Solar Space Counterplan

DDI 2008 SS

Index
Index........................................................................................................................................................................1
Solar Space Counterplan.......................................................................................................................................2
Ext- Counter-plan solves competitiveness...........................................................................................................3
At: Perm do both....................................................................................................................................................4
Cp solves Heg (space leadership internal link)....................................................................................................5
Ext- CP solves space/leadership............................................................................................................................6
At: Space Weaponization Bad (1/2)......................................................................................................................6
At: Space Weaponization bad (2/2)......................................................................................................................8
At: Colonization Bad.............................................................................................................................................9
Solves Space Colonization...................................................................................................................................10
Solves Fossil Fuel Dependence............................................................................................................................11
Energy General....................................................................................................................................................12
Solvency- Effective and profitable......................................................................................................................13
A2: Tech takes forever.........................................................................................................................................14

1
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Solar Space Counterplan

Counterplan Text - The United States federal government should substantially

increase funding for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for the
development of Space Based Solar Power.

And its competitive through the ___________________________________________________

net benefit(s)

Solar Space restores US competitiveness- it would be a Manhattan project for

energy
NSSO 07
(National Security Space Office, Report compiled by more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and business experts around
the world, October 10, 2007, “Space Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security, Report to the Director, Interim
Assessment”, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)

FINDING: The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers a path to address the concerns over US intellectual competitiveness in
math and the physical sciences expressed by the Rising Above the Gathering Storm report by providing a true “Manhattan or Apollo
project for energy.” In absolute scale and implications, it is likely that SBSP would ultimately exceed both the Manhattan and Apollo
projects which established significant workforces and helped the US maintain its technical and competitive lead. The committee
expressed it was “deeply concerned that the scientific and technological building blocks critical to our economic leadership are
eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength.” SBSP would require a substantial technical workforce of high-
paying jobs. It would require expanded technical education opportunities, and directly support the underlying aims of the American
Competitiveness Initiative.

2
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Ext- Counter-plan solves competitiveness

2ac #________________________ solvency

We solve
Developments in Solar Space would invigorate the economy by establishing significant work forces and improvements in technical
education

Prefer our solvency claims

a. its comparative- Solar space could be a manhatten project for energy
b. its conclusive- Solar Space would directly protect the American Competitiveness initiative

[Even if they win that this technology would be impractical- it would cause private industry spin offs that had on the ground
applicability which would solve for all alternative energy links in the 1ac]

Solar Space creates revenue, opens markets, and solves innovation

NSSO 07
(National Security Space Office, Report compiled by more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and business experts around
the world, October 10, 2007, “Space Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security, Report to the Director, Interim
Assessment”, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)

Most of America’s spending in space does not provide any direct monetary revenue. SBSP, however, may create new markets and the
need for new products that will provide many new, high-paying technical jobs and net significant tax revenues. Great powers have
historically succeeded by finding or inventing products and services not just to sell to themselves, but to others. Today, investments in
space are measured in billions of dollars. The energy market is trillions of dollars, and there are many billions of people in the
developing world that have yet to connect to the various global markets. Such a large export market could generate substantial new
wealth for our nation and our world. Investments to mature SBSP are similarly likely to have significant economic spin-offs, each with
their own independent revenue stream, and open up or enable other new industries such as space industrial processes, space tourism,
enhanced telecommunications, and use of off-world resources. Not all of the returns may be obvious. SBSP is a both infrastructure
and a global utility.

NASA’S commercial technology network maximizes spin-offs and private

industry innovation
NASA 02
(National Aeronautics and Space Administration), 2002, Technology Transfer,
and Outreach, http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff2002/spin02.pdf
NASA’s Commercial Technology Network strives to ensure that the Agency’s research and development activities reach the widest
possible audience with the broadest impact. The network, dedicated to technology transfer, serves as a resource of scientific and
technical information with real-world applications for U.S. businesses interested in accessing, utilizing, and commercializing NASA
technology. As the methods of transferring NASA technology continue to grow, the Commercial Technology Office at each NASA
field center works closely with NASA incubators, Regional Technology Transfer Centers, and others in the Commercial Technology
Network to provide private industry with NASA technologies. While not all technology transfers result in commercialization,
countless U.S. citizens benefit from outreach and education successes each year. The following section highlights this year’s
successful technology transfer activities. In addition, it provides a guide to the many organizations that comprise the NASA
Commercial Technology Network.

