178 bq aff answers to natural gas

8/14/2019 178 BQ Aff Answers to Natural Gas

1/48

AT: Natural GasDDI 2008 Deutsch

Index

Index ........................................................................................................................................................................1

**Canada** ............................................................................................................................................................32AC CANADA ....................................................................................................................................................3

2AC CANADA ....................................................................................................................................................4

**LNG Safety** .....................................................................................................................................................5

2AC LNG SAFETY DA ......................................................................................................................................5

**LNG Econ** .......................................................................................................................................................6

2AC LNG ECON .................................................................................................................................................6

2AC LNG ECON .................................................................................................................................................7

AFF Turn: High prices bad ................................................................................................................................8

AFF Impact Turn Booster: LNG Security Costs High ....................................................................................9

**Indonesia** .......................................................................................................................................................10

2AC INDONESIA .............................................................................................................................................10

2AC INDONESIA .............................................................................................................................................11

2AC INDONESIA ............................................................................................................................................12

AFF US Not Key ................................................................................................................................................13

AFF Wind No-Link ...........................................................................................................................................14

AFF Ethanol No-Link .......................................................................................................................................15

AFF Transition to Regional Markets Now ......................................................................................................16

AFF Indonesia Declining ..................................................................................................................................17

**IPI Pipelines** ..................................................................................................................................................18

2AC IPI PIPELINE ..........................................................................................................................................18

2AC IPI PIPELINE ..........................................................................................................................................19

2AC IPI PIPELINE ..........................................................................................................................................20

AFF Relations Good Now .................................................................................................................................21

AFF No Pipeline ................................................................................................................................................22

AFF Nuclear Demand .......................................................................................................................................23

AFF Coal Demand ............................................................................................................................................24

AFF Pipeline Inevitable ....................................................................................................................................25

AFF Pipeline Bad Terrorism .........................................................................................................................26

AFF Pipeline Bad Energy Security ...............................................................................................................27

1


2/48


AFF Pipeline Bad Iran ...................................................................................................................................28

AFF Pipeline Bad Iran ...................................................................................................................................29

AFF Iran Sanctions Bad ...................................................................................................................................30

AFF TAPI Pipeline Better ................................................................................................................................31

**Russia** ............................................................................................................................................................32

2AC RUSSIA .....................................................................................................................................................32

2AC RUSSIA .....................................................................................................................................................33

2AC RUSSIA .....................................................................................................................................................34

2AC RUSSIA .....................................................................................................................................................35

AFF Non-Unique ...............................................................................................................................................36

AFF Energy key to Russian Influence .............................................................................................................37

AFF Russian Influence Increasing Now ..........................................................................................................38

AFF No I/L Too Much U.S. Supply ...............................................................................................................39

AFF Empirically Denied Energy Relations .................................................................................................40

AFF I/L Turn Retaliation ..............................................................................................................................41

AFF Relations Non-Unique ..............................................................................................................................42

**Flaring** ...........................................................................................................................................................43

2AC FLARING ................................................................................................................................................43

2AC FLARING .................................................................................................................................................44**Industries** ......................................................................................................................................................45

2AC Industries ..................................................................................................................................................45

2AC Industries ...............................................................................................................................................47

2AC - Industries ...................................................................................................................................................48

2


3/48


**Canada**

2AC CANADA

1) Non-unique Demand satisfied nowJon Hurdle, a freelance writer who has written for many business publications, 7/14/08, Pa. invites bids for leases on possible gasfield, Reuters, http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1447555220080714

Pennsylvania officials on Monday invited bids to lease land atop a geological formation that may hold enough natural gas

to meet total U.S. demand for two years.The state's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources said it will hold a lease sale from pre-qualified bidders for 18 tractsof state forest totaling some 74,000 acres in two north-central Pennsylvania counties. The bidding will be open until Sept. 2.

The tracts sit over the Marcellus Shale formation, a natural feature about a mile deep that has been known about for years

but which has only recently been suspected of containing massive quantities of natural gas.The formation, which stretches some 600 miles between western New York State and West Virginia, could contain as much as 50trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, or enough to supply the entire U.S. for two years, at a wellhead value of $1 trillion,according to website geology.com.The recoverable quantity may represent about a tenth of the total gas in the formation, some scientists believe.

The estimates came from Pennsylvania State University geoscience professor Terry Englander and New York State Universitygeology professor Gary Lash, the website said."Given the enormity of the nation's energy demand, making less than an addition 4 percent of our state forest available fordrilling is a reasonable decision that protects our forest ecosystem and helps meet energy demands," DCNR SecretaryMichael DiBerardinis said in a statement."This lease sale responds to increased interest in the Marcellus Shale formation, a deep resource thought to contain largequantities of natural gas," the department's statement said. It noted that new technology and increased natural gas prices

have made it possible to recover hard-to-reach fuel.

2) Non-Unique Demand low now

NORVAL SCOTT, correspondent of Dow Jones Newswires, 7/15/08, Reportonbuisiness.com, With prices high, B.C. gas is hot,http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080715.RSHELLBC15/TPStory/BusinessWhile B.C. contains huge amounts of natural gas, those assets are mostly locked in tight formations of shale rock that preventthe gas from flowing freely into wells. Recent technological breakthroughs allow the shale to be fractured more easily,enabling the gas to be extracted

As a result, companies such as Duvernay, which holds tracts of land in the Montney that could contain over one trillioncubic feet of gas, have seen their share price double over the past twelve months. Montney is estimated to hold 50 trillion cubicfeet of reserves - more than in all of Alberta.While Duvernay was keen to continue developing its assets and wasn't looking to sell, Shell approached the company in July withits offer and negotiations proceeded smoothly from that point, Duvernay CEO Mr. Rose said in an interview. "Shell were reallyinterested in us."

3) A decrease in demand would allow Canada to fill its empty reserves-

4) Canadian production would not decrease because of the NAFTAproportionality clause

5) Canada would stop development of the non-economical northern tar pits inreponse to a decrease in demand

3


4/48


2AC CANADA

6) Alternative energies supplement supply, they dont replace natural gas but instead curb market volatility.

Progress Energy, St. Petersburg, Florida, 7-15-2008, Progress Energy gets approval to take next step to secureFloridas energy future.

[MM]

The estimated average annual customer cost increase is expected to be between 3 percent and 4 percent from 2009 to 2018. When theplants begin commercial operation in 2016-17, fuel savings -- a direct cost savings benefit to customers -- is estimated to beapproximately $1 billion a year. The prices of oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels have risen dramatically in the last couple of yearsand continue to be highly volatile.Despite what is expected to be a short-term economic downturn, Progress Energy Florida's service area remains one of the fastest-growing regions in the country. As the fourth-largest state, Florida ranks third nationally in per-capita energy consumption. Over thepast three decades, the size of the average home has grown by 50 percent and uses 30 percent more electricity. Since the Crystal Rivernuclear plant came online in the mid-1970s, the company's customer base has more than doubled.Fuel diversity is important to ensure a reliable, stable supply of electricity for customers. Progress Energy Florida has the most diversefuel mix of any utility in the state, and is committed to a balanced mix of power generation alternatives, including natural gas, coal,oil, nuclear and renewable sources. This is the best way to continue to ensure a safe, reliable and economical source of electricity.Nuclear power is one of three critical components of Progress Energy Florida's balanced solution to meet its customers' energy needsover the long term, which also includes the use of renewable energy sources, and one of the nation's best energy-efficiency programs.

7) Empirically Canadian relations are resilient

4
http://www.progressenergy.com/aboutus/news/article.asp?id=19062http://www.progressenergy.com/aboutus/news/article.asp?id=19062


5/48


**LNG Safety**

2AC LNG SAFETY DA

1. Increased demand elsewhere will keep US LNG imports low.

Platts 6/19/08 (http://www.platts.com/Natural%20Gas/News/8821458.xml?src=Natural%20Gasrssheadlines1)Voracious demand in South Korea and Spain will keep liquefied natural gas deliveries in the US low,which will be bullish to US gas prices, analysts at US investment bank Goldman Sachs said. AnalystsSamantha Dart and Jeffery Currie expect Henry Hub prices to average $12.80/MMBtu over the summerand peak at $13.80/MMBtu this coming Northern Hemisphere winter--before falling back to $10/MMBtuin June 2009as Asian and European pulls US prices up. "The higher-than-expected increase in LNGdemand from Asia and Europe in the first quarter of 2008 was met by higher-than-expected LNG suppliesin the market, likely motivated by high spot LNG prices in the period, and lower-than-expected North

American LNG imports," Dart said. "Both Mexico and the United States showed declines in LNG importsearlier this year relative to our expectations." The increased international demand for gas will, Goldmansaid, bolster US prices as US LNG deliveries will no longer take up the slack for US demand, which theanalysts still see as increasing even as the US economy slows.

