Jump to content
PantherPryde

Seafloor Mining Argument for Oceans Topic

Recommended Posts

Hey, my debate teacher made us do some card cutting and gather some evidence for next year's ocean topic. While I was looking for evidence, I came across an article about seafloor drilling. Then I thought, "You know, if it's done right, you can make an affirmative case for oceanic exploration about seafloor drilling." Here's the link to the article I was talking about. It has evidence to build an affirmative case out of as well as some negative evidence in case your opponent argues that case when you're on negative. You'll have to do the extra research on your own.

 

Link: https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/the-promise-and-perils-of-seafloor-mining

Edited by PantherPryde
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environment DA link for people who hit this

 

Grader 8, Institute for Fisheries Resources Director, and Spain, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations Regional Director,

[William Grader, Executive Director of the Institute for Fisheries Resources, and Glen Spain, Northwest Regional Director and Salmon Protection Program Director for Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, November, 2008, “Offshore Drilling -- It's Back

"Drill, Baby Drill," Really Burn, Baby Burn for Fisheries,†http://www.pcffa.org/fn-nov08.htm, Accessed 6/30/13/ CB]

 

The adverse impacts of offshore drilling begin with disruptive seismic survey airgun operations and continue with routine day-to-day toxic discharges of heavy metals and mutagenic hydrocarbon compounds into the ocean, even during normal operations. In spite of the much-touted "new technology" on the Outer Continental Shelf, chronic damage to the marine environment is still very much a part of every step of offshore drilling activities, including the following:

(1) Seismic Airgun Survey Impacts On Marine Life: The initial exploratory phase of offshore oil and gas activities involves the discharge of thousands of high-intensity blasts from powerful "airguns," creating a strong shockwave throughout the ocean that pounds into the seabed.

Because water is an excellent medium for the transmission of sound, seismic airgun exploration has been directly associated with mass strandings and resulting mortality of whales and other marine mammals, and with decreased fish catch in the impacted region. Permanent damage to the acoustic receptors of various fish species has also been well documented, and the hearing capacity of fish enables them to avoid predators, locate mates, and find prey.

The "Eggs & Larvae Committee," established in the 1980's as a fishing-oil industry collaborative to look at seismic impacts on fish found that the blasts caused major mortality for young anchovy. Fishermen were already aware of the "spooking" the testing caused on adult fish stocks of many species.

(2) Routine Discharges Of Offshore Drilling Wastes: During normal drilling operations for oil or gas, drilling muds are used to cool and lubricate the drill bits. Once the useful properties of drill muds are exhausted, large volumes of spent drill muds are simply discharged over the side of the drill rig directly into the ocean. Each well drilled produces, on average, 180,000 gallons of drilling mud and cuttings. Dumping of spent drill muds spreads plumes of turbidity as the "fine" particles spread throughout the water column, and the heavier components of the discharge accumulate on the seafloor to smother benthic organisms and other marine life.

These discharges also customarily contain toxic materials known to bio-accumulate in the ocean food chain leading to humans. Of primary concern are toxic heavy metals like mercury, chromium, barium, arsenic, cadmium, and "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon" compounds (or PAHs), all found to cause life-cycle mutagenic damage to eggs of pink salmon in the years following the Exxon Valdez oil spill at levels of only two parts per billion.

In addition, what are known as "produced waters," which originate from subsea aquifers, are brought up with the oil or gas, and hundreds of thousands of gallons of often toxic produced waters are subsequently dumped into the ocean.

In many geologic settings in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere, produced waters contain radioactive radium, and the resulting discharge is the source of a radioactive plume trailing from the rig on the ocean currents. Radium is readily taken up by marine life and also bio-concentrates in the marine food web.

While regulations now require drill muds from operations offshore California to be disposed of safely onshore, the same is not true elsewhere. In the Gulf of Mexico, for example, high levels of mercury have been found in recreational anglers eating fish caught around oil platforms. Researching and reporting on the cause in 2000, the Mobile Press-Register not surprisingly found that fish feeding around the oil rigs had elevated levels of mercury compared to those found elsewhere in the Gulf. The source of that mercury was determined to be the drill muds.

(3) Accidental Oil Spills From Rigs: In recent years, oil spills from offshore exploratory and production rigs have often resulted from equipment failure or human error, or a combination of both. Computerized equipment, not subject to constant monitoring and human oversight, has resulted in uncontrolled discharges of oil at many operations in various locations.