3
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

At: Perm do both

1. The permutation links the the _________________________________ net benefit- and the net benefit outweighs any other
risk of offense- that’s on the net benefit flow
2. no risk of double solvency- even if economic growth is linear- wars over economic decline aren’t- the cp would be enough to
invigorate the economy enough to prevent conflicts- this means theres no impact to double solvency

4
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Cp solves Heg (space leadership internal link)

1. the counterplan solves heg- through improving us technoloigcl and

scientific leadership

2. Space Based Solar Power is key to sustain US leadership

National Space Society 07
(Non-profit scientific space advocacy organization), 10/10/07
The Aerospace Commission recognized that Global U.S. aerospace leadership can only be achieved through investments in our future,
including our industrial base, workforce, long term research and national infrastructure, and that government must commit to
increased and sustained investment and must facilitate private investment in our national aerospace sector. The Commission
concluded that the nation will have to be a space faring nation in order to be the global leader in the 21st century—that our
freedom, mobility, and quality of life will depend on it, and therefore, recommended that the United States boldly pioneer new
frontiers in aerospace technology, commerce and exploration. They explicitly recommended hat the United States create a space
imperative and that NASA and DoD need to make the investments - 15 - necessary for developing and supporting future launch
capabilities to revitalize U.S. space launch infrastructure, as well as provide Incentives to Commercial Space. The report called on
government and the investment community must become more sensitive to commercial opportunities and problems in space.
Recognizing the new realities of a highly dynamic, competitive and global marketplace, the report noted that the federal
government is dysfunctional when addressing 21st century issues from a long term, national and global perspective. It
suggested an increase in public funding for long term research and supporting infrastructure and an acceleration of transition of
government research to the aerospace sector, recognizing that government must assist industry by providing insight into its long‐term
research programs, and industry needs to provide to government on its research priorities. It urged the federal government must
remove unnecessary barriers to international sales of defense products, and implement other initiatives that strengthen transnational
partnerships to enhance national security, noting that U.S. national security and procurement policies represent some of the most
burdensome restrictions affecting U.S. industry competitiveness. Private‐public partnerships were also to be encouraged. It
also noted that without constant vigilance and investment, vital capabilities in our defense industrial base will be lost, and so
recommended a fenced amount of research and development budget, and significantly increase in the investment in basic
aerospace research to increase opportunities to gain experience in the workforce by enabling breakthrough aerospace capabilities
through continuous development of new experimental systems with or without a requirement for production. Such experimentation
was deemed to be essential to sustain the critical skills to conceive, develop, manufacture and maintain advanced systems and
potentially provide expanded capability to the warfighter. A top priority was increased investment in basic aerospace research
which fosters an efficient, secure, and safe aerospace transportation system, and suggested the establishment of national
technology demonstration goals, which included reducing the cost and time to space by 50%. It concluded that, “America
must exploit and explore space to assure national and planetary security, economic benefit and scientific discovery. At the
same time, the United States must overcome the obstacles that jeopardize its ability to sustain leadership in space.” An SBSP
program would be a powerful expression of this imperative

3. US space dominance increases overall US heg

Gabriele Garibaldi (Top member at Taiwan security), 7/20/04, http://taiwansecurity.org/IS/2004/IS-Garibaldi-0704.htm
While we may not know much about the character of Chinese space policy (with the exception of the declarations of condemnation of
any space weaponization plan -but the real intentions of China can be deduced from its will to expel the USA from its own area of
infuence), we do know more about China's progress in Space. Meanwhile, it can be asserted definitively that the US is determined to
maintain by all means possible (including denying the rest of the world access to Space) their own space leadership, the key to the
“Full Spectrum Dominance” and the fundamental presupposition of the unipolar-imperialistic “New American Century”.