2. No tradeoff Natural gas demand for heading will be filled by LNG even if energy demands are not.

3. Safety measures are coming now assumes SQ measures

4. Domestic safety reform doesnt solve their evidence assumes ships are hijacked internationally.

5. LNG has an incredible safety record

Los Angeles Business Journal, March 27, 2006, Liquid natural gas has an outstanding safety record,http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_13_28/ai_n16124228

Truth is, LNG has been safely transported around the world for more than four decades with an outstanding safety record.Terrorism experts have testified that LNG makes a lousy terrorist target because operations are heavily secured and offer fewhuman casualties and little disruption to daily life. Environmental impact reports find almost no damage from proposed terminals,but there are tremendous potential benefits from LNG because it is a clean burning fuel that will seriously cut pollutants as publicvehicle fleets are encouraged to switch to natural gas.

5
http://www.platts.com/Natural%20Gas/News/8821458.xml?src=Natural%20Gasrssheadlines1http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_13_28/ai_n16124228http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_13_28/ai_n16124228http://www.platts.com/Natural%20Gas/News/8821458.xml?src=Natural%20Gasrssheadlines1http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_13_28/ai_n16124228


6/48


**LNG Econ**

2AC LNG ECON

1. LNG is facing opposition now

Sophia Ruester and Anne Neumann, Department of Business and Economics, Dresden University ofTechnology, Chair of Energy Economics and Public Sector Management, 6-13-08, The prospects for liquefiednatural gas development in the US, Science Direct, [Crystal Xia]

Industry, policymakers, and regulators agree that of the more than 40 proposals, a handful will become reality . Frisch etal. (2005) favor 14 terminals since collective capacity would vastly exceed the total amount of LNG consistent with forecasteddemand growth but some industry watchers predict the amount will be less than ten. Since September 11, the public hasgrown more aware of risks to national security. Chemical plants and existing and planned nuclear and LNG facilities havecome under intense scrutiny. Richard Clarke, a former Clinton administration official, has published several reports on thelikelihood of terrorist attacks against on- and offshore facilities and tankers. Given the reluctance of US coastal residents tofavor onshore facilities, receiving terminals on both coasts (and in Florida) will likely face prolonged battles for approval. Aneasily documented example of grassroots resistance is Hess LNG's Weaver's Cove (Fall River, MA). The onshore brownfields siteis 4 miles from an existing pipeline. Following the project's announcement in 20002001, it quickly became apparent that theproponents had not done their homework. To offload, tankers would travel many miles through Rhode Island waters to reach theFall River facility. Rhode Island officials were quick to fault the project, and local Massachusetts politicians joined the fray whenit was revealed that existing bridges were too small for tankers to pass under. Fall River, an aging industrial city has struggled toredefine itself; residents and the former mayor made it clear to Massachusetts officials and to FERC early on that a nearby LNGfacility would deter new business from relocating. Terrorist and safety concerns also figured in the opposition. News in March2008 concerning a new plan to construct an offshore facility as part of the original proposal further incensed local officials whoclaimed that Hess LNG did not notify them before announcing the offshore addition. New LNG must also compete with existingfacilities and expansions. A barrier to entry is the lack of available upstream deliveries. In contrast to market entrants, incumbent

oil and natural gas majors currently simultaneously construct liquefaction capacities to correspond with regasification capacities(e.g. ExxonMobil in Qatar on the upstream side and in the US and UK parallel on the downstream side of the LNG value chain).At present, only minor non-contracted volumes are available for LNG trade. Spare capacities are likely to evolve only if existingsites are expanded.Finally, fluctuations in the price of oil coupled with continued political instability in the Mideast frequently make itdifficult for proponents of new LNG to get their message through to the public and many decision-makers .

6


7/48


2AC LNG ECON

2. The LNG market is already slowed due to lack of production and international demand.

Clifford Krauss, correspondent for the NYT, 5-29-08, Global Demand Squeezing Natural Gas Supply, New

York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/business/29gas.html, [Crystal Xia]

But now L.N.G. shipments to the United States are slowing to a trickle , and Cheniere and othercompanies havedropped plans to build more terminals. A longstanding assumption of American energy policy has been that naturalgas would be plentiful abroad, and therefore readily available for importation, as production falls off in NorthAmerica, where many fields are tapped out. But some experts are starting to question that idea, sayingnatural gas could be subject to the same explosion in overseas demand that has made oil so expensive. As it is, thesupertankers that were supposed to deliver cargoes of gas from Africa and the Middle East to the UnitedStates are taking them to places like Spain and Japan instead, pushing up gas prices and depleting thenations stockpiles as the hurricane season approaches. A few years ago people looked at L.N.G. as asolution to North Americas gas needs, said Nikos Tsafos, an analyst with PFC Energy, a consulting

firm. But today we see that there is less L.N.G. around than people expected, and there is more competition for thatL.N.G. from markets that are willing to pay more than the United States.

3. Gas consumption would increase with renewables due to lower prices.

R. Neal Elliot, Anna Monis Shipley, Steven Nadel, and Elizabeth Brown, @ American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 12-03, Natural gas price effects of energy efficiency and renewable energy practices andpolicies, pg. 28, http://www.aceee.org/pubs/e032full.pdf, [Crystal Xia]

4. Increased renewable energy leads to increased natural gas demand

Wall Street Journal. 04/18/08. Surge in Natural-Gas Price Stoked by New Global Trade.[Takumi Murayama]

In a twist, the effort to build alternative-energy projects like solar arrays and wind farms also boosts construction ofgas-fired plants. Because wind is unpredictable, it's often necessary to build back-up generators, and gas-fired plants have anadvantage in that they can be started up relatively quickly, says Doug Kimmelman, senior partner with Energy Capital Partners,a private-equity firm focused on the power sector.In addition, regulatory approval and construction times are shorter for gas plants than coal or nuclear. For reasons like these,new gas-fired power plants continue to be built or planned

7


8/48


AFF Turn: High prices bad

High gas prices are a drag on the economy.

Stephen Brown, Director of Energy Economics and Microeconomic Policy Activity @ the Federal ReserveBank of Dallas, 6-19-03 US Natural Gas Markets in Turmoil: Testimony Prepared for a Hearing on TheScientific Inventory of Oil and Gas Resources on Federal Lands,http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/03brown_testimony.pdf, [Crystal Xia]

Sustained high natural gas prices are likely a drag on U.S. economic activity. Higher energyprices are indicative of increased scarcity of natural gas which is a basic input to production.6 Assuch, rising natural gas prices can result in a classic supply-side shock that reduces potentialoutput. Consequently, output and productivity growth are slowed. The decline in productivitygrowth lessens real wage growth and increases the unemployment rate at which inflation

accelerates.7 If market participants expect the near-term effects on output to be greater than the

long-term effects, they will attempt to smooth their consumption by saving less or borrowingmore, which boosts the interest rate. With slowing output growth and an increase in the realinterest rate, the demand for real cash balances falls, and for a given rate of growth in themonetary aggregate, the rate of inflation increases. Therefore, rising natural gas prices reduceGDP growth and boost real interest rates and the measured rate of inflation.8

8


9/48


AFF Impact Turn Booster: LNG Security Costs High

Security costs will increase

Paul W. Parfomak, CRS Specialist in Science and Technology, 5/24/04 (CRS Report for Congress Liquefied

Natural Gas (LNG) in U.S. Energy Policy: Issues and Implications) [S. Page]To protect the public from an LNG accident or terrorist attack, the federal government imposes numerous safety and securityrequirements on LNG infrastructure. The nature and level of risk associated with LNG is the subject of ongoing debate amongindustry, government agencies, researchers and local communities. Whatever the specific risk levels are determined to be, theycould multiply as the number of LNG terminals and associated tanker shipments grows. Likewise, the costs associated withmitigating these risks are also likely to increase. To the extent these costs are not borne by the LNG industry, they mayrepresent an ongoing burden to public agencies such as the Coast Guard, law enforcement, and emergency response agencies.

