Indigenous Defense

a. Its try or die. Just because its hard to fix racism and oppression doesnt mean
we ought not try. Avoiding the problem because its too big/difficult to fix just
feeds into the oppressive narrative that our society has created.
b. Indigenous people come before other forms of oppression. They have been
systematically harmed and pushed to the margins of our society since it literally
began. Because we specifically disenfranchised indigenous people so early on and
structured a society that so uniquely disempowers them, we have a moral
obligation to help them first.
c. Perm food security/desalination negs. You can find ways to do both, but do the
aff first to protect indigenous people and their land.

AT Indigenous affs:
i. The neg solves we can eliminate nuclear reactors
mostly but not all the way. Because the neg world requires less nuclear
energy, we can cut down and prioritize indigenous land as the first place
we stop nuclear energy activity in, thus solving the harms of the aff but
creating net benefits to the neg.
ii. See other answers in the AT Harvard Westlake aff file

AT Shift DA:
i.

alternate forms of energy are on the rise/working

now

Ben Block, 9-23-2016 (8:10 PM), "U.S. Renewable Energy Growth

Accelerates," No Publication, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5855
Renewable energy markets surged in the United States in the first
half of this year despite uncertainty over federal tax credits and a sluggish national
economy, according to mid-year figures. Wind, solar, and geothermal energy are all
on the rise. At least 17,000 megawatts (MW) of these three energy sources are now under
construction. According to the Energy Information Administration,
renewable energy will account for about one-third of new electricity
generation added to the U.S. grid over the next three years. Wind
energy is leading the way with 19,500 MW of installed capacity at mid-year, including more
than 1,000 MW added in the last six months. The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) secondquarter report [PDF] predicts that total additions for the year will come to 7,500 MW, boosting U.S. wind
capacity by 45 percent. In Texas alone, more than 4,200 MW of wind capacity has been installed this year

Geothermal energy is
expanding as well, although at a slower rate. Nearly 3,000 MW is currently online and about 4,000 MW is under development, the U.S. Geothermal
Energy Association said in its August report [PDF]. Nevada is the hotbed for
or is currently under construction. Iowa is in second place with 1,770 MW.

U.S. geothermal, with as much as 1,900 MW in different phases of development. At a government auction
last week, a record $28.2 million of leases was sold for geothermal energy exploration, which suggests that
additional projects may soon begin. While U.S. solar energy data for 2008 are not yet available, last year's
Solar Energy Industries Association report [PDF] said demand for photovoltaic (PV) panels, concentrated
solar plants, and solar water heaters continues to expand. An additional 150 MW of PV panels were
installed last year, 45 percent more than in 2006. Less than 500 MW of concentrated solar power - utilityscale solar plants that use mirrors to produce heat for power generation - is operational, but another 4,000
MW is in the works. The accelerated growth of renewable energy projects is a response to the powerful
combination of high energy prices and growing state government support. In addition, fears that Congress
will not renew the federal tax credits before they expire at the end of this year have led developers to rush
to connect their projects to the grid by December 31. The tax credits are crucial for renewables industries
to remain competitive with the fossil fuel industries that receive regular government support. "The pipeline
of investment for 2009 has been on hold for months, with escalating risks and costs for the industry," said
Randall Swisher, executive director of AWEA, in a prepared statement. Both major political parties support
extension of the tax credits, but debate over how to make up for the estimated $8.2 billion loss in tax
revenues has resulted in a stalemate between the parties. Swisher's organization said this year's surge in
installed wind capacity will likely enable the United States to surpass Germany as the world leader in wind
power by the end of the year. Germany has installed more than 22,000 MW of wind power, almost 24
percent of the world total. In the meantime, China has laid claim to the world's fastest growing wind
industry and is on track to surpass the U.S. in the next few years. China currently has 10,000 MW of wind
capacity installed, and this is expected to double by 2010. But the U.S. wind industry may soon experience
a gale-force boost.

Last month, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens announced a

plan to install hundred of thousands of megawatts of wind turbines in
the wind corridor that runs from Texas to North Dakota. His plan would provide at least
20 percent of the country's power - enough to keep U.S. wind turbine
factories in operation for decades to come.
A: this card disproves the notion that banning nuclear power will lead to a
shift to coal because it proves that we have new access and new technology
that helps make renewables such as wind, solar, and geothermal more
economically viable and able to replace coal. Wheras my opponents evidence

is (severall years) old, and does not account for the newest advances
scientists and researchers have made in the energy sector.

ii.