5
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Ext- CP solves space/leadership

Solar Space would restore Us Space leadership

NSSO 07
(National Security Space Office, Report compiled by more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and business experts
around the world, October 10, 2007, “Space Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security, Report to the Director,
Interim Assessment”, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)

FINDING: The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP directly addresses the concerns of the Presidential Aerospace Commission which
called on the US to become a true spacefaring civilization and to pay closer attention to our aerospace technical and industrial base,
our “national jewel” which has enhanced our security, wealth, travel, and lifestyle. An SBSP program as outlined in this report is
remarkably consonant with the findings of this commission, which stated: The United States must maintain its preeminence in
aerospace research and innovation to be the global aerospace leader in the 21st century. This can only be achieved through proactive
government policies andsustained public investments in long-term research and RDT&E infrastructure that will result in new
breakthrough aerospace capabilities. Over the last several decades, the U.S. aerospace sector has been living off the research
investments made primarily for defense during the Cold War…Government policies and investments in long-term research have not
kept pace with the changing world. Our nation does not have bold national aerospace technology goals to focus and sustain federal
research and related infrastructure investments. The nation needs to capitalize on these opportunities, and the federal government
needs to lead the effort. Specifically, it needs to invest in long-term enabling research and related RDT&E infrastructure, establish
national aerospace technology demonstration goals, and create an environment that fosters innovation and provide the incentives
necessary to encourage risk taking and rapid introduction of new products and services. The Aerospace Commission recognized that
Global U.S. aerospace leadership can only be achieved through investments in our future, including our industrial base, workforce,
long term research and national infrastructure, and that government must commit to increased and sustained investment and must
facilitate private investment in our national aerospace sector. The Commission concluded that the nation will have to be a space-faring
nation in order to be the global leader in the 21st century—that our freedom, mobility, and quality of life will depend on it, and
therefore, recommended that the United States boldly pioneer new frontiers in aerospace technology, commerce and exploration. They
explicitly recommended that the United States create a space imperative and that NASA and DoD need to make the investments
necessary for developing and supporting future launch capabilities to revitalize U.S. space launch infrastructure, as well as provide
Incentives to Commercial Space. The report called on government and the investment community must become more sensitive to
commercial opportunities and problems in space. Recognizing the new realities of a highly dynamic, competitive and global
marketplace, the report noted that the federal government is dysfunctional when addressing 21st century issues from a long term,
national and global perspective. It suggested an increase in public funding for long term research and supporting infrastructure and an
acceleration of transition of government research to the aerospace sector, recognizing that government must assist industry by
providing insight into its long-term research programs, and industry needs to provide to government on its research priorities. It urged
the federal government must remove unnecessary barriers to international sales of defense products, and implement other initiatives
that strengthen transnational partnerships to enhance national security, noting that U.S. national security and procurement policies
represent some of the most burdensome restrictions affecting U.S. industry competitiveness. Private-public partnerships were also to
be encouraged. It also noted that without constant vigilance and investment, vital capabilities in our defense industrial base will be
lost, and so recommended a fenced amount of research and development budget, and significantly increase in the investment in basic
aerospace research to increase opportunities to gain experience in the workforce by enabling breakthrough aerospace capabilities
through continuous development of new experimental systems with or without a requirement for production. Such experimentation
was deemed to be essential to sustain the critical skills to conceive, develop, manufacture and maintain advanced systems and
potentially provide expanded capability to the warfighter. A top priority was increased investment in basic aerospace research which
fosters an efficient, secure, and safe aerospace transportation system, and suggested the establishment of national technology
demonstration goals, which included reducing the cost and time to space by 50%. It concluded that, “America must exploit and
explore space to assure national and planetary security, economic benefit and scientific discovery. At the same time, the United States
must overcome the obstacles that jeopardize its ability to sustain leadership in space.” An SBSP program would be a powerful
expression of this imperative.
At: Space Weaponization Bad (1/2)

