Get documents about "Framework At alternatives
Shared by: liaoqinmei
-
Stats
- views:
- 7
- posted:
- 8/8/2011
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 131
Document Sample
HAYS DEBATE 1
Tournament Title
Solar Aff Index
Solar Aff Index ..............................................................................................................................................................1
***1AC***....................................................................................................................................................................3
1AC ...............................................................................................................................................................................4
***INHERENCY*** .................................................................................................................................................. 24
I – Fed incentives centralize ........................................................................................................................................ 25
I – Fed incentives centralize ........................................................................................................................................ 26
I – cost stops local ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
I – Price Parity now ..................................................................................................................................................... 28
I – solar market unpredictable ..................................................................................................................................... 29
I – Tax Credits Expire in 08 ........................................................................................................................................ 30
***ADVANTAGES – GENERAL/INTERNALS*** ................................................................................................ 31
CSP .............................................................................................................................................................................. 32
CSP Tradeoff with PV ................................................................................................................................................. 33
CSP BAD..................................................................................................................................................................... 34
UTILITIES .................................................................................................................................................................. 35
Utilities bad – local control.......................................................................................................................................... 36
Utilities Like Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 37
Utilities Hate Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 38
***CENTRALIZATION/DEMOCRACY ADV*** ................................................................................................... 39
***CAPITALISM ADV*** ........................................................................................................................................ 41
Solar Society good – Enviro impacts ........................................................................................................................... 42
AT – Market Solves ..................................................................................................................................................... 43
***SOLVENCY*** .................................................................................................................................................... 44
S – Fed Key ................................................................................................................................................................. 45
S – fed key movement / utilities .................................................................................................................................. 46
S – Fed Key ................................................................................................................................................................. 48
S – individual responsibility ........................................................................................................................................ 49
S – local control good .................................................................................................................................................. 50
S - Decentralization ..................................................................................................................................................... 51
S – community ownership/democracy/energy ............................................................................................................. 52
S – Solar Key ............................................................................................................................................................... 53
S – incentives key to stocks ......................................................................................................................................... 54
S – Decentralized lowers cost ...................................................................................................................................... 55
S – us leadership .......................................................................................................................................................... 56
S – feed-in tariff ........................................................................................................................................................... 57
S - human rights ........................................................................................................................................................... 58
S – distributed generation solves grid .......................................................................................................................... 59
S – CSE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 60
S - LDCs ...................................................................................................................................................................... 61
S - Economy ................................................................................................................................................................ 62
Now key....................................................................................................................................................................... 63
***FRAMEWORK*** ............................................................................................................................................... 64
Framework - imagination ............................................................................................................................................ 65
Framework - politics .................................................................................................................................................... 66
Framework – ROTB .................................................................................................................................................... 67
Revolucion! ................................................................................................................................................................. 68
***2AC ON CASE*** ................................................................................................................................................ 69
At - concentrators good ............................................................................................................................................... 70
2AC Coal Add-On ....................................................................................................................................................... 71
2AC Oil Add-on .......................................................................................................................................................... 72
Yes Storage .................................................................................................................................................................. 73
At electrolyzers fail ..................................................................................................................................................... 74
Storage - timeframe ..................................................................................................................................................... 75
2ac – Nuclear bad add-on ............................................................................................................................................ 76
Add-on magnifier – fossil fuels ................................................................................................................................... 77
Add-On – Hydrogen and Chemical industry ............................................................................................................... 78
AT Hydrogen solar = centralized ................................................................................................................................ 79
At Zoning..................................................................................................................................................................... 80
HAYS DEBATE 2
Tournament Title
AT Silicon ................................................................................................................................................................... 81
AT solar is supplementary ........................................................................................................................................... 82
At solar hurts environment .......................................................................................................................................... 83
AT Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................... 84
AT solar costly ............................................................................................................................................................ 85
***2AC OFF CASE*** .............................................................................................................................................. 86
DISADS ....................................................................................................................................................................... 87
2ac – AT DAs – plan solves all impacts ...................................................................................................................... 88
2ac – AT DAs – plan solves all impacts ...................................................................................................................... 89
K the DA - security ...................................................................................................................................................... 90
AT - investor confidence ............................................................................................................................................. 91
Politics – Bush opposes solar ...................................................................................................................................... 92
Politics – AT pub popularity........................................................................................................................................ 93
Politics – GOP supports plan ....................................................................................................................................... 94
2ac Uniqueness - solar investment inevitable .............................................................................................................. 95
2ac – plan solves heg ................................................................................................................................................... 96
AT military tradeoff DA .............................................................................................................................................. 97
COUNTERPLANS ...................................................................................................................................................... 98
AT States CP ............................................................................................................................................................... 99
AT States CP ............................................................................................................................................................. 100
AT States CP ............................................................................................................................................................. 101
AT States CP ............................................................................................................................................................. 102
AT States CP / AT State Bad K ................................................................................................................................. 103
AT Efficiency CP ...................................................................................................................................................... 105
AT Efficiency CP ...................................................................................................................................................... 106
AT Efficiency CP ...................................................................................................................................................... 107
AT Efficiency CP ...................................................................................................................................................... 108
AT R&D CP .............................................................................................................................................................. 109
AT regneg cp ............................................................................................................................................................. 110
AT regneg/utilities choose/market solves .................................................................................................................. 111
AT solar lease cp ....................................................................................................................................................... 112
AT power purchase agrmnt CP.................................................................................................................................. 113
AT WEC CP .............................................................................................................................................................. 114
AT RPS CP ............................................................................................................................................................... 115
AT International CP................................................................................................................................................... 116
KRITIKS ................................................................................................................................................................... 117
AT Capitalism/LanguageK ........................................................................................................................................ 118
AT K alternatives – law ............................................................................................................................................. 119
AT Alt solves case*** ............................................................................................................................................... 121
AT Nayar or global/local ........................................................................................................................................... 123
AT examine consumption prior / Tech bad ............................................................................................................... 124
AT anthro K ............................................................................................................................................................... 125
***NEG*** ............................................................................................................................................................... 127
Neg – big solar tech OK ............................................................................................................................................ 128
HAYS DEBATE 3
Tournament Title
***1AC***
HAYS DEBATE 4
Tournament Title
1AC
Contention 1 – Inherency
Massive Federal funding for solar power now – current incentives discriminate against
local ownership in favor of centralized solar concentrators – state policies cannot overcome
this bias
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 6-23-„8
[―U.S. Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership of Solar‖
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Sunlight falls everywhere, but America's pursuit of solar power is increasingly narrow. Before 2006, almost
all electricity from solar in the United States was generated by solar photovoltaic panels. But by 2012, almost
half of our on-grid solar electric capacity will be in ten concentrating solar thermal plants in the deserts of the
Southwest. Some observers believe the future of solar energy is centralization. They point to the lower price
of concentrated solar electricity promised by new plants. They confuse price and cost. Recently completed
centralized solar thermal-electric plants are similar in cost to decentralized PV projects. Centralized solar has
a lower price because federal solar incentives discriminate against decentralized and locally owned
residential rooftop installations and skew investment toward commercial projects This policy bias manifests
itself in two ways. The major solar power incentive is a tax credit. But to use a tax credit you must have tax
liability. So the Investment Tax Credit is a de facto incentive for non-residential installations, because the
average American isn't sitting on a lot of tax liability. To add to the homeowner's disadvantage, the federal
solar tax credit is capped for residential solar projects, but not for commercial ones. Take two people, both
wanting a 3 kilowatt (kW) solar panel on their roof. Bob is a business owner, and Harry a homeowner. The
total cost of the installation is $24,000. Bob gets $7,200 from the investment tax credit while Harry gets only
$2,000, just because he's putting the panels on his house. Bob can also depreciate his panel's value. State
solar policies offer support for residential solar, but these rarely offset the federal discriminatory incentives.
HAYS DEBATE 5
Tournament Title
Contention Two: Harms
A solar-based economy is inevitable – The only question is how federal government
incentives will shape the transition – current funding ensures that power will continue to be
centralized in the hands of corporations while individuals and communities are unable to
control energy production.
John Byrne, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy (CEEP) and Professor of Public Policy at
the University of Delaware and Noah Toly is a research associate and Ph.D. candidate in the Center for Energy and
Environmental Policy at the University of Delaware, „6 [―Energy as a Social Project: Recovering a Discourse
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Q_Iblir2udgJ:ceep.udel.edu/energy/publications/2006_es_energy_as_a_social
_project.pdf+Energy+as+a+Social+Project:&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a]
The second fastest growing renewable energy option—solar electric power—is proving more difficult to plug in. Despite steady declines
in the cost per kWh of energy generated by photovoltaic (PV) cells, this alternative remains a pricey solution by conventional standards.
Moreover, the technology does not appear to have significant scale economies, partly because the efficiency of PV cannot be improved
by increasing the size of the device or its application. That is, unit energy costs of large installations of many PV arrays do not deviate
appreciably from those for small installations comprised of fewer arrays. Instead, the technology seems to follow a modular economic
logic in which unit costs neither grow nor decline with scale. Some have praised this attribute, suggesting that PV‘s modularity
means there are no technical or economic reasons for scaling its application to iconic levels that conventional
power plants now represent, potentiating a more robust system of distributed generation and delivering clean
energy to previously marginalized populations (Martinot and Reiche, 2000; Martinot et al., 2002). Small-Is-
Beautiful Solar is attributed with social empowerment potential by Vaitheeswaran (2003: 314) who notes that
PV (and other small scale electricity generation technologies) can overcome social barriers through a
―collision of clean energy, microfinance, and community empowerment,‖ three properties that may lift the
burden of poverty and promote democratic social relations. ―Micropower,‖ he argues (2003: 314), ―is
beginning to join forces with village power.‖ Thus, it would seem that a Solar Society might depend upon a
different politics than Big Wind in displacing a fossil and nuclear energy driven world economy. 18
Transforming Power Perhaps because PV has, so far, found wider social usage in rural contexts where poverty (as modernly conceived)
persists, discussions, in fact, crop up about solar‘s social project. For example, arguments have formed around the gender interests of
PV, at least as it has been diffused in rural life to date (see, for example, Allerdice and Rogers, 2000). And criticism has surfaced about
PV‘s ‗capture‘ by the state as a tool to quiet, if not mollify, the rural poor (Okubo, 2005: 49 - 58). There has even been a charge that PV
and other renewables are being used by multilateral organizations such as the World Bank to stall Southern development. By imposing a
fragmented patchwork of tiny, expensive solar generators on, for example, the African rural landscape, instead of accumulating capital
in an industrial energy infrastructure, the World Bank and other actors are accused of being unresponsive to the rapid growth needs of
the South (Davidson and Sokona, 2002; Karekezi and Kithyoma, 2002). A related challenge of PV‘s class interests has raised questions
about the technology‘s multinational corporate owners and offered doubts about successful indigenization of solar cell manufacturing
(Able- Thomas, 1995; Guru, 2002: 27; Bio-Energy Association of Sri Lanka, 2004: 20). Regardless of one‘s position on these debates, it
is refreshing to at least see solar energy‘s possible political and economic interests considered. But PV‘s advocates have not embraced
the opportunities created by its rural examiners to seriously investigate the political economy of solar energy. The bulk of solar
research addresses engineering problems, with a modest social inquiry focused on issues of technological
transition in which solar electricity applications are to find their way into use with as little social resistance or
challenge as possible. A green politics that is largely unscarred by conflict is, and for a long time has been,
anticipated to characterize an emergent Solar Society (Henderson, 1988; Ikeda and Henderson, 2004).
Likewise, solar economics is thought to be consensual as non-renewable options become too expensive and
PV cells, by comparison, too cheap to be refused their logical role (see, for example, Henderson, 1995, 1996;
Rifkin, 2003). It seems that a solarized social order is inevitable for its proponents, with technological
breakthrough and economic cost the principal determinants of when it will arrive.
HAYS DEBATE 6
Tournament Title
Advantage 1: Centralization
Highly concentrated solar technology is only compatible with current forms of Centralized
energy production - ensures that communities and democratic participation remain
subordinate to technocratic interests.
Steven M. Hoffman, professor of political science at the University of St. Thomas, and Angela High-Pippert
associate professor of political science at the University of St. Thomas, „5 [―Community Energy: A Social
Architecture for an Alternative Energy Future‖ Bulletin of Science Technology Society 25; 387,
http://bst.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/25/5/387.pdf]
The evolution of the industrialized world‘s electrical system represents one of the great technological
achievements of the 20th century. The articulation of a grid-based system of electrical generation,
transmission, and consumption required groundbreaking technical accomplishments in electronics,
metallurgy, engineering, and myriad other scientific fields, as well as the development of complex
organizational and managerial systems. The grid also required a good deal back from society, including a
social structure that paralleled the technical requirements of the system. The greatest of these demands was
an autonomous decision-making system run by technical elites largely free from the world of democratic
citizenship. As pointed out by Lovins (1977) almost 30 years ago, the so-called hard path required a major
―social commitment under centralized management . . . and compulsory diversion [of resources] from
whatever priorities are backed by the weakest constituencies‖ (p. 54). Within the past 20 years, however,
technologies have emerged that present the opportunity for a distinctly new type of electricity system based
on a range of distributed technologies that were largely uneconomic experiments at the time Lovins first
proposed his so-called soft-path-alternative. Today, however, wind energy is a competitive alternative rapidly
maturing to the point of becoming a viable baseload option, solar technologies are rapidly declining in cost,
and fuel cells continue to be a promising alternative (Sawin, 2004). The maturation of these technologies has
sparked a good deal of conversation about a radically decentralized energy system that would embody an
equally distinct sort of democratic social apparatus. There are, however, important caveats that need to be explored as to
whether the development of distributed technologies necessarily presages a fundamental and parallel shift in the social organization of
the electricity system. That is, although distributed technologies are undoubtedly much more environmentally benign than coal, nuclear,
and large-scale hydro facilities, there is little proof that a distributed system even implies a more benign or fundamentally distinct type of
social order. In this respect, the idea of community energy, a term of choice for those seeking to further the development of distributed
technologies, oftentimes represents more of a rhetorical appeal than a call for a substantive change in the ongoing operation of the grid.
Mark Bolinger‘s (2004) examination of state-supported programs for community wind power development illustrates this issue. Based
on what can be referred to as a grid-integration model of distributed generation, Bolinger offers several criteria that might define a
community wind project, including project size, purpose, ownership, and interconnection. He ultimately settles on community wind as
being ―locally owned utility-scale wind development on either side of the customer or utility side of the meter‖ (p. 3). He then identifies
organizational structures typical of wind development, including a few ―owned by multiple local investors.‖ More common, however,
are projects owned by traditional commercial investors, wealthy private investors, or tax-motivated corporate investors that ultimately
―flip‖ the project back to a local investor after realizing the available tax benefits. Notably absent from Bolinger‘s analysis is the
consideration of citizenship, governance, democratic participation, or any other notion commonly associated with the identification,
development, or social construction of communities. At best, community is conflated with local ownership, though local is defined to
include only those projects capable of being grid connected. Makhijani‘s (2004) case study of a hypothetical wind project in New
Mexico is similar to Bolinger‘s. Wind‘s modest record of success is attributed to a variety of grid interconnection issues, including a
―lack of adequate transmission infrastructure, skewed rules for transmission and for integration of wind power into the electricity
market, and the imperfect pricing structure for wind electricity‖ (Makhijani, 2004, p. 2). According to Makhijani, Wind capacity
additions can be made . . . only if there is a well-developed transmission structure that connects high wind areas where the wind power
plants need to be built with a regional grid. This grid should have enough capacity to carry large amounts of power. The transmission
constraint is often a crucial one. (p. 4) Like Bolinger, Makhijani‘s analysis is silent on the issue of community
participation, ownership, governance, or any other issue that might bear upon the social implications of
distributed generation. Even authors who acknowledge the role of the public in the development of
distributed generation oftentimes do so in a very marginal fashion. Sawin‘s (2004) recent analysis of how to mainstream
renewable energy is representative of this tendency. Relevant to her scheme are five major categories of policy drivers: market access
and obligations, financial incentives, education and information dissemination, stakeholder involvement, and industry standards,
permitting, and building codes. Sawin also acknowledges that public participation in policy making, project development, and ownership
increases the odds of success and that policies need to be put into place that encourage individual and/or cooperative ownership of
renewable energy projects (pp. 34-44, 47). Little is said, however, regarding the extent of public participation, the various forms it make
take, the difficulties of educating a passive public, or any of the myriad other issues that might serve to limit public involvement.
Ignoring the social aspects of distributed generation is unfortunate, given the significant impact that
unreceptive community pressures might have on the development of the technology. The well-known Cape Cod
project, proposed for development just off the Nantucket shoreline, illustrates the problem. Although the environmental impact
statement (EIS) released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shows that the project will produce compelling public benefits with
positive environmental and economic impacts . . . for those who oppose that development and others because they don‘t like the
viewshed changes, no report showing protection of habitat and wildlife will ever meet their standards. (E-Cubed, 2005) According to
Penn Future, such opposition derives from a number of factors, including the use of inadequate, poorly presented, and/or incomplete
information, the failure to recognize local costs, and the failure to counter the NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard) argument (E-Cubed, 2005;
HAYS DEBATE 7
Tournament Title
see also Seelye, 2003). Despite such hazards, the current literature, as well as most of the work being undertaken
by the policy and advocacy community, is largely centered around a grid-connection model that emphasizes
distinctly technocratic issues, that is, the problem of interconnection, the need to produce larger machines that can
be more easily integrated into the grid, the development of financial mechanisms that assure profitability to
local landowners, and so on. It is, in other words, a model of distributed generation that largely maintains the essentials
of a grid-based system of electricity generation and consumption, the only difference being the type of
electricity-generating machine, while steadfastly ignoring the societal implications and possibilities of the technology.
HAYS DEBATE 8
Tournament Title
Participatory democracy and community control over energy production is the only
alternative to war and genocide.
Jerome Scott, Director of Project South: Institute for the Elimination of Poverty & Genocide and Walda Katz-
Fishman, board Chair of Project South and prof @ howard univ..10-26-„4 [―Popular Democracy - a vision for our
movement‖ http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/7600]
When people talk about "democracy" we immediately think of "democracy for whom?" It's really important to say whose interests
democracy serves - the interests of the rich and powerful or the interests of working and poor people. We, of course , are struggling
for a democracy that puts the needs, interests and voices of all working and poor women, children and men at
the center of the process - and this is what we call popular democracy. When we look deeper into popular
democracy several principles and processes emerge as essential for understanding and organizing in our
current moment - equality, participatory decision-making, struggle and liberation. Equality means the equal
sharing and access to all the resources and goods and services we must have to satisfy our material,
intellectual, cultural and spiritual needs. It also means that all people are valued and treated equally and have
equal rights regardless of race/ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexuality, age and disability, etc. Going from the
extreme polarization of today's wealth and poverty to equality among all peoples is an ongoing process as
well as an essential principle of popular democracy. Participatory decision-making involves full bottom-up
and active participation in making decisions that affect the lives of all of us - but especially of working and
poor people. The involvement of those most adversely affected is key to this process. For this to happen we
must all prepare ourselves through practice, education and information gathering and then come together to
share our analysis and reach collective agreements. Struggle is the real fight we are in for our very lives
against those who are pushing us into joblessness, poverty, homelessness, hunger, violence, incarceration,
war and death. It is like being in a burning building and being chained to the walls and floor. Our struggle to beat these odds, to
collectively break free and to survive and thrive is what drives us. Our independent path to fundamental social change is rooted in our
vision of another world and a strategic plan to get there. Liberation is what we are fighting for. It is what we will have when we are truly
in control of our own collective destiny as working and poor peoples around the world. We will have full access to the resources, the
goods and services necessary for a quality life - and this is within our reach because today's electronic technology makes it possible to
create a vast abundance of all the goods and services we need. We will also be in control of decision-making as we reorganize society -
locally, nationally and globally - to value all people and our human rights and to respect nature and the ecological system we share on
this earth. Popular democracy has no economic exploitation, political and cultural oppression, poverty,
genocide or war and militarism. Rather, it is the opposite - it embodies and expresses the principles and
processes of equality, participatory decision-making by all, our struggle to be free and liberation for humanity. Democracy =
electoral politics ...What's wrong with this picture? The big lie? The American revolutionaries in 1776 thought they had arrived at
"democracy" because they had defeated the British monarchy. Little did they know that the capitalists - the rich and powerful - had other
plans. Who "took power" - who voted, held political office, and had the major say in all important decisions - was this economic elite,
not the people who were the majority of those who had fought and won. Democracy has often been equated with electoral politics. We
believe it is much more and this is why. To begin with, in the early days of the United States voting was the privilege of the exclusive
few - white men who owned property - about 15% of all the American people. Working people of all racial/ethnic groups, including and
especially peoples of color, and women were denied the right to vote and participate in the political process. During reconstruction - the
brief period following the Civil War and before Jim Crow or southern apartheid was the law of the land - black men gained the vote. But
with Jim Crow southern blacks and working class whites were again excluded from voting. American women - primarily white women -
won the right to vote with the ratification of the 19th amendment in 1920. Most African Americans and other oppressed racial and ethnic
peoples finally got the vote with passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Even voting rights - the most minimal of democratic rights -
were won for the vast majority only after intense political struggles and popular movements, e.g., the Civil War, the women's suffrage
movement and the modern civil rights movement. Today many immigrants - documented and not - are also in a struggle for their voting
rights. Also in a fight for voting rights are the 1000s of ex-felons who are currently denied the right to vote even after "serving their
time." When the US Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo in 1975 that money equals free speech and this is "democracy," they
made clear the class/wealth nature of the US political and electoral system. Our struggle for participatory democracy must be part of a
struggle for a political, economic and cultural system that values all people rather than maximizing profits and transforms power
relations fundamentally. From colony to empire - the world's people strike back It took a long time - 500+ years - to perfect the evil of
today's US empire. Rich white men - mostly slave owners - articulated a vision for post-colonial America in the late 1700s of manifest
destiny. What this meant was their pursuit of absolute control and domination of the entire North American continent south of Canada
and from ocean to ocean primarily through military might. They set about the business of accomplishing this task through the genocide
of millions of indigenous inhabitants of the continent and the stealth of the land and resources. They also enslaved millions of Africans
and African descent peoples whose labor generated untold value and wealth. The additional exploitation of all working women, children
and men further sealed the deal. With the declaration of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, the US ruling class laid claim to the entire western
hemisphere as their sphere of influence. This set the basis for the Mexican American War in which the US grabbed all of Mexico north
of the Rio Grande in 1848, fulfilling the vision of the early elite to extend the US territory from "ocean to ocean." In the Spanish
American War of 1898 - at the turn of the 20th century - the US finally gained some "colonial" and "neocolonial" possessions. Cuban
resistance to direct occupation was so powerful the US had to make it a neocolony - but with rights to have a permanent US military
presence at Guantanamo Bay. The US also annexed Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines; but Philippine resistance was also strong
and the Philippines became another US neocolony. Throughout our history the American peoples have struggled against political and
cultural domination and economic exploitation by a small rich and powerful elite - from indigenous resistance, the abolition and black
liberation struggles to labor, women's and immigrant workers' struggles, and the fight for equal and human rights for all, etc. In the 20th
century the American people have fought for and won many reforms and new laws that we are seeing eroded and eliminated in the 21st
century. Labor laws in the 1930s granted workers' rights to some workers - mainly white men. Civil rights laws recognized the rights of
racial/ethnic peoples and women in the 1950s-60s and made it illegal to discriminate. The anti-poverty laws expanded the social safety
net for working and poor people, including people of color and poor women in the 1960s-70s. And environmental laws in the 1970s-80s
HAYS DEBATE 9
Tournament Title
led to greater environmental protections. We have voted and elected to office politicians we thought would serve our interests. And
some, with great bottom-up popular pressure, supported policies that improved our condition, at least for the time being. But we have
never won a transformation of fundamental power relations and gotten rid of the overwhelming interests of the rich and powerful in the
political, economic and cultural system that shapes our daily lives. The earliest forms of political repression and economic exploitation -
genocide and slavery, forced labor and poverty - continue to be expressed in today's property and wealth privilege, white supremacy,
male and heterosexual dominance, and anti-immigrant prejudices and practices. The welfare state reforms - flawed though they were - of
the 20th century have been transformed into the growing police state and prison industrial complex at home and empire and war around
the globe. In the 21st century electronic age of globalization and neoliberalism we find many of the reforms of the 20th century - laws
and policies we fought so hard to win - rolled back or gone altogether. Throughout US history the rich and powerful have indeed
practiced and experienced a "democracy" that serves their needs and interests. But for working and poor women, men and youth of all
racial/ethnic peoples here and around the world, US democracy is a myth that has been used to set in motion wars of conquest and
occupation abroad and perpetuate the big lie that "this is the best of all possible worlds" at home. Working people have never held power
and had access to the resources, goods and services needed for a full and satisfying life. Once every four years we get to vote for one of
two pre-selected representatives of the ruling class. Never have we had the opportunity to vote for a candidate who truly represents
working peoples' interests. What would this look like? Today's movement moment - winning popular democracy & keeping it Today our
movement is challenged to learn for these lessons of our history and struggles and to chart a path to a victory that we can win and hold
onto. We think there are two key lessons for this moment - "how we build our movement" and "why it's possible to build our movement
and win." How we build our movement Too often in the past our movement has not recognized as important or tried to embrace, practice
or struggle around the principles and processes of popular democracy for building our bottom-up movement for justice, equality and
liberation. This has resulted in a lack of sufficient internal struggle around the privileges of wealth, white supremacy, legal status, male
dominance, heterosexism, language, ability and age, etc. This has kept us divided and has weakened our movement. Clearly in this
movement moment we must challenge and struggle against all forms of privilege and oppression within our movement, as well as in the
larger society, and move forward together on the basis of equality and collectivity. A related task is to develop a broad and diverse
collective leadership so that our movement is not dependent on a single "leader" or "founder." How we build our movement is the very
foundation of the new society we are struggling to bring into being. So we must walk the talk - or we will not be able win. Why it's
possible to build our movement and win The second key lesson is that the electronic technology now available to humanity
can provide for the material and cultural needs of our communities world over. In the past we struggled to reform an
unjust and unequal system, but one that was based on material scarcity. We did not have within our grasp the real solution to the
problem of how to meet the needs of all humanity. To collectively share the resources and things we need and realize our principle of
equality truly requires abundance - so all of us can get what we need. Today's new technology - automation, robotics, computers,
digitization, etc. - makes it possible to have an abundance of all the goods and services we need - food, housing, education, health care,
transportation, cultural expressions and time for family and friends. The technology is also available to do this in a safe
and sustainable way that respects the total environment we live in and share with nature. This abundance
means an end to scarcity and an end to the inequality and power domination that comes with it and that we
have known too long. For us popular democracy - equality, participatory decision-making, struggle and
liberation - is an essential set of organizing and educating principles and processes for growing our
movement for justice, equality and liberation and for transforming our society and reconstructing the new
world we are visioning and fighting for. Make it happen!
HAYS DEBATE 10
Tournament Title
Support of decentralized solar technologies is crucial for participatory democracy – local
control creates a connection between energy production and consumption -
Steven M. Hoffman, professor of political science at the University of St. Thomas, and Angela High-
Pippert associate professor of political science at the University of St. Thomas, „5 [―Community Energy: A
Social Architecture for an Alternative Energy Future‖ Bulletin of Science Technology Society 25; 387,
http://bst.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/25/5/387.pdf]
The idea that a distinctive type of social architecture could accompany a decentralized system of energy
production is not new. More than 30 years ago, Lovins (1977) argued that a soft path premised upon renewable and
small-scale technologies would mean that ―everyone can get into the act, unimpeded by centralized
bureaucracies, and can compete for a market share through ingenuity and local adaptation‖ (p. 50). Duedney and Flavin (1983)
offered a similar possibility for a radically localized system of energy production and consumption, claiming that a decentralized system
of distributed technologies necessarily implied that localities will be much more . . . dominant. . . . Heat for buildings in North America
will come from the rooftops, not from the Middle East. . . . Energy production will thus reinforce rather than undermine local economies
and local autonomy. (pp. 306-307) The ―increased cost and decreased availability of raw materials . . . the extraordinarily rapid
development of new technologies . . . [and] the electronics revolution‖ would, in David Morris‘s (1982) words, allow cities to become
―self-reliant‖ (p. 220). More recently, Morris (2001) has maintained that ―customer-owned utilities are more democratic,
located closer to customer-citizens and therefore more responsive to their values.‖ What is needed, says
Morris, are new ―power rules [that] not only nurture the capacity for self-reliance but for citizenship‖ (p.
