Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report

marine infrastructure requirements. The AMSA does not place a AMSA Executive Summary with Recommendations 2 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S primary focus on determining the operational and economic viabili- ties of specific marine routes within and across the Arctic Ocean. The AMSA, led by Canada, Finland and the United States, reached out to a broad community, including the global maritime community consisting of shipping companies, ship designers, shipbuilders, ship classification societies, marine insurers, non-commercial partner- ships and shipping associations. With the support of the Permanent Participants (indigenous organizations) of the Arctic Council, town hall meetings were held in selected Arctic communities in Canada, Iceland, Norway and the United States to listen to issues and concerns about future Arctic marine activity. The AMSA linked directly with experts of PAME for marine environmental protection issues and overall guidance and leadership of the AMSA. Two additional Arctic Council working groups were also consulted: the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) working group on spill response and marine infrastructure requirements; and the Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) on issues related to the human dimension. All ship types are considered in the AMSA under the general topic of Arctic shipping: tankers, bulk carriers, offshore supply vessels, passenger ships, tug/barge combinations, fishing vessels, ferries, research vessels and government and commercial icebreakers. The result of the AMSA data survey effort produced a comprehensive esti- mate of how many ships (less naval vessels) operated in the Arctic for a given year. This survey represents an historic capture of infor- mation from the Arctic states that can be used as a long-term data- base against which to measure future Arctic marine traffic levels. In addition, more than 185 experts participated directly in the work of the AMSA. Thirteen major AMSA workshops were held from July 2006 through October 2008 on a broad range of relevant topics, including scenarios of future Arctic navigation, indigenous marine use, Arctic marine incidents, environmental impacts, marine infrastructure, Arctic marine technology and the future of the Northern Sea Route and adjacent seas. The AMSA workshops provided extensive informa- tion for developing the report sections. © Fednav, Ltd. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S 3 Synopsis of the Assessment Findings The AMSA 2009 Report is focused on current and future Arctic marine activity. The results of this comprehensive assessment are a range of key findings linked to the main topics identified. These find- ings are listed in full throughout The AMSA 2009 Report at the end of each section. Presented here is a synopsis, or review, of the AMSA findings for each section. Arctic Marine Geography, Climate and Sea Ice: Arctic sea ice has been observed to be decreasing in extent and thickness during the second half of the 20th century and early 21st century. Global Climate Model simulations indicate a continuing retreat of sea ice, but also show that the winter sea ice cover will remain. There is a possibility of an ice-free Arctic Ocean for a short period in summer perhaps as early as 2015. This would mean the disappearance of multi-year ice, as no sea ice would survive the summer melt season. It is highly plausible there will be greater marine access and longer seasons of navigation, except perhaps during winter, but not neces- sarily less difficult ice conditions for marine operations. History of Arctic Marine Transport: There is a long history of Arctic marine transport conducted primarily around the ice-free periphery of the Arctic Ocean. Year-round navigation has been main- tained since 1978-79 in the ice-covered western regions of the Northern Sea Route (between the port of Dudinka on the Yenisei River and Murmansk). Previous Arctic marine transport studies for the Northern Sea Route, Canadian Arctic, Alaska’s coastal seas and other regions have significant relevance to developing any future regulatory framework for the Arctic Ocean. Most of these past stud- ies involved public-private partnerships and close international cooperation. Governance of Arctic Shipping: The Law of the Sea, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a fundamental framework for the governance of Arctic marine navigation and allows coastal states the right to adopt and enforce non-discriminatory laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction and control of marine pollution from ves- sels in ice-covered waters (Article 234). The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the competent UN agency with responsibility for issues related to the global maritime industry. IMO has been proactive in developing voluntary Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-covered Waters, which continue to evolve. The International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) has also developed non-mandatory Unified Requirements for their members that address ship construction standards of the Polar Classes, which are defined in the IMO Guidelines. There are no uniform, interna- tional standards for ice navigators and for Arctic safety and survival for seafarers in polar conditions. And, there are no specifically tai- lored, mandatory environmental standards developed by IMO for vessels operating in Arctic waters. Mandatory measures, drawn up in accordance with the provisions of customary international law as reflected in UNCLOS, would be an effective way to enhance marine safety and environmental protection in Arctic waters. Expanded Arctic marine traffic increases the possibility of, for example, intro- ducing alien species and pathogens from ballast water discharge and hull fouling. Current Marine Use and the AMSA Shipping Database: There were approximately 6,000 individual vessels, many