9


10/48


**Indonesia**

2AC INDONESIA

1. Indonesia is shifting to regional markets as they lose out in the global market

US Embassy, Jakarta Indonesia, 9/1/03, Natural Gas Changes in Indonesia, Energy News,http://jakarta.usembassy.gov/econ/natural_gas2003.html

3. The nature of Indonesias gas industry is changing, however. New LNG producers in Qatar, Australia, Russia, along withMalaysia, now challenge Indonesias leadership in the LNG market. At the same time, a regional gas transmission network is

developing, creating new gas markets and sources of revenue. Domestically, the reduction of fuel subsidies ease fuel pricedistortions, making natural gas more competitive as a fuel alternative. Gas should also play a significant role in meeting thecountrys growing power demands. Finally, the Oil and Gas Law of 2001 has streamlined the process for domestic gas supplysales and created a new domestic market obligation (DMO) for gas. These changes create new opportunities in the domesticgas market, even as the global LNG market becomes more diversified.

2. Non-Unique Indonesia is losing its hold on the natural gas market customers are switching away

now

Grace Nirang, reporter in Jakarta, and Christian Schmollinger, reporter, 8/10/06, Natural gas running low in Indonesia,International Herald Tribune, http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/09/bloomberg/bxgas.php

Utilities in Japan,the largest Asian economy, are turning to other markets. Tokyo Electric Power and Tokyo Gas, the largestJapanese power and gas suppliers, have signed up with Royal Dutch Shell's Sakhalin project in Russia to diversify supplies. OsakaGas is in talks with Inpex, an oil and gas producer based in Tokyo, about joining a $6 billion liquefied natural gas project in Australia.

Japan buys 40 percent of the world's liquefied natural gas and depends on Indonesia for a quarter of its imports of the fuel,according to the Japanese Ministry of Finance. The gas is part of a strategy to reduce the country's reliance on Middle East oil.

"The Japanese must be pretty worried about what's happening in Indonesia," Andy Flower, a former BP executive who works asan independent consultant, said by telephone. "There's no way they can renew the contracts and fill the pipe."Calls from politicians, including Vice President Jusuf Kalla, to divert Borneo gas to other parts of Indonesia have fanned concernabout its reliability as a supplier.Buyers are "already outraged by our failure to meet commitments," said Ari Soemarno, the head of the state oil company,Pertamina, which negotiates Indonesia's liquefied natural gas sales contracts. "We're still studying the impact of Chevron'sstatement."While buyers are seeking alternatives, suppliers like Chevron in Indonesia have become reluctant to invest in fields that could

have to supply markets in Java at lower prices than Japan, said Christopher Newton, the chairman of Indonesian PetroleumAssociation.All export contracts from the Borneo plant at Bontang, known as Badak NGL, are up for renewal between 2009 and 2011 .

10


11/48


2AC INDONESIA

3. Expanding into the US market might not be beneficial pre-existing competition means selling would

be on a spot-term basis

Andrew Symon, Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of South-east Asian Studies, 6/13/04, Asia-Pacific: Get set for an LNGexplosion in the region, Energy Bulletin, http://www.energybulletin.net/node/630

Future supply to the US could force radical change to the industry in the Asia-Pacific region. Producers would sell into what isalready a very large and competitive domestic gas market supplied by Canadian and US fields. They would likely have to sellcargoes on short and spot-term basis, accepting US market prices and hedging against risk with various futures and otherfinancial instruments.

4. Other countries have a massive natural gas demand Malaysia proves

LOONG TSE MIN, staff writer in Kuala Lumpur, 7/14/08, Long-term challenge to users of natural gas, The Star Online,http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/7/14/business/21813487&sec=business

According to Petronas estimates, the demand for gas in Peninsular Malaysia has increased by 97% since 1997, which has put astrain on supply facilities.Petronas had said that its offshore production facilities and the Peninsular Gas Utilisation (PGU) system were running at fullcapacity to meet increasing demand.As our production is unable to meet demand, we have increased the purchase of gas from other sources beyond offshoreTerengganu, a spokesman said.In 2007, 23% of Peninsular Malaysia's gas demand was met through imports. By Petronas' estimates, demand that already outstripssupply will grow to 4,900mmscf(million standard cubic feet) per day by 2027 . Meanwhile, gas supply from offshore Terengganucan only be sustained at 2,000 mmscf per day (see chart).Amirsham, at Friday's announcement, had said the issue was not the subsidy costs to Petronas, which the national petroleum companycould afford, but one of economic viability and sustainability.There is not enough gas in any country that you can point to, so it is important we have economic viability (of industries usingthe gas), he said.

11


12/48


2AC INDONESIA

5. The US isnt heavily invested in Indonesian gas anyway, lack of bidding proves

US Embassy, Jakarta Indonesia, 6/23/04, Indonesias Natural Gas Opportunities and Challenges, Energy News Archives,http://jakarta.usembassy.gov/download/Natural%20Gas%202003.pdf.

Lastly, Indonesia requires new gas production in order to meet the growing regional and domestic demand . Last years fourpercent gas production increase falls well short of the GOIs predicted demand growth of 9-11 percent annually. Private investmentwill be the key to new gas production. Unfortunately, investment in new oil/gas exploration and development averaged $1.2billion for 2001-2003, down from a peak of $2.1 billion in 1998. Although the GOI awarded 15 new exploration tenders in 2003

up from 1 in 2002 and 6 in 2001, major international and U.S. companies were largely absent from the bidding on these new

oil/gas blocks.

6. Demand satisfied now new lease means we wont need gas for 2 years anyway

Jon Hurdle, a freelance writer who has written for many business publications, 7/14/08, Pa. invites bids for leases on possible gasfield, Reuters, http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1447555220080714

Pennsylvania officials on Monday invited bids to lease land atop a geological formation that may hold enough natural gas to

meet total U.S. demand for two years.The state's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources said it will hold a lease sale from pre-qualified bidders for 18 tracts ofstate forest totaling some 74,000 acres in two north-central Pennsylvania counties. The bidding will be open until Sept. 2.The tracts sit over the Marcellus Shale formation, a natural feature about a mile deep that has been known about for years but

which has only recently been suspected of containing massive quantities of natural gas.The formation, which stretches some 600 miles between western New York State and West Virginia, could contain as much as 50trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, or enough to supply the entire U.S. for two years, at a wellhead value of $1 trillion,according to website geology.com.The recoverable quantity may represent about a tenth of the total gas in the formation, some scientists believe.The estimates came from Pennsylvania State University geoscience professor Terry Englander and New York State University geologyprofessor Gary Lash, the website said."Given the enormity of the nation's energy demand, making less than an addition 4 percent of our state forest available fordrilling is a reasonable decision that protects our forest ecosystem and helps meet energy demands," DCNR Secretary MichaelDiBerardinis said in a statement."This lease sale responds to increased interest in the Marcellus Shale formation, a deep resource thought to contain largequantities of natural gas," the department's statement said. It noted that new technology and increased natural gas prices have

made it possible to recover hard-to-reach fuel.

12


13/48


AFF US Not Key

Other countries are the primary importers of Indonesian natural gas

Bill Powers, Editor of Canadian Energy Viewpoint, 7/31/04, Indonesia and Oman, Energy Bulletin,http://www.energybulletin.net/node/1560

While Indonesias oil production capacity continues to dwindle, the countrys natural gas production has remained flat. The USDepartment of Energy (DOE) estimates that Indonesia has reserves of 90.5 trillion cubic feet (tcf) and production of 2.5 tcf per year.Since the country consumes only 50% of its gas production per year, Indonesia has been able to maintain the title of the worldsleading exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are the primary destinations for much of

Indonesias LNG exports. Beginning in 2007, Indonesia will export 2.6 million tons of LNG a year to China.