7). Scott Ridley (1998) has offered a similar perspective on the advantages of locally controlled, if not necessarily locally owned, power
systems. According to Ridley, community energy systems are likely to be ―publicly accountable, non-discriminatory, nonprofit, subject
to open meeting and ethics laws, and oriented toward advancing economic development and the public.‖ This view is echoed by the
American Public Power Association (www.appanet.org), which argues that ―community ownership and democratic governance provide
wide latitude to make decisions that best suit local needs and values, as well as changing market conditions.‖ Community energy is
also seen by many advocates as a major step in bringing about a necessary transition to a more
environmentally benign electricity system. Paul Fenn (1999), author of the Massachusetts ―community
choice‖ legislation, for instance, has suggested that local control is the sole means of making the switch to
the clean and reliable forms of energy required to solve the nation‘s energy dilemma. A central element in the
realization of this radically decentralized idea of distributed generation is the establishment of a clear link between local generation and
local consumption. The California Energy Commission (2001), for instance, argues that a distributed generation system must be
understood as ―electric generation connected to the distribution level of the . . . grid usually located at or near the intended place of use.‖
Under this scenario, attention would be focused on building an integrated community energy system featuring a multiplicity of
technologies, that is, some wind, some solar, some fuel cells, and so on, that would provide redundancy and a high degree of energy
security. The aim of the local power manager would be to create a system scaled to the needs of local users; maximizing revenues to the
owners of the generating units, whether local or distant, would be a secondary concern. The grid would serve as backup in the event of
catastrophic interruptions or as a place to sell excess capacity through a net metering regime. Again, the California Energy Commission
is clear on this point when it argues that ―distributed generation can be used as a primary source of electricity, essentially reducing or
even eliminating reliance on the utility for electric service.‖ In sum, local power advocates believe that ―most people
want to understand their own systems and feel responsible for their own destinies, not be mere economic
cogs‖ (Lovins, 1977, p. 91). Furthermore, not only do people want to participate in such decisions, they are,
according to Lovins, ―qualified and responsible to make these and other energy choices through the
democratic political process‖ (p. 99). Finally, advocates argue that more environmentally benign choices will
almost certainly flow from enhanced public participation in that people will want to make choices that do the
least harm to themselves, their families, and their communities. This model of distributed generation differs
in fundamental and important ways from the grid-integration model. Establishing a linkage between local
generation and local consumption, for instance, turns decisions about the structure of the energy system
into a social process rather than a series of individual or entrepreneurial actions, thus making the ultimate
success of distributed energy at least partially dependent on issues of civic culture and society‘s capacity to
support or nurture community-based decision making. Seen in this light, how to motivate citizens to
participate in community energy projects, how that motivation can be sustained and cultivated, how citizens
might use community energy projects to expand the meaning and boundaries of democratic citizenship, and
what institutional forms might best serve the goal of democratic participation are questions that rival the
importance of interconnection and financial profitability. As Lovins (1977) noted, the most important, difficult, and
neglected questions of energy strategy are not mainly technical or economic but rather social and ethical. They will pose a supreme
challenge to the adaptability of democratic institutions and to the vitality of our spiritual life.4 (p. 59) What Do the People Really Want?
To a great extent, then, community energy advocates in the Lovins, et al. tradition believe that the primary problem obstructing
the full development of distributed generation is not the development of economically and environmentally
superior technology but the institutionalization of strategies and methods that can effectively engage and
then communicate the reality of energy choices to fully functional citizens. Yet, as pointed out above, the assumption
that most people want to and are fully qualified to make fundamental energy choices through a democratic political process is hardly
indisputable (Hibbing & Theiss-Morse, 2002).
HAYS DEBATE 11
Tournament Title
Decentralization and local control of solar energy is the only hope for participatory
democracy
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
Although most citizens have not yet recognized these truths, today‘s battles are about the social control of
energy, including solar energy—about the struggle to shape a clean and decentralized, productive system that
will live up to its democratic potential. The program of the devotees of fossil-fuel is a formula for further
concentration of wealth and power: keep society hooked on petroleum and uranium; delay the solar transition
until the oil and gas are too costly to recover; then burn up the coal and slap a meter on the sun. The antidotes
to perpetual fossil-fuel dependency are democracy and community self-reliance, along with respect for good
design and skilled work.84 If citizens are to transcend their dependency on fossil fuels, they must learn to use
their intelligence to live within their means.We have the technical means now to provide all of the power we
need for a sustainable world. Democracy is a false promise if it does not include the power to steer the energy
economy. In Who Owns the Sun? we have argued that the new solar technologies make it possible to
maintain human society with constantly diminishing use of fossil fuels. However, to turn the tools of a solar
transition over to utilities and fossil-fuel corporations, which is the present policy of the government and
mainstream environmental organizations, is to guarantee that the coming Solar Age will arrive a century
behind its time, and that it will be every bit as autocratic as today‘s fossilfuel economy.We believe that a
solar revolution will necessarily occur at the expense of the private energy monopolies, and that such a
revolution will not take place without a passionate public fight for more democracy and more participation.
Since the sun shines everywhere and is free for the harvesting, solar energy is inherently democratic, if
ordinary citizens are allowed develop and control the tools that utilize sunlight where it falls. People have an
unalienable right to the solar energy that they collect on their rooftops. In the process of establishing the
political and economic means for widespread adoption of renewable technologies, solar energy can help
bring back that taste of happiness that people feel when they control their own resources and their
community‘s economic destiny. Just as the people have unequivocally said no to nuclear power and toxic
wastes, they must now organize to say yes to solar. Public, local control of energy generation, storage, and
distribution is the essential basis for a democratic solar economy. Just as war is too important to leave to the
generals, energy is too important to leave to private monopolies. For the original vision of democracy to be
realized at last, all of us must have our place in the sun.
HAYS DEBATE 12
Tournament Title
Contention 2: Entropy
Fossil fuel consumption is at the root of capitalist exploitation
Elmar Alvater, Prof of PolySci @ Free University of Berlin, „6 [―The social formation of capitalism, fossil
energy, and oil-imperialism.‖ Centre for Civil Society Colloqium on the Economy, Society and Nature:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/Altvater%20energy%20imperialism.pdf]
In order to better understand the indispensable dependence of modern capitalist societies on fossil fuel and
particularly on oil it makes sense to briefly consider the advantages of fossil fuels for capitalist accumulation.
In general terms the Energy Return on Energy Input (EROEI) is very high. For, the entropy of this energy
source is very low, the energy concentration very high so that it is energetically possible, to produce a high
surplus. Fossil energy is a thick energy source, whereas solar flows may be described as a thin form of
energy. Therefore it seems so as if fossil energies are the origin of and responsible for the creation of surplus
value in a capitalist system. However this is not the case. A physical surplus and economic surplus value are
so different as use values and exchange values, as the physical barrel of oil and the futures quotation of that
barrel at the Chicago stock exchange. The misunderstanding of physical and value processes induce some
ecologists to reproach Marx with a certain negligence of the ―value of nature‖ in the process of value-
production (e.g. Immler 1984; Bunker 1985, Deléage 1989). But this rebuke only is relevant insofar as the
labour process is concerned. Of course, nature is as important as labour in processing matter and energy into
needed use values. In the course of the process from input to output man and nature work together; they are
both equally important. But as a process of exchange value production it is only labour which creates value
and surplus value. The reason which mostly is misunderstood by the critics of the Marxian concept of nature,
is the following one: nature is wonderfully productive – the evolution of species in the history of the planet
and their tremendous diversity and variety show it. But nature is not value-productive because it produces no
commodities to be sold on the market. There is no market in nature. The market is a social and economic
construct. The most beautiful bird or a very old tree in a tropical rain forest or the iron ore in a mine are no
commodities; they only are changed into commodities by a process of valorisation (Inwertsetzung; mise-en-
valeur). It is labour which performs the metamorphosis of nature into commodity. But it is not labour as
such, labour sans phrase, but labour power spent under the social condition of value and surplus value-
production (Altvater 1992: 250ff; similarly Burkett 1996: 64). Because of the low entropy and the high
energy intensity of fossil fuels they are apt to enormously help increase the production of use values in a given
time period (and thus of labour productivity). This is a general characteristic of any production system in human history. But only since
the product produced is sold as a commodity against money and those producing the commodity are getting wages which are claims that
cannot buy back the whole product, and since those who control the reproduction process compare the surplus with the capital outlays
the economic surplus appears in the social form of surplus value. From the viewpoint of energy analysis the production process may
look very different as compared with the viewpoint of commodity- and value-analysis. Juan Martinez-Alier mentions with regard to the
different perspectives: ―The productivity of agriculture has not increased, but decreased, from the point of view of energy analysis‖
(Martinez-Alier 1987: 3); but in terms of commodity- production in agriculture and in terms of return on invested capital the
productivity has increased. Therefore it is possible for Dutch agricultural producers to compete with Mexican producers of horticultural
products such as eggplants on the North-American market (Maya 2005). They simply do not take the full costs of fossil energy inputs
into account. In history the transition to industrial systems and to the predominant use of fossil energies is much
more dramatic than that which transformed societies of hunters and gatherers into a social order of sedentary
agricultural systems. It is a revolutionary break in the history of the societal relation of human beings to
nature because it is no longer the flow of solar radiation which serves as the main energy supply for the
system of production and the satisfaction of human needs, but the use of the mineralised stocks of energy in
the crust of the earth. The greatest expansion of human demand for natural resources followed the Industrial Revolution during the
latter half of the 18thand the first half of the 19thcenturies. One of the main advantages of fossil (and to a minor extent nuclear) energies
for capitalist accumulation in comparison with other energies is the congruence of their physical properties with the socioeconomic and
political logics of capitalist development: Firstly, the patterns of space and place change. The location of energy
resources is no longer the main reason for the location of manufactures or industries. For, it is simple to
transport energy resources to any place in the world. The fossil energy system spreads itself far and wide by
creating logistical networks which today cover the globe. It is so to say ―autopoetic‖, for it allows the
transport of energy to remote places of the Earth and thus draws them into the fossil system. Energy supply
therefore is only one factor amongst many others in decisions about where production is to take place. The
availability of local sources of energy has only a minor impact on the competition for locations of
manufactures and industries in the global space. Secondly, and in contrast to solar radiation, which changes
its intensity between day and night and with the rhythms of the seasons, fossil energies can be used 24 hours
a day and 365 days a year with constant intensity. They allow the organisation of production processes
independently of social time schedules, biological and other natural rhythms. The time regime of modernity
follows the logics of profitability and that of the optimisation of shareholder value. The reason is that fossil
energies can be stored and consumed without reference to natural time patterns, and only in accordance with
HAYS DEBATE 13
Tournament Title
the timetable which will optimise profits. ―Time is money‖ (Benjamin Franklin) therefore appears not as a
crazy statement but as an adequate norm for human behaviour in ―modern times‖. Moreover, fossil energies
allow the extreme acceleration of processes, i.e. the ―compression of time and space‖ (Harvey 1999; Altvater
and Mahnkopf 1996/ 2004). In other words: they allow an increase in productivity, i.e. the production of
more commodities within a given time span or the reduction of the time span for the production of the same
amount of products. Since time and space are the coordinates of nature in which we live, their compression is
a serious neglect of the natural conditions of work and life. Thirdly, fossil energies can be used very flexibly
with regard to the quantities of energy consumed or the temporal distribution and spatial location of
consumption. The development of electricity networks and of the electro-motor, the illumination of whole
cities at night, the inventions of the gasoline and diesel-motor are decisive steps for an increasingly flexible
use of energy-inputs, for the mobilisation and acceleration of economic processes and for an individualisation
of social life which never before in human history existed. Now, managerial decisions can follow the logics
of profitability for capitalist firms without needing to take into account energy restrictions or spatial and
temporal constraints. Therefore, accumulation and growth must be understood as increasingly independent
from natural conditions and their limitations. These advantages of fossil energy for the capitalist system make them
indispensable. The congruence of capitalism, fossilism, rationalism and industrialism is perfect. Fossil energy would not have played the
decisive role which it has done since the industrial revolution without the social formation of capitalism and its all- encompassing
dynamics. Four forces since then drove the highly dynamic development: (1) the ―European rationality of world domination‖ (as Max
Weber called it), (2) the ―great transformation‖ to a disembedded market- economy – the theme of Karl Polanyi, (3) the dynamics of
money in the social form of capital (as Marx analysed it) and (4) the use of fossil energies which became the fulfilment of a (by Nicolas
Georgescu-Roegen) so called ―promethean revolution‖, comparable to the Neolithic revolution several thousand years ago, when
mankind discovered how systematically to transform solar energy into crops etc. by establishing sedentary agricultural systems. This
ensemble of aspects of the fossil energy regime gives us not only an impression of the ingredients of its dynamics, but also of the width
of approaches of social sciences which must be applied in order to understand the functional mechanisms of the fossil energy regime, of
the formation of social relations based on the massive use of fossil energy and of a fossil culture, most visible in the dominance of
automobiles in modern societies.
HAYS DEBATE 14
Tournament Title
Capitals only limit is the life conditions of earth itself – transition to solar society restores
ENTROPY as the natural arbiter of our energy consumption patters – this is crucial to
prevent limitless exploitation of natural resources
Elmar Alvater, Prof of PolySci @ Free University of Berlin, „6 [―The social formation of capitalism, fossil
energy, and oil-imperialism.‖ Centre for Civil Society Colloqium on the Economy, Society and Nature:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/Altvater%20energy%20imperialism.pdf] [gender modified]
Without a continuous supply and massive use of fossil energies modern capitalism would be locked into the
boundaries of biotic energies (wind, water, bio-masses, the power of muscles etc.). Although capitalist social forms had already
put down some weak roots in ancient societies (in Europe as well as in Latin America and Asia), these could not flourish because of an
insufficient technological basis and because of the lack of fossil energy. The entropy of energy sources was too high as to allow
considerable surplus production. Therefore growth was limited, and in fact the average growth rate was nearly zero before the industrial
revolution of late 18th century which propelled growth rates to more than 2 per Cent annually until the end of the 20 th century (Maddison
2001). World population also has increased faster than ever before. In pre-capitalist and pre-industrial times economic growth was
dependent on population growth which, in turn, depended – this was the rationale behind Malthus‘ theory – on the supply of goods and
services for subsistence and reproduction. But since the industrial revolution economic growth became independent on population
growth due to an enormous productivity increase and the concomitant increase of the production of relative surplus value. Therefore,
contrary to Malthus predictions and according to the optimistic massage of Adam Smith and David Ricardo per capita incomes also
increased with the widening and deepening of the division of labour. Angus Maddison in an OECD study showed that in the first
millennium after Christ, from 0 to 1000 AD, world population grew at an average annual rate of 0,02% from 230,8 million to 268,3
million. Between 1000 to 1820 the number increased to 1041,1 million. GDP per capita followed a similar trend: in the first millennium
from 0 to 1000 AD there was a slight decrease from an average of $444 to $435 per person per year (in the 1990 equivalent dollar
standard which Maddison uses 3 Entropy and life conditions In view of these numbers the question comes up: is growth possible for
ever, is growth ―triumphant‖ (Easterlin 1998)? The answer has to be ―No‖, because nothing on earth grows eternally without any limits.
The limits of growth belong to the life conditions, to the laws of evolution on the planet Earth, and they are a
direct consequence of the limits of fossil resources which are fuelling the growth-engine. Although the
accumulation of capital and growth are nearly entirely powered by fossil energy (and thus dependent on an
isolated system of finite resources) human and natural life in general is almost entirely dependent on solar
radiation (i.e. on the influx of solar energy into an open system). Daylight, the warming of the atmosphere, of
the waters and the soils, the growth of living beings, the provision of food, etc. are the result of solar
radiation and only to a small extent that of the use of fossil energy consumption. The satisfaction of primary
human needs only is possible by using energy in the form of organic foods (containing proteins, fats,
carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals; water) and in a transformed manner as clothing and shelter - not to
speak about the availability of oxygen. The consumption of fossil energy has repercussions on the man
[human]-nature-relation. The increase of entropy and the associated irreversibility of all processes make up
history. Since capital is following a logics of reversibility and circularity (capital is ―selfreferential‖), the
natural and the capitalist time-and-space-regime are not compatible. Capital has to appropriate the surplus
and invest this surplus again into the production process, which at the end will again result in the
appropriation of a growing surplus. The compulsion to aim a surplus is inescapable, if production processes
have been financed with credits and debt service has to be paid. The performance indicators of capital
indicate very clearly the circularity and reversibility of the flow of capital within the relationship between
results and outlay. Profitability, marginal efficiency of capital, return on capital, profitability, shareholder
value and other indicators clearly demonstrate that the rationality is based on a Weberian rationalist
comparison between the means i.e. investment and objectives, i.e. profit. In contrast, natural processes of
transformation of matter and energy as well as the natural growth process of living beings like plants and
animals are characterised by irreversibility. This follows ultimately from the law of entropy. At the end of the
process there is something qualitatively new (in the rationality of reversibility the quality remains the same,
whereas the quantity of the same quality must grow). This qualitatively new product cannot be reproduced
with the same energy or matter, thus the stocks of energy and matter are used until their depletion, unless
new energy and new matter are supplied from outside the planet Earth.
HAYS DEBATE 15
Tournament Title
Capital justifies exploitation in the name of social and economic SELF-PRESERVATION -
The impact is extinction and every impact imaginable
Deborah Cook, Professor of Philosophy, University of Windsor, 200 ‟6, ―Staying Alive: Adorno and Habermas on
Self-Preservation Under Late Capitalism.‖
In the passage in Negative Dialectics where he warns against self-preservation gone wild, Adorno states that
it is ―only as reflection upon … self-preservation that reason would be above nature‖ (1973, 289). To rise
above nature, then, reason must become ―cognizant of its own natural essence‖ (1998b, 138). To be more
fully rational, we must reflect on what Horkheimer and Adorno once called our underground history (1972,
231). In other words, we must recognize that our behavior is motivated and shaped by instincts, including the
instinct for self-preservation (Adorno 1998a, 153). In his lectures on Kant, Adorno makes similar remarks
when he summarizes his solution to the problem of self-preservation gone wild. To remedy this problem,
nature must first become conscious of itself (Adorno 2000, 104). Adopting the Freudian goal of making the
unconscious conscious, Adorno also insists that this critical self-understanding be accompanied by radical
social, political, and economic changes that would bring to a halt the self-immolating domination of nature.
This is why mindfulness of nature is necessary but not sufficient to remedy unbridled self-preservation. In the
final analysis, society must be fundamentally transformed in order rationally to accommodate instincts that
now run wild owing to our forgetfulness of nature in ourselves. By insisting on mindfulness of nature in the
self, Adorno champions a form of rationality that would tame self-preservation, but in contrast to Habermas,
he thinks that the taming of self-preservation is a normative task rather than an accomplished fact. Because
self-preservation remains irrational, we now encounter serious environmental problems like those connected
with global warming and the greenhouse effect, the depletion of natural resources, and the death of more than
one hundred regions in our oceans. Owing to self-preservation gone wild, we have colonized and destabilized
large parts of the world, adversely affecting the lives of millions, when we have not simply enslaved or
murdered their inhabitants outright. Famine and disease are often the result of ravaging the land in the name
of survival imperatives. Wars are waged in the name of self-preservation: with his now notoriously invisible
weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was said to represent a serious threat to the lives of citizens in
the West. The war against terrorism, waged in the name of self-preservation, has seriously undermined
human rights and civil liberties; it has also been used to justify the murder, rape, and torture of thousands. As
it now stands, the owners of the means of production ensure our survival through profits that, at best, only
trickle down to the poorest members of society. Taken in charge by the capitalist economy, self-preservation
now dictates that profits increase exponentially to the detriment of social programs like welfare and health
care. In addition, self-preservation has gone wild because our instincts and needs are now firmly harnessed to
commodified offers of satisfaction that deflect and distort them. Having surrendered the task of self-
preservation to the economic and political systems, we remain in thrall to untamed survival instincts that
could well end up destroying not just the entire species, but all life on the planet.
HAYS DEBATE 16
Tournament Title
Shift to a solar economy is the only alternative to nuclear war and extinction – our plan
entails a sustained critical analysis of modern energy systems
John Byrne, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy (CEEP) and Distinguished Professor of
Public Policy at the University of Delaware and Noah Toly is a research associate and Ph.D. candidate in the
Center for Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Delaware, „6 [―Energy as a Social Project:
Recovering a Discourse http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Q_Iblir2udgJ:ceep.udel.edu/energy/publications/
2006_es_energy_as_a_social_project.pdf+Energy+as+a+Social+Project:&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=fire
fox-a]
From climate change to acid rain, contaminated landscapes, mercury pollution, and biodiversity loss,2 the
origins of many of our least tractable environmental problems can be traced to the operations of the modern
energy system. A scan of nightfall across the planet reveals a social dilemma that also accompanies this
system‘s operations: invented over a century ago, electric light remains an experience only for the socially
privileged. Two billion human beings—almost one-third of the planet‘s population—experience evening
light by candle, oil lamp, or open fire, reminding us that energy modernization has left intact—and
sometimes exacerbated—social inequalities that its architects promised would be banished (Smil, 2003:
370 - 373). And there is the disturbing link between modern energy and war.3 Whether as a mineral whose
control is fought over by the powerful (for a recent history of conflict over oil, see Klare, 2002b, 2004,
2006), or as the enablement of an atomic war of extinction, modern energy makes modern life possible and
threatens its future. With environmental crisis, social inequality, and military conflict among the significant
problems of contemporary energy-society relations, the importance of a social analysis of the modern
energy system appears easy to establish. One might, therefore, expect a lively and fulsome debate of the
sector‘s performance, including critical inquiries into the politics, sociology, and political economy of
modern energy. Yet, contemporary discourse on the subject is disappointing: instead of a social analysis of energy regimes, the
field seems to be a captive of euphoric technological visions and associated studies of ―energy futures‖ that imagine the pleasing
consequences of new energy sources and devices.4 One stream of euphoria has sprung from advocates of conventional energy,
perhaps best represented by the unflappable optimists of nuclear power who, early on, promised to invent a ―magical fire‖ (Weinberg,
1972) capable of meeting any level of energy demand inexhaustibly in a manner ―too cheap to meter‖ (Lewis Strauss, cited in the New
York Times 1954, 1955). In reply to those who fear catastrophic accidents from the ―magical fire‖ or the proliferation of nuclear
weapons, a new promise is made to realize ―inherently safe reactors‖ (Weinberg, 1985) that risk neither serious accident nor
intentionally harmful use of high-energy physics. Less grandiose, but no less optimistic, forecasts can be heard from fossil fuel
enthusiasts who, likewise, project more energy, at lower cost, and with little ecological harm (see, e.g., Yergin and Stoppard, 2003).
Skeptics of conventional energy, eschewing involvement with dangerously scaled technologies and their ecological consequences,
find solace in ―sustainable energy alternatives‖ that constitute a second euphoric stream. Preferring to redirect attention to smaller, and
supposedly more democratic, options, ―green‖ energy advocates conceive devices and systems that prefigure a revival of human scale
development, local self-determination, and a commitment to ecological balance. Among supporters are those who believe that
greening the energy system embodies universal social ideals and, as a result, can overcome current conflicts
between energy ―haves‖ and ―havenots.‖ 5 In a recent contribution to this perspective, Vaitheeswaran
suggests (2003: 327, 291), ―today‘s nascent energy revolution will truly deliver power to the people‖ as
―micropower meets village power.‖ Hermann Scheer echoes the idea of an alternative energy-led social
transformation: the shift to a ―solar global economy... can satisfy the material needs of all mankind and
grant us the freedom to guarantee truly universal and equal human rights and to safeguard the world‘s
cultural diversity‖ (Scheer, 2002: 34).6 The euphoria of contemporary energy studies is noteworthy for its
historical consistency with a nearly unbroken social narrative of wonderment extending from the advent of
steam power through the spread of electricity (Nye, 1999). The modern energy regime that now powers
nuclear weaponry and risks disruption of the planet‘s climate is a product of promises pursued without
sustained public examination of the political, social, economic, and ecological record of the regime‘s
operations. However, the discursive landscape has occasionally included thoughtful exploration of the
broader contours of energy-environment-society relations.
HAYS DEBATE 17
Tournament Title
Plan: The United States federal government should substantially increase incentives for
decentralized solar-generated electricity production by removing the residential cap on the
Investment Tax Credit and increasing production incentives for locally-owned
photovoltaics.
HAYS DEBATE 18
Tournament Title
Contention 3: Solvency
Changing federal incentives is crucial for allowing local control – market cannot solve the
transition
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The argument over solar technology often centers on bang-for-the-buck. But the economics of solar power –
like most energy sources – reflect government subsidies. Thus, the most appropriate question is ―who
benefits from public policy?‖ Good energy policy spreads the taxpayer-funded benefits widely, and better
energy policy allows citizens to participate in crafting their energy future. With solar PV, individuals can
own their source of renewable power, taking greater responsibility for their energy use. Local ownership
also confers additional economic benefits to the community, reduces transmission costs, and enhances grid
stability. The solar market is changing rapidly, and better public policy can level the playing field between
decentralized and centralized technologies, spreading the benefits of the solar boom more equitably.
The Solar Market: Present and Future Concentrating solar electric plants were first built in the California
desert during the late 1980s. After an almost 20 year gap, two new plants were installed in 2006 and 2007,
adding 61 megawatts (MW) of new capacity. Concentrating solar plants are typically economical only at
large-scale, so despite the intermittent construction of large plants, overall capacity has kept pace with the
steady growth of solar PV. Between 2008 and 2012, it is expected that nearly 300,000 decentralized solar
PV power plants will be installed1 compared to 8 centralized CSP plants. Yet the new concentrating plants
will produce 30% more electricity than the new PV plants. Figure 1 shows installed electricity capacity of
solar PV and concentrating solar in the United States.2 Data for 2007-2012 is estimated based on
extrapolating the past decade of growth (solar PV)3 or from announcements of planned projects
(concentrating solar).4 Solar Incentives Despite diverse available technologies for solar energy
production, solar producers – like most energy producers – still require various government and utility
incentives to compete with existing methods of electricity production. The myriad incentives from the
federal government, states, and utilities reduce the cost of solar electricity and, in most locations, these
incentives favor centralized, commercial-scale solar installations.
Congress should increase production incentives for local control of solar energy
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The competitiveness of absentee owned, centralized solar power plants is in part a result of technological
developments; but, in larger part it is the result of a public policy that discriminates against locally owned,
decentralized solar arrays. The federal solar tax incentives are the primary culprit, offering far greater
incentives for commercial than for residential arrays. Some solar companies have introduced a work-around
of this obstacle for residential installations by installing a company owned array and selling the electricity to
the resident, but it would be far better if Congress would change the tax incentive to give equal benefits to
residential arrays owned by homeowners. Public policies affecting solar development should balance the
desire to increase solar power production with the many benefits of decentralized solar projects. Removing
the residential cap on the Investment Tax Credit would reduce the bias toward commercial power. And
changing federal incentives from tax credits to production incentives could reduce technological biases,
while still supporting increased solar power production. Furthermore, these changes would increase other
benefits, such as transmission cost reductions, increased local ownership and enhanced energy security.
Ownership can change the perspective of citizens by creating energy producers instead of energy
consumers, as well as unlocking a deeper interest in energy efficiency and local energy solutions.
HAYS DEBATE 19
Tournament Title
A national incentive structure is necessary – patchwork of state regulations ensures that
local energy producers have no power to negotiate with utilities
Vijay Vaitheeswaran, Global Correspondent for The Economist, „3 [Power to the People: How the Coming
Energy Revolution will Transform an Industry, Change our Lives, and Maybe Even Save the Planet. Pg. 40-41]
Reformers want governments to sweep away unfair advantages that prop up the established order through
taxation, regulation, and technological standards. The development of micropower can be seriously impeded
by the distorted taxation and subsidy of dirty and inefficient forms of energy. Many big coal-fired power
stations around the world face no "carbon" taxes on their emissions; even worse, many of them benefit from
fat subsidies. In' Europe, such subsidies sometimes come directly from taxpayers; in the U.S., they come
through waivers that exempt old power stations from the latest environmental regulations. Tax codes may
also discriminate openly against micropower. Fuel cells, for example, attract unfavorable depreciation rates
in some countries. Such perverse incentives mean that micropower has never been given a chance to establish
itself. The second snag that outrages reformers is the lack of uniform standards. One significant advantage
of micropower is that it can allow generator owners to become producers as well as consumers – selling
surplus electricity back to the grid when they do not need it. That requires clever electronic control systems,
which now exist. But it also requires commonly accepted standards. Few countries, though, have national
codes governing interconnections to their power grids. As a result, manufacturers and owners of micropower
units have to deal with myriad and sometimes contradictory rules whenever they want to negotiate the right
to buy and sell power. An official report from America's Department of Energy acknowledged that
established incumbents can all too easily thwart newcomers by citing bogus safety concerns, imposing
lengthy approval processes, or demanding outrageous fees. The DOE experts say that harmonizing standards
and acting more vigorously against such anticompetitive practices is essential. Finally, say fans of petite
power plants, several important technical improvements need to be made. Today's antiquated grid - designed
decades ago when power essentially flowed from big power plants to distant consumers - must be upgraded
so that it can handle tomorrow's more complex, multidirectional flows. Yet in many markets, especially the
United States, politicians have failed to give adequate financial incentives to grid operators to make these
investments. Advances in software and electronics will play a key role in enabling micropower, offering new
and more flexible ways to link different electricity systems. But first, regulators need to encourage the
entrenched operators of the world's power grids to adopt modern command, control, and communications
software that will facilitate the connection of any power device to the grid.