Drilling advocates (including certain radio talk show hosts) have often cited oil industry propaganda claiming that there were no oil spills caused by hurricanes Katrina or Rita in 2006. Even a cursory information search shows that claim to be nonsense. Official government reports demonstrate more than 741,000 gallons of oil was spilled from offshore oil rigs damaged by Katrina (see: www.mms.gov/ooc/press/2006/press0501.htm).

After Hurricane Katrina, oil spills were so pervasive that remote sensing equipment using Synthetic Aperture Radar on the "Radarsat" Canadian orbital satellite detected extensive slicks of highly-toxic liquid natural gas condensate, a light oil, spreading throughout the Gulf of Mexico from damaged offshore natural gas drilling infrastructure at the Apache Field. The US Minerals Management Service listed 113 Gulf of Mexico oil platforms as destroyed in 2006 by hurricanes Katrina and Rita, with hundreds more seriously damaged.

Hurricanes of the scope and destructive power of Katrina are expected to become more common in the future, as well as more frequent in higher latitudes, due to the accelerating impacts of worldwide climate change.

Routine discharges of pollutants to ocean waters and the atmosphere are virtually identical for oil or for natural gas operations, except that every phase of gas production also releases fugitive emissions to the atmosphere from leakage from wellheads, compressors, and pipeline and processing components. Natural gas is a powerful accelerant to global climate warming.

The worst case oil spill from an offshore rig in the US was the Ixtoc I blowout incident on June 3, 1979, when a US rig operating 600 miles south of Texas lost drilling mud circulation, ran into high pressure gas, and suffered a blowout in which the oil caught fire and the platform collapsed. In the next few months, approximately 10,000 to 30,000 barrels of oil per day were discharged into the Gulf of Mexico until the blowout was finally capped the following year, on March 23, 1980. At one time during this blowout, ten percent of the surface of the Gulf of Mexico was covered with oil slicks or sheen, and tar balls washed ashore on the beaches of Padre Island in Texas.

"With the nation now debating whether to open more areas offshore to oil and gas drilling, the oil industry can rightly claim it has avoided a repeat of that [1969 Santa Barbara Channel spill] catastrophe, even as offshore activity has ballooned," the Houston Chronicle reported on July 19th, 2008. "But offshore operators continue to spill thousands of barrels of oil, fuel and chemicals into federal waters each year, government records show."

(4) Oil Spills From Pipelines And Tankers Transporting Offshore Oil: California's "Torch" pipeline oil spill, and Alaska's Cook Inlet "Cross-Timbers" oil spill, represent recent examples of highly-automated subsea oil pipelines that have leaked for extensive periods of time without the source of the leaks being detected.

Since any oil produced from offshore drilling operations that lie beyond existing pipeline infrastructure is inevitably transported by barge or tanker to refining centers, there is also a constant risk of a tanker spill that can originate from any point in transit. Modern oil tankers are much larger than the Exxon Valdez that ran aground and spilled its oil 30 years ago, and a spill from one of these super-takers could be even more catastrophic.

In addition, massive floating offshore oil storage facilities, now being expanded in the Gulf of Mexico and planned for other regions, represent an increasing risk of very large spills.

(5) Air Pollution From Offshore Drilling Operations: Oil and natural gas drilling and production operations offshore generate a suite of air pollutants, including ozone, oxides of nitrogen, and sulfur compounds. Each gas well releases 50 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 13 tons of carbon monoxide, 6 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 5 tons of volatile organic carbons (VOCs) each year. The platforms themselves annually generate another 50 tons of NOx, 11 tons of carbon monoxide, 8 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 38 tons of VOCs.

Because drilling rigs offshore lie outside of the regulatory jurisdiction of onshore air quality management districts, coastal states generally have little authority over air emissions from the rigs. Tankering and barging also generate emissions from the transportation of produced crude oil, both as a result of the burning of vessel fuel and from fugitive hydrocarbon emissions from the loading and offloading of tank ships.

In the past the emissions issue has been essentially one for local governments and the environmental community, but now as we're watching the Arctic ice cap disappear and oceans become more acidic as carbon is sequestered from the atmosphere, greenhouse gas emissions have to be a concern from fishermen as well -- both in developing and transporting the oil and gas and in its subsequent burning.

