nearly
daily requests for new account access, ultimately growing to over 170 aerospace and policy experts all
contributing pro-bono. This group became so large, and the need to more closely examine certain
questions so acute, that the group had to be split into four additional groups. As word spread and
enthusiasm grew in the space advocacy community, study leaders were invited to further expand to an open
web log in collaboration with the Space Frontier Foundation. The amount of media interest was substantial.
Activity was so intense that total e-mail traffic for the study leads could be as high as 200 SBSP-related e-
mails a day, and the sources of interest were very diverse. There was clear interest from potential
military ground customers—the Army, Marines, and USAF Security Forces, and installations
personnel, all of which have an interest in clean, low environmental-impact energy sources, and especially
sources that are agile without a long, vulnerable, and continuing logistics chain. There was clear interest
from both traditional “big aerospace,” and the entrepreneurial space community. Individuals from
each of the major American aerospace companies participated and contributed. The subject was an
agenda item for the Space Resources Roundtable, a dedicated industry group .Study leaders were made
aware of significant and serious discussions between aerospace companies and several major energy and
construction companies both in and outside of United States. As the study progressed the study team was
invited to brief in various policy circles and think tanks, including the Marshall Institute, the Center for the
Study of the Presidency, the Energy Consensus Group, the National Defense Industry Association, the
Defense Science Board, the Department of Commerce’s Office of Commercial Space, and the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Interest in the idea was exceptionally strong in the space
advocacy community, particularly in the Space Frontier Foundation (SFF), National Space Society
(NSS), Space Development Steering Committee, and Aerospace Technology Working Group (ATWG), all
of which hosted or participated in events related to this subject during the study period. There is reason to
think that this interest may extend to the greater public. The most recent survey indicating public
interest in SBSP was conducted in 2005 when respondents were asked where they prefer to see their
space tax dollars spent. The most popular response was collecting energy from space, with support
from 35% of those polled—twice the support for the second most popular response, planetary defense
(17%)—and three times the support for the current space exploration goals of the Moon (4%) / Mars(10%).
How does one account for such significant interest? Perhaps it is because SBSP lies “at the intersection
of missionary and mercenary”—appealing both to man’s idealism and pragmatism, the United States’
special mission in the world and her citizens’ faith in business and technology. As an ambitious and
optimistic project, it excites the imagination with its scale and grandeur, besting America’s previous
projects, and opening new frontiers. Such interest goes directly to the concerns of the Aerospace commission, which
stated, “The aerospace industry has always been a reflection of the spirit of America. It has been, and continues to be, a sector of
pioneers drawn to the challenge of new frontiers in science, air,space, and engineering. For this nation to maintain its present proud
heritage and leadership in the global arena, we must remain dedicated to a strong and prosperous aerospace industry. A healthy and
vigorous aerospace industry also holds a promise for the future, by kindling a passion within our youth that beckons them to reach for
the stars and thereby assure our nation’s destiny.”
WNDI 2008 42
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage – A2: Spending Link
SBSP is far less expensive than any other option and pays for itself in less than a year
Lisa Zyga Invetorspot Writer July 12, 2008
Over the past three decades, the report details, NASA and the DOE have collectively spent $80 million
in sporadic efforts studying this concept (by comparison, they note that the U.S. government has spent
approximately $21 billion over the last 50 years continuously pursuing nuclear fusion). In this latest
analysis, which took place over the past six months, more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and
business experts around the world contributed, largely through e-mail and online communication. The NSSO
report emphasizes that the scheme would be economically viable, with paybacks as early as one year
after implementation (not considering preliminary R&D).
WNDI 2008 43
Solar Power Aff
Economy Advantage - A2 : Spending Link

High launch volume makes prices a continually decreasing enterprise
Ad Adstra The Magazine of the National Space Society Spring 2008
The cost issue is obvious: the cheapest launches today run thousands of dollars per kilogram to low
Earth orbit (LEO), and we need to get the materials all the way to
geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO), which is significantly more expensive. The cost of
launch goes up very quickly with the change in velocity, which is measured in meters per
second (m/s). For each increase in velocity, additional fuel is needed, and even more fuel to lift the additional
fuel, and heavier structures to hold the increased fuel, and even more fuel to lift the heavier structures … you
get the idea. In any case, the velocity change
from the ground to LEO is 8,600 m/s, but to GEO it’s 12,400 m/s. Paul Werbos (see references on page 36)
estimates that launch costs must come down to somewhere in the
neighborhood of $450/kg for SSP to deliver energy near current prices (5-10 cents/kw-h).
Fortunately, a high launch rate drives prices down, just as the mass-produced Ford
Model-T was far cheaper than the previous generations of automobiles
WNDI 2008 44
Solar Power Aff
Farming / Economy Advantage
SBSP allows year round farming jumpstarting farming economies

Lisa Zyga Invetorspot Writer July 12, 2008
The report also addresses the impact on Earth of beaming all that energy down. The researchers explain that
microwave-receiving rectennas allow more than 90% of ambient light to pass through, but absorb
almost all of the beamed energy. This means that the method generates less waste heat than terrestrial
solar systems because of greater coupling efficiency, and also that the area underneath the rectenna
can continue to be used for agricultural or pastoral purposes. In some cases, if desired, land in colder
regions could even use some of the extra energy to maintain crops year-round.
WNDI 2008 45
Solar Power Aff
Farming/Economy
SBSP would jumpstart farming and western American economies

The SPS project also permits us to bring electrical energy to parts of the country where there's room
for people, towns, industry, and future growth: the western United States. The biggest problem with the
western U.S. isn't that the land is rugged and difficult to traverse or to live on. The big problem in the West is
water. On any map, you can draw a line along the 100th degree of longitude. East of that line, there's enough
natural rainfall to support the heartland of America—the cities, the industries, and the farms that feed the
world. West of the line, the natural rainfall is sparse, requiring water be obtained by pumping or by diversion.
Farms take on a different appearance because of the requirement to irrigate them artificially with water using
freeflow irrigation from canals, drip irrigation, or circular spray irrigation. The siting of towns and cities
depends upon the water supply, while in the eastern part of America towns and cities were originally
established because of commercial advantage or in a network where no town was more than one day's
journey from any other town. There are room and resources in the American West even today, and all
that's lacking is energy.A prime example of the synergy of energy projects in the American West is the
Boulder Canyon Project created by the Swing-Johnson Bill signed by President Calvin Coolidge in 1928.
This created Hoover Dam, then the largest energy and land reclamation project tackled in the United States.
It was complete a mere eight years later at a cost of $165-million. It's capable of producing an electrical
energy output of 1.835 gigawatts. Hoover Dam not only made possible the farming of the lower Colorado
River Valley, but also the Imperial Valley of California. Its electrical output not only permitted the growth of
the Los Angeles metroplex but also transformed a small railroad town in the desert into the glittering resort of
Las Vegas, Nevada. Its electrical output created the nearby town of Henderson, Nevada, which produces a
large percentage of the magnesium used in the aerospace industry. The Boulder Canyon Project was
originally conceived as a flood control program with hydroelectric capability. The historical spin-offs that
created the intense social activity in this southwestern corner of the United States are an example of the
synergism of projects similar to the SPS.There's room in the West for the SPS system ground rectennas.
With the energy from these rectennas, water can be pumped or diverted and thus create oasis towns
were nothing exists today. With this SPS energy, sea water de-salinization becomes possible, providing
even more water resources for the water-scarce regions of the western U.S. The vast areas of the
American West still beckon as a frontier, but it's an energy frontier out there today.
WNDI 2008 46
Solar Power Aff
Humanitarianism / UN Advantage
SBSP would massively enhance humanitarian an UN nation-building efforts