HAYS DEBATE 20
Tournament Title
Contention 4: Role of the Ballot
Vote aff to demand political change – your decision is a necessary voice in the creation of a
movement for a solar society – the ballot‟s intellectual endorsement of the plan allows
recourse to the federal governments current refusal of decentralized solar energy.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Supporters of solar energy will have to learn from their own experience: motivation will not be strengthened
by practising selfrestraint and taking small steps, but by aggressive demand for big steps, and the claim to
represent the allencompassing alternative and not merely an additional element of energy supply. Such a
claim would mark the transition from being one aspect of the old energy system to the concept of being a
new energy system bringing with it a new system of economy and society the transition from "solar tactics" to a solar
strategy. Great alternatives are easier to mobilize than those that are too small. it is a widespread misconception that small political steps
are generally easier to achieve than large ones. If the solar alternative is to succeed, the prevailing, tenacious smallmindedness
surrounding vital issues must be overcome with the tools of social psychology. This, in turn, will generate demands and challenges to the
political institutions to realign their priorities, not only for existing energy policies but, in general, along the lines of introducing solar
energy and no longer to see themselves as mere patrons and sponsors of the energy industry. Those political institutions which
have predominantly adopted the patterns of thought and action of the present energy industry are unable to
fulfill their responsibilities to the energy system as a whole. Similarly, the political possibilities and responsibilities will
be wasted if they are downgraded to a departmentlevel responsibility. As long as decisions are being made on financial, agricultural,
construction, transportation, technology, economic, local, development and foreign policies without taking the energy system into
account, political institutions will he incapable of solving the essential questions . All individual sectors, departments and
policies must consciously see themselves as links in the all-encompassing chain of alternative energy.
Cabinets really should he energy cabinets in order to make certain that future decisions by all departments
and at all levels are made for the benefit of a solar energy system that assures survival and not just as an
afterthought, but as a matter of top priority. Aconstruction or agricultural ministry, for example, can make a greater
immediate contribution to a new energy system than an environment or energy ministry. A big city or region that accomplishes the
transformatioiv to solar energy to the extent recommended here could start an avalanche by such an example and, with it, could cause
political changes far beyond its own borders. New strategies cannot be carried out by old methods. Part of a solar strategy must
be a new understanding of political action, and new decision-making structures and processes that explode
currently accepted frames of reference. Only in this way will political institutions be able to tap solar energy's
potential. So far neither the political institutions, including parliaments, nor the political parties have
achieved the required strategic and organizational level. Experience teaches that the upheaval needed to
achieve practical, individual and institutional political action never comes about as the result of dialogue and
rational insight (with some exceptions, but their room for manoeuvre remains limited as long as the other
structures remain stuck in anachronisms). Without political propulsion from outside, far too little happens on
the starting blocks of political responsibility. The political institutions that remain constrained by powerful
special interests groups must be brought round to the idea of repressing special interests that damage the
common good, and actually assert the constitutional legitimacy which entitles them and diem alone to make
such decisions. Attempts to do this will succeed only if public support is mobilized. Such support can be
enlisted by a public debate about energy that opens ears and reveals the contradictions, and not via the
constantly invoked "energy consensus" that expects the supporters of solar energy to deal reasonably with the
representatives of the unreasonable, destructive energies. The Movement for the New Century Only
increased public pressure and independent initiatives within society will ensure that solar energy unfolds
fully in time. A new movement for a new century must arise to exert that kind of pressure with all the means
provided by democratic constitutions including the option of voting out of office those who refuse to turn the
key to the door leading away from nature's destruction and towards new economic and social development.
The idealistic, spiritual and intellectual potential for such a movement exists now much of it in the classical ideas
contained in the major ideological currents, as they have crystallized in recent historical periods and have led to the creation of political
parties. The problem is that these fundamental ideas are hardly identical any more with political reality as manifested by today's political
parties, which have turned into conglomerates of more or less contradictory ideas and interests. The conventional wisdom that it is
essential to demonstrate unity leads to the situation that the persistent forces of inertia continuously grind down any new initiatives to the
point of unreeogniaability. The official. idealistic creeds are used to tie the hands of the truly concerned by those who no longer believe
in them and who have made their peace with the dominating power constellations. Anyone who prefers integration into the present
energy system cannot point to any sort of hopeful future for the weakest the growing number 206 207of unemployed, people
in the developing countries and children, all of whom are facing devastated environments. At least those political parties which are based
on notions of social improvement will not come through unchanged: a solar strategy is the opportunity to revive the ideal of social
justice and the principle of selfdetermination. The social movement that emanated from the Industrial Revolution must no longer, as the
Italian founder of the "Manifesto" Group, Luciana Castellina, put it, "limit itself to the search for new ways of more efficient production
and more equitable distribution, of a larger amount of the same things, organized around the same product and consumption goals, but it
must look for new technological possibilities to produce other things and, most of all, to arrive at another way of life."206 This requires
a new material basis, and that is provided by a solar energy system. Solar energy is the pivotal point, for the transition from an "irrational
HAYS DEBATE 21
Tournament Title
must
materialism"207 to a rational materialism. Experience teaches that the impulses and challenges necessary for this transition
come from an extra-parliamentary movement. Such a determined commitment on behalf of a solar strategy
can unleash new forces. It is clear today clearer than it was in the 1970s that there exists an alternative
capable of political and economic mobilization, and it is this basis that would provide strength for a
sociocultural movement on behalf of solar energy. It can set out a concrete and comprehensive alternative.
Such a movement will he able to achieve the radical cultural change to a new spiritual and intellectual state
of mind in society, from which new political initiatives would emerge, as well as new entrepreneurial points
of departure, a new architecture and innumerable individual decisions for the use of energy, and all this without
constant demands for financial help first. In Switzerland, the "Solar 91" effort has triggered a widespread citizens' movement which
wished to mark an historic turning point to a new age on the occasion of that republic's 700th anniversaiy.208 This activism spurred
many solar activities, especially at a local level. In Austria, a new grassroots movement is in the process of formation among ordinary
citizens, who are constructing thousands of solar facilities with the help of local "selfhelp groups". Popular referenda in some countries,
such as Italy, have halted nuclear power use, at least domestically. If the political institutions do not adapt on their own to an
ecologically based survival strategy, despite the practical possibilities, efforts should he made to initiate and conduct popular referenda
to force the shift to solar energy by democratic means for example, by imposing a "Solar Penny" levy to finance society's conversion to
solar energy. In the long run, nobody will be able to preven t energy from supplanting other energy sources. As this book has shown,
the others have nothing to offer in the long term. The current energy system, which is based on outdated forms of energy, is the most
influential economic power on the globe, of course, but in fact it is already "down" the question is still open as to whether humanity
will go "down" with it. The fateful question is whether solar energy will replace conventional energy in time! The
longer the wait, the more certain it will be that the future will bring a cruel life of suffering for the vast
majority of the world's growing population. And, if it is already doubtful now whether it is possible to
summon up sufficient moral and political strength for the change, it is almost certain that it will not be later,
as the menace of more destruction of the natural world and vanishing prospects of normal development for
billions of human beings grows stronger. In other words, the more delay, the greater the effort needed for the
salvation of civilization. The thesis of the central importance of solar energy may be opposed by justified scepticism towards
monocausal doctrines of salvation: it cannot be, it could be argued, that such comprehensive advantages for society could be achieved
"merely" with the use of solar energy. One could make the accusation that this is nothing but another false attempt to solve social
problems with a new technology. But it is precisely the basic importance of energy and the Laws of Thermodynamics that assign this
significance to renewable energies. It is not the arguments in this book that are "monocausal", but the sun, the central star, is monocausal
for the ecosphere. And it is not just a particular technology that provides this broad perspective but precisely this solar power, whose
overwhelming importance for this planet is an undisputable matter of fact. The challenge is to attune the planet's modern technology to
the law's of the sun. And because over the ages the technical capabilities have developed to meet that challenge, even for a growing
human race, mankind has a unique opportunity and precisely at the time of its most serious collective danger. The utilization of solar
energy is in no way a simple solution to complex problems. The crude answer consisted, and still consists, in the use of fossil and
nuclear energies and in increasingly uniform processes in agriculture and industry which have led to a destruction of natural diversity
inappropriate to nature's complexity. Rather, solar energy use means to adapt human civilization once more to the intrinsic forms of
nature. A peace treaty between mankind and nature is not possible without a global solar energy economy. We are very pressed for time
but, on the other hand, we have the opportunities for a solar strategy within our grasp and have reached the point
where we should no longer bear with the inhuman delaying tactics of those who "don't do what they know
must be done". To use the "energy of the people", we need to mobilize the people's energies to stir up a solar
energy revolution. There is no alternative.
HAYS DEBATE 22
Tournament Title
Awareness is key – ballot can spark a national solar plan
Ken Zeribel, Program Manager – DOE National Renewable Energy Laboratory Solar Program, 12-16-„7 [―A
Solar Grand Plan,‖ Scientific American, http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan&page=2)
The greatest obstacle to implementing a renewable U.S. energy system is not technology or money,
however. It is the lack of public awareness that solar power is a practical alternative—and one that can fuel
transportation as well. Forward-looking thinkers should try to inspire U.S. citizens, and their political and
scientific leaders, about solar power‘s incredible potential. Once Americans realize that potential, we
believe the desire for energy self-sufficiency and the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will prompt
them to adopt a national solar plan.
HAYS DEBATE 23
Tournament Title
Individual action is essential for social and political change - The role of the ballot is an
intellectual endorsement of the necessity of a decentralized solar economy.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto) [gender paraphrased]
To wait for parliaments, governments and communities to enact the required key legislation is
unacceptable. It would make solar strategy dependent on political institutions, and that would not be
enough, especially in the current historical context, where these institutions are finding it increasingly
difficult to adapt to the real problems. To move a solar strategy forward, an active society is essential; it
needs independent initiatives to break through constraints that allegedly exist and to create projects. Such a
strategy, that supposedly leads to a decentralization of structures, needs impetus from committed
individuals who not only demand these alternatives but who will themselves turn them into reality. It is
no accident that the solar showpieces that already exist are usually the result of such individual efforts: the
solar thermal power plants in California, wind power plants in Denmark, biogas plants in small agricultural operations, solar homes.
Also, advice to citizens whose interest in solar technology applications has not been satisfied by commercial or public technical
advisers has been provided mainly through public interest initiatives. Historically, this is not new; the social movements of the 19th
century has similar experiences under much more difficult conditions. Independent cooperatives played major roles then in areas such
as purchasing, production, marketing, credit, housing construction and consumer cooperatives. 187 This movement was very
successful, and in many eases grew too large, became bureaucratized and lost its idealist motivation. The movement positively
influenced societal structures but in the process integrated itself into society so thoroughly that its organization was hardly different
from that of any other business. New, independent initiatives must be shaped for the new goals and interests that
lie ahead those that have not been addressed at all or marginally, at best, by established political and
economic forces despite the fact that there is demand for efforts of this kind. The use of solar energy is the
most appropriate example imaginable for this kind of activity. Denmark's operators' cooperatives,
organized by farmers, are a model of how a carefully targeted revitalization of cooperative initiatives can
be achieved in the agricultural sector. Another example is the formation of jointstock companies for
renewable energy investments or the doityourself movement in Austria for constructing solar collectors
with the help of neighbours are part of the spectrum of such initiatives. Because such projects involve a
relatively large number of small investments in energy facilities and not just a few large investments,
almost anybody can participate in their formation. And since everybody can actively take part, even on an
individual basis, a solar strategy is "open" in terms of public involvement more so than ever before with
any comparable issue affecting the prospects for the future. It is possible to evolve a new culture, in which
mankind [humankind] is not merely one cog functioning in a mega-machine. And if a kind of mutually
accelerating interaction should evolve via the cultural revolution "from below" and a revolution of political
decisionmaking processes "from above", the implementation of such a solar strategy will become
unstoppable, current obstacles notwithstanding. It will become possible to undermine the traditional
energy system with highly efficient small-technology systems and to launch a rebellion with thousands of
individual steps that will evolve into a revolution of millions of individual steps. This can be achieved with
smalltech cogeneration systems, from individual households to businesses and trade operations for example, by using biomass
hriquets (initially wood waste, later C4 reed plants), and using the heat generated in a Stirling engine. In a transitional phase, domestic
power could be generated with the help of diesel or natural gaspowered engines. On the other hand, when solar radiation is sufficient
and no heat is needed other than for domestic hot water, electric power and heat needs can be met by solar cells and collectors. With
these practical and very realistic efforts and with the help of new companies developing and manufacturing these technologies outside
the energy cartel a solar strategy can he launched even if the political structures remain fossilised. Its realization will take somewhat
longer, however, because the first hatch of equipment before the start of mass production will he disproportionately expensive. It will
enter the market only via those customers who have consciously altered their private priorities. Despite this opportunity for a practical
citizens' movement, as formulated here, radical political change is still needed. There is no more time to be lost,
because any additional incorrect decisions made that favour conventional energy carriers will be impossible
to reverse, or only with major financial losses.
HAYS DEBATE 24
Tournament Title
***INHERENCY***
HAYS DEBATE 25
Tournament Title
I – Fed incentives centralize
Federal government currently provides substantial incentives for solar skewed in favor of
centralized electricity generation and discriminating against residential installations
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Like most renewable technologies, solar-generated electricity receives generous federal government
subsidies:22 • An Investment tax credit (ITC) of 30% of the project value. This credit expires at the end of
2008 and is capped at $2,000 for residential systems.23 • Accelerated 5-year depreciation for commercial
systems. • The Renewable Energy Production Incentive (2.0 cents/kWh, but only for non-commercial
projects).24 With a total budget of about $5 million a year, this incentive could fully support only 142
MW of solar PV capacity. The value of federal incentives is substantial. They are also skewed toward
commercial rather than residential development because incentives are offered as tax credits and
depreciation schedules. For example, the most lucrative solar incentive is the ITC because it‘s simply 30%
off the regular price. Tax credits are typically only valuable to wealthy individuals or businesses with
existing and ongoing tax liability. Unfortunately, most Americans do not have enough tax liability to fully
use the tax credit and that limits the number of people that might consider an onsite solar power project.
Furthermore, a residential system also has a size cap of $2,000 under the ITC; no such cap exists for
commercially-sited projects. The low ITC cap means that residential systems scaled to fully use the credit
will provide about 1,500 kWh per year, little more than 20 percent of a typical household‘s annual
electricity use. In effect, the federal government is saying, ―we don‘t support residential self-sufficiency‖
when it comes to renewable electricity. Figure 2 illustrates the disparity between residential and
commercial systems receiving the ITC. Looking at systems of increasing size, by the time the two systems
are around 0.8 kW, the residential system has hit the ITC cap, whereas the commercial system will
continue to receive a tax credit worth 30% of the installed cost. Commercial projects also have the
advantage of utilizing accelerated depreciation, allowing businesses to write down the value of the solar
project in a short timeframe and offset other tax liabilities. A homeowner can‘t depreciate a rooftop solar
panel. If a small business and a homeowner install a solar PV project of the same size – 2 kW, for
example – the business owner stands to get an additional $2,500 benefit from accelerated depreciation
compared to the homeowner.25 Figure 3 compares the total federal benefits for a 2 kW solar PV
installation, one commercial and one residential. The incentives for concentrating solar are more
straightforward, since this technology is currently only deployed as a centralized, commercial power plant.
Table 2 shows the impact of federal incentives on the cost of solar power. It is assumed that commercial-
owned systems are able to use the Investment Tax Credit and accelerated depreciation. The residential
user (PV only) gets the capped $2,000 ITC and no depreciation. Since the Renewable Energy Production
Incentive lacks sufficient funding to cover all projects and does not cover commercial installations, the
table assumes no project receives this incentive. As the table shows, federal incentives are strongly
skewed toward lowering the price of business-owned power generation. Commercial solar power prices
drop by an average of 56% compared to Residential PV‘s 12%. Interestingly, the lower operations costs of
large, commercial solar PV make it the least expensive mature solar technology when counting incentives.
There are revealing figures about scale, as well. When a project is owned by a business, small PV projects
are in the same production cost price range as the centralized, large-scale concentrating technologies. As
shown in the table, the break-even price of electricity from a small PV system receiving the full ITC and
accelerated depreciation is $0.19 per kWh. Federal incentives are biased against residential projects, where
the cost of electricity from the small PV is reduced by only half as much as for commercial projects.
HAYS DEBATE 26
Tournament Title
I – Fed incentives centralize
Massive federal incentives for solar power now, but they favor centralized over
decentralized production - state incentives cannot overcome this bias
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
In the next five years, expansion of concentrating solar capacity may outstrip expansion of on-grid solar
photovoltaic (PV) in the United States. The expansion of concentrating solar is in some ways unsurprising.
Combine a recently increased federal incentive (the 30% Investment Tax Credit) with a centralized power
station model and you have the foundation for largescale development. The new concentrating solar
thermal power plants contrast with the existing decentralized solar PV industry. With no need for a steam
turbine, solar PV lends itself to residential or commercial rooftop installation. This easy scalability means it
can serve off-grid residents as well as on-grid households or industry looking for on-site power.
Decentralized solar reduces grid load and stress on transmission lines. Solar concentrators turn sunlight into
just another central-station power source, albeit one based on a free, clean and renewable fuel. The
characteristics of the two technologies and federal solar power incentives tailor the style of ownership.
Individual homeowners receive very little federal support when they install solar PV panels on their
homes. Concentrating solar electric, on the other hand, can only be built at commercial and utility scales and
thus enjoys significant federal incentives. In a few locations, state, local, and utility incentives reduce but
rarely eliminate the disparity in public subsidies for the two solar technologies.
HAYS DEBATE 27
Tournament Title
I – cost stops local
Cost prevents local control of solar
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The major roadblock to local ownership of solar is the high capital cost. A typical residential installation is
between 3 and 5 kW, costing $24,000 to $40,000. Some businesses have tried to remove the roadblock with
two non-ownership models. In the first model, a solar lease, the panels are leased to the customer, who
receives the benefits of local power generation without the upfront capital costs or maintenance
requirements. After a number of years, customers may have the opportunity to buy their solar panels
outright. Solar City, a residential solar leasing organization, typically offers a 15-year lease with an option
to buy the panels for 10-20% of the original cost at the end of the term.
Solar currently too costly for local ownership
Paul Davidson, usa today staff, 8-27-„7 [―Forecast for solar power: Sunny; Advances in technology lower prices‖
usa today, l/n]
Yet like a Mercedes, solar energy is universally adored but prohibitively expensive for most people. A 4-
kilowatt solar photovoltaic system costs about $34,000 without government rebates or tax breaks. As a
result, solar power accounts for well under 1% of U.S. electricity generation. Other alternative energy
sources, such as wind, biomass and geothermal, are far more widely deployed.
HAYS DEBATE 28
Tournament Title
I – Price Parity now
Concentrators and local PV are at price parity because of incentives
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
However, public renewable energy policy should not play favorites. Recent data suggests that solar PV and
solar concentrators are close to price parity. But federal incentives heavily favor large-scale, commercial
solar plants at the expense of decentralized and residential solar. This economic favoritism costs
communities many of the off balance sheet benefits of decentralized, locally owned projects. We need the
benefits of both centralized and decentralized power to move the United States toward a clean energy
future. There are simple ways to level the playing field. If the Investment Tax Credit is renewed, it should
remove the cap on benefits to residential producers. As states and utilities provide rebates or tax
incentives, they shouldn‘t constrain residential development with smaller caps. And most importantly,
both state and federal governments should pursue production-based incentives for solar power, since they
align incentives and allow those without large tax liability to participate in renewable energy production.
HAYS DEBATE 29
Tournament Title
I – solar market unpredictable
Solar market unpredictable
Sean Connor, Solar Energy Market Strategist, Semprius and former energy analyst and electrical engineer, 4-„8
[―The Growth of Solar Concentrator Photovoltaic Markets in the Southwest US‖
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/10161/560/1/MP_SMC13_200804.pdf]
This report explores solar electricity markets with a focus on factors influencing the penetration of high-
concentration PV (HCPV). Currently, solar markets are very dynamic and are being driven by an influx of
venture capital, new market entrants, unstable government subsidies, high electricity prices, and the prospect
of extensive US greenhouse gas regulations. In fact, one prominent industry icon, Jigar Shah described major
market conditions as changing monthly. (Shah, 2007) In order to navigate through these market conditions
and remain relevant as they change, this report identifies the underlying factors that will continue to drive
solar markets and HCPV competitiveness amidst market fluctuations. While current factors will be identified,
a focus will be placed on how market changes will affect the strength of solar in general and more
specifically HCPV. This report contributes to the current solar literature by assessing the competitiveness of
HCPV to traditional PV in the face of general solar market dynamics which should be of particular interest to
HCPV solar module manufacturers, systems integrators, and anyone curious about HCPV.
HAYS DEBATE 30
Tournament Title
I – Tax Credits Expire in 08
Solar tax credits will expire at the end of the year
Ayesha Rascoe, reuters news service, 8-1-„8 [― US Bill Renewing Clean Energy Credits Fails Vote‖
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/49620/story.htm]
US legislation extending renewable energy and energy-efficiency tax credits failed a key procedural vote
Wednesday and lawmakers will now set the bill aside, at least temporarily. The extensive tax package
includes measures providing an eight-year extension of solar energy investment credits, and a one-year
extension of tax credits for biodiesel, renewable diesel and wind power.
HAYS DEBATE 31
Tournament Title
***ADVANTAGES –
GENERAL/INTERNALS***
HAYS DEBATE 32
Tournament Title
CSP
HAYS DEBATE 33
Tournament Title
CSP Tradeoff with PV
Government incentives for solar drive specific PV technologies
Sean Connor, Solar Energy Market Strategist, Semprius and former energy analyst and electrical engineer, 4-„8
[―The Growth of Solar Concentrator Photovoltaic Markets in the Southwest US‖
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/10161/560/1/MP_SMC13_200804.pdf]
While opportunities for HCPV are opening up globally, this report will focus in depth on the behavior of solar markets in the SW US
given its abundant direct solar radiation (insolation), rapidly growing electricity demand, and states with contrasting solar policies.
Given solar systems‘ high capital cost, it is clear that government policies and incentives have been a major
driver of solar market growth worldwide. The US is no exception. State renewable portfolio standards (RPS), federal tax
credits, state tax credits, and various other subsidies are designed to increase the percentage of clean energy generation while nurturing
solar manufacturing competiveness to the point that subsidies are no longer required for significant growth. While the focus of the report
is on HCPV, other electricity generating technologies will also be examined. On a general level, there are many economic substitutes for
CPV and each substitute may exhibit comparative advantages. However, many government incentives are designed to
promote specific technologies renewable technologies. HCPV generally receives the same federal and state government
incentives as PV technologies. These PV technologies possess many of the same operating characteristics as CPV. In 2006, mono-
crystalline silicon (Si) and poly-crystalline Si captured 84.6% of the overall PV market (Figure 6). Given the market dominance of Si PV
and the similar operating attributes as HCPV, crystalline-Si PV technologies will be assumed the closest economic substitutes of HCPV
in this study. These PV technologies include, fixed PV, 1-axis tracking PV and 2-axis tracking PV which are compared to 2-axis
tracking HCPV. Given that the objectives of this report are to identify the current and future competitiveness of HCPV and the overall
market conditions that will drive its growth, the following methodologies are utilized: The technological characteristics of CPV are
outlined; current solar market conditions are identified along with the framework in which HCPV will compete; factors affecting the
costs of retail and wholesale solar installations are examined; the importance of geography and insolation are examined. Finally, a case
study was constructed of hypothetical installation in AZ to examine the impact of subsidies and a range of factors entering into the
financial health of typical solar installations.
Direct market competition between concentrated solar and consumer controlled PV
Peter Lorenz et al., associate principal in McKinsey's Houston office 6-„8 [―The economics of solar power‖ The
McKinsey Quarterly. Thomas Seitz is a director; Dickon Pinner is a principal in the San Francisco office.
www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/pdf/Economics_of_Solar.pdf ]
Our demand and capacity forecasts assume continued improvement in solar-cell designs and materials but
neither a radical breakthrough nor the emergence of a dominant technology. At present, three technologies-
silicon-wafer-based and thin-film photovoltaics and concentrated solar thermal power-are competing for
cost leadership. Each has its advantages for certain applications, but none holds the overall crown. Major
innovations and shifts in the relative cost competitiveness of these technologies could occur.
Concentrated solar cannot compete in the commercial market – tradeoff with PVS is zero-
sum
Sean Connor, Solar Energy Market Strategist, Semprius and former energy analyst and electrical engineer, 4-„8
[―The Growth of Solar Concentrator Photovoltaic Markets in the Southwest US‖
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/10161/560/1/MP_SMC13_200804.pdf]
The retail market is composed of solar systems that are net-metered. Under net-metering a solar system
resides on the utility customer‘s side of an electricity meter and that customer‘s electricity use is offset by the
electricity produced the solar system. The solar installation is generally sized so that it outputs only a fraction
of the customer‘s electricity use. This is due to the fact that many state laws don‘t require utilities to
compensate customers for solar energy output that exceeds their energy demand. Space constraints are also a
factor constraining installation size. The commercial retail market has thus far been the largest US market.
Within this market, roughly 28% of installations (sized in Watts) in 2006 were ground mounted. This fraction
(28%) is used to estimate the HCPV commercial market potential projections in Figure 6. The 70% of the
commercial market that consists of rooftop installations is assumed to be uncompetitive for HCPV due to the
complexity and added cost of 2-axis tracking. Problematic issues arise concerning fire codes, load stresses on
rooftops, and building sway which can cause the HCPV to frequently lose alignment with the sun. (Grunow,
2007)
HAYS DEBATE 34
Tournament Title
CSP BAD
Concentrated solar is costly and has insignificant efficiency gains over local PV
Sean Connor, Solar Energy Market Strategist, Semprius and former energy analyst and electrical engineer, 4-„8
[―The Growth of Solar Concentrator Photovoltaic Markets in the Southwest US‖
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/10161/560/1/MP_SMC13_200804.pdf]
Most companies are pursuing designs using 400X to 1000X high concentration PV (HCPV) systems that
require the use of two-axis trackers to maintain to optical alignment with direct insolation as the relative
position of the sun changes throughout the day. Figure 2 shows typical optical acceptance angles of HCPV.
As the optical misalignment (pointing error) with the direct solar radiation errs larger than the acceptance
angle, the power output from the module quickly drops to zero. The necessity of 2-axis trackers adds
significantly to the complexity and cost of HCPV installations and the cost of maintenance. In addition, the
use of trackers limits the types of surfaces on which HCPV can be economically mounted. On the other hand,
a number of manufacturers are pursing low concentration PV (LCPV) using single-axis trackers or no
trackers which could be suitable for rooftop markets. Table 1 in the appendix summarizes the design features
of current CPV manufacturers with market-ready products and pre-market-ready products. The high
concentration designs have an average cell efficiency of 30% with Si cell efficiencies ranging from 22% -
28% and III-V cell efficiencies ranging from 30% - 37%.
HAYS DEBATE 35
Tournament Title
UTILITIES
HAYS DEBATE 36
Tournament Title
Utilities bad – local control
Utilities will usurp local control – new yyork proves
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
John Schaeffer, founder and president of Real Goods, the largest of the renewable-energy retailers, has
waxed enthusiastic about ―the enlightened attitudes of a utility like SMUD,‖ which operates 4.5 megawatts of
photovoltaic power and has made a commitment to install PV modules on one hundred additional homes
each year. Schaeffer also criticized the ―fat-cat attitudes‖ of a New York utility executive ―who said smugly
that banks would finance only photovoltaic systems provided by utilities‖ to remote customers. These
opportunistic utilities, wrote Schaeffer,― plan to deliver a 1-kilowatt photovoltaic system in a fully prepared
box which costs them around $30,000 . . . [and] in turn, charge the customer 16 percent per year forever.
While this solves the immediate problem of providing power to a remote customer, it misses entirely the
appeal of independent living. The utilities . . . want to bring enslavement to the remote home market just as
they have to the suburbs. . . . The revolution we are fighting is to maintain the values of sustainability,
selfempowerment, and independence rather than to find a new way to place ourselves under the watchful eye
of Big Brother.‖79
HAYS DEBATE 37
Tournament Title
Utilities Like Plan
Utilities are warming to decentralized PV
Greg Pahl, author of several books, writer at alternet, 8-6-„8 [―Can Communities Generate Their Own Power?‖
http://www.alternet.org/environment/93347/will_the_solution_to_the_energy_crisis_come_from_local_power_gene
ration/?page=entire]
Even some utilities have begun to realize benefits of small PV systems, which provide locally generated
power during peak demand times, eliminating or at least reducing the amount of expensive imported power
the utilities have to buy on the open market. Green Mountain Power Corp. in Vermont is a good example of
this enlightened thinking. Company officials say solar energy could ease congestion on power lines, delay
the need for new power line construction and reduce peak energy demand in hot summer months when
demand is highest.
HAYS DEBATE 38
Tournament Title
Utilities Hate Plan
Utilities favor concentrated solar
Peter Lorenz et al., associate principal in McKinsey's Houston office 6-„8 [―The economics of solar power‖ The
McKinsey Quarterly. Thomas Seitz is a director; Dickon Pinner is a principal in the San Francisco office.
www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/pdf/Economics_of_Solar.pdf ]
The technology that currently seems most attractive for utilities is concentrated solar thermal power,
because it involves centralized electricity generation-much as traditional coal, nuclear, and hydroelectric
facilities do-and is today's low-cost solar champion. Its long-term cost prospects, though, are less favorable
than those of some emerging photovoltaic technologies, so choosing it now is in effect a strategic bet on
how quickly relative costs and local subsidy environments will change.
