Bring on the ice!

Over the past few months, we've had a look at some of the impacts of the disappearing cryosphere. The effects are wide ranging, affecting people, habitats and climate not only on regional scales, but also on a global scale.

I think it's true to say that the bulk of the issues discussed are negative. Amongst the most important of these problems are the loss of albedo associated with the decrease in sea ice extent, the rise in sea level due to the loss of ice sheet mass and the impacts on wildlife which depend on cold conditions. It must also be stressed that the problems we've encountered are only set to increase as global climates continue to warm, thereby fuelling additional ice mass loss.

However, we've also seen that there may be some silver linings. namely improved opportunities for resource extraction and the possibility of improving the efficiency of global trade networks. 

But can we really view opportunities for getting more oil and gas as a positive? Isn't this part of the cause of the loss of ice masses in the first place? 

Yes, we are dependent on hydrocarbons, and no one would say no to a few more diamonds or rare earth minerals, but in our haste to get at them we may destroy some of the only truly pristine environments left on the planet. In procuring more hydrocarbons, we are only accelerating the rate at which global climates warm up.

Over and above the negatives that arise as a result of ice loss, I feel that glaciers, ice sheets and the like all hold an intrinsic value that cannot be overestimated. 

Source: Expedition Gallery

How strange would it be to think that there's no ice in the Alps or at the North Pole?

Ice Passages

As sea ice extent declines, it's possible that significant changes to how the world's trade route system operates will occur. New trade routes across the Arctic will become viable, shorter alternatives to the currently existing routes that involve the Suez and Panama canals. 

Source: Discovering the Arctic

The Northwest passage is 7000km shorter than the route through the Panama Canal, and the Northern Sea route is roughly 1/3 of the distance of the route through the Suez Canal. This decrease in distance and also shipping time will increase the efficiency of trade, by reducing costs significantly, thereby leading to additional growth for all parties directly or even indirectly involved in the trade. Furthermore, the risk of pirates in these passages is much lower than the traditional routes, thereby lowering insurance costs. 

Follow this link to have a look at some more of the savings that can be made:

 Savings with Arctic Shipping lanes

It's only been a fairly recent assumption that it will be at all possible to successfully navigate either of these routes. Pharand (2006) states that 'international shipping in the Northwest Passage is a virtual certainty in the foreseeable future.' This claim was based on the fact that sea ice extent was at the lowest ever recorded level in 2006, and again (though not recorded by Pharand) in 2007 (Stroeve et al. 2007). As to the Northern Passage, Russia has only recently encouraged international traffic to use the route, as sea ice has until recently been too thick and extensive to navigate through, even with the use of ice breakers. 

Despite this, there are several shortcomings with such routes. For one thing, Canada and Russia claim sovereignty over the Northwest and Northern Passages respectively, thereby potentially being able to put a toll on using the waters in the event of them being used for international shipping (Byers and Lalonde 2009). Additionally, there are concerns about the viability of parts of the Northwest Passage for large container ships, as it is feared that parts of the channel may not be deep enough (Pharand and Legault 1984), though these claims have not been verified as full bathymetric surveys have not been completed .  It's also true that if a ship were to get in trouble, it would be much more difficult to get aid to that ship in the Arctic than it would have been if it had used one of the more traditional shipping lanes. 

Furthermore, whilst the passages may be ice free at the end of summer, that is certainly not the case in winter, when they are firmly frozen. Hence, any potential gains from using the passages will be entirely seasonal, and if there's a particularly cool summer, then the routes may not be viable for whole years at a time. As a result, shipping companies will be reluctant to put much reliance upon these routes for the foreseeable future. 

Despite these problems, with ice extent declining almost every year, it's entirely likely that we will see more and more shipping through the Arctic Passages, thereby improving the efficiency of global trade.