making multiple voyages, in the Arctic region during the AMSA survey year; half of these were operating on the Great Circle Route in the North Pacific that crosses the Aleutian Islands. Of the 6,000 vessels reported, approximately 1,600 were fishing vessels. Nearly all shipping in the A R C T I C M A R I N E S H I P P I N G A S S E S S M E N T 4 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S will likely be unevenly distributed among and within communities and regions. Constructive and early engagement of local residents in planned Arctic marine development projects can help to reduce negative impacts and to increase positive benefits. Importantly, many local Arctic residents today depend heavily on marine resources for subsistence and the local economy; over-the-ice travel and boat transport allow the use of large marine areas during much of the year. Such life in the Arctic is dependent on movement over the ice and ocean and sea ice is integral to this movement. Environmental Considerations and Impacts: The most sig- nificant threat from ships to the Arctic marine environment is the release of oil through accidental or illegal discharge. Additional potential impacts of Arctic ships include ship strikes on marine mammals, the introduction of alien species, disruption of migra- tory patterns of marine mammals and anthropogenic noise produced from marine shipping activity. Changes in Arctic sea ice will not only provide for possible longer seasons of navigation, but may also result in increased interaction between migrating species and ships. Black carbon emissions from ships operating in the Arctic may have regional impacts by accelerating ice melt. Other ship emissions dur- ing Arctic voyages, such as SOx and NOx, may have unintended consequences for the Arctic environment and these emissions may require the implementation of additional IMO environmental regulations. Arctic Marine Infrastructure: There is a general lack of marine infrastructure in the Arctic, except for areas along the Norwegian coast and northwest Russia, compared with other marine regions of the world with high concentrations of ship traffic. Gaps in hydro- graphic data exist for significant portions of primary shipping routes important to support safe navigation. In addition, for safe opera- tions in the Arctic there is a need for the same suite of meteoro- logical and oceanographic data, products and services as in other oceans, plus comprehensive information on sea ice and icebergs. Except in limited areas of the Arctic, there is a lack of emergency response capacity for saving lives and for pollution mitigation. There are serious limitations to radio and satellite communications and few systems to monitor and control the movement of ships in ice- covered waters. The current lack of marine infrastructure in all but a limited number of areas, coupled with the vastness and harshness of the environment, makes conduct of emergency response significantly more difficult in the Arctic. Z Arctic today is destinational, conducted for community re-supply, marine tourism and moving natural resources out of the Arctic. Regions of high concentrations of Arctic marine activity occur along the coasts of northwest Russia, and in the ice-free waters off Norway, Greenland, Iceland and in the U.S. Arctic. Significant increases in cruise ships, a majority not purpose-built for Arctic waters, have been observed in the summer season around Greenland within the past decade. There have been recent marine operations in the ice- covered central Arctic Ocean for scientific exploration and marine tourism. Scenarios, Futures and Regional Futures to 2020: Arctic natu- ral resource development (hydrocarbons, hard minerals and fisheries) and regional trade are the key drivers of future Arctic marine activity. However, there are many other factors and uncertainties of impor- tance including governance, Arctic state cooperation, oil prices, changes in global trade, climate change variability, new resource discoveries, marine insurance industry roles, multiple use conflicts and Arctic marine technologies. Future Arctic marine activity will include many non-Arctic stakeholders, multiple users in Arctic water- ways and potential overlap of new operations with indigenous uses. Arctic voyages through 2020 will be overwhelmingly destinational, not trans-Arctic. A lack of major ports, except for those in north- ern Norway and northwest Russia, and other critical infrastructure will be significant limitations for future Arctic marine operations. The Bering Strait region, ringed with indigenous communities and a highly productive ecosystem with many species of marine mammals, fish and seabirds, may require formally established vessel routing measures. Offshore hydrocarbon developments may lead to increased marine traffic in the Bering Strait region. For the Canadian Arctic, the Northwest Passage is not expected to become a viable trans-Arc- tic route through 2020, but destinational shipping is anticipated to increase. Marine transportation of oil from the Pechora Sea to Europe is considered technically and economically feasible; the volume of oil and gas may be as high as 40 million tons per year by 2020 on the western Northern Sea Route. Human Dimensions: Marine shipping is one of many factors impacting Arctic communities. There may be some positive economic impacts to increased shipping. However, Arctic residents express concern for the social, cultural and environmental effects of such expansion. The possibility of oil spills is a major concern and hunt- ers are especially concerned about the disruption of marine species and their hunting practices. The costs and benefit of Arctic shipping ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S 5 The focus of the AMSA is marine safety and marine environ- mental protection, which is consistent with the Arctic Council’s mandates of environmental protection and sustainable devel- opment. Based on the findings of the AMSA, recommendations were developed