The SBSP Study Group found that one immediate application of space-based solar power would be to
broadcast power directly to energy-deprived areas and to persons performing disaster relief, nation-
building, and other humanitarian missions often associated with the United Nations and related non-
governmental organizations.
WNDI 2008 47
Solar Power Aff
Future Tech Advantage
SBSP development spurs the development of future tech like antidebris, deep space
exploration and asteroid protection systems
The SBSP Study Group found that retirement of the SBSP technical challenges begets other significant
strategic benefits for exploration, commerce and defense, that in-and-of-themselves may justify a
national program. At present, the United States has very limited capabilities to build large structures, very
large apertures or very high power systems in orbit. It has very limited in-space maneuver and operational
capability, and very limited access to space. It cannot at present move large amounts of mass into Earth
orbit. The United States correspondingly has extremely limited capabilities for in-space manufacturing and
construction or in-situ space resource utilization. It has no capability for beamed power or propulsion.
SBSP development would advance the state of the art in all of the above competencies.
• The expertise gained in developing large structures for space based solar power could allow entirely new
technologies for applications such as image and real-time surface and airborne object tracking services, as
well as high bandwidth telecommunications, high-definition television and radio, and mobile, broadcast
services. It would enable entirely new architectures, such as power platforms that provide services to
multiple payloads, autonomous self-constructing structures, or wireless cooperative formations. The Solar
Electric Transfer Vehicles (SETV) needed to lift the Space Solar Power Satellites out of low-earth orbit,
and perhaps even form its components, would completely revolutionize our ability to move large payloads
within the Earth-Moon system.
• The technology to beam power over long distances could lower application satellite weights and expand
the envelope for Earth- and space-based power beaming applications. A truly developed Space-Based Solar
Power infrastructure would open up entirely new exploration and commercial possibilities, not only
because of the access which will be discussed in the section on infrastructure, but because of the
power available on orbit, which would enable concepts as diverse as comet / asteroid protection
systems, de-orbit of space debris, space-to-space power utilities, and beamed propulsion possibilities
including far-term concepts as a true interstellar probe such as Dr. Robert Forward’s StarWisp Concept.
WNDI 2008 48
Solar Power Aff
Solvency – Government / Private Investment

Even a Single Government Developed SBSPS would Spur Massive Interest and Investment
David Boswell Monday, August 30, 2004
There are a number of reasons why we won’t be seeing huge orbiting solar collectors beaming us lots of
energy anytime soon. Starting the development of such a system by building small proof of concept
satellites is completely within our reach, though. There are economic, political, and engineering
hurdles in the way, but none of these should be enough to stop the idea if we choose to pursue it. Once
a successful demonstration has been achieved, there may be enough interest in government or in
private industry to continue working toward fully-operational solar power satellites.
WNDI 2008 49
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Not Feasible - Too Much New Research / Breakthroughs
SBSP requires no new research or breakthroughs, it uses the same technology as a large
dam, all it requires are the political will and economic means to be put into practice
The SBSP Study Group found that Space-Based Solar Power is a complex engineering challenge, but
requires no fundamental scientific breakthroughs or new physics to become a reality. Space-Based
Solar Power is a complicated engineering project with substantial challenges and a complex trade-
space not unlike construction of a large modern aircraft, skyscraper, or hydroelectric dam, but does
not appear to present any fundamental physical barriers or require scientific discoveries to work.
While the study group believes the case for technical feasibility is very strong, this does not
automatically imply economic viability and affordability—this requires even more stringent technical
requirements.
WNDI 2008 50
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Not Feasible – General
All of your indicts come from outdated and illinformed sources. Underlying SBSP tech has
advanced by leaps and bounds and continues to do so ensuring viability
SBSP Study Group found that significant progress in the underlying technologies has been made since
previous government examination of this topic, and the direction and pace of progress continues to
be positive and in many cases accelerating. Significant relevant advances have occurred in the areas
of computational science, material science, photovoltaics, private and commercial space access, space
maneuverability, power management, robotics, and many others. These advances have included (a)
improvements in PV efficiency from about 10% (1970s) to more than 40% (2007); (b) increases in robotics
capabilities from simple tele-operated manipulators in a few degrees of freedom (1970s) to fully
autonomous robotics with insect-class intelligence and 30-100 degrees of freedom (2007); (c) increases in
the efficiency of solid state devices from around 20% (1970s) to as much as 70%-90% (2007); (d)
improvements in materials for structures from simple aluminum (1970s) to advanced composites including
nanotechnology composites (2007); and many other areas… The SBSP Study Group found that over a
decade has elapsed since a systematic study took a “fresh look” and clearly studied the current status
of component technologies.
WNDI 2008 51
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Not Feasible – General
There are already mass breakthroughs in underlying SBSP technologies and the simple
establishment of an organized SBSP development system can instantly identify more
The SBSP Study Group found that the underlying technical challenges related to SBSP areidentifiable and
technical challenge reduction pathways can be described.
• DoD and other ongoing U.S. Government and international R&D efforts are independently
reducing SBSP technical barriers via S & T development for other goals. However, there is no single
entity for identifying and tracking these independent developments for the sole purpose of SBSP
applicability.
• Numerous technological advances are emerging for each of the technical challenges (example:
entrepreneurial private space access ventures, highly efficient concentrator photovoltaics, very low-weight
thin-film photovoltaic systems, etc.).
WNDI 2008 52
Solar Power Aff
A2 : New Research Necessary / No Interest
The new development of the plan will ensure new breakthroughs and spur interest
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP development over the past 30 years has made little progress
because it “falls between the cracks” of currently-defined responsibilities of federal bureaucracies,
and has lacked an organizational advocate within the US Government. The current bureaucratic
lanes are drawn in such a way to exclude the likelihood of SBSP development. NASA’s charter and
focus is clearly on robotic and human exploration to execute the Moon-Mars Vision for Space
Exploration, and is cognizant that it is not America’s Department of Energy (DOE). DOE rightly
recognizes that the hard challenges to SBSP all lie in spacefaring activities such as space access, and space-
to-Earth power-beaming, none of which are its core competencies, and would make it dependent upon a
space-capable agency. The Office of Space Commercialization in the Department of Commerce is not
sufficiently resourced for this mission, and no dedicated Space Development Agency exists as of yet. DoD
has much of the necessary development expertise in-house, and clearly has a responsibility to look to the
long term security of the United States, but it is also not the country’s Department of Energy, and must
focus itself on war prevention and warfighting concerns.A similar problem exists in the private sector.
US space companies are used to small launch markets with the government as a primary customer
and advocate, and do not have a developed business model or speak in a common language with the
energy companies. The energy companies have adequate capital and understand their market, but do
not understand
the aerospace sector. One requires a demonstrated market, while the other requires a demonstrated
technical capability. Without a trusted agent to mediate the collaboration and serve as an advocate
for supportive policy, progress is likely to be slow.
WNDI 2008 53
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Timeframe
Our advantage will kick in immediately and development would require only 4 years
The SBSP Study Group found that individual SBSP technologies are sufficiently mature to fly a basic
proof-of-concept demonstration within 4-6 years and a substantial power demonstration as early as
2017-2020, though these are likely to cost between $5B-$10B in total. This is a serious challenge for a
capable agency with a transformational agenda. A proposed spiral demonstration project can be found in
Appendix B.
• No government or private entity has ever completed a significant space-borne demonstration,
understandable to the public, to provide proof-in-principle and create strategic visibility for the
concept (the study group did discover one European commercial consortium that was attempting to build a
MW-class in-space demonstration within the next 5 years). While a series of experiments for specific
component selection, maturation, and space qualification is also in order, a convincing in-space
demonstration is required to mature this concept and catalyze actionable commercial interest and
development. There are also critical concept unknowns that can only be uncovered by flying actual
hardware.
WNDI 2008 54
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Health/Saftey
The beam is more diffuse and does less damage than status quo kitchen microwaves
Because the microwave beams are constant and conversion efficiencies high, they can be beamed at
densities substantially lower than that of sunlight and still deliver more energy per area of land usage
than terrestrial solar energy. The peak density of the beam is likely to be significantly less than noon
sunlight, and at the edge of the rectenna equivalent to the leakage allowed and accepted by hundreds
of millions in their microwave ovens. This low energy density and choice of wavelength also means
that biological effects are likely extremely small,comparable to the heating one might feel if sitting
some distance from a campfire.
WNDI 2008 55
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Weaponization
The beam is useless as a weapon: it does no damage, is easily detectable and takes
numerous clearances to concentrate
The physics of electromagnetic energy beaming is uncompromising, and economies of scale make the
beam very unsuitable as a “secret” weapon. Concerns can be resolved through an inspection regime
and better space situational awareness capabilities. The distance from the geostationary belt is so vast
that beams diverge beyond the coherence and power concentration useful for a weapon. The beam
can also be designed in such a manner that it requires a pilot signal even to concentrate to its very
weak level. Without the pilot signal the microwave beam would certainly diffuse and can be designed with
additional failsafe cut-off mechanisms. The likelihood of the beam wandering over a city is extremely
low, and even if occurring would be extremely anti-climactic.
WNDI 2008 56
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Weaponization
SBSP will not be weaponized – Five Reasons