AND, relying on coal for a short time is better

than nuclear power

Nuclear power is justified through emergency framing- this creates a

nuclear state of exception. Nuclear dangers are deprioritized in favor of
remote cataclysms, which systematically warps cost benefit
assessment and recreates warming.
Kaur 11
(Raminder, A nuclear renaissance, climate change and the state of exception, THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF
ANTHROPOLOGY Volume 22, Issue 2)

Increasingly, nation-states such as China, France, Russia, Britain and India are pro-moting the
nuclear option: first, as the main large-scale solution to developing economies,
growing populations and increasing demands for a consumer-led lifestyle , and secondly,
to tend to environmental concerns of global warming and climate change .1Indias Prime
Minister, Manmohan Singh, speaking at a conference of atomic scientists in Delhi, for instance, announced a
hundredfold increase to470,000 megawatts of energy that could come from Indian nuclear power stations by 2,050.
He said, This will sharply reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and will be a major contribution to global efforts to
combat climate change, adding that Asia was seeing a huge spurt in nuclear plant building for these reasons
(Ramesh2009). The Fukushima nuclear reactor disaster of March 2011 has, for the time being at least, dented
some nation-states nuclear power programmes. However, in India, the government has declared that it has

Whilst the carbon

lobby, including the fossil-fuels industries, stand to gain by undermining the validity of global
warming, it appears that the nuclear lobby ben-efits enormously from the growing
body of evidence for human-based global warming. This situation has led to a
significant nuclear renaissance with the promotion of nuclear power as clean and green energy.
John Ritch, Director General of the World Nuclear Association, goes so far as to describe the need to
embrace nuclear power as a global and environmental imperative, for Humankind
cannot conceiv-ably achieve a global clean-energy revolution without a huge
expansion of nuclear power (Ritch nd). To similar ends, Indias Union Minister of State for Environ-ment
commissioned further safety checks whilst continuing its nuclear development as before.

and Forests, Jairam Ramesh, remarked, It is paradoxical that environmental-ists are against nuclear energy

With a subtle sleight of hand,nuclear industries are able to

promote themselves as environmentally beneficial whilst continuing business-asusual at an expansive rate. Such global and national views on climate change are threatening
to monopolise the entire environmentalist terrain where issues to do with
uranium and tho-rium mining, the ecological costs of nuclear power plant construction,
maintenance, operation and decommissioning, the release of water coolant and the
transport and storage of radioactive waste are held as subsidiary considerations
to the threat of climate change. Basing much of my evidence in India, I note how the
conjunction of nuclear power and climate change has lodged itself in the public
imagination and is consequently in a powerful position, creating a truth regime favoured
both by the nuclear lobby and those defenders of climate change who want more energy
without restructuration of market-influenced economies or changes in
consumerist lifestyle. The urgency of climate change discourses further
(Deshpande 2009).

empowers what I call the nuclear state of exception which, in turn, lends
credence to the veracity of human-centric global warming .

iii. Weigh oppression of indigenous people v. the use of

fossil fuels
iii.

Perm: do the aff and then the neg, ie, get rid of
nuclear energy to stop oppression and THEN solve
the fossil fuel problem.

iv.

NON UNIQUE

Nuclear power is justified through emergency framing- this creates a

nuclear state of exception. Nuclear dangers are deprioritized in favor of
remote cataclysms, which systematically warps cost benefit
assessment and recreates warming.
Kaur 11
(Raminder, A nuclear renaissance, climate change and the state of exception, THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF
ANTHROPOLOGY Volume 22, Issue 2)

Increasingly, nation-states such as China, France, Russia, Britain and India are pro-moting the
nuclear option: first, as the main large-scale solution to developing economies,
growing populations and increasing demands for a consumer-led lifestyle , and secondly,
to tend to environmental concerns of global warming and climate change .1Indias Prime
Minister, Manmohan Singh, speaking at a conference of atomic scientists in Delhi, for instance, announced a
hundredfold increase to470,000 megawatts of energy that could come from Indian nuclear power stations by 2,050.
He said, This will sharply reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and will be a major contribution to global efforts to
combat climate change, adding that Asia was seeing a huge spurt in nuclear plant building for these reasons
(Ramesh2009). The Fukushima nuclear reactor disaster of March 2011 has, for the time being at least, dented
some nation-states nuclear power programmes. However, in India, the government has declared that it has