1. Solar Space ensures positive space leadership

6
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

NSSO 07
(National Security Space Office, Report compiled by more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and business experts around
the world, October 10, 2007, “Space Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security, Report to the Director, Interim
Assessment”, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)

FINDING: The SBSP Study Group found that SBSP offers significant opportunities for positive international leadership and
partnership, at once providing a positive agenda for energy, development, climate, and space. If the United States is interested in
energy, sustainable development, climate change, and the peaceful use of space, the international community is even hungrier for
solutions to these issues.

2. Space domination prevents weaponization bad scenarios- no one would

challenge the US
(Everett Dolman, 2003, School of Advanced Airpower Studies, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World
order in the 21st Century”)

Complete domination of space -would give the United States such an advantage on the terrestrial battlefield that no state could openly
challenge it. Traditional war would be effectively over. An idealist vision would be secured by realist means. Strategic dominance of
space would Further force the United States to maintain the industrial and technical capacity to keep it at the forefront of hegemony
for the foreseeable future. Nontraditional war, especially terrorism, would not be over, but it could very well be mitigated. The current
dominant use of space for military matters is in the areas of observation and monitoring. These are the tools of effective police
organizations, and have already been adapted in counter-terrorism plans. The details would be worked out in time, but the strategy
clearly has benefits for the United States and the world. The moral argument has many levels, and stems from both the high ground
and modified sanctuary theses (accepted here) that the weaponization of space is inevitable. The operational level contradiction is
quite simply that it is unconscionable to assign the military services the task of controlling space, and then deny the best means to do
it. To the military, it is the equivalent of sending a soldier into combat without a rifle. At the strategic level it thwarts the gloomier
predictions of the awful result of space weaponization by preempting the process. Most theorists who lament the coming inevitability
of space militarization do so on some variation of the notion that once one state puts weapons into space, other states will rush to do
the same, creating a space-weapons race that has no productive purpose and only a violent end. Other assumptions are generally along
the line that conflict and bloody war must eventually reach the cosmos, and delaying or holding off that eventuality is the best we can
hope for. By seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the United States is unchallenged in space, both those
assumptions are revealed as faulty. The ability to shoot down from space any attempt by another nation to place military assets in
space- or to readily engage and destroy terrestrial ASAT capacity, makes the possibility of large scale space war and or military space
races less likely, not more. Why would a state expend the effort to compete in space with a power that has the extraordinary advantage
of holding securely the highest ground at the top of the gravity well? So long as the controlling state demonstrates a capacity and a
will to use force to defend its position - in effect expending a small amount of violence as needed to prevent a greater conflagration in
the future - the likelihood of either scenario seems remote. To be sure, if the United States were willing to deploy and use a military
space force that maintained effective control of space, and did so in a way that was perceived as tough, non-arbitrary, and efficient,
other states would quickly realize no need to develop space military forces. It would serve to discourage competing states from
fielding opposing systems much in the same fashion that the Global Positioning System (GPS) succeeded in forestalling the fielding of
rival navigation systems. In time, United States control of low-Earth orbit could be viewed as a global asset and a public good.

7
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

At: Space Weaponization bad (2/2)

(don’t read if they read the link for you)

