First is the Criterion, Second is Disads, Third is Significance,

8/14/2019 First is the Criterion, Second is Disads, Third is Significance,

1/6

First is the Criterion, second is Disads, third is significance, fourth is solvency andadvantages are last.

First off: Criterion

Judge you should vote on Net benefits as agreed to in CX. Neg wins theCriterion because Neg wins net benefits: Costs US 21 billion, we gain

3.57 Trillion. Net benefit: 3.55 Tril

The Harvard Environmental Law Review 2007 Cass R. Sunstein Distinguished Service

Professor of Jurisprudence, Law School and Department of Political Science, Universityof Chicago. ARTICLE: OF MONTREAL AND KYOTO: A TALE OF TWO

PROTOCOLS [Accessed viaLexis Nexis ][CR]

Why did the United States adopt such an aggressive posture with respect to ozonedepletion? I have referred to the significant effect of a study by the Council of EconomicAdvisers, suggesting that a well-designed agreement would give the United States far

more than it would lose. A further clue is provided by the following contemporaneousaccount by EPA of the costs and benefits of the Montreal Protocol:n124

FIGURE 1: COSTS AND BENEFITS OF MONTREAL PROTOCOL TO THE UNITEDSTATES (IN BILLIONS OF 1985 DOLLARS)

No Montreal Unilateral Implementation of

Controls Protocol Montreal Protocol by the

United States

Benefits -- 3,575 1,373

Costs -- 21 21

Net Benefits -- 3,554 1,352

[*18] These figures were generated by a projection of over five million skin cancerdeaths by 2165, together with over twenty-five million cataract cases by that year--figures that would be cut to two hundred thousand and two million, respectively, by a50% CFC reduction . n125 Of course it is possible to question these numbers; the sciencedoes not allow uncontroversial point estimates here, and perhaps EPA had an interest inshowing that the agreement was desirable. What matters, however, is the perception ofdomestic costs and benefits, and in the late 1980s, no systematic analysis suggested thatthe Montreal Protocol was not in the interest of the United States. It should be clear thaton these numbers, even unilateral action was well-justified for the United States, becausethe health benefits of American action would create such substantial gains for the

American public. But if the world joined the Montreal Protocol, the benefits would benearly tripled, because it would prevent 245 million cancers by 2165, including morethan five million cancer deaths. n126 At the same time, the relatively low expected cost ofthe Montreal Protocol--a mere $ 21 billion--dampened both public and private resistance,and the cost turned out to be even lower than anticipated because of technologicalinnovation. n127
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=5&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7637647928http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n124http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n124http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n125http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n126http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n126http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n127http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n127http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=5&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7637647928http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n124http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n125http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n126http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/frame.do?reloadEntirePage=true&rand=1256045739130&returnToKey=20_T7642315199&parent=docview&target=results_DocumentContent&tokenKey=rsh-20.995800.9817015122#n127


2/6

Second is disads.

1. Soft Power

Link: World sees Montreal as a positive signal

The Harvard Environmental Law Review 2007 Cass R. Sunstein Distinguished ServiceProfessor of Jurisprudence, Law School and Department of Political Science, University

of Chicago. ARTICLE: OF MONTREAL AND KYOTO: A TALE OF TWO

PROTOCOLS [Accessed viaLexis Nexis ][CR]

But in this light, why was an agreement necessary at all? As we have seen, severereductions in CFC emissions preceded the ratification of the agreement. At first glance,many nations had self-interested motives with respect to the ozone problem, and thesewere sufficient to justify large reductions in such emissions. n134 If so, an internationalaccord might not have been required at all. The United States made substantial reductions[*21] on its own, as did other nations, and still more nations might have done so withoutthe Montreal Protocol. n135 But many nations, including the United States, nonetheless

embraced the agreement. One reason is undoubtedly the "signal" provided byparticipation in the agreement. If a nation promises before and with the world to reduceits emissions, it can send a valuable signal both to its own citizens and to other nationswith which it must interact. Participation in the Montreal Protocol might be worthwhilefor this reason alone.