13


14/48


AFF Wind No-Link

Wind turbines dont necessarily trade-off with natural gas demands gas might be reallocated to cars

Leonard Doyle, Washington correspondent of 'The Independent', 7/12/08,The texan oil baron and the winds of change, TheIndependent, http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/the-texan-oil-baron-and-the-winds-of-change-865830.html

Environmentalists are cheering wildly, but the Pickens Plan has little to do with their worries about the catastrophic dangers of globalwarming. MrPickens has a plan that everyone can get their heads around: He simply wants to end America's addiction to importedoil and use the country's abundant wind power and natural gas resources to keep the country rolling ."We're paying $700bn a year for foreign oil," he said. "It's breaking us as a nation, and I want to elevate that question to thepresidential debate, to make it the number one issue of the campaign this year."Neither presidential candidate is talking about solving the oil problem. So we're going to make 'em talk about it. Nixon said in 1970that we were importing 20 per cent of our oil and that by 1980 it would be 0 per cent. That didn't happen. It went to 42 per cent in1991 with the Gulf War. It's just under 70 per cent now. Where do you think we're going to be in 10 years when our economy is bustedand we're importing 80 per cent of our oil?"Windy as Sweetwater is, there are places further north in the Great Plains which are more suitable for wind farming. Some 250 miles

away, Mr Pickens is building what is described as the world's largest wind farm.He has pumped $2bn into the project so far, buying nearly 700 wind turbines from General Electric (GE) and he will spend another$10bn on the project before it starts generating electricity sometime in 2011.Filling the Great Plains with wind turbines to produce electricity is only half of the Pickens Plan. He wants to see America's

petrol imports cut back as well by converting cars to run on natural gas. At present most of America's natural gas is used to

produce electricity. Generate electricity from the wind and that can be diverted so that as many as a third of the vehicles will

be running on natural gas within only a few years, he says.

14


15/48


AFF Ethanol No-Link

Ethanol demands natural gas for production doesnt change national demand

WilfGobert, an independent energy analyst based in Calgary and a senior fellow with the Fraser Institute, 7/14/08, Financial Post,Energy policy makers' unintended consequences, http://www.financialpost.com/trading_desk/energy/story.html?id=654277

However, the lobby against ethanol subsidies is growing rapidly. In Britain, the government says it will slow the introduction ofbiofuels to address concerns about the impact on food prices.The World Bank's economist says production of biofuels and the domino effect on grain inventories, export bans, and marketspeculation is responsible for 75% of the 140% rise in prices since 2002. This is a stunning estimate when the U.S. Administrationsays the impact has been 2% to 3%, and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization estimates up to 30%.In Canada, the C.D. Howe Institute waded in with a report that says Canada's biofuels policies are misguided, and are havingunforeseen consequences. More importantly, the report suggests the evidence of the benefit of biofuels on greenhouse gasemissions is inconclusive. You may not realize that ethanol production requires substantial energy consumption, primarily

natural gas.

15


16/48


AFF Transition to Regional Markets Now

Indonesia is focusing in on domestic and regional markets, global market is squeezing them out

US Embassy, Jakarta Indonesia, 9/1/03, Natural Gas Changes in Indonesia, Energy News,http://jakarta.usembassy.gov/econ/natural_gas2003.html

Though LNG exports will remain an important component of Indonesias gas marketing strategy, gas demand will

increasingly shift toward domestic and regional markets. Power needs and cheaper, environmentally-friendly gas will drive

this shift.Short-term growth in domestic use, as evidenced by the jump in gas supply agreements, will be relatively easy .However, long-term growth will depend on more complex regulatory, legal and security improvements the overall investmentclimate. A turnaround in the investment climate is essential, not only to ease financing and encourage gas development, but to improvethe countrys economic health as well.

16


17/48


AFF Indonesia Declining

Indonesia is losing out in the LNG global market now09/2/2006 Natural Gas Reserves in Indonesia http://www.oilgasarticles.com/articles/434/1/Natural-Gas-Reserves-in-

Indonesia/Page1.htmlIndonesia is facing a declining share of global LNG markets, despite its past status as the worlds leading LNG exporter. The declinecan be attributed partly to questions over the reliability of Indonesian supply and lower investment in the Indonesian energy sector.Uncertainties over political support for the sanctity of contracts, regulatory transparency, and relatively unfavorable PSC terms haveundermined investment support. As a result, Indonesian LNG exports have been partially replaced by exports from Oman, Qatar,Russia, and Australia on world markets. Since early 2005, exports from the export terminal at Arun in Aceh have been cut back belowthe level of contractual committments, due to continuing production problems in the area, despite the end of the insurgency there. Thesector has also faced restructuring under the terms of Indonesias World Bank and IMF lending agreements, with BP Migas taking overthe supervisory and management roles formerly filled by Pertamina.

17


18/48


**IPI Pipelines**

2AC IPI PIPELINE

1. No pipeline now US-Indian agreement

Shiv KumarVerma, Political Geography Division, Center for International Politics, Organization andDisarmament, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. 06-07. Energygeopolitics and IranPakistanIndia gas pipeline, Energy Policy, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp. 3280-3301. [TakumiMurayama]

Iran's proven oil reserves at the end of 2003 were estimated to be 130,700 million barrels, representing 11.4% of world reservesand some 18.0% of those in the Middle East. With proven reserves of 26,690,000 million cubic meters at the end of 2003, Iranis the world's second richest country in natural gas resources after Russia, with some 15% of the global and 37% of the MiddleEast region total, which is a major discover for Iran (Fisher, 2005). The South Pars offshore fields, which is an extension ofQatar's North Field, are officially the largest natural gas reserves in the world. In the 21st century, the most important factorsthat will decisively determine the fate of Iran gas pipeline are United States and China in the Persian Gulf. Both are thelargest consumers of oil and gas in the world. So a new IranPakistanIndiaChinaRussia scenario begins to emerge, whichlinks global oil and gas security to geopolitics. The question is: can these two issues be reconciled? This paper will endeavor toanalyze the importance of Iran as a gas supplier to east, especially, India and China. It will argue that such dependence on avolatile region like Iran and the perception of scarcer energy resources in the South Asian region have the potential to

lead to conflict in both regions unless these issues are dealt with geo-economics rather than geo-strategic calculations.However, the recent understanding between the United States and India seems to cancel the whole pipeline project aslong as present Iranian regime remains in power. The broad geopolitical conditions that would favor or block the IranPakistanIndia (IPI) pipeline project and Iran's situation as well as the role of the United States in Asia and the state of relationsbetween India and Pakistan are also pertinent issues that are going to be influential in fructifying the proposed pipeline. Themoot question relates to Pakistan's subsidizing the purchases of Iranian gas and how would it finance this commercialjuggernaut. Pakistan would not have an interest in the stable flow of gas in transit unless it is to finance some of its own

purchases from the fees. There is competition for gas from the Gulf, and from Iran. This is not only a matter of political andmilitary strategies, but as much as question of commercial and financial incentives. China seems to have understood that, asexemplified with the deal with Iran. The question is, to what extent India would be able and willing to offer a competing deal.So far, due to Indian foreign policy changes, Iran seems to have suspended the emerging deal with India. In the midst of suchdynamics it is to be seen as to what extent India prefers a close relationship with the United States at the expense of gas tradewith Iran.

18


19/48


2AC IPI PIPELINE

2. The Pipeline fails - Iran is unreliable since its own demand is increasing

Ariel Cohen, Ph.D., Senior Research Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies and International EnergySecurity in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, Lisa Curtis, Senior ResearchFellow for South Asia in the Asian Studies Center, and Owen Graham, Research Assistant in the AllisonCenter at The Heritage Foundation. 05/30/08. The Proposed Iran-Pakistan-India Gas Pipeline: AnUnacceptable Risk to Regional Security, Heritage. [Takumi Murayama]

Iran is an important economic power in the nat ural gas and petroleum industry, but numerous deficiencies in its oil andgas sectorhave caused the overall economy to lag far behind its potential and call into question Iran's future as an oil and gasexporter, including its ability to supply gas to Paki stan and India through the IPI pipeline.Iran has the second-largest gas reserves in the world after Russia and the second-largest petro leum reserves after Saudi Arabia.Iran has an esti mated 974 trillion cubic feet in proven gas reserves and 136 billion barrels in proven oil reserves.[35] Oilprovides more than 70 percent of Iranian govern ment revenue.