HAYS DEBATE 39
Tournament Title
***CENTRALIZATION/DEMOCRACY
ADV***
HAYS DEBATE 40
Tournament Title
HAYS DEBATE 41
Tournament Title
***CAPITALISM ADV***
HAYS DEBATE 42
Tournament Title
Solar Society good – Enviro impacts
Shift to solar society is crucial to prevent capitalist destruction of the earth – we access
every environmental impact
Elmar Alvater, Prof of PolySci @ Free University of Berlin, „6 [―The social formation of capitalism, fossil
energy, and oil-imperialism.‖ Centre for Civil Society Colloqium on the Economy, Society and Nature:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/Altvater%20energy%20imperialism.pdf]
In the analyses of Fourastié or Colin Clark and Jan Tinbergen the transition from primary (agricultural) to secondary
(industrial) and tertiary (services) has been interprted not as a revolution but as a sequence of modernisation steps.
But the transition from an agricultural to an industrial societal relation to nature is a radical change, a revolution.
Capitalist systems are based on the consumption of the limited fossil stocks of energy. Firstly, they will run out and
secondly their combustion is producing such an amount of harmful emissions that the living conditions on earth are
deteriorating. In the terms of thermodynamic economics the transition to capitalist industrial systems based on fossil
fuels creates the globalised planet Earth and moreover the planet is treated as a closed and isolated system. For, solar
radiation from outside (and likewise the irradiation of heat into the outer space) are substituted by fossil energy
sources from inside the crust of the Earth. However, life on Earth remains dependent on the radiation of the sun.
Between life conditions (open system) and economic conditions (isolated system) on Earth a ―firewall‖ has been
constructed. Today, and possibly forever, it is impossible to power the machine of capitalist accumulation and
growth with thin solar radiation-energy. It simply has not the advantages mentioned above, i.e. the potential of time
and space compression, which thick fossil energy offers. Conversely, the fossil energy regime of the capitalist
economy has an extremely destructive effect on life on Earth which is ―powered‖ nearly completely by solar
radiation. The degradation of nature, e.g. the greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion, loss of biodiversity,
desertification, disappearance of tropical rain forests etc. is unquestionable. The advantages of the fossil energy
regime have a price: the disadvantages of ecological destruction and of the necessity to find a solution to the limits
of their availability.
HAYS DEBATE 43
Tournament Title
AT – Market Solves
Market cannot solve the case – capitalism will not respect ecological limits of fossil fuel
consumption before climate change destroys all life on earth.
Elmar Alvater, Prof of PolySci @ Free University of Berlin, „6 [―The social formation of capitalism, fossil
energy, and oil-imperialism.‖ Centre for Civil Society Colloqium on the Economy, Society and Nature:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/Altvater%20energy%20imperialism.pdf]
In capitalist calculation ecological limits of production and accumulation are recognised only when they
increase the costs of economic processes and exert pressures on the rate of profit. Calculations of the
German Institute for Economic Research have shown that the annual costs of climate change will be the
equivalent of about $2000bn from the middle of the century on (Kemfert 2004). The hurricanes of autumn
2005 already caused damages of about 200 bn US$. ―External effects‖ of production and consumption on
society and nature are irrelevant for capitalist rational choices so long as they remain ―external‖ to the
calculations of single firms. But this is the case only so long as the ―carrying capacity‖ and the capacities of
recreation of nature and social systems are sufficient as to bear the polluting emissions of the economic
process. Otherwise they become part of the ―general conditions of production‖, increase the costs of
production, affect negatively profitability and accumulation up to a crisis of the capitalist system. (This is
the theme of James O‘Connor, David Harvey and others.) The attempts to internalize these costs, e.g. by
emission trading, do not offer a real solution. As it is possible to substitute artificial paper money for
natural gold it is not possible to substitute certificates and bonds to be traded on a special stock exchange
for an increase of temperature of the atmosphere.
HAYS DEBATE 44
Tournament Title
***SOLVENCY***
HAYS DEBATE 45
Tournament Title
S – Fed Key
Federal incentives crucial for the viability of solar energy
Emma Ritch, San Jose Business Journal, 12-24-„7 [―Federal energy 'independence' act threatens to chill solar
industry‖]
The newest energy policy from the federal government leaves solar out in the cold. President Bush signed the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 on Dec. 19, establishing standards for higher fuel economy,
renewable fuels, green building and energy efficiency that environmentalists have described as positive steps
to stop the increase of carbon output in the U.S. But the same act failed to address tax incentives that make
alternative energies more economical, and failed to establish a minimum renewable energy component to
U.S. utilities. The tax credits for solar and wind energies are set to expire at the end of 2008. Congress has
another year before the expiration to find the bipartisan support needed to override a promised presidential
veto, and alternative-energy companies are hopeful that will happen but can't count on it. That means
manufacturers would start to decelerate production in June 2008 because of anticipated reductions in
demand. "Without the [federal tax incentives], you would see a pretty massive slowdown in the progress of
the growth of the industry," says Mark McLanahan, vice president for solar project finance for MMA
Renewable Ventures. McLanahan notes that the industry would not collapse but that growth would be less
rapid. His company would likely turn to less price-sensitive customers, such as utilities required by states to
produce a minimum amount of alternative energy, to keep business afloat until the tax incentives are
reinstated. "Although the subsidies are out there, everyone in the industry is working at feverish pace to bring
down the price of solar," McLanahan says. "The industry is extremely committed to getting ourselves to a
point where we don't need subsidies." McLanahan says that price point is three to five years away from
reality and until then subsidies are essential for bridging the gap. Arno Harris, CEO of San Francisco-based
Recurrent Energy Inc., says his company has a "high level of confidence in the industry and on Capitol Hill
that we'll get the tax package early next year." The incentives are a critical part of supporting the
development of the solar industry, he says. But the continuing investment in clean tech, including the Dec. 10 announcement of
Morgan Stanley's $200 million investment in Recurrent over two years, shows that investors don't see the recent energy bill's omissions
as a particular concern, he says. "We've got great bipartisan support," Harris says. Emily Baker, director of public policy and political
advocacy for the National Venture Capital Association, says investors see what was included in the bill as positive steps for the clean
tech industry, such as geothermal. Also, the renewable fuel standard increases the market for emerging developments in ethanol, such as
cellulosic, biomass, soy, algae and sugarcane. Another positive inclusion in the bill is fuel economy standards increasing to 35 miles per
gallon by 2020, she says. And government buildings will be required to increase energy efficiency, which could improve the market for
forms of energy storage and solar, she says. "I think this bill is pretty monumental, especially because of the renewable fuels. There are a
lot of venture investments in the biofuels industry, whether cellulosic or biodiesel or anything in between. But, yes, we're very
disappointed the tax incentives were stripped out of the bill," she says. If the incentives expire without an extension, Congress is sure to
re-examine the decision in 2009, she says. "If you talk to lots of venture capitalists, they will agree those kinds of incentives help with
the certainty of consumer behavior," she says. "What the National Venture Capital Association pushed for is long and certain
government support for these programs. We believe the federal government has a role to play and should dramatically
extend these incentives."
HAYS DEBATE 46
Tournament Title
S – fed key movement / utilities
federal incentives for solar energy are the only way to overcome utilities backlash – key to a
democratic movement that guarantees local control
–chase notes 65
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
We have now come full circle: with the new viability of solar technologies, the clean dreams of the 1970s can finally
become the realities of the new millennium. Now is the time to reprint the Blueprint for a Solar America and Sun! A
Handbook for the Solar Decade, to assess how the programs of the major energy companies and environmental
groups measure up, and to write a new Citizens‘ Solar Blueprint.64 As the price of photovoltaic panels continues to
fall, and as architects and designers figure out how to integrate PVs in beautiful, practical ways into new buildings,
people with sunny backyards and roofs will be visibly generating more than enough electricity for their personal
needs while feeding the excess back into the grid for storage and distribution. Experiments and demonstration
projects are no longer sufficient.We need a reinvigorated, nationwide citizens‘ solar movement to insist that
government and energy users replace increasing proportions of fossil and nuclear energy with renewable energy, so
that the manufacturers of those technologies experience steady expansion in the market in order to reduce unit costs
through economies of scale. Fifty years from now, the world‘s electrical systems could be organized as stand-alone
systems presently are, utilizing strict efficiency, with integrated photovoltaic modules, solar water heaters, small
wind and hydro turbines, and hydrogen-based storage systems—and with fossil-fuel generation used only as an
occasional backup, saving the planet‘s petroleum reserves for use in processes where, unlike burning, the oil is
rationally exploited and priced according to its scarcity. Even in areas where electric power is now completely under
the control of a private monopoly, the sale price of household solar electricity will become a bigger and bigger issue.
Citizens who have invested in solar equiment connected with the grid will want to know why the utility sells them
electricity at 12 cents per kilowatt-hour and credits them at 3 cents per kilowatt-hour, when their meter should
simply run backward, crediting them one for one. Or why not pay them a premium of $1.24 to encourage solar
electricity, like many cities in Germany and Switzerland? Citizens will want to know why they are not allowed a
special nighttime rate to charge up their electric bicycles and cars, when the 100 to 600 square feet of solar modules
on their roof generates enough electricity to power their house and vehicles. Since it is evident that many utilities
will vehemently oppose locally owned and controlled energy systems, Congress itself, sensing a conflict of interest,
has begun to question the wisdom of turning over total control of solar technology to the utilities.65 Although few
people can afford to spend ten thousand dollars or more upfront for a stand-alone household photovoltaic or wind
system connected to the electric grid, many people could afford $150 per month, particularly when they would own
the systems free and clear in fifteen or twenty years.Yet the Federal Housing Administration and Veterans
Administration—which have helped rehouse half of the American people since the end of World War II—will not at
this time guarantee loans for independent solar installations. In a new solar economy, will building owners and
tenants earn income-tax credits or deductions for their payments on such systems? A recent Pacific Gas &
Electric/Bank of America proposal for providing loan money to purchasers of energyefficient refrigerators and other
appliances pointedly leaves solar water heating off the list of options, and participants would not necessarily be
required to turn in their energy-wasting refrigerators in exchange for the new ones.66 If PG&E truly wanted to
encourage solar, it would promote a Solar Bank and offer premiums for solar and wind power over the retail electric
rates, as the Europeans and Japanese do. In the new solar economy, will the utilities universally buy back home-
generated power at a price that makes an investment in PVs worthwhile, or will they pay a fraction of its true value
and try to maintain a monopoly over the transmission equipment? Will building codes be modified to permit any
qualified and bonded solar electricians to install the equipment, or will the utilities have the political power to
control the installation of solar equipment, as they have controlled domestic electric meters? Will building codes,
like those in San Francisco, still require builders to install gas or electric heating in San Francisco and in the other
regions of California with a mild, Mediterranean climate? Or will building codes in the new solar economy forbid
the installation of electric hot water heating in San Francisco except as backup? The task of the new solar movement
will be to put the democracy back in photovoltaics and the other solar technologies whose efficacy can no longer be
denied or delayed on technological grounds. Solar entrepreneurs, socially responsible engineers, and other believers
must break out of their old-hippie ghettos (like California‘s Mendocino County) and their technocratic ghettos (on
the utility plantations) and confront the conventional wisdom about energy in small towns, suburbs, and cities across
America. New institutions—solar banks, ecological businesses, builders‘ cooperatives—and new solar lobbies will
need to be created.Without a vision and a new kind of political pressure, the U.S. government will continue to
maintain the status quo, handing out big tax breaks in energy to oil and gas drillers and to monopoly utilities. In this
book,we argue that public ownership with local democratic control of utilities is a necessary if not a sufficient
HAYS DEBATE 47
Tournament Title
condition for a solar economy in the United States. We believe this for two simple reasons: unlike a large capitalist
enterprise, a publicly owned utility is not impelled to constantly increase sales in order to increase profit margins
and stock prices. Therefore, publicly owned utilities have no inherent drive to promote constantly increasing
electricity sales. If well managed, a public entity can supply electricity more cheaply, because it doesn‘t pay inflated
salaries and, most importantly, because stockholders don‘t siphon off 10 percent each year in dividends. As SMUD
and Osage Municipal Utilities demonstrate, publicly owned and democratically governed utilities can be more
efficient, in both a business and an environmental sense, than privately owned utilities. Commentators familiar with
California utilities would be hard-pressed to claim that Pacific Gas & Electric is run more efficiently than SMUD, in
part because the people of Sacramento have a democratic mechanism to allow them to help govern an extremely
important institution in the life of the community. Sacramento‘s residents voted to shut down SMUD‘s nuclear plant
when it proved to be a boondoggle; by contrast, PG&E used its extraordinary political clout to keep the Diablo
Canyon nuclear power plant open, saddling ratepayers with billions of dollars in outlandish charges and interest over
the decades. SMUD plants tens of thousands of shade trees each year; neighboring PG&E plants none. And
SMUD‘s residential rates are 25 percent lower than PG&E‘s. As competition and restructuring make headway in the
utility industry,people in many more cities and towns may find that municipal intervention may be a way to protect
the average citizen‘s access to affordable, reliable electricity, and to assure continued utility promotion of renewable
energy. A new blueprint for a revitalized solar movement requires advocacy of the following: • Public ―ownership‖
of energy—just as with water or schools • Access to loans for photovoltaics, solar water heating, wind and micro-
hydro generators, and other forms of energy-generating and energy-saving technologies—just as those purchasing
automobiles or homes have access to loans • Reinstitution of tax credits and rebates for renewable-energy
investments, with conscientious licensing and quality-control procedures to guarantee customer satisfaction • Net
metering and rate-based incentives, so that independent, home- and business-based electricity producers are paid the
same price that they would be required to pay for the grid power they are not using • Massive public- and private-
sector investment in renewableenergy technologies and building techniques, to reestablish the U.S. as the
preeminent leader in this economic domain • Partnerships between industry, government, and local communities to
oversee the new ―green‖ industries, in order to make sure that the public knows what is being produced in a factory,
by what means, and how the wastes and by-products will be managed • Scholarships and retraining for displaced
fossil-fuel and nuclear workers, and small-business loans to support new solar tradespeople • Congressional hearings
to examine why none of the above is federal or state policy.
HAYS DEBATE 48
Tournament Title
S – Fed Key
Fed incentives key to solar viability – states empirically fail to fill the gap
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
U.S. Government Policies to Encourage Photovoltaics As noted above, the production of photovoltaic
modules in the U.S. increased eightfold in the 1980s, despite their abandonment by most public officials,who
were determined to prop up existing fossil and nuclear energy systems. For instance, until 1985 the federal
government had granted income-tax rebates of up to $3,000 for the installation of domestic solar water-
heating systems. The loss of such incentives had a devastating effect on customer-located solar installations,
although a few state and utility programs remained in place in the wake of the federal cancellation.96
HAYS DEBATE 49
Tournament Title
S – individual responsibility
Decentralized solar ownership fosters individual responsibility for energy production.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
When individuals or communities can produce their own power, it confers a sense of responsibility. Local
ownership of solar power offers a number of benefits to the individual owner and the community. Primarily,
the solar panel owner reaps the financial benefits of ownership. They get low-cost power. Secondly, being
an energy producer also increases the owner‘s consciousness of their energy use leading them to save as
much energy as possible. And getting power locally means that the solar project owner will be more aware
of other opportunities to be selfsufficient, whether by tapping geothermal or other local energy sources.
The community also benefits when power generation is locally owned. People who own their rooftop solar
panels are more likely to maintain them at peak efficiency, because they receive a tangible benefit and have
ultimate responsibility. Revenues from the project also stay local. A commercial project is often absentee-
owned, with the revenues flowing out of the local community. A locally-owned project retains a 25-200%
greater economic impact for the community.29 With solar power, that‘s in large part because local
ownership keeps the federal solar incentives in the community. Local ownership means paying ourselves to
produce power.
Decentralized solar creates sense of individual responsibility
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 6-23-„8
[―U.S. Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership of Solar‖
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
But there are powerful reasons that go beyond economics or physics. New transmission lines will go through
someone's backyard. That will require utilities to seize private property, something worth avoiding. And
when people produce their own power they begin to take greater responsibility for their energy use. The more
efficient they become, the more independent they become.
HAYS DEBATE 50
Tournament Title
S – local control good
Local solar reduces costs and increases grid stability
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The smaller scale of solar PV allows it to be built closer to load, reducing transmission distances (e.g. line
losses) and aids in electric grid stability (e.g. serving local loads). The shortening of transmission distances
has two distinct advantages. The shortening of transmission distances can help save power. Between 5 and
10 percent of power generated at the solar panel or concentrating solar station can be lost before it reaches
the end user. With a rooftop solar panel, however, these transmission losses are avoided. However, solar PV
generates power in direct current (DC) and must be converted to alternating current (AC). Around 5-10
percent of power can be lost in this conversion, so transmission savings may be negated. A greater
advantage of decentralized solar is saving the cost of constructing such transmission capacity. The
experience with wind power provides a stark illustration. One recent study concluded that injecting 1,400
MW of wind power into the existing transmission and distribution system in West Central Minnesota would
cost $80 million,31 or around $38,000 per MW while proposed capacity and reliability upgrades to
Minnesota‘s high power transmission lines will cost nearly $1.6 billion, or $900,000 per MW.32
Decentralized power saves big on transmission.
HAYS DEBATE 51
Tournament Title
S - Decentralization
The solar revolution endorsed by the 1ac ensures a complete substitute of current energy
production with decentralized solar
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The unique advantage of solar energy is that it can take over the indispensable economic function of
traditional energies in economic structures transformed by solar energy, to be sure and make it accessible
to all mankind [humankind]. Of the various nonrenewable and environmentally damaging elements of the
entire production process conventional energy, mineral raw materials, chemical commodities it is possible
to replace entirely at least the energy component with a complete, inexhaustible and environmentally sound
substitute. This is far from true for the other nonrenewable elements and more intensive efforts will be
needed to replace them to any large extent. This will he the great research and development task for both
public institutions and private enterprises in the coming decades. This then is the bottom line: today's
opportunity to replace nonrenewable and socially damaging energy carriers with solar energies offers the
first and best chance for a new course in development. Inescapably, the utilization of materials and chemicals will
increasingly have to be restricted. Assuming that there is a shift to solar energy, they will no longer be necessary for the energy
supply. Only a solar energy system is compatible with the positive aspects of a free market economy. As long as the full significance
of that goes unrecognized, and as long as it is not acted upon, mankind will go after 202 203these problems in full cry,
will make innumerable efforts to solve them but, despite all efforts, will see that they continue to grow and will still not understand
where the real, deeper, problems lie. The preeminent significance of these global challenges has been recognized, but new nationalist
and fundamentalist movements are rampant. Much is said about the social functions of business and the economy, but the elimination
of social responsibilities under the banner of improved efficiency and productivity increasingly determines economic decisions.
Decentralization is recognized as a necessity, but the real control is becoming more and more centralized.
Innovation is part of every programme, but the old priorities remain fixed. Lipservice is paid to the need to
think in terms of interdependence, hot action still takes place, unchanged, in small compartments.
Longterm thinking is commended, but the reality betrays an increase in shortsightedness. Society regrets
the lack of new fundamental political initiatives and grows weary of politics. An uneasy degeneration
begins to manifest itself the most fatal of all dangers, because it constantly diminishes the likelihood of an
alternative. The calls for alternatives mount, but they have now lost credibility, because the mechanisms of
the victorious Western megamachines are believed to be, in principle, immutable. Thus, despite devastatingly
misguided developments, the chorus of complaints falls on deaf ears and truly alternative programmes are treated with ironic
condescension or pushed carelessly aside. The alternative forces are battering against the padded cell wails of a Western high culture
transformed into a lunatic asylum, a culture that doesn't acknowledge its gradual fail because others have fallen faster. The strategies
offered at present by politics and economics betray a paralyzing fear of deliberately bringing about the necessary changes in the
established order to escape the real risk of unwanted breakdowns with uncontrollable results later on. But the dominant
decisionmaking patterns and decision makers will be superseded eventually one way or another. The key question is solely whether
events will then move in the right direction, or whether the approaching chaos will accelerate, leading ultimately to an irreversible lack
of alternatives. Reactions to the crises of the 1980s and the early 1990s show that we are currently in a dead end and unable to turn.
The Supporters of a Solar Strategy it is impossible, however, to construct an alternative out of the very components of the
development which is to he replaced. The solar revolution needs new supporters in society, in politics, in
economics, in science and in the media. They need to combine to aim at an urgently required, motivating,
realizable and promising perspective, and they must take the offensive in their pursuit of this goal. This
perspective must be consistent free of contradictions in its strategic concept and it must concentrate on the
essential and maintain freedom of choice. If the commitment becomes lost in minor details, the entire effort
will turn into a Sisyphean labour, and eventually be abandoned.
HAYS DEBATE 52
Tournament Title
S – community ownership/democracy/energy
Plan‟s transition to locally controlled energy is best for democracy and energy stability
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The management form best suited to harvesting the solar energy potential are community-owned energy
suppliers in towns and rural areas, reversing the trend towards regional electric utilities. These enterprises
have to generate heat and power and provide grid-independent distribution to the end-user. The geographical
proximity permits the optimum collection of the local solar energy potential; their integration with
construction, land use and infrastructure planning; greater planning openness; better prospects for
democratic participation, including the chance to give more attention to creative new ideas, which is of great
importance for solar energy utilization; e more effective energy counselling for the consumer. These
enterprises are also the best qualified partners for private operators who want to feed surplus electricity into
the grid, and have the greatest economic flexibility for investing in a solar strategy. In recent decades they
have been forced out of their traditional role as power and gas producers by centralized companies, and are
not tied down as much by old investments in plant and equipment as are the others. In general, the goal is of
local and municipal energy self-government. This will bring about a revitalization of municipally owned or
local utilities which have largely been reduced to the role of mere distributors if they still exist. Where such
municipal utilities no longer exist, new ones must be established. The production of solar energy by
municipal utilities will become a key task of local politics in the future in order to reintegrate community life
into the general ecological cycle. Since solar energy utilization from biomass consists in large part of
byproducts from other functions, it offers a wide spectrum of tasks for these municipal or local utilities. the
integration of electric power, gas and heat production and waste and sewage removal. One job of such a
utility would be, for example, to obtain user rights for the facades and roofs of existing buildings and install
and operate solar technology equipment if the owners are reluctant to do so. Communities could also assume
the job for the time being at least of converting biomass into biofuels or biogas by contracting the work out
to private companies, by launching such companies themselves, or by assisting local producers in marketing
these products. Municipally operated utilities are in an ideal position to generate electricity and heat from
biomass in cogeneration plants. These utilities will be able to organize a careful transition to a solar energy
supply system by operating initially a combination of solar energy and conventional energy. At the same
time, they would stimulate local and regional industry because the knowhow needed for these technologies is
easily acquired. Such a communal approach would also be easy on the taxpayer since it would not require
any big leaps in investment. With this strategy, new energy components can he added, one at a time, to the
existing ones. "I Illustration 8 shows the Austrian Feda tte of Steiermark as an example of how such a
concept evolves into a widely spread, decentralized energy system.
HAYS DEBATE 53
Tournament Title
S – Solar Key
We must make a total transition to solar now – it is the only viable alternative to fossil fuel
sources which guarantee planetary destruction
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The significance of energy supply as the heart and circulatory system of all life cannot he changed. What
can be changed is the choice of our sources of energy. Humanity has the chance to survive only if it is
able, within a short period of time, to replace conventional energy sources with the solar energy that flows
through the planet's ecological system. Ignoring these pervading opportunities so thoroughly and for so
long has created a state of affairs where their continued neglect has assumed the dimensions of a global
threat to the common good. Wilnelm Ostwald, a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, in his 1909 book on
issues of natural science and philosophy, "Energetische Grundlagen der Kulturwissenschaft" (Energetic
Foundations of the Cultural Sciences), pointed out, for example, that the sun with its radiation constantly
sends us "free energy' and that this process drives 'practically everything that happens on earth' Ostwald
had already distinguished between two forms of solar energy. On the one hand there are the daily "newly
captured and converted radiation energies which, in economic terms, represent regular income and which
may be consumed on a regular basis, after deduction of the required reserves". On the other hand, there are
"capitalized stockpiles in the form of fossil fuels ... We are dealing, therefore, with a part of our energy
system that behaves in some way like an unexpected inheritance, persuading the inheritor temporarily to
lose sight of the principles of a lasting economy and to live for the day. It must he emphasized here that
even thrifty consumption merely postpones exhaustion but does not prevent it". His conclusion, drawn long
before our knowledge of disastrous environmental dangers, was: "An enduring economy must be based
exclusively on the regular utilization of the annual solar radiation energy". It is not enough to increase the
share of renewable solar energy to 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50% of human energy consumption. It would not
overcome dangers to our existence, but would merely postpone,, the collapse of human civilization. The
goal for the century ahead must be the complete substitution of conventional sources of energy by
constantly available solar energy in other words a complete solar energy supplyfor mankind. This is the
only way to achieve the permanent recovery of mankind. Ills the essence of the most important law of
natural science, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which addresses the issue of entropy, and which has
been described by the German environmental journalist Christian Schutze as the "Basic Law of Decline", a
decline which can be stayed only with the help of solar energy. "We can turn and twist as much as we want,
but our problems will remain unsolved, as long as we are unable to tap the only real source of negative
entropy so intensively that it covers our entire energy demand, including the energy needed to keep
material entropy as low as possible. ,6
HAYS DEBATE 54
Tournament Title
S – incentives key to stocks
Uncertainty about incentives hurts solar stocks
Nichola Groom and Matt Daily, IHT staff writers, 6-2-„8, [―Alternative Energy on Edge in U.S.‖ International
Herald Tribune. http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1411912/alternative_energy_on_edge_in_us/]
Uncertainty about the subsidies has contributed to the volatility in renewable energy stocks this year. Akeena's
shares, for instance, are down about 60 percent from the all-time high of $16.80 they reached in January. Erik
Olbeter, an analyst at Pacific Crest Securities, said in a research note on May 14 that failure to extend the tax credits
soon would hurt companies with large exposures to the U.S. market, like the solar companies Akeena and SunPower
and wind turbine manufacturers like Vestas Wind Systems of Denmark.
HAYS DEBATE 55
Tournament Title
S – Decentralized lowers cost
Decentralized solar generation lowers cost and distributes economic benefits
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 6-23-„8
[―U.S. Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership of Solar‖
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Why do we care whether solar energy is harnessed on a few hundred square miles of Nevada or on millions
of individual rooftops? Why do we care if solar arrays are owned by those who use the electricity generated?
One reason is economic. Decentralized power avoids a significant investment on new transmission lines, and
avoids the losses attendant to transmitting electricity over long distances. Distributed ownership also means
distributed economic benefits, as the power payments (or savings) and tax incentives are spread more widely.
HAYS DEBATE 56
Tournament Title
S – us leadership
US must take a leadership role in solar energy by increasing government incentives
Joseph Romm, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, 4-14-„8 [―The technology that will save
humanity‖ http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/04/14/solar_electric_thermal/index1.html]
The United States has already lost the leadership it had in solar photovoltaics and wind, thanks to deep
budget cuts by President Reagan and the Newt Gingrich-led Congress. By 2010, China will be the top
manufacturer of photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. Must we also abandon our historical leadership in
CSP to conservative doctrine? Other countries, particularly Spain but also Israel and Australia, are poised
to be dominant. And China, which has already begun importing coal and pursuing CSP projects, will not be
far behind. CSP could well be one of the major job-creating industries of the century. Every other major
country aggressively supports clean tech industries with subsidies and mandates. But our Congress and
president can't even agree on a requirement for 10 percent of U.S. energy to be from renewable sources --
far less than most European countries and half our own states. We should have a federal standard requiring
U.S. utilities to get 20 percent of their power from renewables by 2020. Another useful incentive would be
loan guarantees, a program that could be retired once we have a price for carbon dioxide. CSP has no fuel
cost, and low operations and maintenance costs, but it has high upfront capital costs. Loan guarantees can
reduce the risks of the first big plants at little or no cost to the taxpayer. The United States should also insist
that CSP be a high priority for development projects by the Global Environmental Facility and the World
Bank. Finally, we will need more electric transmission in this country. The good news is that because it
matches the load most of the day and has cheap storage, CSP can share power lines with wind farms. When
the country gets serious about global warming, we will need to get serious about a building a transmission
system for a low-carbon economy. If we are smart, the United States can be the economic leader here. We
can accelerate the deployment of a technology that may be critical to saving humanity from a ruined
climate.
HAYS DEBATE 57
Tournament Title
S – feed-in tariff
Replace current solar incentives with a feed-in tariff
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 6-23-„8
[―U.S. Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership of Solar‖
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
But federal policy doesn't prioritize or reward solar energy storage — a policy that would make sense. If it
did so, one could expect that entrepreneurs would quickly refine and install storage systems with rooftop
solar systems. There's a better way. Remove the cap on residential tax credits and level the playing field.