Whilst the carbon

lobby, including the fossil-fuels industries, stand to gain by undermining the validity of global
warming, it appears that the nuclear lobby ben-efits enormously from the growing
body of evidence for human-based global warming. This situation has led to a
significant nuclear renaissance with the promotion of nuclear power as clean and green energy.
John Ritch, Director General of the World Nuclear Association, goes so far as to describe the need to
embrace nuclear power as a global and environmental imperative, for Humankind
cannot conceiv-ably achieve a global clean-energy revolution without a huge
expansion of nuclear power (Ritch nd). To similar ends, Indias Union Minister of State for Environ-ment
commissioned further safety checks whilst continuing its nuclear development as before.

and Forests, Jairam Ramesh, remarked, It is paradoxical that environmental-ists are against nuclear energy

With a subtle sleight of hand,nuclear industries are able to

promote themselves as environmentally beneficial whilst continuing business-asusual at an expansive rate. Such global and national views on climate change are threatening
to monopolise the entire environmentalist terrain where issues to do with
uranium and tho-rium mining, the ecological costs of nuclear power plant construction,
(Deshpande 2009).

maintenance, operation and decommissioning, the release of water coolant and the
transport and storage of radioactive waste are held as subsidiary considerations
to the threat of climate change. Basing much of my evidence in India, I note how the
conjunction of nuclear power and climate change has lodged itself in the public
imagination and is consequently in a powerful position, creating a truth regime favoured
both by the nuclear lobby and those defenders of climate change who want more energy
without restructuration of market-influenced economies or changes in
consumerist lifestyle. The urgency of climate change discourses further
empowers what I call the nuclear state of exception which, in turn, lends
credence to the veracity of human-centric global warming .

Non Unique: Coal Plants are politically difficult to shut down,

regardless of use of nuclear or renewable energy (READ WITH CARD
BELOW)
Martin 16, Richard. "Germany Runs Up Against the Limits of Renewables." MIT Technology Review. MIT, 24
May 2016. Web. 16 Sept. 2016. <https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601514/germany-runs-up-against-the-limitsof-renewables/>.
The auction system is designed to reduce the rate of new renewable-energy additions and keep Germany from producing too much power. It might seem like an easy way to solve the oversupply issue would be to shut down excess

coal plants
are lucrative and
thus politically hard to shut down.
German law requires renewable
energy to be used first on the German grid, when Germany exports excess
electricity to its European neighbors it primarily comes from coal plants.
power plants, especially ones that burn coal. But not only are the

used to even out periods when wind and solar arent available, they

also

Because

Last

fall, the German subsidiary of the Swedish energy giant Vattenfall started up a 1,600-megwatt coal-fired plant that had been under construction for eight years, defying opposition from politicians, environmental organizations, and

Putting a steep price on carbon emissions would hasten

the shutdown of
coal plants. But
. Prices for the permits are so low that there is little incentive for
power producers to shut down dirty plants.
citizens who want to see coal plants eliminated.

German

Europes Emissions Trading Scheme, designed to establish a continentwide market for trading permits for carbon

emissions, has been a bust

(READ WITH CARD ABOVE) New Policies will solve the difficulties in
Germany
Martin 16, Richard. "Germany Runs Up Against the Limits of Renewables." MIT Technology Review. MIT, 24
May 2016. Web. 16 Sept. 2016. <https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601514/germany-runs-up-against-the-limitsof-renewables/>.

Germanys carbon emissions rose slightly in 2015

because the
country produces much more electricity than it needs.
renewables can supply nearly all of the electricity on the grid, the
variability of those sources forces Germany to keep other power plants
running.
After years of declines,

, largely

Thats happening because even if there are times when

And in Germany, which is phasing out its nuclear plants, those other plants primarily burn dirty coal. Now the government is about to reboot its energy strategy, known as the Energiewende. It was

launched in 2010 in hopes of dramatically increasing the share of the countrys electricity that comes from renewable energy and slashing the countrys overall carbon emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 (see The
Great German Energy Experiment). What happens next will be critical not only for Germany, but also for other countries trying to learn how to best bring more wind and solar onlineespecially if they want to do it without relying on

aspects of the Energiewende have been successful

Germanys carbon emissions in 2014 were
27 percent lower than 1990 levels.
fossil-fuel power plants cannot easily
ramp down generation in response to excess supply on the grid,
sometimes so much power in the system that the price goes negative
nuclear power.Some

: renewable sources accounted for nearly one-third of

the electricity consumed in Germany in 2015. The country is now the worlds largest solar market.