Yet instead of reinvesting this money in the oil and gas sector, the Iranian government has generally spent it onambitious weapons purchases, its nuclear pro gram, support for terrorism, and economic subsidies. The Iranian regime isinvesting only about half of the funds necessary just to maintain hydrocarbon pro duction, much less to expand production.Iranian exports are declining by 10 percent to 12 percent annually according to a National Acad emy of Sciences (NAS) study.If current trends con tinue, Iran's oil exports will drop by half in less than five years and disappear entirely by 2015. Thisprojected decline in production would be the result of a lack of investment in the oil sector and a short age of natural gas forreinjection (to enhance oil recovery), caused by continuing massive growth in domestic demand for natural gas due tosubsidized consumption.[36]Iran's domestic demand for natural gas is grow ing by nearly 9 percent annually, while its produc tion is growing by 4.5

percent per year.[37] Thus, domestic gas demand has increased at the expense of reinjection, accelerating oil depletionrates. Despite its massive gas reserves, Iran has been forced to import 23 mcm per day from Turkmeni stan. However, onDecember 31, 2007, Turkmeni stan stopped daily deliveries of gas, forcing Iran to begin importing from Azerbaijan.[38]These trends indicate that Iran will be an unreli able oil and gas supplier and a high political risk. The NAS study

concludes that without major changes, Iran will cease to be a net oil exporter by 2014 and will therefore be incapable ofsupplying gas to Pakistan and India through the IPI.[39]

19


20/48


2AC IPI PIPELINE

3. IPI Pipeline allows Iran to develop nukes and continue support of terrorism


Indian support for the IPI undercuts U.S. efforts to isolate Iran economically by challenging U.S. sanctions against Iran's oiland gas industry. Over the long term, pursuing the IPI will increase Iranian influence in South Asia, which couldcontribute to greater instability in the region, especially if Iran develops a nuclear weapons capability and contin ues to

support international terrorism.

Iran continues to flout international pressure to cease its uranium-enrichment efforts and discon tinue its nuclear program. In

March 2008, the U.N. Security Council took notice and passed Resolution 1803, the third round of sanctions on Iran, adding tothe sanctions adopted in 2006 and 2007.[30]Resolution 1803 follows the December 2007 release of the controversial National Intelligence Estimate, which stated that Iranhad halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. While this may be the case, the report also recognizes that Iranian entitiesare continuing to develop a range of techni cal capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons and that

Iran's uranium enrich ment and ballistic missile programs are continu ing.[31] Both programs are vital for building anuclear weapons arsenal. Moreover, Iran remains the world's biggest supporter and financer of terrorism.

4. IPI Pipeline Bad: Terrorism, Iran Nukes, and killing US soft power

Dr. Anjali Sahay Visiting Assistant Professor,PhD( Old Dominion University) AND Dr. Jalil Roshandel Associate Professor,PhD.(Universite des Science Sociales, Tolouse, France) March 28 th2008Iran, Pakistan, India Natural Gas Pipeline: Implications and

Challenges for the United StatesIn addition, emerging strategic relationsbetween Iran and India could lead to cooperation in the nuclear field. Furthermore, revenuesgenerated by Pakistan could be further used to support terrorist activities, depending on whochannels the funding. While the US recognizes the growing energy needs of India andPakistan, it has repeatedly expressed concerns over international participation in energyprojects with Iran. Moreover, the revenues acquired could be used to further Irans allegednuclear weapons program, support for terrorism in addition to a concern on Irans humanrights record. It is not clear who will be finally involved in the implementation of the project,but China, Russia, Japan, and some Europeans could potentially fit in the long term. Last butnot least, Russian involvement in the building of the pipeline project in addition to theirinvolvement in the Caspian Sea projects can further complicate the situation by reducing USinvolvement in the region.

5.

20


21/48


AFF Relations Good Now

Indo-Pakistani Cooperation is better now

Bruce Pannier, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 04/28/08. Energy: Turkmen, Iranian Presidents MovingAhead With Rival Pipelines, Payvand. http://www.payvand.com/news/08/apr/1293.html

[Takumi Murayama]Reports from Islamabad on April 25 indicated that India and Pakistan were close to finalizing their part of the deal.Ahmadinejad is trying to push the potential partners to sign that deal. For its part, Iran has already started constructing thepipeline on its territory and could have its section to the Pakistani border completed by 2012.The IPI pipeline would be some 2,600 kilometers long and would cost an estimated $7 billion. The IPI pipeline would initiallycarry some 30 bcm annually, but within three to four years after starting up that amount would increase to 70 bcm. Iran firstproposed the pipeline in the 1990s, but tensions between Pakistan and India kept the project on hold until now. In theirmeetings last week, Pakistani and Indian officials stressed that cooperation between the two nuclear neighbors is betternow.

21


22/48


AFF No Pipeline

US will intervene to stop the pipeline

Dr. Ali Mostashari, Strategic Initiatives Advisor, UN Development; and Research Affiliate, MIT. 01~03/07.The Political Economy of the Iran-Pakistan-India Gas Pipeline, Iran Analysis Quarterly Vol. 4 Number 1, p.31. [Takumi Murayama]

While differences on the pricing structure between India and Pakistan are the current official stumbling block (Times of India,March 22, 2007), the U.S. opposition to the IPI project and the potentials of being impacted by U.S. sanctions is alsoinfluencing Indias current reluctance to go ahead with the project. Not surprisingly, India faces pressures from the UnitedStates to isolate Iran and to rely on an alternative route, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) gas pipeline project, if itwanted to keep its good relations with the U.S (Jamali, 2005). The Financial Times reported in January 2006 that Washingtonhad warned India that Delhis own nuclear deal with the US could be ditched if the Indian government did not vote to referTehran to the United Nations Security Council ( Financial Times, January 26, 2006). The impact of U.S. pressure was seen inanother decision-making venue involving Iran, when India endorsed the referral of Iran to the Security Council during theFebruary meeting of the IAEA. This resulted in Irans refusal to ratify the previously agreed liquefied natural gas (LNG) dealwith India for the time being. More recently, there was a perceived shift in the U.S. rhetoric on the issue when President Bushindicated that the administration may soften its stance on the issue during a visit to Pakistan in March 2006, when he said "ourbeef with Iran is not the pipeline, our beef with Iran is the fact that they want to develop a nuclear weapon."(India Daily, March4, 2006). However, the administration openly supports the TAP project and could use economic, strategic and nuclearincentives to Delhi for forsaking the IPI project if it feels that an agreement is near.

22


23/48


AFF Nuclear Demand

Nuclear power is a better option for India with increasing gas prices

Shiv Kumar Verma, Political Geography Division, Center for International Politics, Organization andDisarmament, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. 06-07. Energygeopolitics and IranPakistanIndia gas pipeline, Energy Policy, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp. 3280-3301.

[Takumi Murayama]Therefore, nuclear power looks like becoming critical to India's economy and long-term energy security. First, India's riseas an economic power means that its energy needs will rise massively. The BRIC report of Goldman Sachs projects India'sGDP to rise by 40 times between 2000 and 2050. If energy consumption rises at just half this rate, it means India will need 20times more energy in 2050. It will be difficult or impossible to meet these needs through conventional fuels. Secondly, theprice of fossil fuels has shot up, with oil more than doubling to US$80/barrel and gas more than tripling to US$7/mBtu inthe US. Oil prices are notoriously volatile and could fall sharply in a few years. But they will surely rise again later. Theemergence of China, India, and other Asian countries as major consumers means that global supplies of fossil fuels willincreasingly come under pressure. By contrast, nuclear energy is unconstrained by fuel worries: a small amount of uranium

generates many megawatts, and plutonium can be extracted from the spent fuel to yield fresh fuel in mixed-oxide reactors.Nuclear power plants are extremely capital intensive, costing twice as much as thermal plants of comparable output. Theyneed an additional 1015% for de-commissioning when they become too old to operate. But they have the big advantage ofvery low running costs. By contrast, running costs can be half the total costs in a thermal plant, and keep rising with fuelprices.