Amend the tax credit and make it refundable, so folks without large tax liability — the majority of
Americans — can join the solar revolution. Or better yet, replace all the tax incentives with a feed-in tariff
like the one that has created a tidal wave of solar development in Germany. Unlike tax credits or
buydowns, a feed-in tariff pays for performance, allows anyone to produce renewable energy, and doesn't
require annual Congressional renewal or appropriations. It is a policy that mirrors the abundance and
availability of sunlight with a limitless potential for solar energy investment. Sunlight shines everywhere
and American solar energy policy should encourage us to harness it everywhere, as well.
Feed-in tariffs solve solar
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The right to feed privately generated electricity from solar power plants into the public grid must he guaranteed by
law at a price that corresponds to the average power generation costs of utilities. Only Switzerland has such a
guarantee so far; Germany has set a price at 90% of present power generation costs and, in italy, the legally
guaranteed price of such feeding is based on the hourly changing costs of power generation. Most countries have not
yet passed this type of law.
The precondition for such regulations is a territorial monopoly for a grid operator, who may only enjoy this
monopoly by taking into account the interests of others and who may not exclude independent power producers.
Payment for independent power fed into the grid provides essential flexibility in the private operation of solar power
plants and for the creation of private power production cooperatives. Every country should introduce this policy.
HAYS DEBATE 58
Tournament Title
S - human rights
Renewable energy is a fundamental human rights
WREA (World Renewable Energy Assembly), 10-30-„5 [―The Human Right to Renewable Energy‖
http://www.hermannscheer.de/en/images/stories/pdf/WREA_2005_final_communique_en.pdf ]
―All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.― This first sentence of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights articulates a basic human commitment. Only by respecting this commitment, a
humane life in peace can be assured durably. Energy is the fundamental prerequisite of every life.
Availability of energy is a fundamental and indivisible human right. In the 20th century we have gained the
experience that the established system of energy supply - mainly based on fossil energies, and partly nuclear
energy - is not in a position to assure this human right for everybody. It is violated billion fold. Due to the
imminent depletion of conventional energy sources and their dramatic impact on the environment and
climate, this right can be assured even less for an ever-increasing number of people. The human right to
energy can only be fulfilled by renewable energy.
HAYS DEBATE 59
Tournament Title
S – distributed generation solves grid
distributed generation through local solar is crucial for grid viability
Greg Pahl, author of several books, writer at alternet, 8-6-„8 [―Can Communities Generate Their Own Power?‖
http://www.alternet.org/environment/93347/will_the_solution_to_the_energy_crisis_come_from_local_power_gene
ration/?page=entire]
Distributed generation reduces the need for "importing" electricity from other regions and reduces
transmission losses. And if the distributed generation is well positioned, it can actually provide "voltage
support" for the existing transmission system and improve system reliability. This type of model can
include small-scale individual or community solar, wind, hydro, geothermal or biomass DG systems that
would enhance and provide greater stability to the portions of the grid where they are located. But not all
DG projects fit this model. Large-scale commercial wind farms, for example, are normally located where
the wind resource is best, but not necessarily where the electricity is needed. In this scenario, additional
expensive transmission and distribution lines are often required.
HAYS DEBATE 60
Tournament Title
S – CSE
[CSE = community supported energy]
Patchwork of state CSE in absence of federal legislation
Greg Pahl, author of several books, writer at alternet, 8-6-„8 [―Can Communities Generate Their Own Power?‖
http://www.alternet.org/environment/93347/will_the_solution_to_the_energy_crisis_come_from_local_power_gene
ration/?page=entire]
Unfortunately, in the absence of a coherent national energy policy in the United States, the rules and
regulations governing CSE projects vary considerably from state to state, making it extremely difficult to
offer a simple, one-size-fits-all approach for success. Nevertheless, there is a growing number of small,
local DG projects that offer good models for other communities around the nation. The Westridge
Windfarm in Pipestone, Minn., the Bingham Lake Wind Farm, also in Minnesota, and Hull Wind I and II in
Hull, Mass., are excellent examples of community-owned wind power. The Minnesota projects are owned
by farmers and other local residents, while the Hull projects are owned by a municipal utility. Regardless of
the ownership model, in each of these cases the community receives the benefits of local ownership.
State patchwork hinders viability of CSE
Greg Pahl, author of several books, writer at alternet, 8-6-„8 [―Can Communities Generate Their Own Power?‖
http://www.alternet.org/environment/93347/will_the_solution_to_the_energy_crisis_come_from_local_power_gene
ration/?page=entire]
OK, if Community Supported Energy is such a good idea, why aren't there more examples in the United
States? The main barriers to wide-scale implementation of CSE is a general lack of national standards and
an inflexible regulatory environment. In most states there is an outdated regulatory and approval process
that does virtually nothing to encourage these types of projects. For the most part, CSE isn't even on the
radar screen of most regulators, and the typical high cost of the approval process (often $100,000 to
$500,000 or more, depending on the project) halts most community-based initiatives before they even get
started. What's more, federal energy production tax credits (PTC) for wind farms, for example, favor large-
scale corporate projects that are well beyond the means of local communities to take advantage of. This can
make financing some local projects a real challenge.
HAYS DEBATE 61
Tournament Title
S - LDCs
Solar crucial for developing countries
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Even a superficial look at the potential of solar energy makes clear its all encompassing significance: solar
energy offers a secure supply of energy that cannot be manipulated or channeled by any energy cartel.
Further destructive exploitation of fossil or biological resources and the unholy fight for legal emission
quotas, which in the end will only add to the burdens of developing countries, can be avoided; energy sources
and energy consumption would be coupled again, creating the prospect that novel, decentralized industrial
and trade structures can be created in developing countries. Just as importantly, solar energy offers probably
the best opportunity the only one not tried so far for a "reduction of population growth, improved living
conditions in rural areas, thus reducing the drift from these areas to the cities and also reducing international
migration movements", as noted in the "Harare Solar Energy Declaration" of November 1991.13 The fate of
all humanity depends on the development of the nonindustrialized countries. None of the development
concepts offered so far has been able to prevent the distance between them and Western industrialized
countries from increasing dramatically. The growing masses of humanity are ever less willing to tolerate
their pauperization the more they are dazzled thanks to global telecommunications by the wealth of the
Western "models". And since it is, for all practical purposes, hopeless to attain that goal in their own country,
migratory movements increase. Much is said about new wars between North and South. This notion is
absurd: it is absolutely unimaginable that a state or a group of states in the developing countries could wage a
war against a rich Western state, because all military and other preconditions for that are lacking. The Gulf
War against Iraq is proof: even that single state in the South with the highest level of weaponry at its disposal
was unable to mount a military reaction after the start of hostilities by Western forces. The result was not a
war but an execution. Much more likely is a different development: that the North will be increasingly
brutalized and lose its system of values in the face of the harrowing misery in the developing countries,
which will be increasingly written off, and it will close its borders to starving refugees. Our political concepts
of economic development have so far been of no help to their survival in their own countries.
HAYS DEBATE 62
Tournament Title
S - Economy
Solar helps the economy -
A – Jobs across all sectors
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
It has already been emphasized that the introduction of solar energy will generate new jobs in nearly all sectors
of industrial production and the service sector. The objection is frequently heard that solar energy technologies would be too
expensive for economies that are competing with each other, but this merely reveals an insular way of looking at economic issues . The
cost of solar energy is higher not because of the cost of the primary energy but because of labour costs. But
higher labour costs then means: solar energy utilization requires more jobs! The introduction of solar energy
would lead to a reduction of unemployment and, with it, the social costs of unemployment. The world watch Institute
has calculated that five times as many people would be employed for the production of 1000 Gwh from wind energy than from nuclear
in
power. The numbers of jobs required would undoubtedly not be as large as they are today once solar energy plants are produced
series. But its introduction would mobilize new development and production activities in many segments of
industry, not only for the production of solar energy converters, but also equipment for solar energy utilization.
Crafts and small business would be given new impetus.
B – spending
SCHEER, 94
Linked to this is the opportunity to reverse existing trends: a move away from service jobs to productive work. This trend will be augmented by
the fact that, with a growing number of people generating their own energy, another element of the existing nonproductive service jobs will be
reduced. Similar considerations apply to health services since undoubtedly solar energy will contribute to an improvement in the
general level of health. One US cost estimate has found that the conventional energy system causes corrosion damage of
about $2 billion annually, health costs between $12 and 82 billion, agricultural damage between $2.5 and 7.5 billion, military
security costs between $15 and 60 billion, unemployment costs of more than $30 billion, and subsidies of various types of $55
billion in other words, hidden costs of between $116 and $236 billion, depending on how rigorous the calculations are. 162
C – Investment
SCHEER, 94
Solar energy use will eliminate the contradiction between economic growth and destruction of nature so a new
economic dynamic of its own will be created. There is no market potentially larger than that for solar technologies, and so far it has
been almost completely neglected. Entire new segments of industry can be created, segments that would not face any fundamental
acceptance problems by society, as is increasingly the case with traditional centres of production . This, in turn, guarantees security for
new investments.
D – Manufacturing
SCHEER, 94
The economic and structural change triggered by the introduction of solar energy will be characterized by a drastic
increase in the number of wealth-creating jobs. Traditional jobs in energy production and energy supply will be
reduced, including transport and distribution, and these will be replaced by productive work in manufacturing solar
energy panels and the installation trades.
E – Administrative costs
SCHEER, 94
As mentioned, administrative intervention in business, and with it the costs of traditional energy supply, increase
because of growing environmental damage and other dangers. This extends into the international arena for example, agreements
about the protection of the oceans from waste products of energy generation or control of the nuclear fuel cycle . Hand in hand with
these rules and regulations comes an administrative apparatus to control damage and monitor execution. The growing
inadequacy in actually enforcing these rules points to increased administrative costs, which never show up in any energy calculation. The
introduction of solar energy offers the opportunity to reduce these administrative costs. This has not happened so far, partly
because of real administrative obstacles to solar energy such as construction codes, land use rules and nature conservancy codes which, in
misinterpreting the hierarchy of environmental dangers, occasionally raise more objections to the installation of solar energy facilities than to
traditional energy equipment. But there is no need for special safety rules for solar energy plants, no emission limits, no
waste disposal rules, smog regulations or monitoring stations. Only the utilization of biomass requires a few administrative
regulations which do not have to be any more extensive than those that exist already for agriculture and which can be handled by existing
agricultural administration agencies.
HAYS DEBATE 63
Tournament Title
Now key
Now is key for a new solar energy strategy.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Reason demands that the opportunities indicated here for humanizing the industrial Revolution by way of
solar energy should be seized immediately. The ecological, social and economic state of the world does not
permit any further delay to a solar strategy. The goal of building an energy supply system based on solar
energy must he the single highest priority in order to achieve the kind of politics and policy that genuinely
correspond to the core problems not only in the individual fields of energy and environmental policy, but
in all aspects of economic activity.
HAYS DEBATE 64
Tournament Title
***FRAMEWORK***
HAYS DEBATE 65
Tournament Title
Framework - imagination
Must imagine the unimaginable – embracing the possibility of a total solar society creates
new possibilities for humanity.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
This claim will be regarded as excessive only by those who still underestimate the all encompassing,
disastrous consequences of our current energy sources and who fail to recognize the central importance of
energy supply. If we really want to succeed in tackling the problems outlined in Agenda 21 we have to arrive
at "Agenda 1" the all encompassing solar energy economy. Solar energy is not a nostalgic remembrance of
times past, of an earlier pastoral idyll, which was anything but an idyll for most human beings. Rather, the
conversion of mans energy system to a solar one and, with it, the reintegration of humanity's energy system
into the planet's, will be the decisive step toward incorporating humanity into "the rhythm of nature.' This
opens up new opportunities in almost all relevant fields of action where we are now running out of options,
and which those in charge refuse to see in an energy context. This all encompassing utilization of solar
energy will offer a new perspective for humanity a realizable, concrete vision, a realistic utopia This project
embraces far more than replacing current energy supply technologies with solar energy technologies. This
fundamental shift is meeting with such huge obstacles and opposition because it challenges the very web and
interplay of energy, economics and social systems. The introduction of a global solar energy system has
more fundamental importance for humanity than the industrial Revolution and the French Revolution had for
the economic and political development of modern times. Both revolutions led humanity into a new epoch,
but one that no longer assures permanence. Only all embracing solar energy utilization promises the kind of
development that will benefit humanity permanently, because it makes possible universal human rights and
the right to self-determination in all societies. Only a global solar energy system permits an environmental
economy, a humanization of the industrial Revolution and the transfer of both to all people. The Industrial
Revolution's path has so far led mankind into deeper schisms and disruption. The reversal of social
achievements which threatens now, even in the traditional centres of the Industrial Revolution, will lead to
rapid self-destruction. A solar energy system, on the other hand, opens up unique and because of the basic
importance of energy manifold opportunities, as opposed to the multiple dangers caused by the existing
energy system.
HAYS DEBATE 66
Tournament Title
Framework - politics
Endorsing the politics of the 1ac is the only alternative to extinction
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
[gender paraphrased]
The central objection is well known: conversion of mankind's total energy supply to solar energy is
considered unrealistic. This can mean only two things: either, that man's selfdestruction is unavoidable; or,
that there are other, more realistic prospects for the survival of mankind. No other possibilities exist. The
plea for solar energy is not a technological one, but a political one. Nor is it another analysis of the dangers
of destroying the environment; it deals with the inadequate political efforts to avert crises arid the deplorable
lack of perspective. It both aims at, and culminates in, a strategic design. Politics, in the original meaning of
the word, is the forming of society according to values that are potentially valid for all people. In Greek
philosophy, political action meant not only action on behalf of the community in contrast to private,
selforiented and selfserving action but also a special way of shaping society: a form of action that takes its
cue from ideas of equality and freedom, rather than despotism and tyranny.' This kind of rethinking should be
at the core of political discussions at a time when just about every activity is labelled "political", even if there
is no positive reference to the public at large. Terms like "special interest politics", 'company politics",
"union politics" are all, if interpreted rigorously, inherent contradictions. The degradation of the very
concept of politics goes hand in hand with the increasing failure of politics to come to grips with the
requirements of a humane shaping of society.
Try or die - Must demand a total transition to solar
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The validity of the information offered in scientific scenarios of this type is by definition limited, because
they have to proceed from currently provable numbers and because they cannot assume any development
breakthroughs or great leaps forward, or allow for the influence of special interests, crises and political
changes. While it will require a great deal of concentrated effort to turn these strategies into reality, it
nevertheless is disappointing that great destructive energy potentials remain. Since nature's energy store is
large enough to meet all our energy needs with solar energy, there is no reason not to try to reach 100%
coverage, given the remaining danger potentials. The frequently asked question of how large the share of
solar energy could be in the total energy picture is actually foolish: since solar's potential is more than
sufficient to meet human energy needs, there is no limit to the usable solar energy share. The order of
magnitude of the solar energy share is simply a question of "input": the more political effort and economic
investment, the larger the share.
HAYS DEBATE 67
Tournament Title
Framework – ROTB
Your ballot functions as an affirmation of a new way of thinking about energy – vote aff to
demand a transition to a solar society before its too late
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The previous chapter made clear that the only people able to recognize the profound opportunities offered
by solar energy are those capable of dissociating themselves from established ways of thinking. The resistance
to new ideas, widely present even in science, has been described by the philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn in his observations on
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" thus: "The fundamental rethinking of a conventional paradigm regularly occurs only when it
becomes obvious that it is no longer possible to solve a problem with the traditional scientific way and when awareness of that
impossibility creates a new paradigm", an "alternative candidate". Even then, that process of substitution is anything but rapid and
smooth. For the established experts, "the new theory means a change of the rules that until then controlled normal, scientific practice.
Inevitably, this affects large scientific projects that have already been successfully concluded. "67 In other words: their labours are in
danger of becoming waste paper. Not only is their own scientific reputation suddenly at stake, but also the life's work of one or several
generations of scientists, and frequently large research resources and funds money. This is crucial for understanding why
technological and scientific research is more stubbornly than ever before resisting new priorities outside their own sphere of
competence. This is why emancipation from traditional thinking is even more difficult today than when Kuhn
described it more than a decade ago. Solar energy will prevail against all opposition because its
fundamental advantages cannot be suppressed in the long run, but this optimism is not a good enough
reason to moderate our demands and expectations because at stake is the fateful question of whether this
new energy will arrive in time and to the extent necessary to avert the socioeconomic and social
environmental dangers looming on the horizon. Those attitudes, so noticeable in the sciences, are hardly
different in politics, business and the media, especially if massive business and national economic interests
as well as power politics are at stake as exemplified by energy supply issues. An increasingly positive
response to solar energy is noticeable among some of the media, but it has hardly advanced in political and
business coverage. The representatives of establishment energy polities always pretend they are the very
incarnation of objectivity when it comes to renewable energy, but in reality they mean their own, onesided,
perspective. If there are conflicts, they call for "energy consensus" and accuse others of ideological
ignorance. They yearn for the past when energy policy and the energy industry were not the dominant
themes of domestic political controversy, and the only issues that mattered were guarantees of energy
security and low energy prices. The lack of commitment to solar energy, noticeable at all levels of the
establishment, reveals an irrational attitude to existential questions and mirrors the pervasive helplessness
of our present culture in response to the new challenges to our civilization. To overcome these obstacles,
we must analyse why and how they retain their hold.
HAYS DEBATE 68
Tournament Title
Revolucion!
Plan spurs a Solar revolucion entail a transformation of all relationships of domination –
this is the only alternative to fossil fuel imperialism
Elmar Alvater, Prof of PolySci @ Free University of Berlin, „6 [―The social formation of capitalism, fossil
energy, and oil-imperialism.‖ Centre for Civil Society Colloqium on the Economy, Society and Nature:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/Altvater%20energy%20imperialism.pdf] [gender modified]
There seems in fact to be only one realistic alternative to oil imperialism – namely a shift from oil
dependence to renewable energy sources, to the radiation energy of the sun (and its secondary derivatives
such as photovoltaic, eolic, water, biotic energies etc.), or to volcanic and geothermal energy. The Neolithic
revolution is an important example which shows that it is possible to extremely increase the productivity of
labour and of resources on the basis of the solar energy-regime. Therefore, a similar increase after the
transition to a ―solar society‖ cannot be excluded. On the one hand the shift to non-fossil and to renewable
energy is a response to energy scarcity. This was already the Brazilian experience after the first oil price
shock of 1973 when it started the ―pro-alcool‖-program of the production of ethanol out of sugar cane.
President Lula of Brazil has offered technological experience in the production of ethanol to other
governments in Latin America in order to face the recent energy crisis. In the volcanic regions of Central
America and the Andes it also is possible to tap volcanic and geothermal energy. The transition to renewable
energy requires appropriate technologies, but above all appropriate social institutions which have to be
developed in the course of a social learning process in order to realise the necessary transformation and to
overcome the above mentioned ―firewall‖ which separates the (closed) fossil regime from the (open) life
energies provided by the sun. This radical transition from fossil to renewable energies can be understood as a
―solar revolution‖. Such a revolution must aim not just at a simple seizure of power but must include radical
transformation in patterns of production and consumption, of life and work, of gender relations, of the
societal relation of mankind [humankind] to nature. It is a holistic endeavour, a revolution, which cannot be
carried out in a short period of time but in the long run.
HAYS DEBATE 69
Tournament Title
***2AC ON CASE***
HAYS DEBATE 70
Tournament Title
At - concentrators good
Solar concentrator technology can be owned locally.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Solar concentrators could potentially be built in a more decentralized fashion. Smaller CSP plants – five
megawatts, for example – could adapt to local load and grid capacity. In California, a company called eSolar has
collected substantial venture capital on a proposal to build ―modular‖ 33 MW solar tower plants, small enough to
avoid licensing by the California Energy Commission.33 This shortens development time by 1-2 years. Building
smaller CSP plants would be a significant development in the industry, where most proposed facilities are larger
than 50 MW. Dispersed, distributed power generation can also provide additional stability to the electric grid. By
decentralizing generation, the risk of power station failure is reduced. Many generators make for a smaller chance
of large power outages.
HAYS DEBATE 71
Tournament Title
2AC Coal Add-On
Solar can displace coal.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Getting greater round-the-clock, firm power production may be one rationale of the federal incentives for
solar concentrators. All types of solar power can be stored: solar PV in batteries and solar concentrators in
oil or molten salt ―thermoses.‖ However, unless battery costs decline, storage costs for solar thermal are
currently a tenth that of solar PV. With solar concentrators, thermal storage capacity allows the power
plants to store solar energy for hours after the sun has set and to generate power ―on demand.‖ Some of the
newer plants have upwards of 12 hours of storage, which may allow them to be considered firm power
sources, available to the grid at any time of day. This type of power source is more valuable to power
companies than ―intermittent‖ power sources. Having solar operate 24 hours a day also means it can serve
as baseload power and can make a run at displacing coal-fired power plants that can run roundthe- clock.
Solar could replace all fossil fuel based electricity production.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Solar concentrators promise a new level of development for clean electric power in the United States. Large
size and central development allow them to provide hundreds of megawatts in just a few projects and
substantially increase the penetration of renewable power in the U.S. electrical grid. Thermal storage may
make solar power competitive as a firm, baseload source of electricity. These are great developments for the
progress of renewable energy because it means renewables could supplant all kinds of fossil fuel electricity
generation.
PUT MOOUNTAIN TOP MINING BAD ARGS HERE
HAYS DEBATE 72
Tournament Title
2AC Oil Add-on
New discoveries prove solar energy can be stored in fuel cells
Sciencey Daily, 8-1-„8 ['Major Discovery' Primed To Unleash Solar Revolution: Scientists Mimic Essence Of
Plants' Energy Storage System. ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm]
In a revolutionary leap that could transform solar power from a marginal, boutique alternative into a
mainstream energy source, MIT researchers have overcome a major barrier to large-scale solar power:
storing energy for use when the sun doesn't shine. Until now, solar power has been a daytime-only energy
source, because storing extra solar energy for later use is prohibitively expensive and grossly inefficient.
With today's announcement, MIT researchers have hit upon a simple, inexpensive, highly efficient process
for storing solar energy. Requiring nothing but abundant, non-toxic natural materials, this discovery could
unlock the most potent, carbon-free energy source of all: the sun. "This is the nirvana of what we've been
talking about for years," said MIT's Daniel Nocera, the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy at MIT and senior
author of a paper describing the work in the July 31 issue of Science. "Solar power has always been a limited,
far-off solution. Now we can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon." Inspired by the
photosynthesis performed by plants, Nocera and Matthew Kanan, a postdoctoral fellow in Nocera's lab, have
developed an unprecedented process that will allow the sun's energy to be used to split water into hydrogen
and oxygen gases. Later, the oxygen and hydrogen may be recombined inside a fuel cell, creating carbon-free
electricity to power your house or your electric car, day or night.
This solves oil dependence and warming
Sciencey Daily, 8-1-„8 ['Major Discovery' Primed To Unleash Solar Revolution: Scientists Mimic Essence Of
Plants' Energy Storage System. ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm]
Sunlight has the greatest potential of any power source to solve the world's energy problems, said Nocera.
In one hour, enough sunlight strikes the Earth to provide the entire planet's energy needs for one year.
James Barber, a leader in the study of photosynthesis who was not involved in this research, called the
discovery by Nocera and Kanan a "giant leap" toward generating clean, carbon-free energy on a massive
scale. "This is a major discovery with enormous implications for the future prosperity of humankind," said
Barber, the Ernst Chain Professor of Biochemistry at Imperial College London. "The importance of their
discovery cannot be overstated since it opens up the door for developing new technologies for energy
production thus reducing our dependence for fossil fuels and addressing the global climate change
problem."
HAYS DEBATE 73
Tournament Title
Yes Storage
New tech makes storage of solar energy viable on a large scale – solves all previous
limitations
AEN, Alternative Energy News, 8-4-„8 [MIT Develops Way to Bank Solar Energy at Home.
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/mit-bank-solar-energy-home/#more-434]
The fossil fuel scenario is pressing us to look for alternative sources of energy and that too, soon. We all are
tightening our purse strings when fuel prices are rising irrespective of whether we own a vehicle or not. We
need some dependable alternative source of energy to power our industries, offices and homes. Though we
have abundance of air water, sunlight and tidal forces on this earth to produce power but one limitation or
another always crops up before us which won‘t allow these power sources to replace the fossil fuels
completely. In one hour, enough sunlight strikes the earth to provide the entire planet‘s energy needs for one
year. But we have been unable to trap the unlimited power of sun till now. The main problem is storage of
sunlight. What should we do when the sun refuses to shine? Perhaps MIT professor Daniel Nocera might
have an answer. He thinks that sunlight has the greatest potential to be an alternative source of power for the
humankind. MIT‘s Daniel Nocera, the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy at MIT, is inspired by the
photosynthesis process of plants. He states ―Solar power has always been a limited, far-off solution. Now we
can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon.‖ MIT researchers have come up with a simple,
toxin free and highly efficient process for storing solar energy. During photosynthesis, plants use sunlight to
break water into hydrogen and oxygen atoms and later on the atoms recombine and produce energy. MIT
scientists have tried to duplicate this method of plants to store sun‘s energy. The main constituent in Nocera
and Kanan‘s procedure is a new catalyst that generates oxygen gas from water and another catalyst produces
hydrogen gas. The catalysts are cobalt and platinum. These new catalysts work at normal room temperature
in neutral pH water and the whole system can be installed easily. Nocera hopes that within 10 years,
homeowners will be able to power their homes in daylight through photovoltaic cells, while using excess
solar energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen to power their own household fuel cell. Electricity-by-wire
from a central source could be a thing of the past.
HAYS DEBATE 74
Tournament Title
At electrolyzers fail
Indicts of current electrolyzers do not apply
Sciencey Daily, 8-1-„8 ['Major Discovery' Primed To Unleash Solar Revolution: Scientists Mimic Essence Of
Plants' Energy Storage System. ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm]
Currently available electrolyzers, which split water with electricity and are often used industrially, are not
suited for artificial photosynthesis because they are very expensive and require a highly basic (non-benign)
environment that has little to do with the conditions under which photosynthesis operates.
HAYS DEBATE 75
Tournament Title
Storage - timeframe
Transition to total solar storage can happen in 10 years
Sciencey Daily, 8-1-„8 ['Major Discovery' Primed To Unleash Solar Revolution: Scientists Mimic Essence Of
Plants' Energy Storage System. ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm]
Nocera hopes that within 10 years, homeowners will be able to power their homes in daylight through
photovoltaic cells, while using excess solar energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen to power their own
household fuel cell. Electricity-by-wire from a central source could be a thing of the past.
HAYS DEBATE 76
Tournament Title
2ac – Nuclear bad add-on
Solar creates decentralized energy system that is incompatible with nuclear
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Until now it was regarded as almost offensive to ask about the costs of a grandiose technology effort such as fusion energy. Some
estimates, however, predict energy generation costs roughly ten times as large as those associated with fission reactors.79 Fusion power
plants will be very expensive because the surface needed to exchange heat must be very large. Additionally, the "energy payback time"
of a fusion reactor the period of time needed to produce more energy than required to construct it in the first place is likely to he
uneconomic. The physicist Benecke estimates that period to be 20 years for a reactor with a lifetime of probably only 30 years .14 But
assume the most optimistic position, which still admits that fusion generated electricity would cost two to three times as much as that
generated by conventional fission reactors." By way of comparison, it should he noted that there are even today at the very start
of the utilization of solar energy, wind power plants, solar power plants or biomass plants that match the
operating costs of existing nuclear plants or that produce power at lower cost, even without including the cost of nuclear waste
disposal. Even if there were not a hint of danger associated with the operation of fusion energy, there would he no economic reason to
pursue it as electricity from solar power is already more costefficient than can be expected of fusion in the best
possible case. If fusion energy ever becomes commercial it is safe to predict that solar energy will be far
more economical. There is not the slightest doubt that solar energies will continue to become cheaper with
increasing usage. This means that only if the potential for solar enelriv i:: ant large enough to assure
humanity's energy supply would there be a reason for continuing to support fusion energy. The potential is in
fact inexhaustible, global and much larger than will ever he needed. In short, fusion energy is superfluous in
view of the real opportunities for solar energy. A fusion reactor would be an even more extreme example of
centralized, expensive technology than a conventional nuclear power plant. A conventional reactor with a 1200 MW block
contains a core weighing 1000 tons; the core of a fusion reactor would range from 5000 to 30,000 tons. A fusion reactor would have an
output capacity of 5000 MW or more there are already design sketches for 200.000 MW behemoths which by comparison almost gives
a conventional nuclear power plant the aura of a decentralized plant. The prospect that the existing, mostly centralized power supply
structure would reach a climax of sorts with fusion energy is apparently one of the reasons why the power industry perseveres in its
insistence on pursuing that line of development and pointedly ignores the obvious advantages of solar energy. With fusion energy on the
scene, the existing energy supply structures, which for all practical purposes already represent states within the state, could be
perpetuated indefinitely into the future. Artificial fusion and natural solar energy delineate two essentially opposing
development philosophies. Those who are waiting for fusion energy have to maintain and expand the existing
centralist management structures. Users of solar energy must strive for diametrically opposite concepts. If
solar energy is used now and extended further and wider, an energy system will be created into which fusion
reactors will no longer fit.