Lack of high power energy supply dooms space based missile defense
Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist, 7/16/07, ‘Solar power satellites and space radar’, The Space Review
One of the great showstoppers for the Space Radar (SR) program, formerly known as Space Based Radar, is power. It takes a lot
of energy to transmit radar beams powerful enough to track a moving target on Earth from space. What is called the Ground
Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) is what makes SR so much better than other space radar systems, such as the recently-launched
German SAR-Lupe or the NRO’s Lacrosse system. While many of the details are classified, the power problem seems to be the main
reason that the US Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has been extremely reluctant to fund this program.
In order to achieve the power levels needed for an effective GMTI system using current technology, very large solar arrays would be
needed. Even if these were to use the new Boeing solar cells that, according to the company, are more than 30% efficient, the arrays
would still be much bigger than anything on any operational satellite. Such large arrays would make the SR spacecraft easy targets for
enemy antisatellite weapons and would also produce so much drag while in low Earth orbit (LEO) that their lifespan would be shorter
—perhaps much shorter—than current-generation reconnaissance satellites.
Why, then, does such a system need to rely 100% on its own power? If solar power satellites (SPS) were available in geosynchronous
orbit and could beam electricity to the SR satellites in LEO, this might allow the radar satellites to have as much power as their
power control systems and heat radiators could handle. Power could be transmitted by a tightly focused laser or microwave beam to
one or two receptors, integrated into the spacecraft’s bus. If the radar antenna were integrated into the skin of the satellite the way it is
on a B-2 bomber, such satellite would be difficult to detect and track.
Using power from an SPS, such a satellite would be able to liberally use its ion engines to change its orbit. These engines would
never be powerful enough to make the kind of quick responsive maneuvers that some space operations commanders would like to see
in future LEO-based spacecraft, but they would be a step in the right direction.

A spaced-based laser missile defense could end all wars

FAS, Federation of American Scientists, 5/30/08, ‘Space Based Laser [SBL]’, http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sbl.htm
The potential to intercept and destroy a missile over enemy territory soon after launch, rather than over friendly territory, makes the
development of a boost phase intercept (BPI) capability very desirable. In concert with ground based theater missile defense (TMD)
systems already under development, the U.S. continues to investigate BPI concepts for BMD systems.
The SBL program could develop the technology to provide the U.S. with an advanced BMD system for both theater and national
missile defense. BMDO believes that an SBL system has the potential to make other contributions to U.S. security and world security
as a whole, such as inducing potential aggressors to abandon ballistic missile programs by rendering them useless. Failing that,
BMDO believes that the creation of such a universal defense system would provide the impetus for other nations to expand their
security agreements with the United States, bringing them under a U. S. sponsored missile defense umbrella.
An SBL platform would achieve missile interception by focusing and maintaining a high powered laser on a target until it achieves
catastrophic destruction. Energy for the sustained laser burst is generated by the chemical reaction of the hydrogen fluoride (HF)
molecule. The HF molecules are created in an excited state from which the subsequent optical energy is drawn by an optical resonator
surrounding the gain generator.

More cards in Missile Defense file

8
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

At: Colonization Bad

1. No risk of offense- attempts at colonization will be made without the
coutnerplan- the difference is that the counterplan enables these missions to
succeed

2. Colonizing space prevents extinction- modified gender language

(James Oberg, space writer and a former space flight engineer based in Houston, 1999, Space Power Theory,
http://www.jamesoberg.com/books/spt/new-CHAPTERSw_figs.pdf)

We have the great gift of yet another period when our nation is not threatened; and our world is free from opposing coalitions with
great global capabilities. We can use this period to take our nation and our fellow [hu]men into the greatest adventure that our
species has ever embarked upon. The United States can lead, protect, and help the rest of [hu]mankind to move into space. It is
particularly fitting that a country comprised of people from all over the globe assumes that role. This is a manifest destiny worthy of
dreamers and poets, warriors and conquerors. In his last book, Pale Blue Dot, Carl Sagan presents an emotional argument that our
species must venture into the vast realm of space to establish a spacefaring civilization. While acknowledging the very high costs that
are involved in manned spaceflight, Sagan states that our very survival as a species depends on colonizing outer space.
Astronomers have already identified dozens of asteroids that might someday smash into Earth. Undoubtedly, many more
remain undetected. In Sagan’s opinion, the only way to avert inevitable catastrophe is for mankind to establish a permanent
human presence in space. He compares humans to the planets that roam the night sky, as he says that humans will too wander
through space. We will wander space because we possess a compulsion to explore, and space provides a truly infinite prospect of new
directions to explore. Sagan’s vision is part science and part emotion. He hoped that the exploration of space would unify
humankind. We propose that mankind follow the United States and our allies into this new sea, set with jeweled stars. If we lead, we
can be both strong and caring. If we step back, it may be to the detriment of more than our country.