However, an expert commission appointed by the countrys minister of economy and energy has said the 40 percent target

probably wont be reached by 2020. And the energy revolution has caused problems of its own. Because

on sunny, windy days there is

in other words,

operators of large plants, most of which run on coal or natural gas, must pay commercial customers to consume electricity. That situation has also arisen recently in Texas and California (see Texas and California Have Too Much

addressing such issues, Germanys Parliament

is expected to soon eliminate the government-set subsidy for renewable
Renewable Energy) when the generation of solar power has maxed out. In hopes of

energy

that has largely fueled the growth in wind and solar.

. Power producers will bid to build
renewable energy projects up to a capacity level set by the government,
a
supergrid that would
enable renewable power to be easily transported across borders, reducing
the need for reliable, always-on fossil fuel plants to supplement
intermittent electricity from solar and wind. If you want to use fluctuating
renewable power, you have to upgrade the grids
, known as a feed-in tariff,

Instead of

subsidizing any electricity produced by solar or wind power, the government will set up an auction system

and

the resulting prices paid for power from those plants will be set by the market, rather than government fiat. Also helpful would be

Europewide

across Europe, says Daniel Genz, a policy adviser with Vattenfall. Efforts to build

that grid are under way, but theyll be expensive: between 100 billion and 400 billion ($112 billion to $448 billion), according to a November 2015 report from e-Highway2050, which was formed by the European Union to plan for a
pan-European power grid.

v.

AT Desalination DA:
i.

Non-unique: There are forms of desalination that

work well with energy that is non-nuclear

International Renewable Energy Agency 15

http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/Water_Desalination_Using_R
enewable_Energy_-_Technology_Brief.pdf
As of April 2015, the membership of IRENA comprises 158 States and the
European Union (EU), out of which 92 States and the EU have ratified the Statute. The Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (ETSAP) is an
Implementing Agreement of the International Energy Agency (IEA), first established in 1976. It functions as a consortium of member country teams
and invited teams that actively cooperate to establish, maintain, and expand a consistent multi-country energy/economy/environment/engineering (4E) analytical capability. Its
backbone consists of individual national teams in nearly 70 countries , and a
common, comparable and combinable methodology, mainly based on the MARKAL / TIMES family of models, permitting the compilation of long term energy scenarios and in-depth
national, multi-country, and global energy and environmental analyses. ETSAP promotes and supports the application of technical economic tools at the global, regional, national and
local levels. It aims at preparing sustainable strategies for economic development, energy security, climate change mitigation and environment. ETSAP holds open workshops twice a
year, to discuss methodologies, disseminate results, and provide opportunities for new users to get acquainted with advanced energy-technologies, systems and modeling

Desalination based on the use of renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and
geothermal energy, can provide a sustainable way to produce fresh water
in the future. It is expected to become economically attractive as the costs of renewable technologies continue to decline and the prices of fossil fuels continue to
increase. Using locally available renewable energy resources for desalination is likely to be
a cost-effective solution particularly in remote regions, with low population density and poor infrastructure for fresh water and electricity
developments.

transmission and distribution. The present deployment of renewable-based desalination i.e. less than 1% of desalination capacity based on conventional fossil fuels and nuclear energy

Renewable desalination is mostly based on the RO process (62%), followed by

thermal processes such as MSF and MED. The dominant energy source is solar photovoltaics (PV), which is used in some 43% of the existing applications, followed by solar
thermal and wind energy (EU, 2008): can be used on over 99% of the already
existing desalination plants, while using nuclear energy would require
building new plants to account for the distinct way nuclear power
releases electricity, an economic feat the majority of countries could not
handle. The right co combination of renewable energy source with a desalination
technology can be the key to match both power and water demand
economically, efficiently and in an environmentally friendly way . Assessing the technical
(EU, 2008) does not reflect the advantages of this technology option.

feasibility and cost effectiveness of renewable desalination plants requires a detailed analysis, including a variety of factors, such as location, quality (salinity) of feed-water input and
fresh-water output, the available renewable energy source, plant capacity and size, and the availability of grid electricity.

ii. Perm: Use other forms of energy to create fresh water

and do the aff to minimize oppression.
iii. Outweigh on probability: When you take away
nuclear reactors, you have 100% solvency on removal of dangers to
indigenous people and their land. They dont have any way to prove 100%
that they can provide a sufficient amount of people with clean water so
you always prefer the aff.
iv. Oppression comes before any direct util impacts (this
only works if they dont try to link desalination to oppression but you

can also argue that the oppression of indigenous people is a lot more direct
and targeted and marginalizing than the water argument is).