Aff hurts soft power by ignoring a commitment to the world. This is bad because

Impact 1, Hegemony: If the United States wants to remain strong, soft power isimportant

Joseph S. Nye [Ph.D. In political science from Harvard University. The 2008 TRIP

survey of 1700 international relations scholars ranked him as the sixth most influentialscholar of the past twenty years, and the most influential on American foreign policy.

Received his bachelor's degree summa cum laude from Princeton in 1958, did

postgraduate work at Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship and earned his Ph.D. He is theUniversity Distinguished Service Professor of the John F. Kennedy School of Government

at Harvard University. He was Deputy to the Under Secretary of State for Security

Assistance, Science and Technology and chaired the National Security Council Group on

Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Nye also served asAssistant Secretary of Defensefor International Security Affairsin theClinton Administration.In recognition of hisservice, he received the highest Department of State commendation, the Distinguished

Honor Award. In 1993 and 1994, he was chairman of the National Intelligence Council,

which coordinates intelligence estimates for the President. He was awarded theIntelligence Communitys Distinguished Service Medal. In 1994 and 1995, he served as

Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, where he also won theDistinguished Service Medal with an Oak Leaf Cluster. He has been a trustee of Wells

College and Radcliffe College. A member of the editorial boards of Foreign Policy and

International Security magazines, he is the author of numerous books and more than a

hundred and fifty articles in professional journals. In addition, he has published policyarticles in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The International Herald Tribune,
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=5&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7637647928http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administrationhttp://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=5&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7637647928http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense_for_International_Security_Affairs&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administration


3/6

The Wall Street Journal, and The Financial Times. He has received numerous prestigiousprizes and honorary degrees, and was reportedly passed over by President Obama for the

post of Ambassador to Japan- against the urging of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton- in

favor of a campaign fundraiser.]The Paradox of American Power: Why the WorldsSuperpower Cant Go it Alone,, Published in Oxford University Press, New York, 2002

p. 8-9. [Book] [Ethos]In my view, if the United States wants to remain strong, Americans need also topay attention to our soft power. What precisely do I mean by soft power? Military powerand economic power are both examples of hard command power that can be used toinduce others to change their position. Hard power can rest on inducements (carrots) orthreats (sticks). But there is also an indirect way to exercise power. A country may obtainthe outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it,admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity andopenness. In this sense, it is just as important to set the agenda in world politics andattract others as it is to force them to change through the threat or use of military oreconomic weapons. This aspect of powergetting others to want what you wantI call

soft power.

It co-opts people rather than coerces them. Soft power rests on the ability toset the political agenda in a way that shapes the preferences of others. At the personallevel, wise parents know that if they have brought up their children with the right beliefsand values, their power will be greater and will last longer than if they have relied onlyon spankings, cutting off allowances, or taking away the car keys. Similarly, politicalleaders and thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci have long understood the power that comesfrom setting the agenda and determining the framework of a debate. The ability toestablish preferences tends to be associated with intangible power resources such as anattractive culture, ideology, and institutions. If I can get you to wantto do what I want,then I do not have to force you to do what you do notwant to do. If the United Statesrepresents values that others want to follow, it will cost us less to lead. Soft power is notmerely the same as influence, though it is one source of influence. After all, I can alsoinfluence you by threats or rewards. Soft power is also more than persuasion or the abilityto move people by argument. It is the ability to entice and attract. And attraction oftenleads to acquiescence or imitation.

2. Hurt ozone layer and global warming

Link: Scientific consensus: CFCs hurt the ozone layer and increase global

warming

Albany Law Environmental Outlook Journal 2005 Elias Mossos is currently working

towards an LL.M. degree in International Business and Trade Law at The John MarshallLaw School where he received his J.D. in 2004. He is a legislative analyst for theHonorable Michael J. Madigan, Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives.