When first confronted with the idea of gigawatts of coherent energy being beamed from a spacebased solar
power (SBSP) satellite, people immediately ask, “wouldn’t that make a powerful weapon?” Depending on
their bias that could either be a good thing: developing
a disruptive capability to enhance U.S. power, or a bad thing: proliferating weapons to space. But the NSSO
is not interested in spacebased solar power as a weapon. 1. The DoD is not looking to SBSP for new
armaments capabilities. Its motivation for studying
SBSP is to identify sources of energy at a reasonable cost anywhere in the world, to shorten the logistics lines
and huge amount of infrastructure needed to support military combat operations, and to prevent conflicts
over energy as current sources become increasingly costly. 2. SBSP does not offer any capability as a
weapon that does not already exist in much less expensive options. For example, the nation already has
working ICBMs with nuclear warheads should it choose to use them to destroy large enemy targets.3.
SBSP is not suitable for attacking ground targets. The peak intensity of the microwave beam that
reaches the ground is less than a quarter of noon-sunlight; a worker could safely walk in the center of the
beam. The physics of microwave transmission and deliberate safe-design of the transmitting antenna
act to prevent beam focusing above a pre-determined maximum intensity level. Additionally, by
coupling the transmitting beam to a unique ground-based pilot signal, the beam can be designed to instantly
diffuse should pilot signal lock ever be lost or disrupted.4. SBSP would not be a precision weapon. Today’s
militaries are looking for more precise and lower collateral-damage weapons. At several kilometers across,
the beam from geostationary Earth orbit is just too wide to shoot individual targets—even if the
intensity were sufficient to cause harm. 5. SBSP is an anti-war capability. America can use the existing
technical expertise in its military to catalyze an energy transformation that lessens the likelihood of
conflict between great powers over energy scarcity, lessens the need to intervene in failed states which
cannot afford required energy, helps the world climb from poverty to prevent the spawn of terrorism, and
averts the potential costs and disaster responses from climate change. Solving the long-term energy scarcity
problem is too vital to the world’s future to have it derailed by a misconception that space solar power might
somehow be used as a weapon. That is why it is so important to educate people about this technology and to
continue to conduct the research in an open environment.
WNDI 2008 57
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Weaponization
Militarizing space prevents multiple nuclear wars
John J. Miller, Bradley Fellow at the Heritage Foundation 7/15/2002 National Review
That may sound like 21st-century imperialism, which, in essence, it would be. But is that so bad? Imagine
that the United States currently maintained a battery of space-based lasers. India and Pakistan could
inch toward nuclear war over Kashmir, only to be told that any attempt by either side to launch a
missile would result in a boost-phase blast from outer space. Without taking sides, the United States
would immediately defuse a tense situation and keep the skies above Bombay and Karachi free of
mushroom clouds. Moreover, Israel would receive protection from Iran and Iraq, Taiwan from China,
and Japan and South Korea from the mad dictator north of the DMZ. The United States would be
covered as well, able not merely to deter aggression, but also to defend against it.
Militarizing space means fewer weapons on Earth