to provide a guide for future action by the Arctic Council, Arctic states and many others. The AMSA recommenda- tions are presented under three broad, inter-related themes that are fundamental to understanding the AMSA: Enhancing Arctic Marine Safety, Protecting Arctic People and the Environment, and Building Arctic Marine Infrastructure. It is recognized that imple- mentation of these recommendations could come from the Arctic states, industry and/or public-private partnerships. I. Enhancing Arctic Marine Safety A. Linking with International Organizations: That the Arctic states decide to, on a case by case basis, identify areas of common interest and develop unified positions and approaches with respect to international organizations such as: the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the International Maritime Satellite Organization (IMSO) to advance the safety of Arctic marine shipping; and encourage meetings, as appropriate, of member state national maritime safety organiza- tions to coordinate, harmonize and enhance the implementation of the Arctic maritime regulatory framework. B. IMO Measures for Arctic Shipping: That the Arctic states, in recognition of the unique environmental and navigational condi- tions in the Arctic, decide to cooperatively support efforts at the International Maritime Organization to strengthen, harmonize and regularly update international standards for vessels operating in the Arctic. These efforts include: ---Support the updating and the mandatory application of rele- vant parts of the Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-covered Waters (Arctic Guidelines); and, ---Drawing from IMO instruments, in particular the Arctic Guidelines, augment global IMO ship safety and pollution pre- vention conventions with specific mandatory requirements or other provisions for ship construction, design, equipment, crew- ing, training and operations, aimed at safety and protection of the Arctic environment. The Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment Recommendations C. Uniformity of Arctic Shipping Governance: That the Arctic states should explore the possible harmonization of Arctic marine shipping regulatory regimes within their own jurisdiction and uniform Arctic safety and environmental protection regulatory regimes, consistent with UNCLOS, that could provide a basis for protection measures in regions of the central Arctic Ocean beyond coastal state jurisdiction for consideration by the IMO. D. Strengthening Passenger Ship Safety in Arctic Waters: That the Arctic states should support the application of the IMO’s Enhanced Contingency Planning Guidance for Passenger Ships Operating in Areas Remote from SAR Facilities, given the extreme challenges associated with rescue operations in the remote and cold Arctic region; and strongly encourage cruise ship operators to develop, implement and share their own best practices for operat- ing in such conditions, including consideration of measures such as timing voyages so that other ships are within rescue distance in case of emergency. E. Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) Instrument: That the Arctic states decide to support developing and implementing a compre- hensive, multi-national Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) instrument, including aeronautical and maritime SAR, among the eight Arctic nations and, if appropriate, with other interested parties in recog- nition of the remoteness and limited resources in the region. II. Protecting Arctic People and the Environment A. Survey of Arctic Indigenous Marine Use: That the Arctic states should consider conducting surveys on Arctic marine use by indig- enous communities where gaps are identified to collect informa- tion for establishing up-to-date baseline data to assess the impacts from Arctic shipping activities. B. Engagement with Arctic Communities: That the Arctic states decide to determine if effective communication mechanisms exist to ensure engagement of their Arctic coastal communities and, where there are none, to develop their own mechanisms to engage and coordinate with the shipping industry, relevant eco- nomic activities and Arctic communities (in particular during the planning phase of a new marine activity) to increase benefits and help reduce the impacts from shipping. 6 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S C. Areas of Heightened Ecological and Cultural Significance: That the Arctic states should identify areas of heightened eco- logical and cultural significance in light of changing climate condi- tions and increasing multiple marine use and, where appropriate, should encourage implementation of measures to protect these areas from the impacts of Arctic marine shipping, in coordination with all stakeholders and consistent with international law. D. Specially Designated Arctic Marine Areas: That the Arctic states should, taking into account the special characteristics of the Arctic marine environment, explore the need for internationally designated areas for the purpose of environmental protection in regions of the Arctic Ocean. This could be done through the use of appropriate tools, such as “Special Areas” or Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSA) designation through the IMO and consistent with the existing international legal framework in the Arctic. E. Protection from Invasive Species: That the Arctic states should consider ratification of the IMO International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments, as soon as practical. Arctic states should also assess the risk of intro- ducing invasive species through ballast water and other means so that adequate prevention measures can be implemented in waters under their jurisdiction. F. Oil Spill Prevention: That the Arctic states decide to enhance the mutual cooperation in the field of oil spill prevention and, in collab- oration with industry, support research and technology transfer to prevent release of oil into Arctic