ARTICLE: THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL AND THE DIFFICULTY WITH

INTERNATIONAL CHANGE [Accessed viaLexis Nexis][CR]

The scientific community was yet another motivating force behind the Protocol as acollaborative scientific effort in 1984 resulted in the "most comprehensive study of the
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1


4/6

stratosphere ever undertaken[.]" n50 Scientists discovered that not only did CFCs depletethe ozone, but so did other substances that contained CFC subparts. n51 This was animportant discovery because it could explain, to some extent, global warming, certain[*12] cancers, and other health problems; however, the research was too preliminary toascertain ozone depletion's responsibility for these societal harms. n52

Impact: cross apply aff impacts under harm 2.

Third, lets look at significance.

1. Lives wont be lost. Tech innovation solves for CFCs: we have alternatives

The George Washington Law Review November, 2008 Stuart Minor Benjamin and ArtiK. Rai Professors of Law, Duke University School of Law. Article: Fixing InnovationPolicy: A Structural Perspective [Lexis Nexis][CR]

Significantly, innovation is also central to addressing the most salient dangers that

earlier productive activity (often spurred by innovation) has created. Innovation thatproduced economically attractive alternatives to ozone-layer destroyingchlorofluorocarbons ("CFCs") prompted the United States to take the lead in securingrapid international agreement to the Montreal Protocol for limiting CFCs. n36 In largepart because of innovation, "the monetized benefits [to the United States] dwarfed themonetized costs and hence the circumstances were extremely promising for Americansupport and even enthusiasm [*11] for the agreement." n37 For similar reasons,managing global warming may require unprecedented levels of innovation.

2. CFCs are less efficient.

Transition away from CFCs increased energy efficiency

American University Sustainable Development Law & Policy Winter, 2007 Donald

Kaniaru, Rajendra Shende, Scott Stone, Durwood Zaelke Donald Kaniaru is an Advocatefor Kaniaru & Kaniaru Advocates located in Nairobi. Mr. Kaniaru is the former

Director, Division of Environmental Policy Implementation, for the United Nations

Environment Programme ("UNEP"). Rajendra Shende is the Head of the OzonActionBranch in the Division of Industry, Technology and Economics at UNEP-Paris. Mr.

Shende is an expert on the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements and

transfer of environmentally sound technologies to the developing countries, and policy

advisor to more than 150 governments for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol.Scott Stone is a Policy Analyst for the Institute for Governance & Sustainable

Development ("IGSD") and a Research Fellow for the Program on Governance for

Sustainable Development at University of California, Santa Barbara ("UCSB").Durwood Zaelke is President of IGSD. Mr. Zaelke is the Co-Director for the Program on

Governance for Sustainable Development, UCSB and Director of the International

Network for Environmental Compliance & Enforcement. Mr. Stone acts as a Consultantto and Mr. Zaelke is a Managing Partner of the Washington, DC office of Zelle,
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7647922531&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7647922538&cisb=22_T7647922537&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=7338&docNo=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7647922531&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7647922538&cisb=22_T7647922537&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=7338&docNo=1


5/6

Hofmann, Voelbel, Mason & Gette, both currently focusing on removing barriers tobeneficial uses of environmentally superior technology, such as the current use of

HCFC-123 in chillers and the use of hydrocarbons and other flammable refrigerants as

replacements for HFCs. EXPLORING HOW TODAY'S DEVELOPMENT AFFECTS

FUTURE GENERATIONS AROUND THE GLOBE: IN THIS ISSUE: CLIMATE LAW

REPORTER: STRENGTHENING THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL: INSURANCEAGAINST ABRUPT CLIMATE CHANGE [Accessed viaLexis Nexis][CR]

Past transitions from CFCs to HCFCs and hydrofluorocarbons ("HFCs") helped drivetechnological innovation in substitutes, manufacturing processes, and equipment, whichin many cases resulted in gains in energy efficiency, reduced leakage, or othertechnological improvements. To date about eighty percent of ODSs that would be in usewithout the Montreal Protocol have been replaced by non-fluorocarbon chemicals, whichdo not deplete the ozone layer. These substitutes include not-in-kind chemical substitutesand product alternatives (e.g. a roll-on deodorant instead of a spray can), changes tomanufacturing processes, conservation measures, and doing without. The transition out of

HCFCs is likely to produce similar innovations and environmental advances. Butdeveloping countries, if they continue their over-reliance on HCFC-22, will be slow tobenefit from these positive changes.

fourth, solvency.