For arms-control fanatics, however, space is a kind of sanctuary, and putting weapons in it poses an
unconscionable threat. U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan has called for ensuring “that outer space remains
weapons-free.” Theresa Hitchens of the Center for Defense Information warns of threats to “global
stability” and “the potential for starting a damaging and destabilizing space race.” With space, there’s
always the sense that weapons violate some pristine nature. This is clearly one of the sentiments behind
the Kucinich bill. Yet it is exactly wrong -- there should be weapons way up there because then there
will be fewer of them right down here.
WNDI 2008 58
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Weaponization
Space militarization is inevitable—its just a matter of who wins the race
James Oberg, space writer and a former space flight engineer based in Houston, 1999, Space Power Theory,
http://www.jamesoberg.com/books/spt/new-CHAPTERSw_figs.pdf
It is almost certain that sometime early in the 21st Century, the fielding of space-based weapons will
occur under the auspices of defense, in much the same manner as the nuclear weapon buildup that
occurred within the latter half of the 20th. And, like nuclear weapons, once fielded, there will be no
reversing course. This too is an historical lesson of warfare. As the world now grapples with the
proliferation of nuclear weapons that were once the province of superpowers, so too will it see the initial
weaponization of space be followed by increasingly sophisticated armaments as proliferation occurs there as
well. A sobering thought is the prospect that as launch costs go down per unit of mass, the opportunity for
other actors to put weapons into orbit about the Earth will go up. Given this prediction, what nation or
military force would shun the opportunity to prepare itself for the inevitable? And, if one’s charter is
the control of space, as is the US Defense Department’s, how can you be expected to enthusiastically
deny yourself the means to more competently conduct your mission? The directive to “ensure freedom of
action in space and, if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries”33 clearly conjures images of
space weapons. Although the caveat “consistent with treaty obligations,” somewhat blurs this directive, the
statement nevertheless maintains the effect of an open-ended clause under which the placing of weapons in
space is virtually assured.
WNDI 2008 59
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Weaponization
Militarizing space cements U.S. hegemony
In addition to an assortment of high-tech hardware, the United States could use an Alfred Thayer Mahan for
the 21st century. In 1890, Mahan was a captain in the Navy when the first edition of his book, The Influence
of Sea Power on World History, was published. Today it ranks among the classic texts of military theory.
Mahan argued that nations achieve greatness only if they dominate the seas and their various
geographic “pressure points,” holding up the example of the British Royal Navy. One of Mahan’s early
readers was a young man named Theodore Roosevelt, who began to apply these ideas while working in
the Department of the Navy during the 1890s, and later as president. Mahanian principles shook the
country loose from its traditional strategy of coastal defense and underwrote a period of national
dynamism, which included the annexation of Hawaii, victory in the Spanish-American War, and the
construction of the Panama Canal. No writer has clearly become the Mahan of space, though one candidate
is Everett C. Dolman, a professor at the Air Force’s School of Advanced Airpower Studies, in Alabama.
Dolman’s new book Astropolitik offers a grand strategy that would have the United States “endeavor at
once to seize military control of low-Earth orbit” and impose “a police blockade of all current
spaceports, monitoring and controlling all traffic both in and out.” Dolman identifies low-Earth orbit
as a chokepoint in the sense of Mahan -- anybody who wants access to space must pass through it. “The
United States should grab this vital territory now, when there’s no real competition for it,” Dolman tells
me. “Once we’re there, we can make sure the entry cost for anybody else wanting to achieve space
control is too high. Whoever takes space will dominate Earth.” Dolman would benefit from a political
benefactor. Mahan enjoyed the patronage of Roosevelt, who took a scholar’s ideas and turned them into
policies. Space has a number of advocates within the military bureaucracy, mostly among its younger
members. It does not have a political champion, with the possible exception of Sen. Bob Smith, a New
Hampshire Republican who has made the subject a personal passion. Smith calls space America’s “next
Manifest Destiny” and believes the Department of Defense should establish an independent Space Force
to serve alongside the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Smith, however, may not stay in the Senate much longer,
facing stiff political challenges at home. With the right mix of intellectual firepower and political muscle, the
United States could achieve what Dolman calls “hegemonic control” of space. The goal would be to make
the heavens safe for capitalism and science while also protecting the national security of the United
States. “Only those spacecraft that provide advance notice of their mission and flight plan would be
permitted in space,” writes Dolman. Anything else would be shot down.
WNDI 2008 60
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Attacks on SBSP
The US already has a number of satellites in orbit that would be damaging if the attack is
coming it is inevitable with SBSP or not
Attacks on every other energy source are more likely, SBSP satellites have multiple
redundancies builtin ensuring it could survive an attack and those with the tech and intel
to launch a functional attack have a greater stake in maintaining SBSP infrastructure
Certainly both the rectenna and satellite are vulnerable to attack, just like every other type of energy
infrastructure. However, it takes significantly more resources and sophistication to attack an asset in
geostationary orbit than it does to attack a nuclear power plant, oil refinery or supertanker on Earth.
The satellite is also very large and constructed of a number of similar redundant parts, so the attack
would need to be very precise. An attack on the receiving antenna would probably be the least value-
added attack, since it is a diffuse and distributed array of identical modular elements that can be
quickly repaired while the receiving station continues to operate. Nevertheless, the best routes to
security are a diversity and redundancy of clean energy sources, and a cooperative international regime
where those who are capable of damaging a SBSP system also have an interest in preserving the new
infrastructure for their own benefit.
WNDI 2008 61
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Attacks on SBSP
Even in the unlikely event of a successful attack it would have no impact on the system
Committee on Satellite Power Systems Electric Power From Orbit: A Critique of a Satellite Power System 1981
Large bases of operations in space are planned for low earth orbit by several nations during the next three or four
decades. Such bases would be vulnerable to low-altitude anti-satellite weapons. While SPS ground
manufacturing, launch, and rectenna sites would be vulnerable to military or terrorist attack, the entire
system would be so extensive and dispersed that the damage from such attacks would likely be no more than
that in the case of attacks on conventional terrestrial generating systems.
No One would attack SBSP systems they have too much of a stake in their existence
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers significant opportunities for positive international leadership
and partnership, at once providing a positive agenda for energy, development, climate, and space. If the
United States is interested in energy, sustainable development, climate change, and the peaceful use of space,
the international community is even hungrier for solutions to these issues. While the US may be able to afford
increased energy prices, the very availability and stability of energy is a threat to other countries’ internal
stability and ability for development. SBSP offers a way to bypass much terrestrial electrical distribution
infrastructure investment and to purchase energy from a reliable source at receiver stations that can be built
by available domestic labor pools without significant adverse environmental effects, including greenhouse gas
emissions.
WNDI 2008 62
Solar Power Aff
A2: Astronomic Interference

SBSP includes precautions that check Astronomic Interference
Some of the problems discussed in this section can probably be mitigated to a considerable degree
through various techniques, such as the use of special filters, nulling of the interfering signal, and the
siting of telescopes to provide the maximum amount of shielding by the terrain. Shielding from radiation
coming directly from an SPS satellite cannot be achieved, however. SPS satellite design and maintenance
standards of the highest quality would be vital in minimizing interference. No matter what measures were
taken, SPS satellites would preclude certain measures in certain portions of the sky.
WNDI 2008 63
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Environmental Damage
Lunar Launch and Construction checks any environmental damage
Both the cost and environmental impact of launches can be massively reduced long-term through the
use of lunar materials. In that scenario, only the facilities to mine the moon and convert these materials
into solar power satellites need be launched from Earth. It’s the difference between launching a car
factory, which is large, versus the millions of cars it produces, which is a lot bigger. SSP satellites can be
made largely of silicon and metals: silicon to convert sunlight to energy, and metals for structure, mirrors,
and the antenna. The Apollo program proved conclusively that the moon contains large quantities of
both. Launch from the moon requires far less energy than launch from Earth, because the moon is
much smaller and therefore exerts a much weaker gravitational pull. Also, geosynchronous orbit is 12,400
m/s from the Earth’s surface, but only 4,600 m/s from the surface of the moon. Of course, launch from the
moon would also have no effect on the Earth’s atmosphere. The Stanford/NASA summer studies (see
references on page 36) closely examined electromagnetic launch of materials from the moon, which requires
no fuel, only energy. This system, called a mass driver, could deliver millions of tons of material per year to
orbit. A mass driver works using electromagnetic forces to provide rapid acceleration, similar to the initial
startup of some roller coasters. On the moon magnetic buckets full of lunar materials ride an electromagnetic
wave generated by structures installed on the lunar surface. At just the right point, the buckets release their
payload and return for reuse. The payload is sent into space at very high speed with no fuel cost or
terrestrial environmental impact. Lunar materials must be converted into satellite components, a difficult
materials processing and manufacturing problem in an unfamiliar, unique environment. Some of the work,
such as mining, must be conducted on the lunar surface. Other work, such as assembly and test of solar
power satellites must be conducted in orbit. The rest of the work, materi-als processing and component
manufacture, will be divided optimally between these locations. To minimize the mass launched from the
moon, we may want to process the materials to eliminate the bits not needed in orbit. Because lunar dust is
small, sharp, and difficult to deal with, we may also wish to fuse the material to avoid launching lunar dust to
the orbital work site. Conversion of the processed materials into satellite components might best be done in
orbit since bulk materials can take a great deal of shaking and acceleration on launch, but more complex
components often cannot.
WNDI 2008 64
Solar Power Aff
Inherency / A2 : Command & Control CP
Because there is no specific mandate SBSP progress has been inhibited and decentralized
The SBSP Study Group found that no existing U.S. federal agency has a specific mandate to invest in
the development of Space-Based Solar Power. Lacking a specific mandate and clear responsibility, no
U.S. federal agency has an existing or planned program of research, technology investment, or
development related to Space-Based Solar Power. Instead, the responsibilities for various aspects of
SBSP are distributed among various federal agencies.
WNDI 2008 65
Solar Power Aff
A2: Ground Based Solar Power