1.

9
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Solves Space Colonization

The Development of Solar Space Solar will enable interplanary travel and
sustainable colonies
John C. Mankins, Manager, Advanced Concepts Studies Office of Space Flight, August 97, from Acta Astronautica, vol. 41, no. 4,
pp. 347-359, ‘A Fresh Look at Space Solar Power: New Architectures, Concepts and Technologies,
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/a_fresh_look_at_space_solar_power_new_architectures_concepts_and_technologies.shtml
Lastly, there are a number of potential applications of these technologies in future human exploration missions, including the
moon, Mars and asteroids in the inner solar system. These include: megawatt-class SEPS Lunar cargo space transfer vehicles
Lunar orbit WPT for Lunar surface power affordable human Mars mission transportation systems.
Of these, the concept of using multi-megawatt-class space solar power systems to achieve very low cost Mars mission concepts
appears to have particular leverage. By using systems that are amenable to low-cost, multi-unit, modular manufacturing, even
though the overall system masses are not lower, the cost appears to be significantly lower. Example: The "SolarClipper". An
especially intriguing opportunity is that of using affordable megawatt-class space power for interplanetary space missions. It
appears to be possible to reduce the cost for Earth surface-to-Mars orbit transportation dramatically through the use of very
advanced, large-scale space solar power in a solar electric propulsion system (SEPS) approach. The basic architectural
strategies of the SolarClipper concept are straightforward:
Use low-mass/high-efficiency space solar energy, rather than nuclear energy, as the basic power system;
Modularize transportation systems into packages of less than 40,000 pounds each to enable launch of all but selected surface
systems, with resorting to heavy lift launch vehicles (HLLVs);
Fabricate multiple identical SEPS systems to enable effective mass production at dramatically lower cost per unit weight of
purchased hardware; and,
Use "brilliant" systems architectures that can assemble themselves in Earth orbit with little more than autonomous rendezvous and
docking technologies;
Exploit the higher fuel efficiency ("specific impulse" of electric propulsion to offset the mass associated with modularity of systems and interconnections between
systems assembled in space.
Because the majority of a mission's mass could be transported to Earth orbit on lower cost vehicles, a substantial savings
(perhaps a factor of 2-to-3) in launch costs might be achieved. Because most system elements are mass-produced, costs per unit
weight could be reduced by as much as a factor of 10.
As an added advantage, SolarClipper cargo transfer vehicles can - once they reach Mars orbit - be deployed for use as
operational solar power satellites using wireless power transmission to provide essential energy to surface operations (thus
eliminating the need for Mars surface nuclear reactors). This combination of SEPS for Earth-Mars transport, and SPS
WPT at Mars, could make possible non-nuclear exploration architectures (at least within the inner solar system).

SBSP IS CRUCIAL TO SPACE COLONIZATION

NSSO 07
(National Security Space Office, Report compiled by more than 170 academic, scientific, technical, legal, and business experts around
the world, October 10, 2007, “Space Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security, Report to the Director, Interim
Assessment”, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)

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

10
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Solves Fossil Fuel Dependence

SBSP IS CRUCIAL TO SHIFTING AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS

(William Atkins, Thursday, 12 April 2007, “Space Solar Power from satellites could generate power from Sun”,
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/11260/1066/)

Such a SSP system would use photovoltaics (PV) to convert energy from the Sun. PV technology consists of solar cells to
convert solar energy into electricity. Then, energy collected from the Sun would be transmitted to the Earth with the use of
microwave technology. Microwaves are electromagnetic waves with wavelengths in the range between 30 centimeters and one
millimeter. The use of microwaves is commonly found in kitchen microwave ovens. The use of the Sun to generate electricity
has been used for years to operate satellites, especially those that travel far from the Sun. Unlike, such uses, SSP systems could
eventually be used on a global basis in order to reduce, or maybe even eliminate, the dependence on fossil fuels.