1. States will continue to ban CFCs

Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 2003 Laura Thoms Law Clerk for Honorable

Judge Marilyn L. Huff, United States District Court for the Southern District ofCalifornia; Harvard Law School, J.D. 2002; Duke University, A.B. in Environmental

Science and Policy 1999. ARTICLE: A Comparative Analysis of International Regimes

on Ozone and Climate Change with Implications for Regime Design [Accessed viaLexis Nexis][CR]

Legislators first began to respond to public concern at the state level. In the mid-1970's,legislation against CFCs was introduced or passed in California, Michigan, Minnesota,New York, and Oregon, among other states. Industry was threatened with a "patchwork"of differing state regulations and began to publicly support federal [*828] regulations,which would at least be uniform and consequently less disruptive. n179 Congressresponded in the late 1970s. In 1977, it passed a stratospheric ozone protectionamendment to the Clean Air Act, and in 1978, it prohibited the use of CFCs as aerosolpropellants in nonessential applications. n180 National pressure increased and, as a resultof a 1984 lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Counsel ("NRDC"), theDistrict Court for the District of Columbia ordered the EPA to issue domestic regulationsunder the Clean Air Act by early 1987. n181

And, state laws wont be amended: aff admitted this in CX.

2. Consumers demand products without CFCs in them
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=3&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7647922531http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7637647928&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7637647944&cisb=22_T7637647942&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=151337&docNo=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?start=3&sort=RELEVANCE&format=GNBFI&risb=21_T7647922531http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7637647928&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7637647944&cisb=22_T7637647942&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=151337&docNo=1


6/6

Albany Law Environmental Outlook Journal 2005 Elias Mossos is currently workingtowards an LL.M. degree in International Business and Trade Law at The John Marshall

Law School where he received his J.D. in 2004. He is a legislative analyst for the

Honorable Michael J. Madigan, Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives.

ARTICLE: THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL AND THE DIFFICULTY WITH


The United States played a lead role in persuading and motivating the internationalcommunity to adopt the strict guidelines of the Montreal Protocol. n33 This was partiallybecause heavy press coverage led to a high level of American public awareness in theharmful effects caused by CFCs and ozone depletion. n34 A decade prior to the Protocolnegotiations, the "U.S. market for spray cans had fallen by nearly two-thirds becauseAmerican consumers were acting on their environmental concerns." n35 A consumerbase that was attuned to the ozone depletion problem was enough to encourage industryto jump on the bandwagon, if not out of conviction, at least out of concern for their"public image and long-term reputations." n36 Clearly, "where consumers' environmental

awareness is well developed, information creates demand in favor of environmentallyfriendly products." n37

Fifth, Advantages.

1. Illegal trading will stop in 2010: no countries will be producing them

Albany Law Environmental Outlook Journal 2005 Elias Mossos is currently working

towards an LL.M. degree in International Business and Trade Law at The John Marshall

Law School where he received his J.D. in 2004. He is a legislative analyst for the

Honorable Michael J. Madigan, Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives.ARTICLE: THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL AND THE DIFFICULTY WITH


In the late 1990s, between 9000 and 18,000 tons of CFCs were illegally imported intothe United States each year. n132 At that time, CFCs were second only to cocaine indollar amount of illegal substances smuggled into the United States annually. n133 MostCFCs are believed to be smuggled from Article 5 countries, n134 which are allowed toproduce CFCs until 2010 and therefore have large supplies of the dangerous chemicals.n135 Due to consumer reluctance to convert to ozone-friendly refrigerants despite themeasures taken by the CFC industry to find [*23] alternative refrigerants, the demandfor these environmentally sound substances has been much lower than anticipated. n136
http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/us/lnacademic/auth/checkbrowser.do?rand=0.36541497929339717&cookieState=0&ipcounter=1&bhcp=1

Documents

First is the Criterion, Second is Disads, Third is Significance,