Space Based Solar power produces far more energy and far less waste than solar power.
The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP appears to be an environmentally attractive option, but one that the
environmental community is largely unaware of or engaged with. If solar is considered “green” energy,
then SBSP could be considered the ultimate green energy. SBSP, if manufactured on Earth (and not in‐
space using lunar or asteroidal material), will of course have very similar manufacturing/pollution
impacts as ground solar—except that per unit of delivered energy, much less residual pollution needs
to be produced because much less solar collection area (and therefore solar collector materials) is
required with SBSP. While the advantages of a distributed grid of ground solar are clear, especially for peak
power during the middle of the day, space solar has several distinct advantages over ground solar, such
as its appropriateness for base‐load power (the minimum power required by the grid at all times). SBSP’s
primary environmental benefit is in the form of nearly carbon‐free, renewable energy.
Recommendation: The SBSP Study Group recommends engagement with representatives of several well‐
established national environmental organizations to determine general support levels for SBSP.
Geostationary SBSP experiences nearly continuous sunlight and therefore is available more than 99%
of the time and so does not incur the same difficulties of storage for terrestrial solar, which requires a
corresponding increase in overcapacity. Even considering the energy cost of launch, SBSP systems do
payback the energy to construct and launch. In fact, SBSP systems have net energy payback times (<1
year except for very small 0.5 GW plants) well within their multi‐decade operational lifetimes. Payback
times are equivalent and perhaps faster than terrestrial solar thermal power (Zerta et al, 2004). The
reason for this is that an equivalent area in space receives 8‐10 times the energy flux for the annual
average, and as much as 30‐40 times the energy flux in a given week than the same area located on a
favorable place on the ground after considering day/night, summer/winter, and dust/weather cycles. Prior
analyses suggest that the resulting energy payback (time to recover the energy used in deploying a power
system) for SBSP is equivalent to or less than (perhaps as little as ½) comparable ground solar baseload
power systems (which includes energy storage capacity for 24/7 usage, and pay back in 1.6‐1.7 years) Even
after losses in wireless power transmission, the reduced need for overcapacity and storage to make up
for periods of low illumination translates into a much lower land usage vs. terrestrial solar for an equivalent
amount of delivered energy.
WNDI 2008 66
Solar Power Aff
A2: Ground Based Solar Power

Ground Based solar power destroys biodiversity and farmland
Unlike terrestrial solar facilities, microwave receiving rectennas allow greater than 90% of ambient
light to pass through, but absorb almost all of the beamed energy, generating less waste heat than
terrestrial solar systems because of greater coupling efficiency. This means that the area underneath the
rectenna can continue to be used for agricultural or pastoral purposes. To deliver any reasonably
significant amount of base‐load power, ground solar would need to cover huge regions of land with
solar cells, which are major sources of waste heat. As a result, these ground solar farms would produce
significant environmental impacts to their regions. The simultaneous major increases to the regional
temperature, plus the blockage of sunlight from the ground, will likely kill off local plants, animals and
insects that might inhabit the ground below or around these ground solar farms. This means that that a
SBSP rectenna has less impact on the albedo or reflectivity of the Earth than a terrestrial solar plant of
equivalent generating capacity. Moreover, the energy provided could facilitate water purification and
irrigation, prevent frosts, extend growing seasons (if a little of the energy were used locally) etc. In the
plains of the U.S. (e.g., South Dakota, etc), in sub‐Saharan Africa, etc. etc. there are vast areas of
arable land that could be both productive farm land and sites for SBSP rectennas.
WNDI 2008 67
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Multilateral Counter-Plan
1. Doesn’t Solve our Hegemony advantage exporting the development of SBSP to a number
of different countries ensure that United States primacy and competition are doomed.
Impact is 1AC extinction evidence from Lieber 05.
2. International Input and Consultation are Normal Means for the development of SBSP
and the soft power gained for SBSP development is enough to change and legal problems or
international opposition
The SBSP Study Group found that no outright policy or legal showstoppers exist to prevent the
development of SBSP. Full-scale SBSP, however, will require a permissive international regime, and
construction of this new regime is in every way a challenge nearly equal to the construction of the satellite
itself. The interim review did not uncover any hard show-stoppers in the international legal or
regulatory regime. Many nations are actively studying Space-Based Solar Power. Canada, the UK,
France, the European Space Agency, Japan, Russia, India, and China, as well as several equatorial
nations have all expressed past or present interest in SBSP. International conferences such as the
United Nations-connected UNISPACE III are continually held on the subject and there is even a UN-
affiliated non-governmental organization, the Sunsat Energy Council, that is dedicated to promoting the
study and development of SBSP. The International Union of Radio Science (URSI) has published at least
one document supporting the concept, and a study of the subject by the International Telecommunications
Union (ITU) is presently ongoing. There seems to be significant global interest in promoting the
peaceful use of space, sustainable development, and carbon neutral energy sources, indicating that
perhaps an open avenue exists for the United States to exercise “soft power” via the development of
SBSP. That there are no show-stoppers should in no way imply that an adequate or supportive
regime is in place. Such a regime must address liability, indemnity, licensing, tech transfer, frequency
allocations, orbital slot assignment, assembly and parking orbits, and transit corridors. These will likely
involve significant increases in Space Situational Awareness, data-sharing, Space Traffic Control, and
might include some significant similarities to the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO)
role for facilitating safe international air travel. Very likely the construction of a truly adequate regime
will take as long as the satellite technology development itself, and so consideration must be given to
beginning work on the construction of such a framework immediately.
3. Multilateral Efforts will Fail

(1) They wouldn’t have the funding
(2) Disagreements over specifics would hamstring the effort LOST proves
(3) Most countries would say ‘No’
Even assuming that a multilateral approach was adopted, a private international enterprise (e.g., one similar to
the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization—INTELSAT) would still face formidable financial
and administrative obstacles. Construction of an SPS would be far more complex and more expensive venture
than deep-sea mining under the proposed Law of the Sea Treaty, and it may prove particularly difficult to
establish a sound institutional framework and management in order to raise the necessary capital and to
achieve equitable participation by the intended beneficiaries (See Chapter 3, section on “Financing an SPS”).
There is also the problem of long-deferred and, possibility, speculative return on investment.
WNDI 2008 68
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Multilateral Counter-Plan
4. Other Countries don’t have the technical capabilities to implement SPSB in enough to
avoid scarcity. Impact is Nuclear conflict that’s Advantage 1.
In spite of the major advances that China has made in developing its own space technology, it will be
many years before they can realistically contemplate building the off-Earth elements of a solar power
satellite, let alone a lunar-based system. Even if NASA administrator Mike Griffin is right and they do
manage to land on the Moon before the US gets back there in 2020, building a permanent base and a
solar panel manufacturing facility up there is beyond what can reasonably be anticipated. If the US
were to invest in space-based solar power it would not be alone. The Japanese have spent considerable
sums over the years on this technology and other nations will seek the same advantages described in
the NSSO study. America’s space policy makers should, at this stage, not be looking for international
partners, but instead should opt for a high level of international transparency
5. Permutation : Do Both
6. Multiple International Actor Fiat Bad