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environment DA link for people who hit this

 

Grader 8, Institute for Fisheries Resources Director, and Spain, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations Regional Director,

[William Grader, Executive Director of the Institute for Fisheries Resources, and Glen Spain, Northwest Regional Director and Salmon Protection Program Director for Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, November, 2008, “Offshore Drilling -- It's Back

"Drill, Baby Drill," Really Burn, Baby Burn for Fisheries,†http://www.pcffa.org/fn-nov08.htm, Accessed 6/30/13/ CB]

 

The adverse impacts of offshore drilling begin with disruptive seismic survey airgun operations and continue with routine day-to-day toxic discharges of heavy metals and mutagenic hydrocarbon compounds into the ocean, even during normal operations. In spite of the much-touted "new technology" on the Outer Continental Shelf, chronic damage to the marine environment is still very much a part of every step of offshore drilling activities, including the following:

(1) Seismic Airgun Survey Impacts On Marine Life: The initial exploratory phase of offshore oil and gas activities involves the discharge of thousands of high-intensity blasts from powerful "airguns," creating a strong shockwave throughout the ocean that pounds into the seabed.

Because water is an excellent medium for the transmission of sound, seismic airgun exploration has been directly associated with mass strandings and resulting mortality of whales and other marine mammals, and with decreased fish catch in the impacted region. Permanent damage to the acoustic receptors of various fish species has also been well documented, and the hearing capacity of fish enables them to avoid predators, locate mates, and find prey.

The "Eggs & Larvae Committee," established in the 1980's as a fishing-oil industry collaborative to look at seismic impacts on fish found that the blasts caused major mortality for young anchovy. Fishermen were already aware of the "spooking" the testing caused on adult fish stocks of many species.

(2) Routine Discharges Of Offshore Drilling Wastes: During normal drilling operations for oil or gas, drilling muds are used to cool and lubricate the drill bits. Once the useful properties of drill muds are exhausted, large volumes of spent drill muds are simply discharged over the side of the drill rig directly into the ocean. Each well drilled produces, on average, 180,000 gallons of drilling mud and cuttings. Dumping of spent drill muds spreads plumes of turbidity as the "fine" particles spread throughout the water column, and the heavier components of the discharge accumulate on the seafloor to smother benthic organisms and other marine life.

These discharges also customarily contain toxic materials known to bio-accumulate in the ocean food chain leading to humans. Of primary concern are toxic heavy metals like mercury, chromium, barium, arsenic, cadmium, and "Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon" compounds (or PAHs), all found to cause life-cycle mutagenic damage to eggs of pink salmon in the years following the Exxon Valdez oil spill at levels of only two parts per billion.

In addition, what are known as "produced waters," which originate from subsea aquifers, are brought up with the oil or gas, and hundreds of thousands of gallons of often toxic produced waters are subsequently dumped into the ocean.

In many geologic settings in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere, produced waters contain radioactive radium, and the resulting discharge is the source of a radioactive plume trailing from the rig on the ocean currents. Radium is readily taken up by marine life and also bio-concentrates in the marine food web.

While regulations now require drill muds from operations offshore California to be disposed of safely onshore, the same is not true elsewhere. In the Gulf of Mexico, for example, high levels of mercury have been found in recreational anglers eating fish caught around oil platforms. Researching and reporting on the cause in 2000, the Mobile Press-Register not surprisingly found that fish feeding around the oil rigs had elevated levels of mercury compared to those found elsewhere in the Gulf. The source of that mercury was determined to be the drill muds.

(3) Accidental Oil Spills From Rigs: In recent years, oil spills from offshore exploratory and production rigs have often resulted from equipment failure or human error, or a combination of both. Computerized equipment, not subject to constant monitoring and human oversight, has resulted in uncontrolled discharges of oil at many operations in various locations.

Drilling advocates (including certain radio talk show hosts) have often cited oil industry propaganda claiming that there were no oil spills caused by hurricanes Katrina or Rita in 2006. Even a cursory information search shows that claim to be nonsense. Official government reports demonstrate more than 741,000 gallons of oil was spilled from offshore oil rigs damaged by Katrina (see: www.mms.gov/ooc/press/2006/press0501.htm).

After Hurricane Katrina, oil spills were so pervasive that remote sensing equipment using Synthetic Aperture Radar on the "Radarsat" Canadian orbital satellite detected extensive slicks of highly-toxic liquid natural gas condensate, a light oil, spreading throughout the Gulf of Mexico from damaged offshore natural gas drilling infrastructure at the Apache Field. The US Minerals Management Service listed 113 Gulf of Mexico oil platforms as destroyed in 2006 by hurricanes Katrina and Rita, with hundreds more seriously damaged.

Hurricanes of the scope and destructive power of Katrina are expected to become more common in the future, as well as more frequent in higher latitudes, due to the accelerating impacts of worldwide climate change.