23


24/48


AFF Coal Demand

Coal demand in India will increase

Bill Holland, associate editor for Platts Gas Daily. 11/07/07. Economics govern future of IPI gas pipeline;Analysts see India's coal resources as more obvious gas source, p. 2. [Takumi Murayama]

"The politics are going to be too much for India," said Mark Rowley, oil and gas attorney at the London office of law firmBaker Botts. Rowley is a veteran of cross-border pipeline projects, having been involved with both the Caspian and the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipelines."Pipeline gas is an option [for India] but not the most obvious one," Rowley said. "India has vast coal resourcesthat'smuch more obvious than putting a pipe through Pakistan."Rowley said there was a high likelihood that the Iran-Pakistan portion of the pipeline would be built, but doubted that Indiawould ever rely on its historic enemy Pakistan to meet its energy needs."Coal is king," Frost & Sullivan Asian Pacific Energy Practice Director Ravi Krishnaswamy told executives at the AsianBusiness Forum's Asian Power Conference in Singapore last month. India's coal-fired power generation will increasesignificantly, particularly if government plans to find developers for 10 ultra-mega power projects between 2012 and 2017

come to fruition. Each UMPP would generate 4,000 MW or more, Krishnaswamy said.India needs gas mainly as feedstock for its petrochemical and fertilizer industries. Gas-fired power plants account for only8% of the country's 15.4 quadrillion Btus of annual energy consumption, according to the US Energy InformationAdministration.

24


25/48


AFF Pipeline Inevitable

The IPI Pipeline is inevitable Indian demand

Bill Holland, associate editor for Platts Gas Daily. 11/07/07. Economics govern future of IPI gas pipeline;Analysts see India's coal resources as more obvious gas source, p. 2. [Takumi Murayama]

India currently produces 996 Bcf/year of gas and consumes 1.1 Tcf/year, importing the difference as LNG through twoterminals. But its demand for natural gas has risen faster than that for any other fuel over the last five years , the EIAsaid.Energy security analyst Gal Luft of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a think-tank based in Washington, DC,believes the pipeline will have to be built. "India doesn't have much of a choice, Iran is the only game in town" forsatisfying the subcontinent's growing energy needs, Luft said. "At the end of the day, they need the gas and it will comefrom Iran."

25


26/48


AFF Pipeline Bad Terrorism

Terrorists can attack the IPI Pipeline, jeopardizing the Indian economy. LNG is better.

Gurmeet Kanwal, Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi. 07/06/08. IPI pipeline a good option- but a security nightmare, IANS, http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php?sid=378963

[Takumi Murayama]Though this option through Pakistan is economically the most viable, India must consider whether good economics

should be allowed to be jeopardised by bad security. India must not allow the supply of a strategic resource to be heldhostage to the machinations of capricious jihadi elements. Also, the Baloch people are concerned that Pakistan will notequitably share with their underdeveloped province the revenues earned from the pipeline. A new wave of vigorous insurgencyhas engulfed most of Balochistan and the gas pipeline is bound to be targeted.Though the government of Pakistan has stated several times that Pakistan is willing to give a unilateral undertaking that it willnot allow the disruption of the supply of gas to India, President Pervez Musharraf had admitted that his government had nocontrol over some jihadi organisations that are responsible for internal instability in Pakistan. Since then, internal instability hasdeteriorated further. How then will the Pakistan government ensure the physical security of a pipeline that runs for almost1,500 km through open terrain even if it is inclined to do so?The diameter of the gas pipeline would be 50 to 55 inches. Though such pipelines are mostly buried underground, they are laidjust below the surface and their route is well marked to facilitate maintenance, making them prone to easy disruption. Thecompressor stations that are usually overground are also vulnerable to sabotage, though these are easier to guard.Any terrorist group or disgruntled individual fanatic with a medieval mindset could disrupt the pipeline with a few gramsof plastic explosive or a few hundred grams of high explosives that are available in abundance in Pakistan. In fact, explosivecharges, detonators and cordite are so freely available in some areas in Pakistan that one can buy the stuff from the

neighbourhood grocer. Under such circumstances, ensuring the security of the pipeline would be a challenge for the mostcommitted police or paramilitary force.

The entire length of the pipeline would need to be fenced off on both sides to deny easy access to prospective saboteurs. Sincewire fencing can be easily cut, it would need to be kept under electro-optical surveillance throughout its length, combined withcontinuous physical patrolling. All these measures would cost a massive amount to implement and would still not guarantee100 percent security.A more suitable option may be to form an international consortium of stakeholders to build and operate the pipeline, buy the

gas from Iran and deliver it at India's border. Such a consortium will incur heavy costs to ensure the security of the pipeline.Also, higher insurance costs, other opportunity costs and the need to maintain larger strategic reserves might well make theoverland option too expensive.Perhaps the best option at present is to continue with LNG while simultaneously exploring the possibility of a secureoverland route with unimpeachable international guarantees. If India can get natural gas at the border and has to pay onlyfor what it gets - cash-on-delivery - without sinking its money into capital investment, the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline mightstill be a good option. Decisions made today will affect India's energy security and have an impact on the growingeconomy for decades to come and must, therefore, not be made lightly.

26
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php?sid=378963http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php?sid=378963


27/48


AFF Pipeline Bad Energy Security

India still concerned about supplies and security of IPI

FARS News Agency. 06/28/08. Pakistan Steps up Pressure over IPI Pipeline.http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8704080876 [Takumi Murayama]

Even though petroleum minister Murli Deora reiterated India's commitment to the pipeline project, the government isconcerned over the issue of assured supply of gas and security of the pipeline . New Delhi wants both issues to benegotiated at the trilateral level. Sources said these issues have still not been taken up for discussion till now.Mukherjee, who had earlier discussed the pipeline project during his trip to Islamabad, merely hoped that the outstandingissues would be sorted out."We are hopeful it will be possible to resolve this technical, commercial and all other aspect so that it can contribute tothe problems arising from high energy crisis," he said.

27
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8704080876http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8704080876


28/48


AFF Pipeline Bad Iran

The IPI Pipeline is part of an Iranian Energy Strategy to help its economy

Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD in political science, specializing in Irans foreign and nuclear affairs at the Center ForStrategic Research. 07/10/07. A blockage in the peace pipeline, Asia Times.http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IG10Df01.html [Takumi Murayama]

But broadly speaking, the "external obstacles" to this project pale in comparison with the tangible benefits to all threecountries, such as securing a reliable gas supply for energy-strapped India, bringing much-needed cash to the Pakistanigovernment, and helping Iran with its "energy strategy".Concerning the latter, it is noteworthy that Iran has some 15.7% of the world's natural-gas reserves, second only to Russia,although its current share in the global gas market is negligible . That's partly as a result of the lack ofadequate (badlyneeded) investment in the gas sectorand partly due to existing external obstacles such as the US sanctions.Iran's planned export of natural gas to India is part of a broader, long-term energy strategy that relies both on pipelines

and the more technologically challenging liquefied natural gas (LNG) exported to China, Turkey and Europe. India has

already signed a separate $22 billion LNG deal with Iran.Iran plans to increase its gas exports through pipelines to 303.6 million cubic meters per day (mcm/d) by 2025 from some13mcm/d in 2006. Iran's LNG exports are also expected to grow to 18mcm/d by 2025. Therefore, Iran's total natural gas exportwill reach around 18 billion cubic meters (bcm) in 2025, assuming that the pipeline does not turn into a pipe dream at the endof the day.

Iran will disrupt energy supply if the US interferes

Dr. Ali Mostashari, Strategic Initiatives Advisor, UN Development; and Research Affiliate, MIT. 01~03/07.The Political Economy of the Iran-Pakistan-India Gas Pipeline, Iran Analysis Quarterly Vol. 4 Number 1, p.27. [Takumi Murayama]

The increasing energy needs of China and India at the beginning of the new century and continuous supply disruptions inIraq and elsewhere have led to an increasing importance of energy as a geopolitical weapon of choice. Many of todaysenergy resources lie within the control ofgovernments which the United States does not see as allies. Russia, Iran, andVenezuela and Bolivia, while having different relationships to the U.S. and exercising different strengths in the energy market,can affect an already tight energy market the U.S. is quite dependent on. Specifically with regards to Iran, there havebeen numerous implicit and not-so implicit threats by Tehran that U.S. and Western military or economic measures will

be countered by disruptions of the energy supply (Calgary herald, June 5, 2006). Not surprisingly, with increased tensionbetween Iran and the West markets have reacted with even higher energy prices, pushing prices to heights unseen since thelate 1970s and that despite the current existence of adequate energy stocks and supplies in the West.