Solar directly competes with nuclear
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
It follows, that, in principle, any use of nuclear or fossil energy should be avoided where, under reasonable
conditions, it is already possible to use solar energy. It is no longer acceptable that destructive energy is used
because of egotistical interests, thoughtlessness or laziness, if alternatives are available. At the very least, the
further use of current energy forms must no longer be permitted as soon as solar energy no longer presents
any unmanageable economic and functional disadvantages. This maxim offers a number of starting points for
the practical launch of a solar strategy.
HAYS DEBATE 77
Tournament Title
Add-on magnifier – fossil fuels
Solar energy can completely replace all conventional energy sources
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Proof must be provided that the potential of solar energy is sufficient to replace conventional energy sources
completely, that it can help to prevent climate catastrophes and other dangers deriving from conventional energy
utilization, and that it is capable of overcoming the lack of energy in developing countries. The total solar energy
potential is composed of the amount of energy actually available, the technical potential of energy conversion and
the economic potential for using these technologies. The remarks that follow are based on the current level of
technical development, the cost of solar energy installations and the cost of converted energy. They demonstrate a
market of real, sweeping new possibilities. There is no doubt that solar energy offers humanity a far greater energy
potential than it will ever he able to use inexhaustible as well as usable for all activities of all people, including
industrial applications. At a distance of 150 million km (93.75 million miles), the sun radiates incessantly a mere
fraction of its total energy output onto earth. In a quarter hour, the sun offers more energy than humanity consumes
in an entire year. Not all of it is, directly or indirectly, usable for man hot the usable potential is now one thousand
times larger than mankind's total annual energy consumption (comparing total energy consumption with the total
potential generating capacity using 15% efficient photovoltaic cells the current state of the art). To OECD countries
alone, the usable solar harvest is 170 times the final energy consumption, as indicated in Table 10 00 page 74. In the
CIS countries and Eastern Europe, the ratio is 400, while for developing countries it is 9502° Other calculations
indicate that solar plants with an efficiency of only 10% over a total area of 500,000 sq. km (195,000 sq. miles) in
North Africa's Sahara desert would be sufficient to supply all humanity with solar energy.°° Added to direct solar
radiation should be the potential for indirect solar energy: wind power, biomass, hydro power, wave energy. Only
20% of the annual growth of biomass is in theory sufficient to meet mankind's primary energy consumption 14
Scenarios for Active Solar Energy Utilization Statistics differ widely in estimating the current share of solar energy
in final energy consumption. With the exception of hydro power, the solar share is often ignored completely in these
statistics. The European Community's statistical office has, for the first time, attempted such a systematic inquiry. It
computed a share of 5.4% for 1991 and assumed that this share would rise to 9.6% by the year 2005. For the United
States, a current share of between 8 and 10% has been estimated. 95 Scientific scenarios assessing the possible
share of solar energy in a nation's energy supply arrive at results that are far above those claimed by the notorious
sceptics. A study by five American research institutes analyzing the potential for the United States found that, by
tripling research and development efforts, solar energy could achieve a share of 29% of the total American energy
supply by 2030. Additional political stimuli (higher taxes for conventional energy, tax concessions on solar energy
and reduction of administrative and informationbased barriers to the introduction of solar energy) could increase that
share to 50% or more in the same period .16
HAYS DEBATE 78
Tournament Title
Add-On – Hydrogen and Chemical industry
Solar energy must be used for hydrogen development
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
A solar energy economy will have a larger share for electricity than the nuclear fossil energy economy but
not all energetic processes that require fuels can be substituted by electricity and direct heat. A basic
disadvantage of solar energy carriers is that with the exception of biomass they do not produce any fuels
directly. While biomass energy carriers can substitute a large share of fossil energy resources because of their
physical characteristics (solid, liquid, gaseous), solar hydrogen represents another option to guarantee the
security of energy supplies.!" There are three basic reasons why hydrogen must be produced electrolytically
via solar-generated electricity: In instances in which even the combined supply of various solar energy
carriers may contain the risk of downtimes, hydrogen can be utilized as "stored sun" for additional power
generation. The solar hydrogen component is required for economical use of solar-generated power: when
we are approaching a level of power generation capacity sufficient to meet the demand of an entire country
or large supply regions, there will be plants which at times especially in the summer generate considerably
more electric power than can be distributed and than is immediately needed. In order not to waste this
electricity, it makes sense to employ these capacities for hydrogen production and to use the hydrogen as
energy, not for power supply purposes but as fuel, or for industrial process heat, in the steel industry, for
example, and as a substitute for coal. The steel industry alone contributes about 100/i to global CO,
emissions, in Brazil, for example, its operations contribute to the destruction of the tropical rain forest
because of its use of charcoal produced from wood from these endangered forests.
Thisis key to the chemical industry
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The huge demand for hydrogen in the chemical industry has been met so far with hydrogen produced from
fossil raw materials and with fossil energy. Replacing this part of hydrogen production by water
electrolysis driven by solar power in other words, the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen would
represent nothing less than the "greening" of the chemical industry. In the long term it would afford the
opportunity to produce the petrochemicals needed by industry from the combination of solar hydrogen and
oil derived from hiomass. In the steelproducing sector, substituting hydrogen for coal would bring about an
emissionfree production process.
HAYS DEBATE 79
Tournament Title
AT Hydrogen solar = centralized
Solar hydrogen facilities will be decentralized
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
But, most of all, detractors point to the high costs of hydrogen on top of the costs for solar energy. They also
point to the dangers that they say would arise due to centralization if hydrogen production facilities were
sited in a few desert locations only an argument that was at the centre of attention at the beginning of the
hydrogen debate, However, there will he no need for central sites because, on one hand, there is the prospect
of an environmentally benign replacement of fuels by biomass, which will make a faster breakthrough
because of cost advantages. On the other hand production of solar hydrogen will have to take its cue from the
efficiency criteria of, by then largely decentralized, solar electricity production. This means: economical
hydrogen production does not start with some large solar plants somewhere in the desert, but with smaller
units in smaller areas with real cost advantages over large systems with the help of electricity from hydro
power, wind power or biogas plants, perhaps even in homes with decentralized electrolysis plants. Large
facilities may not be added until later.
HAYS DEBATE 80
Tournament Title
At Zoning
Federal support overcomes zoning issues
Corry Berkooz, former planning director of Schuyler County, New York, 6-„8 [Let the Sun Shine In: Recent
federal funding encourages planning departments to take the lead in residential solar programs.
http://www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=200007]
But incorporating solar technology into zoning codes can be complicated. Solar energy systems involve a
broad spectrum of planning interests: safety, economics, environmental, and visual aspects that affect the
quality of life and involve many groups, from home owners to utility companies to fire departments. Even
more stakeholders will be involved in the future, given the federal government's growing support of
renewable energy sources.
HAYS DEBATE 81
Tournament Title
AT Silicon
Silicon production capacity will triple
Peter Lorenz et al., associate principal in McKinsey's Houston office 6-„8 [―The economics of solar power‖ The
McKinsey Quarterly. Thomas Seitz is a director; Dickon Pinner is a principal in the San Francisco office.
www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/pdf/Economics_of_Solar.pdf ]
Cell manufacturers shouldn't overreact to this tight environment by making big bets on supply and demand
contracts for polysilicon or by forging onerous partnerships with suppliers. High margins have encouraged
incumbents to add capacity and have attracted new entrants. Many observers have therefore been predicting
that global polysilicon production capacity will at least triple from 2005 to 2010, and our forecasts indicate
that demand for the material will only double during the same period. This mismatch suggests that the spot
price of polysilicon wafers could drop from over $200 a ton to the variable cost of production-as little as
$25 to $50.
HAYS DEBATE 82
Tournament Title
AT solar is supplementary
This linguistic framing of solar as supplementary ensures extinction.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
To the extent that their existence is acknowledged at all by the energy policy and the business
establishment, solar energies are regarded as mere 'supplementary" energies. The term implies that solar
energy is not a viable replacement for conventional energy carriers, but merely one means of supplying the
additional amounts of energy that conventional energy cannot supply. This linguistic usage relegates solar
energy to the level of some kind of accessory to the main energy supply, suitable for luxury and secondary
demand, but not for "real" power plants and "real" energy equipment. If this limited interpretation remains
in vogue, the current generation may as well order the coffins for its descendants now.
HAYS DEBATE 83
Tournament Title
At solar hurts environment
Reject their absolutist standards - Despite environmental burdens solar is the only
alternative to extinction.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
It is true that even solar energy technologies create environmental burdens. Naturally their installation must
proceed with careful regard for the land. Nevertheless, these objections, presented occasionally by some
conservationists, pale in comparison with their alternatives. They indicate that the hierarchy of danger is
frequently not taken into account in assessing environmental burdens. It is environmentally disproportionate
to equate the irreversible dangers for man from traditional energy sources with reversible regional
intervention in nature via solar energy utilization. Naturally, a virgin section of coastline is more beautiful,
but the choice is not an unspoiled coast versus wind power plants, but continued oil spills into the sea, CO2
emissions, and electricity from nuclear power versus wind power plant. The real equation is that for every
averagesized windpower plant not constructed, 1000 tons of CO2 are emitted annually by coal fired power
plants. It is environmentally irresponsible to oppose the construction of a wind power plant because of
concern about nature conservation and thus implicitly accept that the destruction of nature by nuclear or
fossil energy cannot be reduced by a corresponding amount. To put it bluntly, there is a tendency to tie the
introduction of solar energy to the precondition of absolute nature conservancy where not even the trace of a
problem remains. But when such projects fail, the process of total destruction continues. If such absolute
standards were applied to energy conservation, the imbalance would be much greater since cutting current
energy consumption in half would still mean that the other half would continue to he used, with
corresponding consequences. Evidently, these reservations of some environmental protection groups are
perhaps better explained on psychological grounds. Environmental protection has been a rather defensive
effort, aimed at the prevention of further destruction by legal restrictions and prohibitions. Replacing
conventional energy with solar energy is an act of offensive transformation. Since it is much more difficult to
formulate a "yes" on behalf of a new development than merely a "no" to existing conditions, many more
people reject the current energy system than argue courageously on behalf of an ambitious solar alternative.
Ludicrously, environmental impact statements have even been demanded for some reforestation programmes.
HAYS DEBATE 84
Tournament Title
AT Land Use
Solar frees up land
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
It has already been shown that economically appropriate use of solar energies reduces the amount of land
needed for energy supply. Once solar cells on roofs and wind farms on grazing land replace traditional
power plants, including the mining regions for primary energy, additional land will be gained instead of lost!
HAYS DEBATE 85
Tournament Title
AT solar costly
Cost is not a reason to reject – the alternative is extinction
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
These cost studies should not be over emphasised. Even if solar energy's "competitiveness" simply isn't
there in comparison with that of conventional energy carriers, and could never hope to match it, the path
towards solar energy should he taken, without hesitation, in any event because of the overriding concerns
for the continued assurance of human existence. For the same reasons, there were seldom any questions
about costs when it came to matters of military security, unless it was a matter of comparing the costs of
different weapons technologies to achieve a given goal. With solar energy, the question about costs or the
"energy balance" is raised with such notorious frequency, because the questioners typically want to use the
answers as an argument to block solar energy. High costs are supposed to have an intimidating effect and to
prove economic "unreasonableness" or even "irresponsibility". Enormous costs did not matter at all when
nuclear power was at the early stages of development, because the goal of a supposedly inexhaustible
energy supply in the future was paramount. These comparisons show, the carefully planned poisoning of
the atmosphere surrounding solar technology, and how strenuously the opponents were searching for killer
arguments against solar as if human beings operate at every instant of their everyday lives exclusively
according to "economic" principles. However, it is obviously true that the conversion of our energy system
into a solar energy system will he achieved more rapidly and with less friction the lower the costs.
HAYS DEBATE 86
Tournament Title
***2AC OFF CASE***
HAYS DEBATE 87
Tournament Title
DISADS
HAYS DEBATE 88
Tournament Title
2ac – AT DAs – plan solves all impacts
Decentralized Solar solves all impacts- economy, war, warming, gender, human rights
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Since individual human beings cannot pick and choose among energy systems, a car or aeroplane journey creates a
guilty conscience. The younger generation, in particular, is now denied a life free of anxiety because of the
destructive consequences of the energy system and the resulting mental and emotional costs have become
incalculable. Liberation from this fear is conceivable only in one of two ways: either by accepting the system's
consequences and thereby the increasing ruthlessness and brutalization of human relations as if those privileged by
today's energy system had the right to he the sole and the last surviving human beings on this earth or by
consciously and decisively reorienting the energetic foundations of society to the sun's powers. Precisely because
energy is the most fundamental of all issues, the existing energy system violates the very basis of human rights and
the longer this continues, the worse it becomes. There is an obligation to attempt everything possible not simply to
mitigate the worsening climate catastrophe, but to prevent it. Nevertheless, the importance of solar energies to
society would be fundamental for human development even without the global environmental crisis and without the
limitations of conventional energy resources. Clearly, the utilization of solar energy is economically and socially the fundamental innovation for
the global community. its rapid introduction consequently represents a unique opportunity to: integrate the economy and thus redirect
evolution's deadly detour, exemplified by the fact that this essential union has been turned into its antithesis, with fossil and nuclear energy as
the most significant and most dangerous examples; provide a stable and independent economic foundation in developing countries, slow down
population growth and prevent international migratory movements; permit industrial development in developing countries with the widespread
use of nature's solar energy supply, arid not simply a bad imitation of the North's own industrial growth. To the extent that solar energy is
independent of centralized energy supply centres and infrastructures, the classic migration from rural to urban areas and the formation of
evergrowing, densely populated urban regions can he avoided; • create new production structures and markets in which all
economies and all people can participate, and which can be driving forces for the creation of innumerable new industrial and skilled
production jobs; • relieve economies of the everincreasing costs that result from their traditional trading methods; • reverse the, until now
unstoppable, trend towards everincreasing centralization of economic and political structures and the attendant bureaucratization and social
inflexibility; • reduce international inequalities and make energy autonomy possible for every nation. Based on
the direct connection between disposal of conventional energy, capital accumulation, extremely uneven distri
bution of wealth within the world economy and international depend ency, a new interrelation between
solar energy, widely distributed capital, a more equitable distribution of the world's resources and
economic partnership might arise; prevent continuous and increasing tensions, crises and conflicts,
which in many cases are caused by the unequal availability of conventional energy sources; prevent
further global energy crises of the type experienced in the 1970s. Another energy crisis would finally plunge the
greater part of developing countries into a horrorfilled delirium. For that reason they have no other choice but to
take immediately the direct road away from the age of oil and towards the age of solar energy; •
overcome traditional social hierarchies as well as discrimination against women in developing
countries, thus providing a viable sociological basis for democratic development based on human rights. Both of
these are linked to the de facto energyslave status, which in turn is caused by a shortage of energy; offer
mankind [humankind] a prospect of survival that would overcome its spreading fatalism about the future and which
in terms of social psychology would create a new mood of societal motivation. To reject these opportunities
merely because of the currently extra in some cases only minimally higher costs of a few cents per kilowatt hour or
per gallon of fuel is nothing less than sheer lunacy on the part of monomaniacal political and economic leadership
elites. They represent an "economy of death", as the American arms critic Richard Barnet calls it. Neither their
increased power nor their elitist arrogance can distract attention from that. Solar energies, on the other hand, promise
an "economy of suivival" environmentally, economically and socially, in terms of developmental and industrial policies and politics. With
them, it will no longer be a matter of "faster, higher, further", which has both fascinated and demanded too much of mankind in this century, and
not only in competitive sports. Instead, it promises to make life as we live it more compatible both with the natural world and with human nature,
linked to a generally higher standard of living and, all in all, an improved quality of life. Solar energy is the energy of the people.
HAYS DEBATE 89
Tournament Title
2ac – AT DAs – plan solves all impacts
All inequality and oppression are rooted in the form of our energy consumption – we must
shift our current patterns to avoid extinction.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Modern consumption patterns have become dangerous, mostly because of their intimate links to orgies of
energy consumption. The population explosion is deeply rooted in the fact that people because they have no
access to usable energy seek survival through the classic escape route of increasing human work energy by
increasing the size of their families. Poverty is prevalent mostly in those regions of the world without
sufficient energy sources and services, the basis of all economic development. The fact that environmental
quality and human health are endangered by current energy supply patterns needs no emphasis in the age of
smog in urban areas and of Chernobyl. Man's economic activities are at the centre of societal development.
In turn the core of any economic activity is the use of readily available energy. Those who regard "energy
policy" or the "energy industry" as one of several policies or economic sectors as a single, speciality issue
have neither recognized nor understood the basic cause of the dynamics of environmental destruction. If they
do not understand that, they cannot find a solution. It is no accident that the history of human development
has always been a history of the various energy supply options. Environment, agriculture, industrial
production, transportation, development these and other sectors of the present age, which thinks and acts
almost exclusively in terms of division of labour, are primarily sectors of energy politics and the energy
economy. To a vastly underestimated degree, they affect international, national and local politics and policies
and their structures. Questions of power or dependence, wealth or poverty, privilege or equality, destruction
or survival of human societies have always been decided by that key criterion of who has access to energy.
This has now evolved into a question of the survival or death of global society. Energy is the lifeline of any
natural and societal development. No natural and no societal life process can be imagined or described
without reference to its energy requirement. Ecology deals with issues of energy conversion and the
transformation of matter in ecosystems. For this reason, the manner in which we consume energy has created
more than a narrow set of problems that can be solved by a single industry sector or a specialized political
department. All humanity is threatened with decline because the energy supply system of the 20th century
has all-encompassing destructive consequences the exhaustion of oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear energy, and
the self-destructive energy exploitation of developing countries, including loss of their vegetation. All this
has produced a cancer in society's organism that keeps metastasizing in more and more parts of its body and
is systematically eating it away. The energy crisis becomes a crisis for humanity.
HAYS DEBATE 90
Tournament Title
K the DA - security
Focus on national security interests always pushes off energy policies necessary to sustain
all life – weigh the da against guaranteed extinction.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
An intrinsic part of this goal is to protect society from life's dangers. For this reason, state security has always
had a leading role, not subject to much controversy even in many democratic societies. Now, for the first
time in history, the question of maintaining the natural and, with them, the social foundations of life has
become the security matter for the future, even for those societies not yet subject to frequent natural
catastrophes. For the first time, classical foreign and security policy are unable to combat the principal
threats. "What use is the best social policy when the Cossacks are at the gates?" German chancellor Adenauer
used to ask in the 1950s to justify the primacy of military strength in Western politics. Today we have to ask:
what use is military security, if the brush fire of our energy consumption burns, dries up, sweeps away and
irradiates everything that lives or is needed for life? In 1961, the German political philospher Dolf
Sternberger described the maintenance of peace as the principal subject of politics, because it is the basis of
any society's life.9 This is even more fundamentally true of peace with nature. The maintenance of the
natural foundations of life must be the "People's Road" of politics. In the face of this challenge, those who
claim to be practising realpolitik are moving on a shaky, unreal foundation. Not only do the governing
paradigms of politics and economics deprive large segments of the human population of life's fundamentals,
but they render those available in developed societies increasingly uncertain. Those mainly responsible for
this state of affairs cannot even come up with an appropriate counterconcept, and that is why their policies
must fail, A "realism" incapable of warding off the essential threats to society's structure can no longer be
called "political". At best it is a selfish realism, fighting for a place for oneself among the elite who, just
possibly, may have the dubious privilege of being the last to be defeated. Political action has atrophied to the
point where it is merely the best means to cope with existing structures. It fails as soon as a political answer
to real problems demands questioning these structures and moving beyond them. Oskar Negt and Alexander
Kluge, observing these "relational measures of politics", have argued that realpolitik turns out to be "useless"
if one ceases to be fascinated by "the artistes of the possible" but looks instead at "the visible results of this
type of 20th century politics". It "does not produce anything of permanence and, for that very reason, no
(sense of) community .... Faced with interests that took their cue from (a sense of) community and that saw
themselves as political forces, realpolitik has always invoked the derogatory point of view of the merely
utopian and thus contributed to the mystification of the real power of the status quo. What we are criticizing
in this realpolitik is not its momentum of realism but that it is imaginary, without reality".")
HAYS DEBATE 91
Tournament Title
AT - investor confidence
Investor confidence in solar is dropping – lack of governement certainty blocks innovation
Nichola Groom and Matt Daily, IHT staff writers, 6-2-„8, [―Alternative Energy on Edge in U.S.‖ International
Herald Tribune. http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1411912/alternative_energy_on_edge_in_us/]
Anxiety is setting in among companies specializing in solar and wind power, and the investors that are
backing them, as U.S. lawmakers delay the extension of tax credits deemed critical for the burgeoning
renewable energy industry. After several failed attempts by Congress to prolong alternative energy
subsidies that are set to expire at the end of this year, companies are bracing for the worst by cutting jobs
and trying to increase their sales in Europe, where generous government incentives are more certain. "It
certainly is affecting business," said Mike Splinter, chief executive of Applied Materials, a maker of solar
equipment. "It's a major issue for the solar industry," Splinter said. "We've seen hundreds of cities and
many states start to adopt their own rules, and we can't pass even the simplest, smallest of incentives."
Unpredictable solar incentives cause foreign investors to pullout of US industry
Nichola Groom and Matt Daily, IHT staff writers, 6-2-„8, [―Alternative Energy on Edge in U.S.‖ International
Herald Tribune. http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1411912/alternative_energy_on_edge_in_us/]
The Solar Energy Solutions division of Sharp, the Japanese electronics company, is seeing a strong increase
in demand as its clients scramble to finish projects before the U.S. tax credits expire, said Ron Kenedi, vice
president of the division. But he warned that projects would be halted if an extension of the credits did not
materialize. "When you have a stoppage it gets tough to invest, and you get people thinking about, 'Maybe I
shouldn't do it now' - and that's not a good thing," Kenedi said.
HAYS DEBATE 92
Tournament Title
Politics – Bush opposes solar
Bush opposes even modest increases in solar incentives
Nichola Groom and Matt Daily, IHT staff writers, 6-2-„8, [―Alternative Energy on Edge in U.S.‖ International
Herald Tribune. http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1411912/alternative_energy_on_edge_in_us/]
The latest bill includes about $20 billion of incentives that extend for one year the federal tax credit for
companies that produce electricity from wind, and extend it for three years for power generated from
biomass, geothermal, hydropower, landfill gas and solid waste. Businesses and homeowners would also be
able to offset 30 percent of the cost of solar or fuel-cell equipment purchased before 2014 with a one-time tax
credit. The measure passed in the House last month, but the White House threatened to veto it. Democrats
have said election-year pressures and soaring gasoline prices will eventually lead to an extension of the
subsidies. But that confidence is not shared by the industry.
HAYS DEBATE 93
Tournament Title
Politics – AT pub popularity
Public support of solar does not influence government action.
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
As a hostile Congress and an indifferent president cut federal R&D expenditures for solar in 1995, solar
enthusiasts began to search for other sources of money. The problem was not lack of citizen interest; all polls
continued to show massive support for solar energy, as they had for over two decades.23 But that public
sentiment was not getting translated into action by the private and governmental institutions that dominate
energy policy in the United States. For solar advocates left penniless by the vagaries of energy policy, ―green
pricing‖ became the new holy grail.The concept of green pricing was simple: solar energy would be paid for
by consumers who voluntarily agreed to pay a premium of a few dollars each month for ―green‖electricity in
some form.
HAYS DEBATE 94
Tournament Title
Politics – GOP supports plan
GOP support of solar tax credits.
Ayesha Rascoe, reuters news service, 8-1-„8 [― US Bill Renewing Clean Energy Credits Fails Vote‖
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/49620/story.htm]
US legislation extending renewable energy and energy-efficiency tax credits failed a key procedural vote
Wednesday and lawmakers will now set the bill aside, at least temporarily. The extensive tax package
includes measures providing an eight-year extension of solar energy investment credits, and a one-year
extension of tax credits for biodiesel, renewable diesel and wind power. The bill required 60 "yes" votes in
the 100-member Senate to move forward, but received only 51, with 43 opposed. Lawmakers who support
the legislation introduced by Sen. Max Baucus say the package is necessary to support investment in the US
renewable energy industry. The renewable energy industry says the delays are causing uncertainty in the
industry and jeopardizing new projects. "This is just one piece of the puzzle," said Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid. "But it is an important piece -- and one that can make a difference in energy prices immediately."
The package also authorizes US$2 billion in clean energy bonds to help finance facilities generating
electricity from renewable energy. In addition to the energy measures, the tax package would also add US$8
billion to the Highway Trust Fund, renew the research and development tax credit for businesses, and also
raise the income level at which Americans must pay the Alternative Minimum tax. Although the tax
legislation stalled Wednesday, it is not dead. The bill can be brought to a vote again, and Reid said he is open
to negotiating with Republicans to get the bill passed. Republican leaders expressed support for the tax
package, but said they wanted to focus on passing legislation that would increase domestic oil production.
HAYS DEBATE 95
Tournament Title
2ac Uniqueness - solar investment inevitable
Solar investment inevitable – demand for AE will increase regardless of subsidies
Nichola Groom and Matt Daily, IHT staff writers, 6-2-„8, [―Alternative Energy on Edge in U.S.‖ International
Herald Tribune. http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1411912/alternative_energy_on_edge_in_us/]
Still, at least one investor says he believes the industry will thrive no matter what happens to subsidies
because they are just one factor underpinning the skyrocketing demand for renewable energy sources. "The
chief worry is not that demand may slow, the chief worry is how fast can they make their business grow,"
said Kevin Landis, chief investment officer of Firsthand Funds, an investment firm based in San Jose,
California. Firsthand Funds counts Akeena, Suntech Power Holdings and Sharp among its portfolio of
renewable energy stocks. "That's the right kind of problem to have," Landis added. "I wouldn't shed any
tears about end demand right now."
HAYS DEBATE 96
Tournament Title
2ac – plan solves heg
Without a total shift to solar energy US Hegemony becomes unsustainable
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Paul Kennedy, in his widely noted historical study about the rise and fall of the great powers, has described
the factors of such a rise: military strength, the gratification of social and economic needs of the people, and
the safeguarding of lasting economic growth."' If one of these three components of national power fails for a
prolonged period of time, decline becomes inevitable. The Soviet Union broke up because it had only
military strength left. The United States also bases its global role as leader of the pack mainly on military
strength, and it is less and less able to meet the economic and social needs of its population, let alone assure
its economic future. The other two Western power centres, Western Europe and Japan, face increasing
difficulties. If Kennedy is right, and he predicted the dissolution and national breakup of the Soviet Union in
his study written in the mid1980s, the West with its egocentrism is likely to face unimaginable turbulence
and dislocations. The "First World" exerts such a degree of dominance, including an unprecedented level of
uniformity in economic thinking, over the suppressed or declining "Fourth", "Third" and "Second" Worlds
that their continued fate depends, for better or worse, on the fate of the West. Since the West commands a
position of superior economic strength, most of world opinion believes that the "Victory of the West" now
means global progress at all levels. But on the question of destroying the environment via energy
consumption, this unique hegemony rather threatens the opposite. The Western model is the most destructive,
clearly evidenced by the fact that 80% of the world's energy is consumed by 20% Of the world's population,
despite its higher energy efficiency. When the West now wants to use its economic prescription for energy
reform in developing countries, it acts like an unreformed alcoholic who wants to recommend the proper
withdrawal treatments for others. Without a radical shift of the world's energy supply system to non-
destructive solar energy sources without a solar revolution in the wake of inc industrial Revolution the
Western model of democracy and capitalism is not the perfection of history but its execution.
HAYS DEBATE 97
Tournament Title
AT military tradeoff DA
No challengers – plan will not threaten US security
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The bottom line: at $113 million, the United States Government in 1990 spent less on solar technology
development than the costs of one transport plane, a BlB bomber or a single nuclear missile! To clarify the
orders of magnitude involved here: imagine that the United States gave up in each of the next ten years only
one each of the ten Trident submarines, 49 Arleigh Burke destroyers, 62 Los Angeles attack submarines, 120
C17 transports, one of the 100 BlB bombers, one each of the 114 MX missiles and of the 807 Trident
missiles, one each of the 1168 F/A 18, 2189 F16s and 811 Apache attack helicopters and spent those sums on
solar technology; the country would have an additional annual budget of $3.66 billion for renewable
energies! (See illustration 3, a graphic of these relationships, on page 45). Imagine further, that the US
converted the military SDI programme to a "Solar Development Initiative" and put the planned average
annual outlays of $6 billion (to 1997) into solar technology development. The total annual budget for public
support of solar technology development would he almost SlO hill ion more than all countries taken together
spent on it during the 1980s. Not even the most paranoid American security fanatic could argue this would
endanger military security. Indeed even if all these defence projects were cut back by 50% to provide funding
for environmental technologies of the future, nobody could seriously argue that this would endanger national
security. Even if the United States were to eliminate completely all these military procurement programmes,
it would not make a dent in America's far superior military power. However, because of political ideology
and collusion of interests, the American leadership has failed to recognize so far that its claim to world
leadership means the nation must embark on an allpervasive conversion of the armaments business and a
technological orientation towards environmental safety. (Some of these issues are being addressed by the
Clinton administration.)