(a) Undermines Reciprocity – the Affirmative is limited to one actor by the resolution
and so should the negative to check massive structural negative bias
(b) Shreds Affirmative Ground and Justifies Abuse – allowing multiple international
actors allows them to fiat out of wars and all of our best offense based upon the reaction
of other countries.
(c) Functional Object Fiat – the rest of the world and international community are who
the affirmative is directing their action toward. Allowing them to fait those actors is no
different than fiating away affirmative harms.
(d) No Decision Maker – there is no decision making body that has the possibility of
choosing to orchestrate the rest of the world functioning in concert and the US.
(e) Not Real World – at no point in history has the rest of the world come together in
concert to pass such a specific policy making debate a meaningless exercise as it severs is
connection to real policy making.
(f) Multiple International Actors is a Voting Issue – the ground abuse has already
occurred in the 2AC because we had to withhold our best arguments and spend more time
on the counterplan to make up for it. There’s no way to give back time or strategy a ballot
is the only option. .
.

WNDI 2008 69
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Telecomm DA
Telecom no longer relies on satellite power and primarily uses fiber-optics
Eric R. Hedman The Space Review Feb 4 2008
The National Security Space Launch Report details the potential market for space launch through
2020. It projects a steady decline in the market through this time period. There are a number of reasons for
this. One reason is that satellites are being designed with higher capability and longer life requiring fewer of
them. Another reason is that more telecommunications traffic has moved from satellites to fiber optic
cables. The report is absolutely correct that if things continue without new markets of either tourism or new
technical applications, the space launch industry will wallow for decades.
SBSP will be developed to avoid interfering with telecomm

International Union of Radio Science URSI White Paper on Solar Power Satellite (SPS) Systems 2006
Another important issue concerning the space-based microwave antenna is the necessarily high
precision of the control of the beam direction. This is important for two reasons: to maximise the
energy transferred to the Earth; and to limit radiation in undesired directions, in order to avoid
adverse effects on existing telecommunications, passive radio-detection systems, and biological systems.
This goal may be achieved with the concept of a retrodirective array, in which the rectenna sends a
pilot signal to the SPS in order to indicate its position before the power beam is transmitted. This pilot
beam is then used to direct the power beam back along exactly the same path as the pilot beam: in the
retrodirective direction. The effect of this is to automatically remove perturbations to the direction of the
propagating beam, assuming that the perturbing factors along the propagation path do not change
during the round-trip transit time.
Initially it will help telecomm as they are hired to launch SBSP

M I Hoffert & S D Potter, October 1997, "Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World",
Extracted from "Solar Power Satellites: A Space Energy System for Earth", edited by Peter Glaser . Also
downloadable from http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam it down how the new satellites can power the
world.shtml
Despite the funding desert in the United States, work on solar power satellites has continued elsewhere. In
Japan, for example, leaders of the New Earth 21 program at the Ministry of Technology and Industry (MITI)
view space solar power as "an essential part in the proper control of CO2 levels." MITI has sponsored the
design of a kite-like orbiter that would travel in low earth orbit above the equator, with transmitting antennae
on the earthward face and solar collectors on spaceward faces. In the United States, commercialization of
space power will become a reality only if it can attract investment capital and succeed as a business.
Fortunately, the private sector seems eager to invest in the communications satellites that could provide
the vehicles for a solar power satellite. Motorola, for example, is putting $3.8 billion into Iridium, a
venture comprising 66 communications satellites in low earth orbit. Teledesic Corp.--a joint venture of
Microsoft chairman Bill Gates and cellular phone tycoon Craig McCaw of Mobile Telecommunications
Technologies--plans to spend $9 billion to deploy 288 satellites.
WNDI 2008 70
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Telecomm DA
In the long run it will help telcomm by developing new communications tech
The expertise gained in developing large structures for space based solar power could allw entirely ne
w technologies for applications such as image and real‐time surface and airborne object tracking servi
ces, as well as high bandwidth telecommunications, high‐definition television and radio, and mobile, br
oadcast services.
WNDI 2008 71
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Telecomm DA
SBSP helps telecom by boosting signals and increasing function
Dr. Bernard J. Eastlund and Lyle M. Jenkins
http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/139228.pdf 2008
Development of Space-Based Solar Power as a clean,renewable energy source for the world’s needs
isdependent on an evolutionary approach. Dual use ofsuch systems for weather research and control
willincrease the economic value of solar power satellites.Understanding the weather and computer simulationof storm systems is necessary
before attemptinginteraction to mitigate storms. When computer simulation can define storm interaction, the initial investment in space-based solar power can save livesand reduce
property damage. In the process, thefundamentals of Space-Based Solar Power aredemonstrated, leading to development of commication energy systems. This clean, renewable
energy sourcecan potentially reduce green house gases andconsequently global warming.With violent storms such as tornadoes, solutions havefocused early warning and on
development of fortifiedbuildings to withstand the strong forces that are the hallmark of these atmospheric events. Sophisticated prediction methods have been developed to
warnpopulations of potential storm danger. These "warn and seek shelter" mechanisms have clearly reducedthe loss of life and, to a lesser extent, property damage associated with
these natural events. However, despite our best efforts, loss of life and costly property damage are still strongly associatedwith severe weather phenomenon. Concepts are described
that use ground or spacebased platforms for generating beams of microwaveradiation to provide localized thermal heating or ionization of the atmosphere. These heating techniques
could be used as a research tool forimproving computer simulations of atmosphericphenomena. The ultimate goal is to utilize such tools for prevention of tornadoes. The experimental
techniques include heating of raindroplets with microwaves between 26 and 35 Ghz,heating of oxygen with microwave frequencies ofabout 55.2 Ghz and focusing microwave
radiationbetween 2.45 Ghz and 35 Ghz at various altitudes tocreate an artificial ionized plasma pattern in the atmosphere. The ability to create artificial ionized patterns can leadto
direct measurement of electrical parameters, suchas the electrical conductivity. Such experiments wouldhelp determine the importance of electrodynamic forces in severe storm
development. Methods are proposed for creating atmosphericionized plasma patches with ground based microwavephased arrays.These are focused on specificlocations in the
atmosphere. These plasma patchescan be used for obtaining time dependent diagnosticsof temperature and thermal transport as a function of time. The electrical conductivity of the
patches canlead to new diagnostics of localized electricalproperties in severe storms. Microwave heating oflocalized regions of the atmosphere can providetemperature perturbations
that spread via radiative or conductive transport. Diagnostics of this temperaturetransport process, with radiometry or other means, can provide valuable validation of the assumptions
andresults of computer simulations. The experimental technique is similar to "ink drop" experiments todetermine the diffusion of chemicals in a liquid. This can be applied to the
atmosphere to study heat transport and electrical properties. Creation of artificial ionization plasma patterns in the atmosphere can permit experimental study of the influence of
electrical phenomena on storm systemsand contribute to new computer simulations includingelectrodynamic forces. Such plasma patterns can alsobe heated with microwaves to
provide a unique newexperimental tool that can artificially generate acousticand gravitational waves in the atmosphere. Advanced computer simulations of severe weathersystems,
such as the Advanced Regional PredictionSystem (ARPS) code, require accurate boundarycondition information for application to real storms. Wind profiles as a function of altitude
are an essential input. Another potential application is hurricane simulation. Steering winds are crucial to the development and track of hurricanes. Microwaveheating can produce
localized high temperatureregions and aid the measurement of the wind velocityin those regions. Initially, inexpensive ground based microwave phasedarrays focused on specific
locations in theatmosphere, will be used to create the plasma patchand to heat the atmosphere. Initial experiments would correlate heating in a specific region of a weathersystem with
computer simulations of the weathersystem. Eventual applications include the dual use of solar power satellites to provide a green energysource for mankind while being capable of
applyingmicrowaves to generate plasma patches andpotentially control severe weather. .One concept is to prevent concentration of rotational energy in a meso-cyclone by heating the
cold rainydowndrafts within the storm. [Ref. 4]. If applied at the right zone with the appropriate intensity, the convective shears will be disrupted. The anticipatedresult is to eliminate
the death and destruction from tornadoes Experimentation with microwave beams in theatmosphere could lead to concerns about safety.
Themicrowavefluxrequiredforusefulheatingexperiments, or for weather modification can beaccomplished with local microwave flux on the order of5 milliwatts/ cm2[Ref. 6] which is
within the guidelines for home microwave oven emission. Nevertheless,because of public safety concerns, we would followthe recommendations of the National Academy of Science.
The National Academy of Science [Ref. 5] has published some guidelines for the conduct ofsevere weather mitigation research: -Theoretical modeling and simulation analysis of
thephysics, chemistry and biology of the relevantgeophysical, geochemical climate and ecologicalsystems-Study of potential for instability and chaos -Small–scale mitigation
experiments to determine physical, chemical and biological properties wherethey are known-Detailed design, development and cost analysis ofdeployment systems-Study of related
natural events to understand theirrelevant properties, including the statistics of their occurrence.-Studyof possibleecological, geophysical, geochemical and atmospheric side effects,
includingconsideration of reversibility. 3. WEATHERRESEARCHCONCEPTSArtificial Ionized Plasma Patterns in the Atmosphere as Experimental Tool Electrical conductivity
modification by creation of artificial ionization plasma patterns in the atmosphere can, for the first time, permit experimental study of electrical phenomena and contribute to new
computer simulations of electrical activity in severe weathersystems. Such plasma patterns can also be heatedwith microwaves to provide a unique new experimental tool that can
artificially generate acoustic andgravitational waves in the atmosphere. Artificial Ionospheric Mirrors have been studied sincethe 1980’s. The principal objective was to enable overthe
horizon communication.The power levels(109watts) to generate the fields were consideredprohibitively expensive. Consequently, no artificial Ionospheric mirrors have been
produced in anyportion of the atmosphere. Recently an approach hasbeen patented by Eastlund that takes advantage of the Sun’s cosmic rays to aid in producing the plasmapattern
[Ref. 3]. The cosmic particles can reduce the electrical breakdown field of the atmosphere by up to a factor of 40. This in turn will reduce the power required by a factor of 1600. It is
expected that the artificial ionized plasma patterns can be created usinginexpensive magnetron power beaming. An exampleof such a plasma pattern is shown in Figure 1. There are
They may aid intelecommunications to increase the function
several potential applications of theseartificially ionized plasma patterns.
of mobile phones or to enable over the horizon communications.The atmospheric heating capability may
be applied tospecific regions. Modifying electrical conductivity maybe accomplished in a controlled manner.
WNDI 2008 72
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Kritiks – SBSP Movement