28
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IG10Df01.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IG10Df01.html


29/48


AFF Pipeline Bad Iran

IPI Pipeline allows Iran to develop nukes and support terrorism


This pipeline would give Iran an economic life line and increase its leverage and influence in South Asia. U.S.policymakers argue that allowing the IPI pipeline to proceed would encourage the Iranian regime to defy the will of theinternational commu nity, develop nuclear weapons, and support terrorism. Furthermore, inadequate investment in Iran'soil and gas industry and increasing domestic demand could render Iran incapable of supplying natural gas through the IPI.

U.S. Opposes IPI Pipeline because of Iran, 3 reasons

Shiv KumarVerma, Political Geography Division, Center for International Politics, Organization andDisarmament, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. 06-07. Energygeopolitics and IranPakistanIndia gas pipeline, Energy Policy, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp. 3280-3301.

However, the US opposes the gas-pipeline deal; first, in its perception it would help ease Iran's economic difficultiesbecause of the handsome revenues it would generate. As it is, the US is concerned about the bonanza that oil-rich countriesincluding Iran are reaping due to skyrocketing global oil prices. Secondly, the pipeline would set a dangerous precedent forother countries to follow. Iran is suitably placed as the natural transit corridor for the transport of Caspian Sea oil and gas. TheUS has, therefore, gone overboard to draw transit routes for Caspian oil that bypass Iranian territory. The prime example of this

approach has been the construction of the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline. In this case, the US made an extraordinary effort to routethe pipeline towards the Turkish port of Ceyhan, so that Iranian territory was avoided. In this politically driven deal, thecompanies involved had to spend millions in extra costs to construct the pipeline through unfriendly terrain and conflict provenzones. Thirdly, and most important, the pipeline would help anchor friendly ties among Iran, Pakistan, and India. Thiswould greatly undermine US strategic leverage with India and Pakistan against Iran in the future. Therefore,determined to keep Iran as isolated as possible, the US even prior to Mr. Ahmadinejad's emergence had tried to persuadethe Europeans and Iran's Arab neighbors to restrict economic and political links with it. The Europeans have largelydisregarded Americans exhortations, and Iran's relationship with them has grown over the years. European companies havepumped in billions of dollars in IranLibya Sanctions Act adopted by the US, which bars investments of more than US$40million into Iran's hydrocarbon sector. Defying US pressure, Japan, Washington's trusted ally, has also decided to put US$2billion into developing Iran's giant Azadegan oil field, which has estimated deposits of 26 billion barrels. In October 2002, Iranurged Caspian oil producers to ignore US sanctions and to pipe their oil through Iran. The Golden Gate from the Caspian Sea tothe Persian Gulf is now open and companies in the Caspian Sea can be sure their resources will be delivered in international

markets (Bhadrakumar, 2005).

29


30/48


AFF Iran Sanctions Bad

US sanctions on Iran hurt Russo-US relations

Shiv KumarVerma, Political Geography Division, Center for International Politics, Organization andDisarmament, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. 06-07. Energygeopolitics and IranPakistanIndia gas pipeline, Energy Policy, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp. 3280-3301.

Sanctions against Iran have thus far discouraged US oil corporations from accepting the Iranian pipeline offer. ThePersian route would be, as even US oil executives concede privately, shorter, cheaper, and safer than any of the other plannedpipelines through Russia, the south Caucasus, or Afghanistan. And while European companies active in Iran also face heavyfines in the United States, very few of them feel similarly bound by the US sanctions. The French Prime Minister said that noone accepts that the United States can now impose their laws on the rest of the world. European companies have takenadvantage of the absence of US competition on the Iranian oil market. In its efforts to keep the US out of the Caspianregion, Iran has found an unexpected ally in Russia. United States activities in this region have led both countries totemporarily set aside their centuries old enmity. Now that they no longer share a common border after the fall of the SovietUnion, their relations have grown almost cordial. Despite sharp criticism from the US, Moscow encourages Russiancompanies to sell arms to Iran, and to assist the country in building its first civilian nuclear power plant at Bushehr. The

US$800 million project, to be completed by 2004, has been a major concern for US officials and non-proliferation expertswho fear that Iran could covert nuclear waste from the plant into weapons grade radioactive material, thereby

accelerating its efforts to develop its own nuclear weapons. The Russian assistance to Iran has now become the biggest

stumbling block in the current USRussian rapprochement (Kleveman, 2003 L. Kleveman, Persian trump card: Iran, TheNew Great Game: Blood and Oil in Central Asia, Atlantic Books, London (2003).Kleveman, 2003).

30


31/48


AFF TAPI Pipeline Better

ADB and other investors make TAPI a better choice

Bruce Pannier, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 04/28/08. Energy: Turkmen, Iranian Presidents MovingAhead With Rival Pipelines, Payvand. http://www.payvand.com/news/08/apr/1293.html

[Takumi Murayama]But TAPI enjoys two advantages that the IPI does not -- support from the Asian Development Bank(ADB) and noIranian participation. The ADB's support gives the project a greater international profile and, since Iran is not involved,TAPI may also find other investors -- including U.S. companies that are forbidden by U.S. law to deal with Iran, andEuropean investors who fear U.S. sanctions if they commit to IPI instead of TAPI.

31


32/48


**Russia**

2AC RUSSIA

1. Non-unique: Russia relations terrible in status quo.

M. K. Bhadrakumar, career diplomat for Indian foreign services, June 19, 2008, Russias energy drive leavesreeling, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JG19Ag01.html. [T-Jacob]

Washington hit back by ensuring that Russian companies are left out in the cold from the 30 contracts for lucrative oil deals thatBaghdad is awarding. It is a big blow for Russia. In February, Moscow had written off US$12 billion or 93% of Iraq's debt to Russiain a move that was widely seen as aimed to help Russian oil company LUKoil regain the Saddam Hussein-era rights to develop Iraq'sgiant West Qurna-2 oil field. But under US pressure, the Iraqi government is now awarding West Qurna-2 to the US's Chevron. TheKremlin didn't show any anger, but coincidence or not, Gazprom chief executive Alexei Miller suddenly arrived in Tehran on Monday

and discussed with Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad the setting up of an organization of gas-producing countries. No doubt,with the Russian foothold in Libya (which has estimated natural gas reserves of 1.47 trillion cubic meters), in coordination withAlgeria (which currently supplies over 10% of Europe's gas supplies), Qatar (with proven natural gas reserves of 25.8 trillion cubicmeters) and Iran (which has the world's second-largest reserves after Russia), the time for a "Gas OPEC" is approaching. The Iranianleader also suggested to Miller a market-sharing arrangement so that Russia and Iran could "collectively meet the demands of Europe,India and China in the gas sector". During the visit, an agreement was signed on the development of Iran's oil and gas fields byRussian companies; on Russian participation in the transfer of Iran's Caspian Sea crude oil to the Oman Sea; cooperation in thedevelopment of Iran's fabulous North Azadegan oil field; and, possible participation of Gazprom in the planned Iran-Pakistan-Indiagas pipeline project. Evidently, Moscow took a deliberate decision to press ahead with Iran in energy cooperation in the full glare ofworld publicity in complete disregard of US displeasure. Tehran loved it. To quote a US expert, "Russia's strategic interest in Iranimplicitly underscores the futility of hopes that Moscow would cooperate with Washington in imposing meaningful sanctions on Iran.While Western European companies are moving out of Iran or suspending agreements for fear of US sanctions (which penalizeinvestments of more than $20 million a year in Iran's oil and gas sector), Gazprom is enlarging the already existing foothold."

Conceivably, the danger of losing out on the last energy frontier to Russia (and China) could be a factor in Washington's policy shifton Iran talks. Washington calls the u-turn "a strong signal to the Iranian government that the United States is committed todiplomacy". But according to The New York Times, Rice has decided to "test Iran's willingness to consider an international package ofincentives meant to coax Iran into making concessions on its nuclear program". What we do not know is how close the Bushadministration may be for involvement in Iran's energy sector, which is an element in the so-called "international package ofincentives". (Halliburton, which Vice President Dick Cheney headed, was a very active player in Iran.)