11
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Energy General

Solar Space solves energy problems while creating effective marekts

(Jeff Foust, Monday, August 13, 2007 , “A renaissance for space solar power?”, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1)

For nearly four decades, one concept has tantalized space professionals and enthusiasts alike: space solar power. The ability to collect
solar power in space, continuously and in effectively limitless quantities, and then transmit that energy back to Earth, could
radically reshape not only the space industry but also society in general. That clean (or, in the current vernacular, carbon neutral)
energy would, advocates claim, help meet the growing energy needs of an increasingly developed world without relying on
sources that degrade the environment and/or come from politically unstable regions of the globe. That demand for energy, in
turn, would create tremendous demand for launch and other space services, driving down costs that would, in turn, open other
markets.

12
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

Solvency- Effective and profitable

Solar Space would be profitable and effective (Erik Sofge, January 2008, “Space-Based Solar Power Beams Become Next Energy
Frontier”, http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html)

The idea of using satellites to beam solar power down from space is nothing new—the Department of Energy first studied it in the
1970s, and NASA took another look in the ’90s. The stumbling block has been less the engineering challenge than the cost. A
Pentagon report released in October could mean the stars are finally aligning for space-based solar power, or SBSP. According to the
report, SBSP is becoming more feasible, and eventually could help head off crises such as climate change and wars over
diminishing energy supplies. “The challenge is one of perception,” says John Mankins, president of the Space Power Association
and the leader of NASA’s mid-1990s SBSP study. “There are people in senior leadership positions who believe everything in space
has to cost trillions.” The new report imagines a market-based approach. Eventually, SBSP may become enormously profitable—
and the Pentagon hopes it will lure the growing private space industry. The government would fund launches to place initial arrays
in orbit by 2016, with private firms taking over operations from there. This plan could limit government costs to about $10 billion.
As envisioned, massive orbiting solar arrays, situated to remain in sunlight nearly continuously, will beam multiple megawatts of
energy to Earth via microwave beams. The energy will be transmitted to mesh receivers placed over open farmland and in strategic
remote locations, then fed into the nation’s electrical grid. The goal: To provide 10 percent of the United States’ base-load power
supply by 2050. Ultimately, the report estimates, a single kilometer-wide array could collect enough power in one year to rival
the energy locked in the world’s oil reserves.

13
Solar Space Counterplan
DDI 2008 SS

A2: Tech takes forever

1. this doesn’t effect solvency- The funding to NASA demands an immediate
high paying work force and technical education- this restores American
competitiveness alone

2. Solar Space is feasible- we have the technology now

(Jeff Foust, Monday, August 13, 2007 , “A renaissance for space solar power?”, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1)

One obstacle facing space solar power is that most people have not heard of it, and many of those who have associate it
with the huge, expensive concepts studied back in the 1970s. Those proposals featured arrays many kilometers long with
massive trusses that required dozens or hundreds of astronauts to assemble and maintain: Mankins joked that a giant Borg cube
from Star Trek would have easily fit into one corner of one of the solar power satellite designs. “You ended up with a capital
investment—launchers, in-space infrastructure, all of those things—on the order of $300 billion to $1 trillion in today’s dollars
before you could build the first solar power satellite and get any power out of it,” he said. Those concepts, he argued, are
outdated given the advancements in technology in the last three decades. The efficiency of photovoltaic arrays has
increased from 10 to over 40 percent, thus requiring far smaller arrays to generate the same amount of power. Advances
in robotics would allow assembly of “hypermodularized” systems, launched piece by piece by smaller vehicles, with little or no
astronaut labor. “We think it’s now more technically feasible than ever before,” he said.

14