Our affirmative defense of space based solar power is critical to a real world changing of
perceptions concerning space based solar power which is contributing to needless conflict
and poverty
SBSP is an anti-war capability. America can use the existing technical expertise in its military tocatalyze an
energy transformation that lessens the likelihood of conflict
between great powers over energy scarcity, lessens the need to intervene
in failed states which cannot afford required energy, helps the world climb from poverty to prevent the spawn
of terrorism, and averts the potential costs and disaster responses from climate change. Solving the long-
term energy scarcity problem is too vital to the world’s future to have it derailed by a misconception
that space solar power might
somehow be used as a weapon. That is why it is so important to educate people about this technology
and to continue to conduct the research in an open environment.
WNDI 2008 73
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Kritiks – Space  Consciousness Shifting

Colonization is key to a consciousness transformation
Frank White, author, 1987, The Overview Effect, p. 60-61
Thus, the lunar astronaut, in seeing so much more of the solar system and the universe than the orbital
astronaut, begins to sense that an underlying purpose may lie behind it all. This is the essence of a
“new psychology for a new civilization,” a recognition of what is important through an understanding
of who we are and where we are in the universe as a whole. Apollo astronaut Jim Irwin and others have
suggested that it is the contrast between the Earth and the moon that jolts astronauts into a different
awareness. The Earth is a water planet, beautiful, full of life, and hospitable to life. Perhaps the unique lunar
expedition experience belongs to Edgar Mitchell, who flew on the Apollo 14 mission and was the sixth man
on the moon. Just as Russell Schweickart’s experience is a model for the Overview Effect, Mitchell’s is a
good example of the Universal Insight. Significantly, the experience occurred while Mitchell was gazing at
the Earth. According to an article in Otnni magazine, On the way back from the moon, while contemplating
the earth, Mitchell had a “peak experience or a religious experience, depending on what word you want to
use.” It was an “explosion of awareness, an aha! a wow!” It was, apparently, what a religious person would
call a revelation. He came to realize that the universe is made up of spirit and matter but that they are not
separate. The bridge is consciousness. God is something like a universal consciousness manifest in each
individual, and the route to divine reality and to a more satisfying human, material reality is through the
human consciousness. In our interview, Mitchell said that he could now articulate his understanding of the
experience much better than when he was interviewed for the Omni article. He explained that his break-
throughs came from being completely open to the initial experience and then spending sixteen years
interpreting it. Today, he is close to developing a systematic structure for describing his experience with great
precision. In terms of its eventual implications, Mitchell sees spaceflight revolutionizing our value systems.
Spaceflight is one of the more powerful experiences that humans can have, and the technological event of
breaking the bonds of Earth is far more important than the technology that went into it, because of this
perspective Spaceflight, getting outside of Earth and seeing it from a different perspective, having this sort of
explosive awareness that some of us had, this abiding concern and passion for the well-being of Earth.., will
have a direct impact on philosophy and value systems. It’s got to be investigated far more thoroughly. 12
Schweickart’s experience was the foundation for the Association of Space Explorers, and Edgar Mitchell
founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences and is constructing an entirely new philosophical system based on
his experience. In this way, the impact of space on a single astronaut is amplified and magnified
throughout society and may affect the lives of millions… The universe is so enormous and awesome
that it becomes a unifying force in itself as more people become experientially aware of it. In addition, it
provides opportunities for humans to interact in wholly new and different ways. The space
environment will cause certain behavior patterns to mutate because they will become increasingly less
viable. Special factors in the environment may promote a form of thinking that will take humanity far
beyond the current understandings of unity and disunity, war and peace, competition and cooperation.
WNDI 2008 74
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Kritiks – Space  Consciousness Shifting