32
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JG19Ag01.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JG19Ag01.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JG19Ag01.html


33/48


2AC RUSSIA

2. Non-unique: Russia collapse imminent.

Dave Kimble, civil libertarian writer and writer for the centre for research on development, May 21, 2006,Collapse of Petrodollar Looming,http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=KIM20060521&articleId=2486. [T-JacobRussia's oil exports represent 15.2% of the world's export trade in oil, making it a much more significant player than Iran, with 5.8%of export volumes. Russia also produces 25.8% of the world's gas exports, while Iran is still only entering this market as an exporter.GlobeAndMail.com is reporting that President Chavez of Venezuela is considering following Iran's move towards pricing oil in Euros.Venezuela has 5.4% of the export market, although since the bulk of his country's exports are of heavy oil to the US, where it needsspecial facilities to process it, it would be a very brave or foolhardy President that told the US to buy its oil in Euros, or else ...Nevertheless, you can see the attraction for any country wanting to apply some pressure on the world's superpower. And whereVenezuela leads, Bolivia may not be far behind. You can see how this could quickly get out of control. While the Iranians have beensuffering numerous delays in implementing their bourse, Russia could have their oil market up and running almost as soon as theircurrency market is ready to take on the work load, which might only be a few months away. Some commentators on the Iranianproposal have suggested that the impact on the US Dollar would not be so great because the greenback is used for all sorts of trade,not just oil, so 5.8% of the international oil trade is really only a small part of the bigger picture. This argument looks a bit weak ifboth Russia and Iran will be lowering the demand for Dollars to buy oil and gas. In order to counter the reduced demand for USDollars, the standard control lever available to the Federal Reserve is to increase interest rates, over and above what it was going to bedoing. This has the usual unwelcome consequences of dampening the US economy, and squeezing people with mortgages, which inturn leads to rising wages, falling house prices and a slump in the construction industry. At the same time, lower demand for Dollarswill weaken its conversion rate, making imports more expensive. With rising wages, fuel bills and debt-servicing feeding through intoprices for home-produced goods, the stage is set for either an inflationary spiral or a recession. In the short term, the inflationary routealways looks to be the less painful, but it can only lead eventually to a crisis of confidence in US Dollars, when traders abandon thepaper and rush for the exit. US-Russian relations slide It cannot have escaped the notice of the Russians that this announcement is apoke in the eye for the US. So its timing can hardly be an accident, coming less than a week after US Vice President Dick Cheney'saddress to a conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, where he attacked Russian energy policy, in front of an audience of European heads ofstate. "No legitimate interest is served when oil and gas become tools of intimidation or blackmail, either by supply manipulation, orattempts to monopolise transportation", Cheney said, referring to the Ukrainian gas cut-back (that Ukraine provocatively passed on to

the downstream customers in western Europe). The next day Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov fired back "[the] U.S. vicepresident should be informed that for the last 40 years neither the U.S.S.R. nor the Russian Federation has ever broken a singlecontract for oil and gas supplies abroad." The antagonism continued to verberate when Lavrov met US Sectretary of StateCondoleezza Rice at a foreign ministers' summit in New York on Iran's nuclear programme. As well as criticising Cheney's comments,Lavrov also attacked Rice's number three, Nicholas Burns, for his criticism of Russia's assistance with Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility."This meeting isn't going anywhere", snarled Rice, perhaps angry that the rebuke of Burns reflected badly on her. Burns himself wasprobably a bit cranky after his trip to Moscow in April, when he publicly asked Russia not to go ahead with the sale of Tor-M1 mobileanti-missile missiles to Iran, only to be bluntly rebuffed by Russian Chief of Staff, General Yury Baluyevsky. Meanwhile the worldlooks on, hoping that the great powers really know what they are doing, and that World War 3 won't start because of a subtlemiscalculation in brinkmanship.

33
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=KIM20060521&articleId=2486http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060517.RTICKERB17-1/TPStory/TPBusiness/America/http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=KIM20060521&articleId=2486http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060517.RTICKERB17-1/TPStory/TPBusiness/America/


34/48


2AC RUSSIA

3. Non-Unique: Russia hasnt imported an ounce of LNG to the U.S.

4. No Internal link: Because of large supply, the U.S. will not become dependent on Russia for naturalgas

Marshall I. Goldman, Kathryn Wasserman Davis Professor of Russian Economics (Emeritus) at WellesleyCollege, former associate Director of the Davis Center for Russian Studies at Harvard University from 1975 to2006, M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in Russian studies and economics from Harvard University, honorary Doctor ofLaws degree from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Fulbright-Hayes Lecturer at Moscow StateUniversity, State Department consultant, May 27, 2008, Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia, OxfordUniversity Press, Pg. 7Equally unusual, even though there are no natural gas pipelines connecting the United States with Russia, Gazprom is also beginningto export LNG (liquified natural gas) to the United States. For the time being, because Gazprom as yet lacks the technology to produce

LNG on its own, it is a swap arrangement. These shipments under the Gazprom label actually originate in Algeria (in exchange,Gazprom pipes gas to some of Algeria's customers in Europe), but by 2010, Gazprom anticipates (unrealistically) that it will supply asmuch as 10 percent of the natural gas the United States needs as LNG directly from its own fields.' Given that the United States hasfairly large natural gas reserves of its own and supplements domestic production with imports by pipeline from Canada, it is unlikelythat the United States will ever become as beholden to Russia for its energy as Germany or Austria have become. Yet Russia'semergence as an energy superpower will have a long term impact on U.S. and world diplomacy if for no other reason than that ourEuropean allies will begin to think twice before saying "no" to Russia.

5. Internal link turn: If Russia uses its influence in the U.S. through energy, the U.S. market will rebel

crushing relations

Marshall I. Goldman, Kathryn Wasserman Davis Professor of Russian Economics (Emeritus) at WellesleyCollege, former associate Director of the Davis Center for Russian Studies at Harvard University from 1975 to2006, M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in Russian studies and economics from Harvard University, honorary Doctor ofLaws degree from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Fulbright-Hayes Lecturer at Moscow StateUniversity, State Department consultant, May 27, 2008, Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia, OxfordUniversity Press, Pg. 206This implies that U.S. policy should encourage Russian companies to invest in the United States, especially when they provide goodsand services that supplement those sold by others. In the same way, the more assets owned by Russian entities outside of Russia, themore Russian firms are likely to feel pressure to conform to international standards. Thus, if Gazprom should for some reason decideto withhold delivery of LNG to its U.S. customers, as a countermeasure those customers might well decide to seize Russian ownedassets as a hostage. In the same way, companies like LUXoi1 should be encouraged to compete in U. S. markets by exporting Russian

petroleum to the gasoline service stations that it owns here. (This is also a way to diversify oil imports.) 'When Russia is able to act asa monopolist, however, such investments are more problematic building a natural gas pipeline that gives them monopoly power overconsumers in the territory served by that pipeline would be an example.

34


35/48


2AC RUSSIA

6. No link: disadvantage link isnt predicated specifically off of the affirmative case

7. No Impact: Zero chance of war with Russia

Noah Shachtman, writer for national security online network database, June 9, 2008, Moseley: Gates wasRight; Zero Chance of War with China or Russia,http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/moseley-gates-w.html. [T-Jacob]

Defense Secretary Robert GatesfiredAir Force Chief of Staff General "Buzz" Moseley afterrepeatedly accusing the serviceof being unable to focus on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In a fascinating interview withAir Force Times, conductedright after his removal, Moseley said the critiques were dead-on. It's an eye-opening admission. For years, Moseley'sgenerals have been warning about the dangers of China and a resurgent Russia -- and downplaying today'scounterinsurgency conflicts. Now, Moseley is saying there is "an almost zero chance we will fight a nation-state" like Russiaor China. Which makes you wonder why the Air Force has been so preoccupied with these countries.

35
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/moseley-gates-w.htmlhttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/moseley-gates-w.htmlhttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/moseley-gates-w.htmlhttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/breaking-air-fo.html#morehttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/breaking-air-fo.html#morehttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/breaking-air-fo.html#morehttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/04/gates-air-force.html#previousposthttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/06/080609af_moseley_interview/http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/moseley-gat

178 bq aff answers to natural gas

Documents