HAYS DEBATE 98
Tournament Title
COUNTERPLANS
HAYS DEBATE 99
Tournament Title
AT States CP
States incentives still favor centralized solar and even if changed cannot make up for
federal bias.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
Some states and utilities provide funding to make up some of the gap in federal incentives between
commercial and residential solar generators. Typically, state and utility programs focus on small-scale
installations. States have several tools at their disposal, from upfront system cost rebates, to performance
based tax credits, to sales and property tax exemptions. Utilities tend to favor rebates or production
incentives. Table 3 lists the solar PV incentives provided by states and their utilities.26 States are listed if
they or their utilities offer a rebate or tax credit. In some states, producers may be able to choose between a
rebate or production incentive, and both are listed. States with only a sales or property tax exemption are not
listed. Table 4 shows incentives for concentrating solar (called solar thermal electric).27 This table is much
smaller, since many states and utilities do not provide incentives for solar concentrators. Instead of
―buydown‖ programs, as are used with solar PV, incentives for concentrating solar are ―performance
incentives,‖ paid per kWh produced. [Note: Some states are changing or are considering changing their
solar PV buydown programs into performance based incentives.] State and utility incentives cannot erase
the federal bias toward commercial systems, despite more attention to residential development. Only
Connecticut reduces the break-even price of 2 kW residential solar to below that of a similar commercial
installation. In some states, the incentive structure increases the disparity between commercial and
residential systems. However, state incentives do level the playing field between large and small. In at least
15 states, the price per kWh of small-scale commercial PV is less than large-scale (25 MW) PV, once state
and utility incentives are factored in. This is largely due to project size caps on state or utility incentives.
There‘s no question that state incentives are a significant benefit for any solar PV installation. In several
states, the cost of power from a residential, small-scale solar PV system drops from $0.41 per kWh with
federal subsidies to less than $0.25 per kWh with the additional state incentive. With incentives in six states,
small-scale commercial PV projects can break even with a price of power of $0.10 per kWh, comparable to
large-scale solar. Concentrating solar also benefits from state incentives. In Nevada, property tax
exemptions and other incentives shave off 20% of the capital cost over 10 years. These benefits are entirely
for large-scale projects and commercial entities, since concentrating solar is currently only built at the
megawatt scale. In the end, state incentives aren‘t sufficient to make up the difference between residential
PV and commercial solar, whether PV or concentrating. However, in several cases, state incentives do
provide small-scale, commercial PV with an edge over large-scale PV, and perhaps even concentrating
solar. We can expect that for both decentralized PV and centralized solar thermal electric power, as
production expands and project sizes grow, unsubsidized costs will decline over time. To some extent, this
is reflected in recent projects. Nevada Solar One, the most recently completed concentrating solar plant,
came in at $4,000 per kW. And the proposed Southern California Edison 250 MW solar PV project
promises an installed cost of $3,500 per kW.28 This compares to an installed cost of $8,000 per kW for
typical small-scale solar PV projects in California. Off the Balance Sheet The impact of government
incentives for solar goes far beyond the financial balance sheet. The incentive structure skews toward
commercially-owned solar, limits local ownership and lowers the potential economic benefits of solar. The
bias also has implications for decentralized power generation, grid stability, and firm power production.
HAYS DEBATE 100
Tournament Title
AT States CP
Perm solves best – states and federal should align incentives for solar.
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
However, public renewable energy policy should not play favorites. Recent data suggests that solar PV and
solar concentrators are close to price parity. But federal incentives heavily favor large-scale, commercial
solar plants at the expense of decentralized and residential solar. This economic favoritism costs
communities many of the off balance sheet benefits of decentralized, locally owned projects. We need the
benefits of both centralized and decentralized power to move the United States toward a clean energy
future. There are simple ways to level the playing field. If the Investment Tax Credit is renewed, it should
remove the cap on benefits to residential producers. As states and utilities provide rebates or tax
incentives, they shouldn‘t constrain residential development with smaller caps. And most importantly,
both state and federal governments should pursue production-based incentives for solar power, since they
align incentives and allow those without large tax liability to participate in renewable energy production.
HAYS DEBATE 101
Tournament Title
AT States CP
State Utilities currently lack federal oversight on DOE Fuding – counterplan ensures that
utilities maintain control over PV installations
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
The utilities have shown every intention of maintaining tight control over the development of photovoltaics,
a potentially disruptive new technology with respect to the status quo.108 The Department of Energy sees the
electric utilities as the prime market for photovoltaics and seems ready to hand over the decision-making
power concerning DOE funds to the Utility Photovoltaic Group, providing for minimal oversight. The Utility
Photovoltaic Group has written the TEAM-UP proposal (Building Technology Experience to Accelerate
Markets in Utility Photovoltaics), which would commit the DOE to a $160-million program—supposedly to
be matched with about $350 million from utility customers or stockholders—to subsidize the price of
photovoltaic modules and allow the installation of 32 megawatts of large-scale, utility- controlled PV arrays
through the year 2000. A subsidiary part of this project seeks DOE funding to maintain a ―market
aggregation‖ office, to help the utilities negotiate wholesale PV purchases from manufacturers, and thus
effectively drive independent PV installers out of business. According to the utility group‘s proposal, the
ideal TEAM-UP program director must be an ―experienced utility industry manager . . . [who is] . . .well
accepted by the utility constituency,‖ and utilities will be guaranteed a majority on the board of directors and
working committees which advise and consent on all major decisions. Basically, representatives of the utility
industry will get to channel the public‘s money wherever they choose, with no formal public oversight and
no representation from homebuilders, independent PV installers, environmentalists, labor unions, or even the
Department of Energy. Though the TEAM-UP grant proposal conceded that there was ―no guarantee‖ that
the grant would create ―widespread and sustainable commercialization . . . and lower prices‖ for photovoltaic
manufacturers, TEAM-UP estimated government subsidies would double domestic PV sales and double or
triple the number of utilities that normally include photovoltaics in their product mix.109
HAYS DEBATE 102
Tournament Title
AT States CP
Governement support of local control is crucial
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
An energized, democratic solar movement would use government leverage to accelerate the establishment
of a vigorous photovoltaics market, which would contribute to local economic development and local
control over the economy. The genius of photovoltaic technology is that it fosters a genuine ―free
market‖—more than any other form of energy production, because sunlight falls everywhere and is free
.While the TEAM-UP program of the Utility Photovoltaic Group would increase short-term buys of
photovoltaics, it is anathema to the goal of a democratic solar transition. The reason is simple. Turning over
photovoltaics to the electric utilities perverts the decentralized potential of PV technology in order to
support the needs of a highly centralized system of finance and control. Instead of becoming a tool to
encourage local self-reliance, photovoltaics would thereby serve the opposite tendency.
HAYS DEBATE 103
Tournament Title
AT States CP / AT State Bad K
Federal action is crucial to prevent fascism – demanding solar incentives at the federal level
invigorates movements against authoritarianism – Spain proves.
Roni Krouzman, writer, activist and citizen, 2-21-„5 [―Fill the Vacuum‖
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0221-21.htm]
As Americans commemorate President's Day, Spanish historians are marking an important date in their own
nation's history as well. It was on February 21, 1936 that Right Wing general Francisco Franco was relieved
of his command and sent to the Canary Islands. Franco's holiday there would not last long. Just under five
months later, he would launch his infamous coup d'etat, spawning a brutal three-year civil war that would
lead to the establishment of a fascist state in Spain and harbor ominous warnings for the rest of Europe.
Franco did not only win because his forces were strong; he also won because his opposition was weak.
Because the majority of the Left and the Right had abandoned the Spanish state, there was no national
government to speak of left to fight him. By the 1930s, both the Left and the Right in Spain had lost faith in
the national government. The Left saw it as an oppressive capitalist force, and the Right saw it as too liberal
and permissive. Today, the United States stands at a similar crossroads: the Left is becoming increasingly
disgusted with politics and the political system - especially after the last two elections - and an increasingly
authoritarian Right is taking over. And it is taking over almost everywhere, from the presidency, the federal legislature, our
national court system and our major national political parties, down to my local school board, which is appointing conservative,
authoritarian school administrators in one of the most liberal parts of the country. God only knows what is happening in Kansas and
Alabama. On the Left, we are beginning to panic, because we all understand - deep to the very core of our beings - that to travel
down the tragic road that Spain and Germany and Italy did during the first half of the last century - at a time
when our government possesses unparalleled powers to persecute domestic dissidents and, along with an
expanding array of other countries, a stockpile of nuclear weapons with the capacity to destroy the world
many times over - would lead to a disaster unprecedented in human history, one that may end life on Earth as
we know it. If we are to avert such a disaster, we must draw our inspiration from the past, by looking to
popular movements that succeeded in achieving peace and justice without resorting to violence. Thankfully,
there were many that did so, and they left many valuable lessons. Yet if we are to succeed, we must also do
some things differently. We must learn from those popular movements that failed, namely those that
abandoned their national governments, because they hold profound lessons as well. In most countries, the Right stands on
many legs, and that makes it seem powerful. But that unity is invariably built upon many contradictions, and each of those legs
embodies at least one vulnerable Achilles' heal. Today, one of the Right's most glaring Achilles' heals is the fact that at the same time it
is dismantling much of our government in both word and deed, it also depends on government power to maintain foreign and domestic
control. And here-in lies an extraordinary opportunity, if we are willing to let go of past labels and broaden our worldview. The Right
is going for broke, gambling that it can dismantle much of the State apparatus and still maintain support and
control. Today, the Left has the once in a few decades opportunity to call the Right's bluff, to build a popular
movement that will not only stop the Right in its tracks but use its energy to move us closer to the peaceful,
just, sustainable society we all dream of quicker than we ever thought imaginable. To call that bluff, we can
do one simple thing: as citizens, we can fill the vacuum. And there is no better time to start than now, several
months after the Presidential election, at a time when the Right is making clear its foreign and domestic priorities for the years to come
and the Left is grappling for new strategies. As spring approaches, we have fertile ground in which to plant our seeds. In my town of
San Rafael - as in the majority of municipalities across the country - the Right's retreat at the national level is causing growing hardship
locally. Though San Rafael is located in the wealthiest county in California, our library has shortened its hours and slashed its budget
for new books. The schools here are laying-off teachers. The roads are not being as well maintained and the cultural programs are
disappearing. As progressives, we are always torn between wanting to build something beautiful but also knowing we must stop what is
ugly. This dilemma amounts to a heart-wrenching Catch-22: How can we promote justice and sustainability when we
need to stop war and destruction? And yet how can we stop war and destruction without building justice and
sustainability? Today, we can do both: we can build while we oppose. We can use the Right's energy to our
advantage, and as it comes charging toward us, shift our stance a bit and flip those forces over onto their backs, where they can lay in a
daze and watch as we build a new society. This may sound like a grand vision, and in some ways it is. But mostly it's quite simple: As
the Right abandons the State, we can rush in to fill the void. As the Right cuts funding for our schools, we can step in
and not only support our public schools, but create out of their shells the progressive, nurturing institutions they can and ought to be. As
the Right cuts funding for health care, we can take over our local public hospitals and expand their missions. As the Right cuts funding
for our cultural institutions, we can rush in to support those institutions and use our newfound power to make their mandates more
progressive than they've ever been. And even when it comes to the police, when the Right cuts funding for cops, we may choose to rush
in and use our newfound power to create more community policing positions, and enact stronger guidelines to protect our freedoms and
our bodies from police abuse. Sometimes, taking over our local institutions will come only after difficult struggles. Other times we will
face virtually no resistance. In any case, we can count on a basic tenant of human organization that holds true from the most liberal
democracies to the most authoritarian dictatorships: whether crafting economic policies or putting in new speed bumps, the world is run
by those who show up. Across America, the Right is showing up. From national elections to local school boards, the conservative base
is taking over our democratic institutions and altering the very nature of our country. Today, the Left must do the same. We cannot
afford to make the mistakes our predecessors made in much of Europe during the 1920s and 30s. Instead, we must show up. And as we
do so, we can use our newfound power not only to stop the Right and take back our country and our communities, but to demand that
HAYS DEBATE 104
Tournament Title
our institutions become more just and sustainable as well. We can demand that all police uniforms issued by the police department we
now control - with a new mandate and more progressive practices - be made of organic cotton in fair trade factories that minimize
pollution. We can demand that all our schools conserve energy and run on solar power and provide their
students with healthy food and pay their cafeteria workers a living wage. The same holds true for our
political freedoms and institutions. If the Right is intent on destroying the Bill of Rights, let us embrace its valuable protections
- to freedom of expression, and due process, and liberty from unwarranted search and seizure - and educate our fellow citizens about
why they are important, and even seek to strengthen the protections they provide and apply them to new realms, throughout every
government agency and even throughout the private sector. As the Democratic Party loses power, let us do what my friend Janis and her
friends did, and what Michael Moore has begged us to do for years: let us take over its local committees and make the Democrats into a
true People's Party. Such action will require a major shift in our worldview, from looking at government and
dominant institutions as the enemy to looking at "them" as ours. And people in my town, especially young
people, are beginning to make that shift.
HAYS DEBATE 105
Tournament Title
AT Efficiency CP
any viable energy efficiency plan must include strong suppor t for solar – anything less
guarantees a loss of social control
Dan Berman, PhD, journalist, professor, environmental activist, and John T. O'Connor, pre-eminent
spokespersib for the environmental movement, „96 [Who Owns the Sun? People, Politics, and the Struggle for a
Solar Economy. http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/whoownsthesun.pdf]
Along similar lines, Dr. Hermann Scheer, longtime member of Germany‘s Bundestag and president of the
European Solar Energy Association (Eurosolar), argues that for energy activists to focus on energy efficiency
to the exclusion of solar power is a fraud, though energy efficiency is an indispensable part of the
sustainable-energy strategy. Fighting for a New Solar Society 243 ―The oft-cited phrase ‗Energy-saving is
the greatest new energy source‘ is not only factually false—for ‗saving energy‘ is not a real source—but it
only reduces the energy demand to some extent.What is really necessary,‖ Scheer argues in Sun Strategy, ―is
to replace [fossil] fuel with sun energy . . . the only energy which is really friendly to the environment.‖
Scheer envisages solar energy as a new ―people‘s energy,‖ with solar equipment manufacturing and
installation on the scale of today‘s automobile industry. This powerful solar industry would become the
engine for a new and more decentralized economy,with well-paid, highly- skilled jobs that could provide the
material basis for a more decentralized and more cooperative social system.80 But most mainstream business
thinkers couldn‘t care less. Indeed, the 150th anniversary issue of the The Economist, perhaps the world‘s most influential business
magazine, published ten authoritative articles about possible developments for the period 1993 through 2143,with zero references to
solar energy or the possible problems, such as the greenhouse effect, of building a society totally reliant upon fossil fuels.81 Though the
debate over restructuring and retail wheeling was triggered by large industrial interests, it has created a forum where the needs of
average electricity consumers can be discussed. The formal positions of almost all state public utilities commissions are rife with pious
protestations of concern for the interests of the average consumer and the need to preserve and expand a clean-energy sector.82 Whether
those noble sentiments will become reality depends on a level of popular understanding and mobilization around the energy issue not
seen in the United States since the 1970s-era oil shocks and the battles over nuclear energy. That mass movement of energy activism
stopped nuclear power plant construction, launched the solar energy and building-efficiency movements, and for a short time managed
to reverse the monotonic increase in petroleum consumption in the United States.83
HAYS DEBATE 106
Tournament Title
AT Efficiency CP
Efficiency programs result in a net increase in energy consumption
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The industrialized world does not consume more energy than developing countries because it produces
more industrial goods and requires more services. The opposite is true: it produces and consumes more
because it commands more efficient energy conversion techniques which have allowed it to acquire capital,
market and growth advantages. Increased efficiency of energy utilization therefore does not automatically
mean a reduced need for energy. It is true that increases in productivity make possible a gradual decrease in
the need for human labour energy, but humans shift their energy needs into areas of consumption which are
not essential for the safeguarding of economic existence and which are, to a very large degree, energy
inefficient.
Efficiency programs increase consumption
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The following structural reasons argue against the hoped for and necessary success of an "efficiency
revolution": Ever since the industrial Revolution there has been a continuous increase in energy efficiency.
The rapidity of this process differed, however: it moved faster in times of expensive energy and tougher
industrial competition, but it slowed down in times of cheap oil or an oil glut. The oil crises of 1973/74 and
1979/81 triggered the biggest jump in efficiency so far, resulting in the uncoupling of economic growth and
energy consumption in many Western industrial countries. But the fact that the countries with the highest
energy efficiency, the Western industrial countries, which account for some 20% of the world's population,
consume about 80% of the world's energy supply each year clearly indicates that higher efficiency in
energy conversion technology does not automatically mean overall energy savings. If there were such a direct
linkage, energy consumption should occur at exactly the inverse ratio: the industrial countries, with 20% of the world's population,
should be consuming less than 20% of the total energy. Those countries with lower energy efficiencies and 80% of the world's
population should consume more energy than their global population share. In other words, it is impossible to talk about energy
conservation independen c economic and social structures. Higher energy efficiency reduces energy costs after a short period of time
and brings with it competitive advantages. This cost reduction provides entrepreneurs, individuals and national economies with more
freedom to manoeuvre to meet their energy demand for additional services or products. Savings in one sector of energy technology
stimulate the acquisition of other energy technologies and more usage the second or third car, more light fixtures or domestic
appliances, more travel, but most of all, increased production. The energy savings concepts currently in vogue in the
industrialized world are based on the unspoken assumption that one's own energybased demand for services
and products is largely met. This means that any, improvements in efficiency affecting this demand would
lead to a correspondingly lower demand for primary energy. This assumption is not tenable in terms of the
sociology of economics. Developed industrial societies are invariably the greediest for additional energy
services. In order to achieve effective energy savings via increased energy efficiency, simultaneous
increases in energy costs must he guaranteed. Efficiency improvements that merely lower costs lead
inevitably to increased consumption. Tax increases must kickstart energy savings, and further tax increases
must he instituted to catch and contain cost reductions, which can otherwise cause reckless growth in
energy consumption. Only if this type of political rationality underlies the industrialized countries'
strategies towards increased efficiency can we hope to achieve genuine energy savings.
HAYS DEBATE 107
Tournament Title
AT Efficiency CP
Effeciency distracts from the need for total solar economy
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Based on its maximum achievable savings potential, a strategy of energy savings alone, therefore, is hardly
sufficient to conduct an effective policy to protect the global environment. The frequently quoted sentence,
"energy saving is the largest new source of energy", is factually wrong because saving energy is not a source
but merely reduces the demand placed on sources already being exploited. Additionally, it distracts from the
fact that solar energy is the only truly alternative and environmentally friendly source of energy. If 50% of
conventional energy can he saved, emissions caused by the other 50% will remain. A success rate of 50% in
energy savings simply means that the emissions generated in one year at the moment will in future take two
years to generate. Let there he no misunderstanding the intent here is not to put a damper on energysaving
initiatives. All these efforts are needed, without any ifs and huts. The greater the success rate in energy
savings, the faster solar energy can he used, because the total amount of traditional energy to be substituted
by solar energy will be that much smaller. Energy saving represents a bridge to solar energy, but not a
substitute. Both strategic elements belong together, but solar energy must be at the core of a strategy; solar
energy alone is the definitive solution. Energy saving represents the vehicle to reach the goal more quickly.
HAYS DEBATE 108
Tournament Title
AT Efficiency CP
Perm solves best – effeciency cannot substitute for a solar strategy, but can act as a bridge
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Based on its maximum achievable savings potential, a strategy of energy savings alone, therefore, is hardly
sufficient to conduct an effective policy to protect the global environment. The frequently quoted sentence,
"energy saving is the largest new source of energy", is factually wrong because saving energy is not a source
but merely reduces the demand placed on sources already being exploited. Additionally, it distracts from the
fact that solar energy is the only truly alternative and environmentally friendly source of energy. If 50% of
conventional energy can he saved, emissions caused by the other 50% will remain. A success rate of 50% in
energy savings simply means that the emissions generated in one year at the moment will in future take two
years to generate. Let there he no misunderstanding the intent here is not to put a damper on energysaving
initiatives. All these efforts are needed, without any ifs and huts. The greater the success rate in energy
savings, the faster solar energy can be used, because the total amount of traditional energy to be substituted
by solar energy will be that much smaller. Energy saving represents a bridge to solar energy, but not a
substitute. Both strategic elements belong together, but solar energy must be at the core of a strategy; solar
energy alone is the definitive solution. Energy saving represents the vehicle to reach the goal more quickly.
Perm solves - Parallel strategies are necessary
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
A basic precondition for a successful solar strategy is that not just one option for using solar energy be tried,
but that all relevant options will be tried within an overall programme. This truism has to he mentioned
again because one option is frequently played off against another, especially energy conservation against
solar technology, even by supporters of environmental politics. A serious and responsible strategy aiming
genuinely at replacing the current energy system must leave such petty controversies behind. This includes
no longer thinking traditionally in terms of successive stages energy saving first and only then solar energy,
for example but of advancing in parallel steps. As has been made clear, it is by no means true that energy
saving is always the prerequisite first step especially not if new investments for energy facilities are at stake.
Energy saving obviously remains a key element on the road to a solar energy economy. Energy savings
strategies will not be discussed here to any great extent because their importance is no longer seriously in
dispute and because an extensive body of literature on the subject exists already. However, the frequently
cited advantage that they represent the quickest and most effective method for climate relief is vastly
outperformed by another strategy: the carefully targeted utilization of solar energy by nature itself.
HAYS DEBATE 109
Tournament Title
AT R&D CP
Waiting for R & D ensures no distribution of technologies
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Finally, it is always objected that there must be more research and development first, that the time is simply
not yet right for market introduction. This statement directly contradicts the previous one, that there are not
yet sufficiently promising research ideas, and is in any case plainly wrong. The spectre has been raised that it
may be a mistake to start mass production of a technology which may later prove to he outdated. The
production of TV sets was not deferred until colour TV was available, nor did the production of radios wait
until the advent of multifrequency receivers! None of these products would have made it to the market, if
arguments of this type predominated before their launch.
HAYS DEBATE 110
Tournament Title
AT regneg cp
Counterplan ensures Massive delays (even with implementation dates)
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
It is irresponsible to let the convenience of the dominant players in the energy industry determine the
timing for the general introduction of solar energy technologies, especially as there will be no single best
date, given the different energy investment cycles. To seek consensus for structural change in the energy
sector simply means increasingly painful delay. "Energy consensus" is a euphemism for prolonging as
much as possible the use of conventional energy and keeping out renewable energy. For solar energy to
prevail against the obstinate opposition and disinformation of the ruling energy system calls for an energy
battle. Without the long fight by the environmental movement against nuclear power many more nuclear
power plants, with all their attendant burdens on the common good, would be operating now. The array of
obstacles available to the vendors of primary energy has been amply demonstrated by their
counterstrategies against energy conservation initiatives in some countries, where political efforts to make energy more
expensive have been subverted by suppliers lowering energy prices, with both operators and equipment suppliers fearing a loss of
turnover. However, their attitudes have begun to change in recent years, in part because of changes in the political constellation, but
also partly voluntarily. In particular, some American companies have calculated that the introduction of energy conservation
techniques and the sale of energy from performance-optimized plants is better for their corporate balance sheets than investments in
new power plants and equipment with long writeoff periods. Plant constructors have begun to realise that there is a large and non-
controversial demand for components that improve plant efficiency and are not subject to the interruptions caused by civic protests.
There is apparently no longer a fundamental conflict, except with energy suppliers, about energy conservation strategies, which is why
these are always listed as the main priority in official proposals for energy reform, while solar energy is still relegated to the sidelines.
No need for consensus – must fundamentalyl reform the industry
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
What is needed to achieve the giant steps forward towards solar energy utilization is a consistent political
strategy. Rather than constantly trying for a consensus among all interests in the energy industry, which is
obviously nonsense for a serious solar strategy, such a strategy must attempt to split up the energy industry!
If one looks at the different motives for clinging to established structures, it is evident that plant and equipment manufacturers,
regional utilities, new private companies, and other types of business ventures among solar energy producers and users should have
the greatest interest in a solar strategy. They are the potential winners whose interests should and must he made to coincide with those
of the general public. They need political backup for an antimonopolistic, antifossil and antinuclear stance for as long as they are not
strong enough on their own in the battle of economic interests. Without protection, the market power of the energy industry, busy
pushing its conventional energy sources, will equate to solar energy's failure in the market place for an irresponsibly long period of
time.
HAYS DEBATE 111
Tournament Title
AT regneg/utilities choose/market solves
Allowing utilities to control the transition to solar ensures extinctions – plan is crucial for
decentralization of corporate control
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Even if large energy corporations were not subject to these economic constraints, one should not count on
any great enthusiasm for solar innovation. These corporations would then have to be willing to turn over a
large part of their centralized activities to smaller, decentralized operations and either break up their own corporation,
or reorganize into decentralized, independently operating, horizontally structured regional departments. During the transition period they
still would have to provide conventionally generated power from central plants to areas without a solarbased power generation system,
but this would shrink each year instead of growing. In the end, the centralized services would he limited to operating a grid and handling
the import of the fraction of solar energy fed from distant largescale solar power plants. Any attempt to provide solargenerated energy
from central facilities would reduce the economic efficiency, as shown in chapter 5, and thus slow down its rapid introduction. Large
energy corporations, therefore, have little real incentive to shift rapidly and appropriately to solar energy, but simply stand in each
other's way supported by the credit institutions who want to get their money back. Since solar energy represents, in the long
run, the death sentence for large facilities, it is naive to imagine that major solarbased innovation will get
underway as soon as performance and cost analyses have established that solar energy techniques are
competitive. The fact that the economies of solar energy are permanently, wilfully and consciously miscalculated, despite all the
evidence of its success, is obviously due to the influence of special interests. Once the real economic opportunities and advantages are
properly laid out, any publicly supportable arguments in favour of postponing the largescale launch of solar energy utilization will
vanish. In order to nip such shoots in the bud, public enthusiasm is constantly dampened, either with misleading figures or even absurd
statements about solar energy's alleged environmental burdens. With the help of a few small showpiece projects, the opponents of solar
technology are feigning effort and interest and constructing a lcH aura of earnest competence, creating an opportunity to badmouth
publicly solar energy. As recently as the summer of 1992, the Bayernwerke utility in Munich began operating a phorovoltaie
demonstration plant in a village not connected to the grid for which they officially announced a price of $6.25/kWh, more than five
times the cost at other existing German photovoltaic plants. Germany's large electric utilities spend over $62.5 million a year on
advertising campaigns against solar energy; this is more than they have invested so far in phorovoltaies or wind power plants as they
allege they could not justify these costs to their customers. This is in hypocritical contrast to their claim in fullpage newspaper
advertisements that 'We, Germany's electricity producers, also regard these types of energy positively. And we invest considerable
amounts in their development. But let's be realistic: solar power is fairweather power." A rapid switch to solar energy would demand a
degree of entrepreneurial unselfishness by the main actors in the energy industry without precedent in the history of commerce and an
innovative farsightedness that is extremely rare, especially in large corporate bureaucracies. To depend on the energy industry
in the switch to solar energy would be to leave mankind to its doom. It would also he highly inappropriate
politically to entrust the fate of man to the good will and business decisions of a single industry. Were it not
for the acute dangers of growing climate anomalies and the critical race against time, a gradual, orderly,
wellcushioned transition to solar energy utilization that would take into account the economic problems
resulting from the existing burden of investments by the energy industry might be possible. However, the
increasing gravity of global environmental danger just does not allow such creeping structural change.
HAYS DEBATE 112
Tournament Title
AT solar lease cp
Solar lease doesnt solve
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The solar lease is a novel way to confer ownership of solar projects that doesn‘t require such significant
upfront costs. However, the government incentives still accrue to the leasing company – not the owner –
and that may dilute community wide economic benefits.
HAYS DEBATE 113
Tournament Title
AT power purchase agrmnt CP
Power purchase agreement doesnt solve local control
John Farrell, research associate on the New Rules Project at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 5-„8
[―Concentrating Solar and Decentralized Power Government Incentives Hinder Local Ownership‖ Revised edition .
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/reinsider/story?id=52829]
The second model is the solar power purchase agreement (PPA). Where the lease model has the customer
pay for the panels and then get the power for free, the solar PPA model has the customer simply pay for the
electricity that's being generated. A customer signs a 15 to 20-year agreement to buy the solar power at a
fixed rate (but often with an inflation adjustment). In this model, the customer may never own the physical
PV panels and all government incentives accrue to the solar provider. These two financing models are
becoming popular in the largest U.S. solar market, California. While only 3.6% of solar projects under the
state‘s Solar Initiative have third party ownership (indicative of a solar lease or PPA model), almost 44% of
total installed capacity is not owned by the property owner. 30 While these financing models do lower the
upfront costs, they also reduce the lifetime economic benefits and sense of responsibility that comes with
ownership.
HAYS DEBATE 114
Tournament Title
AT WEC CP
WEC policies will fail
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
What is not understandable is that politicians, who should be responsible to the general public, and the media
generally go along with this charade that reaches a sort of climax every three years with the conferences of
the socalled "World Energy Council". This World Energy Council is nothing more than the assembled
international energy cartel to which entire armies of politicians and journalists make their pilgrimages. There,
the attempt is regularly made to show where the "factual" limits of new goals for energy and environmental
policies lie. In 1989 in Montreal (at that time the cartel meeting still called itself the "World Energy
Conference") it was determined that solar energy could account for a maximum of only 3% of the world's
energy supply by the year 2020. In 1992 in Madrid, it was claimed that renewable energy would not play any
significant role in the next century (9. Three months after the Rio Conference came a supercilious declaration
that annual CO., emissions could only be reduced by 10% by the year 2020. What is presented as a forecast is
in reality a special interests decree.