Routine discharges of pollutants to ocean waters and the atmosphere are virtually identical for oil or for natural gas operations, except that every phase of gas production also releases fugitive emissions to the atmosphere from leakage from wellheads, compressors, and pipeline and processing components. Natural gas is a powerful accelerant to global climate warming.

The worst case oil spill from an offshore rig in the US was the Ixtoc I blowout incident on June 3, 1979, when a US rig operating 600 miles south of Texas lost drilling mud circulation, ran into high pressure gas, and suffered a blowout in which the oil caught fire and the platform collapsed. In the next few months, approximately 10,000 to 30,000 barrels of oil per day were discharged into the Gulf of Mexico until the blowout was finally capped the following year, on March 23, 1980. At one time during this blowout, ten percent of the surface of the Gulf of Mexico was covered with oil slicks or sheen, and tar balls washed ashore on the beaches of Padre Island in Texas.

"With the nation now debating whether to open more areas offshore to oil and gas drilling, the oil industry can rightly claim it has avoided a repeat of that [1969 Santa Barbara Channel spill] catastrophe, even as offshore activity has ballooned," the Houston Chronicle reported on July 19th, 2008. "But offshore operators continue to spill thousands of barrels of oil, fuel and chemicals into federal waters each year, government records show."

(4) Oil Spills From Pipelines And Tankers Transporting Offshore Oil: California's "Torch" pipeline oil spill, and Alaska's Cook Inlet "Cross-Timbers" oil spill, represent recent examples of highly-automated subsea oil pipelines that have leaked for extensive periods of time without the source of the leaks being detected.

Since any oil produced from offshore drilling operations that lie beyond existing pipeline infrastructure is inevitably transported by barge or tanker to refining centers, there is also a constant risk of a tanker spill that can originate from any point in transit. Modern oil tankers are much larger than the Exxon Valdez that ran aground and spilled its oil 30 years ago, and a spill from one of these super-takers could be even more catastrophic.

In addition, massive floating offshore oil storage facilities, now being expanded in the Gulf of Mexico and planned for other regions, represent an increasing risk of very large spills.

(5) Air Pollution From Offshore Drilling Operations: Oil and natural gas drilling and production operations offshore generate a suite of air pollutants, including ozone, oxides of nitrogen, and sulfur compounds. Each gas well releases 50 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 13 tons of carbon monoxide, 6 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 5 tons of volatile organic carbons (VOCs) each year. The platforms themselves annually generate another 50 tons of NOx, 11 tons of carbon monoxide, 8 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 38 tons of VOCs.

Because drilling rigs offshore lie outside of the regulatory jurisdiction of onshore air quality management districts, coastal states generally have little authority over air emissions from the rigs. Tankering and barging also generate emissions from the transportation of produced crude oil, both as a result of the burning of vessel fuel and from fugitive hydrocarbon emissions from the loading and offloading of tank ships.

In the past the emissions issue has been essentially one for local governments and the environmental community, but now as we're watching the Arctic ice cap disappear and oceans become more acidic as carbon is sequestered from the atmosphere, greenhouse gas emissions have to be a concern from fishermen as well -- both in developing and transporting the oil and gas and in its subsequent burning.

Thanks for the DA link! :D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone come across a card for inherency; at least one that isn't vague and will have to be slightly pulled out of context for it to be applicable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone come across a card for inherency; at least one that isn't vague and will have to be slightly pulled out of context for it to be applicable?

I think it's mostly cards for things like advantages that we have discovered so far. No cards for inherency that I know of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This aff might have issues with T:

 

I think I remember seeing a card somewhere that says Resource Extraction is distinct from development, but I can't find it.

 

 

What I did find was a card that says resource extraction is exploration, although I do think you'll have a tough time winning the limits debate using an interpretation this broad:

 

 

 

 

Lester and Robinson 2009 (Daniel F., Dept. of Astronomy @ UT Austin and Michael, Dept. of History @ Hillyer College, U of Hartford, “Visions of Explorationâ€, Space Policy 25, p. 236-243 GAL)

The historical record offers a rich set of examples of what we call exploration: Christopher Columbus sailing to the New World. Roald Amundsen driving his dogs towards the South Pole, and Neil Armstrong stepping into the soft dust of the Moon. Yet these examples illustrate the difficulty in pinning down exploration as an activity. If we define exploration as travel through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it we exclude Columbus. whose discovery was serendipitous rather than purposi'ful. We would also have to exclude Amundsen and Armstrong, and indeed many of the pantheon of explorers, who tended to dash across new terrain rather than investigate it systematically. Even more expansive terms such as "discovery" sometimes offer a poor fit for the object of modern expeditions: did Robert Peary discover the North Pole in 1909. an axis point that Greek astronomers knew about 2500 years ago? Not in any meaningful sense of the word. Students of exploration, then, must make peace with this uncomfortable fact: "exploration" is a multivalent term, one which has been (and undoubtedly will continue to be) used in different ways by different people. Geographical discovery, scientific investigation, resource extraction, and high-risk travel are activities tucked inside this definitional basket.