Space Colonization means a mass uniting of humanity a consciousness shift ending conflict
Isaac Asimov, visionary genius, 1985,
http://info.rutgers.edu/Library/Reference/Etext/Impact.of.Science.On.Society.hd/3/4
I have a feeling that if we really expanded into space with all our might and made it a global project, this
would be the equivalent of the winning of the West. It's not just a matter of idealism or preaching
brotherhood. If we can build power stations in space that will supply all the energy the world needs, then the
rest of the world will want that energy too. The only way that each country will be able to get that energy will
be to make sure these stations are maintained. It won't be easy to build and maintain them; it will be quite
expensive and time-consuming. But if the whole world wants energy and if the price is world cooperation,
then I think people are going to do it. We already cooperate on things that the whole world needs.
International organizations monitor the world's weather and pollution and deal with things like the oceans
and with Antarctica. Perhaps if we see that it is to our advantage to cooperate, then only the real maniacs will
avoid cooperating and they will be left out in the cold when the undoubted benefits come in. I think that,
although we as nations will retain our suspicions and mutual hatreds, we will find it to our advantage to
cooperate in developing space. In doing so, we will be able to adopt a "globalist" view of our situation. The
internal strife between Earthlings, the little quarrels over this or that patch of the Earth, and the
magnified memories of past injustices will diminish before the much greater task of developing a new,
much larger world. I think that the development of space is the great positive project that will force
cooperation, a new outlook that may bring peace to the Earth, and a kind of federalized world
government. In such a government, each region will be concerned with those matters that concern itself
alone, but the entire world would act as a unit on matters that affect the entire world. Only in such a way
will we be able to survive and to avoid the kind of wars that will either gradually destroy our civilization
or develop into a war that will suddenly destroy it. There are so many benefits to be derived from space
exploration and exploitation; why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise
the sure destruction of all that humanity has struggled to achieve for 50000 years? That is one of the reasons,
by the way, that I have come from New York to Hampton despite the fact that I have a hatred of traveling and
I faced 8 hours on the train with a great deal of fear and trembling. It was not only The College of William
and Mary that invited me, but NASA as well, and it is difflcult for me to resist NASA, knowing full well that
it symbolizes what I believe in too.
WNDI 2008 75
Solar Power Aff
A2 : Kritiks – Space  Ecological Consciousness Shifting

Space colonization leads to increased commitment to ecological preservation
*gender modified
Marshall Savage, Founder of the Living Universe Foundation, 1994, The Millenial Project, p. 267-268
Prophets of doom are currently in fashion. Some of these Cassandras strike me as being decidedly anti-
human. A few of them seem to think the world—even the universe—might be a better place without us.
This is so wrong. Humans are the source of all light: poetry, music, art, love, laughter, hope, dreams;
none of these would exist without us. Without us, the universe itself might not even exist. Reality may
depend on our consciousness to perceive it and give it tangible form. Without us, all might be without
form, and void; and darkness would remain upon the face of the deep. I believe that humans are good, and
that more humans are better. True, a population explosion, within the confines of a single ecosphere, is
certainly suicidal. But we need not remain restricted to our present land mass. We can expand. First,
into the unsettled frontiers of the world’s oceans. Then, into space. Once we are out of the bottle, we need
never turn back. As we expand our presence in space, the importance of Earth as the tap-root and well-
spring of all Life will become ever more compelling. Preserving and maximizing natural diversity and
ecological complexity is sure to become one of [hu]mankind’s top priorities. Within the next Millennium,
we will come into an era when the Earth is actually benefited by the growing magnitude of man s powers.
When we have entered such a phase, the continued growth of our species will become an unmitigated anti-
disaster. Our maturing powers will allow us to repair the ravages of the past. We can restore our
Mother planet to health and then protect her— forever.
Space colonization leads to a new ecological consciousness

Frank White, author, 1987, The Overview Effect, p. 123-124
As humans begin the task of building the new civilizations, we will continue to look inward and
outward, forward and back. There is a New Earth in the way we ourselves see it. No longer “the
world,” Earth is a planet, our “mother” in a real sense, and this implies a change for us. Apollo
astronaut Russell Schweickart said, “I viewed my mother quite differently when I was in the womb than I did
after birth. Afterward, I was able to take more responsibility for her. “2

File

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

File

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

WNDI 2008 1

Solar Power Aff

SOLAR POWER AFF

Soft Power Advantage…………………………………………………………………………………..……………23

Energy Scarcity Advantage

Warming / Environment Advantage

Warming / Environment Advantage – Cap / World Industry Shift……………………………….………………33-34

Nuke Power Advantage

Future Tech Advantage

SPACE BASED SOLAR POWER AFFIRMATIVE

1AC Inhrency (1/1)

1AC Energy Scarcity Advantage (1/4)

1AC Energy Scarcity Advantage (2/4)

1AC Energy Scarcity Advantage (3/4)

1AC Energy Scarcity Advantage (4/4)

Chinese instability means global nuclear conflict.

1AC Space Advantage (1/7)

1AC Space Advantage (2/7)

1AC Space Advantage (3/7)

1AC Space Advantage (4/7)

1AC Space Advantage (5/7)

1AC Space Advantage (6/7)

1AC Space Advantage (7/7)

1AC Hegemony / Competitiveness Advantage (1/3)

1AC Hegemony / Competitiveness Advantage (2/3)

1AC Hegemony / Competitiveness Advantage (3/3)

Hegemony Advantage – Troop & Re-Supply

Hegemony Advantage – Space Radar (1/2)

Hegemony Advantage – Space Radar (2/2)

Soft Power Advantage

SBSP development would massively enhance US soft power

Soft Power Advantage – A2: International Opposition

SBSP development catalyzes US space development and exploration

Space Advantage – Space Science

Space / Economy Advantage

Energy Scarcity Advantage

Energy Scarcity Advantage

Energy Scarcity Advantage

Warming Advantage 2AC

Risks of runaway warming threaten all life on the planet

Warming/Environment Advantage – Cap/World Industry Shift (1/2)

Warming/Environment Advantage – Cap/World Industry Shift (2/2)

Warming Advantage – A2: Biosphere Heat

Nuke Power Bad Advantage 2AC

Proliferation causes nuclear war

Economy Advantage – Jobs/R&D

Employment drives the economy

Economy Advantage – Space Manufacturing (1/2)

Economy Advantage – Space Manufacturing (2/2)

Economy Advantage – BizCon - A2: No Interest / Investment

Economy Advantage – A2: Spending Link

Economy Advantage - A2 : Spending Link

Farming / Economy Advantage

SBSP allows year round farming jumpstarting farming economies

SBSP would jumpstart farming and western American economies

SBSP would massively enhance humanitarian an UN nation-building efforts

Future Tech Advantage

Solvency – Government / Private Investment

A2 : Not Feasible - Too Much New Research / Breakthroughs

A2 : Not Feasible – General

A2 : Not Feasible – General

A2 : New Research Necessary / No Interest