Commercial Navigation Of North East Passage

[jethro]

Does it really matter if it's the first or the millionth? We all know there's less ice around than there used to be. It tells us nothing of the future nor gives conclusive proof of AGW happening/not happening. This all sounds more like a debate on the reliability of media reporting, how about a thread in serious discussion for that one guys?

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

This all sounds more like a debate on the reliability of media reporting, how about a thread in serious discussion for that one guys?

That's what it is. The discussion title is factually wrong because the media has got its facts wrong. That's the only thing to discuss. There can be no discussion beyond this because the thread is now irrelevant as a conversation starter. Nothing major has happened. We are where we were before as far as Arctic Ice is concerned.

[jethro]

Commercial use of the passage on a big scale is interesting, it's possible that the Arctic melt may make this a reality - time will tell.

Whilst I respect you think there is nothing more to discuss, I think there's probably quite a bit to discuss when it comes to the reality of this becoming a shipping route in the future. The potential for further Arctic damage is large, due to the immense scale of pollution in the form of black carbon that shipping is renowned for.

[Gray-Wolf]

Not only the problems of soot

(seas off Alaska near Bering straights last year)

but also the impact those 2 ice breakers have on the integrity of the pack. The fact the Russians are/have completed the worlds largest nuclear powered ice breaker doesn't bode well for the future of that section of the Arctic.

Of course there is also the future mining/drilling operations we are to expect up there too (and their associated pollutions) as Russia's sea floor flag planting showed us the other year. Whether they will not need the breakers (due to AGW already melting out the pack) or not they appear to be geared up for a bit of ice breaking over the coming years none of which is good for the stability of the pack.

Is the disappearance of the Siberian side of the pack over the last 8 years connected with your Russian ministry statement AFT?

[jethro]

None of it's going to help, is it? There's potentially a lot of money at stake, I'm not sure the integrity of Arctic pack ice will feature too highly on the level of concerns.

Russia are not huge fans of the AGW theory, their astrophysicists predicted a prolonged Solar minimum long before NASA started coming around to the idea; given their geographical position in the world, keeping warm will take top priority. That's not even considering the energy deficit, any large oil and gas reserves found in Arctic oceans will, I'm sure, give them an incentive to break up the pack further if needed.

[Thundery wintry showers]

Re. AFT, the world isn't black and white I'm afraid. It isn't a case of "either the NE passage is used or it isn't", the extent to which it is used is also important. The main point here is that if the ice continues to melt (which still looks likely overall at this stage, despite two years of slight recovery) then it will become easier for more use of the NE passage to occur.

Excessive use of the NE passage will be a problem because of what Jethro mentioned, the big increases in pollution that would result and the desire to break up the pack further. Regardless of whether AGW is contributing heavily to the ice melt or not, it doesn't make sense (except from a short-term profits perspective) to contribute heavily to the melt through other human activities. But unfortunately short-term profits tends to over-ride other motives these days, so it is a concern.

Edited September 14, 2009 by Thundery wintry showers

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

The only thing that interests me first of all is that the media is wrong, there is nothing "new" about commerical use of the North East passage, and that the thread title is wrong. I wonder if osmposm could now edit the title in view of this fact.

I'm happy to help reorientate the discussion towards the legitimate question of the future climatic effects of development in the Arctic.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Here's how it goes: the media make a huge mistake on Monday, then spend Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday exclusively revealing how much of a mistake it was.

Media 're-open' North Eastern Passage

Thermageddon fever disappears 70 year trade route

Edited September 14, 2009 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[osmposm]

The only thing that interests me first of all is that the media is wrong, there is nothing "new" about commerical use of the North East passage, and that the thread title is wrong. I wonder if osmposm could now edit the title in view of this fact.

I'm happy to help reorientate the discussion towards the legitimate question of the future climatic effects of development in the Arctic.

...and I'd be happy to rename the thread title, since I agree that the Independent article was even more misleading than I'd supposed. Thank you for giving us the excellent links, I accept that the situation is far more complicated than I'd supposed. I still think it may be the first commercial sailing by a western company; but that seems to be partly, at least, to do with decisions made by the Russian to try and expand the trade, perhaps reinforced by more favourable ice conditions in the last few years.

I think it's right that you may have got the extent of the trade a bit confused, though - I think they're saying it maxed at 150-200 thousand tons in the early 90s, though whether the 7 million tons mentioned was total annual cargo in what they call "The North Sea" including short-haul, or the cumulative total of the long-haul is not clear. The statement that self-sufficiency requires an increase to 10 million tons implies a degree of subsidy by the Russians hitherto. But commercial (by some definition or another) long-haul transport along the route does seem to have taken place in the past, and I apologize for furthering the media's heavily-biased report.

One slight problem - I'm not allowed to edit the title of a thread myself, even one I've started! Perhaps the mods could change it to something less contentious? Removing the sub-title words "The first ever recorded is nearly complete" would do the trick, I think.

Ossie

[pottyprof]

Well as technology moves on, I'm sure we will grab the oil etc if the ice is there or not..

As for the majority of the media, if they can sell a story, they will.. If they are forced to sell a story, they will.. Either way it keeps shareholders happy and their owners/editors in the money.. It keeps the general public informed about what the powers that be want to inform the general public about, whether it be true or false..

Sorry.. Did I ever mention that climate change was under a political veil and that the media are part and parcel to that? Or was that just my imagination?

Lets face it.. They could tell us that black is white at the pole and the vast majority of the human race would have to take their word for it as we sit here in our homes.. In a green and pleasant land.... or is it?

I think what I'm getting at here is that information may get a bit crappy anyway depending on which site you look at....

[laserguy]

Well as technology moves on, I'm sure we will grab the oil etc if the ice is there or not..

As for the majority of the media, if they can sell a story, they will.. If they are forced to sell a story, they will..

Where there's a will,there's a way....

Ah,the media - when they wise up to the moribund sun,rising ice extents,flatlining or declining temps etc etc,get ready for Ice Age II. Sorry,OT again.

[Iceberg]

Where there's a will,there's a way....

Ah,the media - when they wise up to the moribund sun,rising ice extents,flatlining or declining temps etc etc,get ready for Ice Age II. Sorry,OT again.

It's really frustrating how the media, governments, NGO's, scientists, educational establishments, global companies etc all fail to see it....

[laserguy]

It's really frustrating how the media, governments, NGO's, scientists, educational establishments, global companies etc all fail to see it....

I know Ice,I know. Been saying it all along,pay attention now! They do see it methinks,but have good reason to pretend otherwise. Will AGW implode spectacularly,or wither like a flower on a stalk and disappear quietly into the night?

http://www.nti.org/d...an/icebrkrs.htm

More on Russian nuke icebreakers. They know they're gonna need them (they knew years back,even as the recent decline accelerated!),and how.