Edited by TejaVepa
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This aff might have issues with T:

 

I think I remember seeing a card somewhere that says Resource Extraction is distinct from development, but I can't find it.

 

 

What I did find was a card that says resource extraction is exploration, although I do think you'll have a tough time winning the limits debate using an interpretation this broad:

 

 

 

 

Lester and Robinson 2009 (Daniel F., Dept. of Astronomy @ UT Austin and Michael, Dept. of History @ Hillyer College, U of Hartford, “Visions of Explorationâ€, Space Policy 25, p. 236-243 GAL)

The historical record offers a rich set of examples of what we call exploration: Christopher Columbus sailing to the New World. Roald Amundsen driving his dogs towards the South Pole, and Neil Armstrong stepping into the soft dust of the Moon. Yet these examples illustrate the difficulty in pinning down exploration as an activity. If we define exploration as travel through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it we exclude Columbus. whose discovery was serendipitous rather than purposi'ful. We would also have to exclude Amundsen and Armstrong, and indeed many of the pantheon of explorers, who tended to dash across new terrain rather than investigate it systematically. Even more expansive terms such as "discovery" sometimes offer a poor fit for the object of modern expeditions: did Robert Peary discover the North Pole in 1909. an axis point that Greek astronomers knew about 2500 years ago? Not in any meaningful sense of the word. Students of exploration, then, must make peace with this uncomfortable fact: "exploration" is a multivalent term, one which has been (and undoubtedly will continue to be) used in different ways by different people. Geographical discovery, scientific investigation, resource extraction, and high-risk travel are activities tucked inside this definitional basket.

 

 

Thanks for the input. Also, is purposi'ful even a word, or did you mean purposeful? Sorry, but I was confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people run T against this just compete interpretations. 

 

Development is extraction of resources  

Hibbard et al 10  K. A. Hibbard, R. Costanza, C. Crumley, S. van der Leeuw, and S. Aulenbach, J. Dearing, J. Morais, W. Steffen, Y. Yasuda --- International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme.   2010     Developing an Integrated History and Future of People on Earth (IHOPE): Research Plan     IGBP Report No. 59.

http://www.igbp.net/download/18.1b8ae20512db692f2a680006394/report_59-IHOPE.pdf

A common characteristic of human-in-environment development is extraction and consumption of natural resources. A typical response to the exhaustion of these resources has been to move to new regions where continued extraction and consumption is possible. These migrations have led to colonisation of new areas, conflict and displacement of indigenous populations, introduction of new species, and so on. Only quite recently in human history has the ability to occupy new lands become limited by geopolitical constraints. New frontiers are now associated with technological advances that are used to overcome local constraints of resource availability.

Ocean development is use of ocean resources

Washington legislature 91    Washington State Legislature,   WAC 173-26-360   filed 4/24/91, effective 5/25/91.]  Ocean management.          http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=173-26-360

 (3) Ocean uses defined. Ocean uses are activities or developments involving renewable and/or nonrenewable resources that occur on Washington's coastal waters and includes their associated off shore, near shore, inland marine, shoreland, and upland facilities and the supply, service, and distribution activities, such as crew ships, circulating to and between the activities and developments. Ocean uses involving nonrenewable resources include such activities as extraction of oil, gas and minerals, energy production, disposal of waste products, and salvage. Ocean uses which generally involve sustainable use of renewable resources include commercial, recreational, and tribal fishing, aquaculture, recreation, shellfish harvesting, and pleasure craft activity.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input. Also, is purposi'ful even a word, or did you mean purposeful? Sorry, but I was confused.

 

I'm pretty sure that's an issue with the OCR-ing of the original journal article. I would change it, but that might qualify as altering evidence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that's an issue with the OCR-ing of the original journal article. I would change it, but that might qualify as altering evidence

 

I was hesitant to change it too, but it still bothers me... XO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look up the original source and if it says purposeful than you can change it. If anything, it seems more likely that the change to what the author was saying came from the OCR process itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...