HAYS DEBATE 115
Tournament Title
AT RPS CP
RPS leads to concentrated solar market viability
Joseph Romm, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, 4-14-„8 [―The technology that will save
humanity‖ http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/04/14/solar_electric_thermal/index1.html]
So what do we need to do to ramp up CSP? Interestingly, most CSP executives don't talk much about the
need for government R&D. They mostly need policies aimed at creating initial market demand that would
help bring down costs quickly over the next several years. One such policy is a so-called national
renewable portfolio standard, which would require utilities to get a minimum percentage of their electricity
from new renewable forms of power, or purchase such power from other utilities. After that, the typical
manufacturing learning curves and economies of scale -- plus a market price for carbon dioxide set by the
cap-and-trade system -- should do the rest. That means Congress and the president must renew the 30
percent solar energy investment tax credit through 2016. After all, it's the least they can do. From 2002 to
2007, fossil fuels received almost $14 billion in electricity-related tax subsides, whereas renewables
received under $3 billion. From 1948 to today, nuclear energy R&D exceeded $70 billion, whereas R&D
for renewables was about $10 billion.
CSP plants would develop rapidly
Joseph Romm, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, 4-14-„8 [―The technology that will save
humanity‖ http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/04/14/solar_electric_thermal/index1.html]
The technology has no obvious bottlenecks and uses mostly commodity materials -- steel, concrete and glass.
The central component, a standard power system routinely used by the natural gas industry today, would
create steam to turn a standard electric generator. Plants can be built rapidly -- in two to three years -- much
faster than nuclear plants. It would be straightforward to build CSP systems at whatever rate industry and
governments needed, ultimately 50 to 100 gigawatts a year growth or more.
HAYS DEBATE 116
Tournament Title
AT International CP
Allowing other the response of other nations dictate domestic energy policy is simply an
attempt to deny personal responsibility
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The international treatment of an energy tax is another ease study showing how responsibility is pushed
aside. As soon as this demand surfaced in Germany its basic correctness was endorsed in principle, but at
the same time the necessity of a common international framework was pointed out at least within the
European Union. After the Commission of the European Union came up with a joint position after long
debate just before the Rio Conference, the plan was dropped entirely under pressure from some member
governments who pointed to the Rio meeting once it had become clear that no such resolution would he
passed there. The principle that a basic shift to environmentally safe energy must be agreed on
internationally is an excellent vehicle for hiding from a critical public one's own interest in perpetuating the
wrong choices. Since not only one government but the entire community of nations finds itself on the same
dead end street, and since everybody is using the same smokeandmirrors tricks, this maxim is proving to be
an extremely cumbersome obstacle in the way of innovations. This is true especially for the global energy
system which is largely international in its makeup and which is characterized by the fact that almost
everybody concerned has made the same mistakes. It has become hackneyed and a stereotype to claim that
any meaningful steps of one's own toward better care for the environment will lead to economic
disadvantage if the international community, or economically or politically linked groups of states, do not
act in concert.
HAYS DEBATE 117
Tournament Title
KRITIKS
HAYS DEBATE 118
Tournament Title
AT Capitalism/LanguageK
Permutation solves – do not reject our strategic use of conventional discourse - we must
couch our project for decentralized solar within terms of the current energy regime
John Byrne, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy (CEEP) and Professor of Public Policy at
the University of Delaware and Noah Toly is a research associate and Ph.D. candidate in the Center for Energy and
Environmental Policy at the University of Delaware, „6 [―Energy as a Social Project: Recovering a Discourse
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Q_Iblir2udgJ:ceep.udel.edu/energy/publications/2006_es_energy_as_a_social
_project.pdf+Energy+as+a+Social+Project:&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a]
Today, however, the bestsellers of the movement chart a course toward ―natural capitalism‖ (Hawken et al.,
2000), a strategy that anticipates synergies between soft path technologies and market governance of energy-
environment- society relations. Indeed, a major sustainable energy think tank has reached the conclusion that
―small is profitable‖ (Lovins et al., 2002) in energy matters and argues that the soft path is consistent with
―economic rationalism.‖ Understandably, a movement that sought basic change for a
third of a century has found the need to adapt its arguments and strategies to the realities of political and
economic power. Without adaptation, the conventional energy regime could have ignored soft path policy
interventions like demand-side management, integrated resource planning, public benefits charges, and
renewable energy portfolio standards (see Lovins and Gadgil, 1991; Sawin, 2004), all of which have caused
an undeniable degree of decentralization in energy-society relations. In this vein, it is clear that sustainability
proponents must find ways to speak the language and communicate in the logic of economic rationalism if
they are to avoid being dismissed. We do not fault the sustainable energy camp for being strategic. Rather,
the concern is whether victories in the everyday of incremental politics have been balanced by attention to
the broader agenda of systemic change and the ideas needed to define new directions.
HAYS DEBATE 119
Tournament Title
AT K alternatives – law
Plan is crucial to reshape paradigms and imagine a solar society – elites will not act on
their own - status quo ensures extinction
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
Before it began, the Earth Summit was widely regarded as the ultimate hope the "Last Exit Rio". It was
supposed to lay the cornerstone for a new policy for world development. After Rio everything neglected in
such a reckless fashion up to then was supposed to he rectified. In fact, the Summit turned out to be one of
misdirected policies both in its key issues as well as in the methods of its political actors. This was not
surprising: the same individuals who, because of their political and economic strategies, are responsible for
the destruction of nature are hardly in a position to act as suitable instigators of new developments. It is
impossible for those who create threats in the first place to act against their own interests and come up with
radical political decisions. Above all, the global environmental crisis is a global crisis of politics and
policies.It is not necessary, nor is it the intention of this book, to add yet another volume to the reports already available about the
warming of the earth's atmosphere, the radioactive contamination of entire regions, the poisoning and erosion of soils, the contamination
of bodies of water, air pollution, the burning of vegetation, the extermination of biological species, or the depletion of the ozone layer.
All the new evidence being added to the body of scientific knowledge indicates more and more that the actual degree of damage is
higher than assumed so far, and that its consequences will afflict us faster than expected. Today, more than ever before, there is the
utmost urgency for answers to the question of why there are no political strategies, long overdue, to achieve peace with nature.
Conference follows conference, but more often than not the result is nothing more than a call for yet another followup conference.
Report follows report and the result is usually a contract for yet another report. Political decisionmakers reassure and excuse themselves
by pointing to the shared responsibility of others without whom, they say, they can do nothing. Instead of changing their own strategies,
they preach a change in general consciousness. Appeals are made to rethink the issues especially by those with a mandate to act.
Decisionmakers divert attention from their own responsibilities by shifting them to the general public. The threat is acknowledged in
theory but ignored in practice. Another decade of anxietyladen speeches, reports and conferences as substitutes for political action would
be lifethreatening for mankind. But that is exactly what we most fear: the fact that even the Earth Summit ended with a decision to hold
a followup conference was no accident. When the Summit was arranged, the slogan was, "We're going to try our best: in Rio". Now it is,
'We're still trying our best: at the next conference". But why do we stick to the policy of only marginal practical value that proclaims
"Peace with Nature", when those perennial "shocked, shocked" speeches should have caused a fundamental change of priorities long
ago? Why is it that presumably responsible governments, parliaments and international organizations have only managed to devise
countermeasures which, even if successful, are nothing more than the nc":phoric drop in the bucket, a single drip on the rapidly
heatingup globe? Why are they risking collective doom despite the fact that they have all the relevant information and data at their
fingertips? Why do those who are in positions to do something effective not fight hack? Why is there lethargy instead of a popular
uprising have more and more people resigned themselves to the brewing disaster and written off the future? What explains the strange
harmony of politically misdirected decisions in the face of exploding contradictions? Never before have there been better, or more
urgent, reasons for fundamental innovation, but there is a basic lack of new activist supporters. Why has it been impossible for any
political organization to develop an appropriate and practicable strategy? Who will he the true supporters of such a process? Mankind's
fate depends on finding the right answers to these questions. The dangers of destroying the environment, and with it civilization, are not
caused by a lack of knowledge and intelligence in political and economic leaders, but by their stubborn refusal to find a way out of the
fossilized structures of thought and action that direct their programmes, and on which their very existence depends. They are
continuously seeking solutions within the existing frames of reference, which they believe could be ecologically supplemented or
modified at best, but which, in their view, should by no means bereølaeed. With this approach, they practise surgery on symptoms, and
become increasingly less successful the longer they restrict themselves to that approach. No longer do they make any attempt to find a
common thread that connects these problems, because they have given up questioning the connection itself. And, since the collapse of
the Eastern Bloc, the West's leaders, in their selfdeceiving euphoria of victory, see less reason for that than ever before. The need for a
change in political paradigms by the end of this century of environmental destruction has been urged repeatedly for example, in Fritjof
Capra's book published in the 1970s, "The Turning Point".' There are comprehensive analytical arguments for such pressing changes, but
a lack of corresponding practical strategic designs. The philosopher Hans Jonas, warning voice of the "Responsibility Principle", in an
interview on the occasion of the Rio Conference, reached the resigned conclusion that he still had not given up hope that mankind would
yet learn how to change its way of thinking.' The German social philosopher Carl Amery, in his book "Nature as Polities", concludes
that the logic of mankind's survival dictates the "fastest possible destruction of the industrial system, at any price".' The German
NewLeft author Robert Kurz, in his book "The Collapse of Modernization", concludes that it makes no sense "in view of the collective
suicidal actions on a global scale" even to discuss individual 'reforms' as long as this discussion does not lead to a perspective of the
genuine abolition of modern goods and their global system".' The great political drama of the present age is that unvarnished analyses
such as these and their resulting conclusions have not yet produced strategies that genuinely correspond to the depth and width of the
real problems those that must be tackled and realized, that must be visualized and experienced, and whose immediate advantages can be
CONTINUES
HAYS DEBATE 120
Tournament Title
demonstrated and mobilized for mankind's longterm benefit. More and more analysts of this disastrous war against the environment are reaching
the frustrating conclusion that collective selfdestruction can no longer he avoided and that we are, irreversibly, in a process of decline. In contrast,
the conceptual and intellectual leitmotiv of this book is that this descent can he reversed ' although at present there are many more
reasons against this thesis than supporting it. The essential precondition is a change of paradigms of political and
economic strategies in other words, a basic realignment of standards of action; a political revolution of a type and
quality without precedent. But equally unprecedented is the danger to be overcome. Obviously, all these themes
are important; however, a crucial shortcoming of this type of themesetting very typical of conferences of this sort
immediately becomes obvious. If there are 31 focal points then, in reality, there are none. Even political systems
have a limited capacity for dealing with problems. If everything is important, nothing is done. The politics of
"muddling through" continues and genuinely ambitious new strategies peter out. So what is the right starting point it
is necessary to set strategic priorities to achieve a genuinely innovative movement. Such priorities must not be
selected arbitrarily or accidentally, because that would only lead to endless discussions about which is the right one.
Any such priority must not only open the door to the solution of one of the many issues, but also provide a pathway
to the solution of the global problem. Setting priorities becomes legitimate once there is a clear ranking of dangers.
HAYS DEBATE 121
Tournament Title
AT Alt solves case***
We must have recourse to the political institutions that are preventing transition to solar
society – voting aff is an act of political engagement necessary to hold the government
accountable for change
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto) [genderparaphrased]
The result is that governments are really ruled by bureaucracy, their permanent institutions, and are
increasingly interchangeable. The public is waiting in vain for new grand political designs, even though these
almost force themselves onto public attention, such as the shift to solar energy. Political leadership and
parliaments inevitably depoliticize themselves in such a situation, because they have no creative ideas of
their own which they could push through with their formal decisionmaking powers. This simultaneously
encourages society's growing political apathy by permanently frustrating its expectations. Instead of acting
on the insights of the German social philosopher Niklas Luhmann who urges "reducing complexity", exactly
the opposite happens because of the organizational structure of political institutions and their work patterns:
laws and regulations are enacted of constantly growing complexity and confusion, increasing the inability for
reform, and increasing disgust with politics at a time when sweeping reform and political engagement should
be paramount for the survival of mankind [humankind]. Increasingly dangerous political deficits are being
papered over by flights of rhetoric. Problems are treated with words instead of genuine attempts to solve
them. This deception of the public works for a while, particularly with the help of the media, but the result is
a growing loss of credibility by political actors, resulting in political apathy and, ultimately, rebellion. This
seems to be the only explanation for contradictions, such as the fact that the German Government published
the positive results of a governmentfinanced test programme for lowenergy homes but at the same time
finances new public housing programmes which ignore these recommendations. Another example is that the
Commission of the European Union adopts a suggestion for an energy tax to lower energy consumption, but
at the same time promotes deregulation of European air traffic aimed at lowering air fares, which would
generate extra traffic with a consequent increase in the consumption of climatedamaging energy. Similarly,
the German research ministiy on the one hand finances climate and solar energy research but at the same
time participates in the development of supersonic aircraft whose deployment would inevitably contribute
significantly to the destruction of the earth's atmosphere. All the skewed positions described in chapter 2
under the heading "The Failure of Politics to Meet Future Challenges" are part of this category of grotesquely
contradictory government action. It is no wonder then that, within a ministry, a government or a parliament,
one hand knocks over what the other is trying to build up. The social and environmental costs of past and
present energy supply are thus disregarded, as are the broad social advantages of solar energy. Cities with
millions of inhabitants are choking on their own waste and disease is spreading, but more thought is given to
the construction of a coalfired or nuclear power plant than to separating out these gargantuan amounts of
waste and using their organic constituents to produce energy to protect the atmosphere, to improve air
quality, to cleanse the water, solve the waste problem and support public hygiene. Just as the energy industry
is sticking to its traditional structures and its current investments (for which there exists at least a certain, if
limited, economic logic), the system of political institutions and the processes they control cling to deeply
rooted modes of operation. They are incapable of taking steps towards and making plans for the future in a
way appropriate to the magnitude of the problem while they adhere to the welltrodden paths of political
business. It is a truism that, to move to the path towards a global solar energy economy with the necessary
rigour, the economic obstacles must be overcome with strategic political decisions. To do this, ' It is
nceessary to test political institutions for their serviceability. This includes basic administrative reforms
which can only make sense if we know the goals they must serve. A political solar energy offensive, which
will affect nearly all areas of politics and policy, must address these changes as well. With the growing
disenchantment with polities, it has become fashionable to accuse the current generation of politicians of
lacking ability, while pointing to the towering personalities of the past. But this comparison merely veils the
real problems and is, despite the current shortcomings of governments, extremely unfair. The present
political figures are faced with far more problems to solve than any preceding generation. Environmental
problems, excessive armaments, janusheaded technology projects, orgies of wasted energy, excessive
bureaucratization and, last but not least, the entrenched structures of control and decision making are all
problems with their roots in the decisions of the muchpraised predecessors, the overwhelming consequences
of which can no longer he ignored. Many past political decisions were made blind to their future
consequences, which partially explains the current state of political helplessness. Today's generation has to
pay for the mistakes of previous generations. It is very difficult to see how these consequences can be
corrected in the short term. The real weakness of most of the current politicians has nothing to do with the
HAYS DEBATE 122
Tournament Title
charge that they are not as good as their predecessors. It is something different: they cannot formulate a real
alternative as long as they are tied by the established patterns of action. Originals are always more impressive
than recent pale imitations who may still he suitable for smooth, successful individual leadership careers. The
requirements and capabilities currently required to gain political leadership are increasingly in stark contrast
to the actual ability needed to handle these responsibilities today. Conventional patterns of behaviour are at
best sufficient to wield "power within existing conditions", but not any more to exercise creative "power
over conditions". Thus, the "power to act and impotence to change" exist side by side, forming a deadly
mixture because the ideas for a more appropriate contemporary political concept have not yet prevailed and
there are simply not enough active reformist participants. The political neglect affecting a central area of
future concern, such as solar energy, has a deeper cause; that these omissions continue is also explained by
the observation that polities does not occur in a vacuum, but is significantly influenced by ideological
currents.
HAYS DEBATE 123
Tournament Title
AT Nayar or global/local
The alternative ensures government subordination of environmental movements – must
make demands on the state to ensure transition to solar
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
"Think globally, act locally" this catchy slogan of the environmental movement urges everyone to play
their part in society, acting on his or her sense of responsibility. Internationally, reality works according to
another, unspoken formula perhaps best described as "Talk globally, postpone nationally". The global
dimension of environmental dangers is continuously abused by national governments as an excuse either to
water down or put off completely longoverdue initiatives as long as nobody else acts on them. It has
become the favourite game of governments to redirect expectations of them to some other international
arena such as a conference or some organization. It is always easy to come up with reasonable sounding
explanations: it won't accomplish much if only one country takes the initiative; since we all compete
internationally, all the other countries would have to go along to avoid incurring economic disadvantages
by imposing higher energy taxes in one country only. While the need for global changes is essentially
correct, it is very dangerous for the common good to make essential initiatives wholly dependent on such
changes. It means burying perspectives for the future, because it is almost impossible to expect all
governments to display the same political will and interest at the same time, and to have the same political
and economic room to manoeuvre for new strategies.
HAYS DEBATE 124
Tournament Title
AT examine consumption prior / Tech bad
Alternative fails – we must introduce solar technologies first – the restructuring of
consumption patterns will follow.
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The argument that energy consumption habits and lifestyle must change before the massive use of solar
energy overlooks the relationship between technology utilization and structural development. The
defensive posture towards solar energy among the supporters of conventional energy is, after all, based on
the knowledge of exactly the extent to which the deployment of solar energy technologies would alter
existing organizational structures towards more decentralization and independence. It would be nonsensical
and impossible to seek to change structures for a technology that has not even been introduced yet.
Techniques leave their mark on political and social patterns and, once created, these structures demand
their appropriate technologies. Structures created by this interplay will automatically be modified by solar
energy once the techniques required have been efficiently deployed. The same is true when it comes to the
demand to modify life styles. Most peoples consciousness is not changed primarily because of their
understanding of necessities but, recalling a basic sociological insight by Karl Marx, by changes in their
economic circumstances. In other words, it changes with the practical reconfiguration of the energy system,
but not before such a change.
HAYS DEBATE 125
Tournament Title
AT anthro K
The problem of anthropocentrism is not human superiority but the INDIVIDUAL
SELFISHNESS – plan creates teh conditions necessary for a move away from “EGO
Fascism”
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
The anthropocentric world view man [human] as the centre of all things is being repackaged in such an
absolute, individualistic manner to the point that there is no price too high for that ideal, even at the
expense of other human beings living now or in the future. This mental and spiritual condition articulates
wholly unreasoning and unreasonable arguments, free of any humanitarian standards. For example, we hear
time and again that unfortunately ozone destroying CFCs used in, among other places, vehicle
airconditioning systems can only he phased out when substitute materials are available. Only about 10% of
all cars have air conditioning; but to give them up is regarded as unreasonable, even if the ozone layer
grows more fragile all the time! This type of argument is in line with the ideology of the times: the future is
sacrificed in favour of satisfying present desires, something that is assuming characteristics of what might
be called egofascism.
HAYS DEBATE 126
Tournament Title
HAYS DEBATE 127
Tournament Title
***NEG***
HAYS DEBATE 128
Tournament Title
Neg – big solar tech OK
Large solar technologies are politically and philosophically the same as smaller forms of
energy generation
Hermann Scheer, member German Parliament, President of Eurosolar, and Chair the World Council for
Renewable Energy, ‟94 (A Solar Manifesto)
One cannot fail to notice that some parts of the environmental movement harbour reservations about solar
energy: not against the overall goal of a solar energy economy but against immediate, fullspeedahead entry
and against some forms of utilization. These critics distinguish between the "soft" and "hard" path, between
"small solar technology" and "largescale solar technology", with great scepticism towards the latter and
vehement rejection of the "hard, largescale technology path" which, they argue, would merely exchange one
hard technology for another. For this reason, the argument goes, we should start small and softly, and maybe
limit ourselves to that. It is much more important, we are told, to modify the structures of energy
consumption and to change our lifestyles before we introduce a new technology. Some doubts are voiced
about negative effects on the environment from solar energy use. Obviously, these arguments are music to
the ears of the supporters of current naturedestroying energy systems. They are gratefully accepted and used
because they help dampen expectations for solar energy and they justify, seemingly in environmental terms,
irresponsible caution about solar energies. On closer examination, these reservations betray either a lack of
information about the potential of solar energy, or they indicate some sort of psychological inhibition. The
objection that one largescale technology must not merely be exchanged for another confuses the wrapping
with the content. It takes its cue from experience that is simply not applicable to solar energy technology if
we examine its specific economics in relation to nature's energy supply. Even if it involves simply an
exchange of technologies, the argument is without merit because this exchange means nothing less than the
replacement of environmentally destructive with environmentallybenign energy sources. The source of
energy actually used and the conversion processes are, and will remain, the core problem; everything else is
secondary. The size of energy facilities in and of themselves do not represent an existential danger for
humanity, and would not have triggered a worldwide protest movement. In a solar power plant, the maximum
credible accident would be the failure of a few modules requiring their replacement, a procedure that can he
performed immediately, without danger and without having to shut down the entire power plant. The pair of
opposites "soft" and "hard", of "large" and "small", cannot he simply transferred to solar energy. What does
"hard" and "large" mean in terms of solar energy? There is a single solar energy technology, though, where
the analogy to large nuclear technology is appropriate. This technology exists only on paper, and will have to
he kept there. This involves solar power plants in space. As early as the 1970s, the American physicist Glaser
developed the idea of stationing a solar cell platform measuring 11.7 by 4.3 km (7.3 by 2.7 miles) in space.
The station could continuously convert solar energy into electricity because, except for a few hours every
year, it would never be in the earth's shadow, A 10 gigawatt energy stream, equivalent to the output of 10
nuclear power plants, would he transmitted with a 1 km (0.6 mile) diameter microwave beam to a 50 sq. km
(19.3 sq. mile) reception antenna. Since massively hunched microwaves of this type are extremely harmful
and since this type of solar energy, in contrast to insolation naturally occurring on earth, would funnel large
additional energy volumes into the earth's atmosphere, such a satellite power plant cannot claim the positive
features normally associated with solar energy. 17' Even today, work is continuing on these concepts; as
recently as the late 1980s, the German company MBB had plans for a development of this type.
HAYS DEBATE 129
Tournament Title
August 25, 2008
US Government Investing up to US $24M To Bring Solar Energy Online
Washington, DC, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy John Mizroch announced recently that the DOE will invest up to US $24 million --
subject to the availability of funds -- to develop solar energy products that will hopefully accelerate the
penetration of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in the United States.
When the projects are combined with the overall industry cost share of up to US $16 million, more than US
$40 million in total could be invested in these SEGIS projects, with future federal funding subject to
appropriations from Congress.
The Solar Energy Grid Integration Systems (SEGIS) projects will provide critical research and development
(R&D) funding to develop less expensive, higher performing products to enhance the value of solar PV
systems to homeowners and business owners. These projects are integral to the Solar America Initiative,
which aims to make solar energy cost-competitive with conventional forms of electricity by 2015.
"Harnessing the natural and abundant power of the sun and cost-effectively converting it into energy is an
important component of our comprehensive strategy to commercialize and deploy advanced, clean,
alternative technologies to enhance our energy security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Mizroch said.
"Our investment in these grid integration projects will lay the groundwork for high levels of solar
photovoltaic market penetration to help meet the President's goal of making solar power cost-competitive
with conventional sources of electricity."
The SEGIS funding opportunity was announced on November 15, 2007. The projects selected for negotiation
of awards focus on collaborative research and development by U.S. industry teams to develop products that
will allow PV to become a more integral part of household and commercial smart energy systems.
Some research teams will work to develop intelligent system controls that integrate traditional building
energy management systems with solar systems. The developments will allow building energy managers to
better respond to time-of-use pricing and weather conditions to minimize building energy costs and stabilize
the effect on the electricity grid.
The applicant teams will also develop products that facilitate interaction between solar energy systems and
plug-in hybrid vehicles, to provide a secure back-up power sources during outages. The intelligent controls
and energy management efforts are a critical step towards developing net-zero-energy homes, buildings, and
communities.
The DOE has selected 12 industry teams to participate in cost-shared cooperative agreements focusing on
conceptual design of hardware components and market analysis. For these 12 winning projects, US $2.9
million total in DOE funding is leveraging US $1.7 million in industry cost-share. The plan is to award
additional contracts in Fiscal Year 2009 and in the out years-subject to the availability of funds- for projects
demonstrating the most promising technology advancements exhibiting a high likelihood of commercial
success.
When the projects (listed below) are combined with the overall industry cost share of up to US $16 million,
more than US $40 million in total could be invested in these SEGIS projects, with future federal funding
subject to appropriations from Congress.
The Department's Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, NM will provide project management
support to these projects.
Below is a list of companies or project teams selected to help develop products that maximize the value of
PV systems and offer consumers greater control of their electric consumption and costs:
HAYS DEBATE 130
Tournament Title
Apollo Solar was selected to develop advanced modular components for power conversion, energy storage,
energy management and a communications portal for residential-size solar electric systems. The inverters,
charge controllers and energy management systems will be able to communicate with utility energy portals to
implement the seamless two-way power flows of the future.
EMTEC, Emerson Network Power, Liebert Corporation, Hull and Associates, and Ohio State University plan
to develop large, three-phase, highly efficient, small footprint, advanced and innovative power conversion,
energy storage and energy management components for commercial- and utility-scale PV systems. The new
products will include an integrated grid interface controller that works in conjunction with a customer smart
meter to respond to time of day pricing signals. The total system provides improved economics for power
distribution and minimizes wide fluctuations in supply and demand of electricity.
Enphase Energy Inc. was selected to develop a complete module-integrated solar electric solution controlled
by an energy management system, to interface with utilities and allow advanced control for modular utility-
interactive applications.
General Electric and Sentech Inc., in collaboration with candidate utilities including American Electric
Power, Duke, and Hawaii Electric Company, were selected to develop product concepts for integrating solar
PV generation with the electrical grid for commercial and residential use. The residential improvements will
integrate energy storage, responsive loads, and utility demand side management and are expected to reduce
homeowner energy bills and support utility needs to reduce peak loads. New and enhanced inverter and
distribution system control concepts for both commercial- and utility-scale installations will be developed.
Nextek Power Systems with Houston Advanced Research Center will work to modify an existing power
gateway design to incorporate bi-directional current flow capability, higher voltage operation, and added
functionalities that include integrated communications and an energy management system for value-added
PV utility interconnections.
Petra Solar with Florida Power Electronics Center, and Florida Solar Energy Center will focus on multi-layer
control and communication with PV systems to achieve grid interconnectivity, cost reduction, system
reliability, and safety - resulting in a cost competitive, easy to install, modular and scalable system.
Premium Power is working to develop an inverter system that makes PV economically viable in terms of
initial investment, operating costs, and system lifetime. An intelligent PV system that optimizes the value of
PV generation will be developed for commercial- and utility-scale applications with an advanced inverter
having energy management.
Princeton Power Systems, with TDI Power and World Water and Solar Technologies Corp, is working to
develop a complete design for a 100-kW demand response inverter based on Princeton Power Systems'
proprietary inverter technology. The design will be optimized for low-cost, high-quality manufacture, and
will integrate control capabilities including dynamic energy storage and demand response through load
control.
PV Powered, with Portland General Electric Team, South Dakota State University, and Northern Plains
Power Technologies, is working to develop a suite of maximum power point tracking algorithms to optimize
energy production from the full range of available and emerging PV module technologies with
communications integration, facility energy management systems and utlity management networks.
SmartSpark Energy Systems Inc, with Evergreen Solar and Innovolt Inc, was selected to design, construct,
test, and commercialize an alternating-current PV module with smart building systems interfaces that provide
system diagnostics, data logging, and advanced utility interconnection.
The Florida Solar Energy Center of the University of Central Florida, with SatCon, Sentech Inc., EnFlex,
SunEdison, Northern Plains Power Technologies, Lakeland Electric Utilities and additional utilities, is going
to work towards developing new grid integration concepts for PV that incorporate optional battery storage,
utility control, communication and monitoring functions, and building energy management systems. The
Florida Solar Energy Center of the University of Central Florida will validate an anti-islanding strategy for
PV inverters to allow PV generation to remain connected to the grid during some grid disturbances, while
still meeting safety operation requirements. New inverter architectures with advanced controls will be
introduced, bringing even more stability and security to the home.
HAYS DEBATE 131
Tournament Title
VPT Inc., with the Center for Power Electronics, Plug-in Conversions, Moonlight Solar, Breakell Inc., and Delta
Electronics will work to develop component circuits and an overall system design for an integrated energy
system. The R&D will include inverter controllers that can be used with existing inverters to add sophisticated
home interoperability, active anti-islanding and intentional islanding control, and a bidirectional power converter
designed for plug-connected vehicles. The bidirectional power converter will also be useable for stationary
DC/AC grid-interactive applications.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=53336&src=rss