waters, since prevention of oil spills is the highest priority in the Arctic for environmental protection. G. Addressing Impacts on Marine Mammals: That the Arctic states decide to engage with relevant international organiza- tions to further assess the effects on marine mammals due to ship noise, disturbance and strikes in Arctic waters; and consider, where needed, to work with the IMO in developing and implementing mitigation strategies. H. Reducing Air Emissions: That the Arctic states decide to sup- port the development of improved practices and innovative tech- nologies for ships in port and at sea to help reduce current and future emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Oxides (SOx) and Particulate Matter (PM), taking into account the relevant IMO regulations. III. Building the Arctic Marine Infrastructure A. Addressing the Infrastructure Deficit: That the Arctic states should recognize that improvements in Arctic marine infrastruc- ture are needed to enhance safety and environmental protection in support of sustainable development. Examples of infrastructure where critical improvements are needed include: ice navigation training; navigational charts; communications systems; port ser- vices, including reception facilities for ship-generated waste; accu- rate and timely ice information (ice centers); places of refuge; and icebreakers to assist in response. B. Arctic Marine Traffic System: That the Arctic states should sup- port continued development of a comprehensive Arctic marine traffic awareness system to improve monitoring and tracking of marine activity, to enhance data sharing in near real-time, and to augment vessel management service in order to reduce the risk of incidents, facilitate response and provide awareness of poten- tial user conflict. The Arctic states should encourage shipping companies to cooperate in the improvement and development of national monitoring systems. C. Circumpolar Environmental Response Capacity: That the Arctic states decide to continue to develop circumpolar environ- mental pollution response capabilities that are critical to protect- ing the unique Arctic ecosystem. This can be accomplished, for example, through circumpolar cooperation and agreement(s), as well as regional bilateral capacity agreements. D. Investing in Hydrographic, Meteorological and Oceanographic Data: That the Arctic states should significantly improve, where appropriate, the level of and access to data and information in support of safe navigation and voyage planning in Arctic waters. This would entail increased efforts for: hydrographic surveys to bring Arctic navigation charts up to a level acceptable to support current and future safe navigation; and systems to support real- time acquisition, analysis and transfer of meteorological, oceano- graphic, sea ice and iceberg information. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | A M S A E x E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y W I T H R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S 7 Simultaneous with the globalization of the Arctic, marine access in the Arctic Ocean has been changing in unprecedented ways driven by global climate change. Arctic sea ice is undergoing an historic transformation - thinning, extent reduction in all seasons and sub- stantial reductions in the area of multi-year ice in the central Arctic Ocean - which has significant implications for longer seasons of navigation and new access to previously difficult to reach coastal regions. The international scientific community has already taken advantage of these changes through pioneering voyages in the central Arctic Ocean. The same sea ice retreat also has important influences on the regional, Arctic marine ecosystems and future fish- eries. Taken together, these changes present increased demands on the existing legal and regulatory structures challenged to meet the needs for enhanced marine safety and environmental protection in the face of increasing Arctic marine activity. Such challenges will The Arctic is regarded as containing some of the last physically undisturbed marine spaces on earth. Early in the 21st century, the Arctic has also been undergoing extraordinary environmental and developmental changes. Long known as a storehouse of untapped natural resources, high commodity prices and a growing worldwide demand in recent years have the Arctic poised as a significant contributor to the global economy. Increasing regional and coastal marine transport to sup- port the exploration and extraction of oil, gas and hard minerals, coupled with the increasing presence of the global marine tourism industry, have brought a complex set of users to the maritime Arctic. The potential impacts of these new marine uses - social, environ- mental, cultural and economic - are unknown, but will be significant for Arctic indigenous people and the marine environment already undergoing significant changes due to climate change. Introduction 8 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION The Ottawa Declaration of 1996 formally established the Arctic Council as a high level intergovernmental forum to provide a means for promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic states, with the express involvement of Arctic indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues, especially issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic. The Arctic Council is comprised of Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden and the United States of America. In addition to the member states, the council created the category of Permanent Participants in order to provide for the active participation of, and full consultations with, Arctic indigenous representatives within the council. Open equally to Arctic organizations of indigenous people with a majority of Arctic indigenous constituency, the Permanent Participants represent a single indigenous people resident in more than one Arctic state; or more than one Arctic indig- enous people resident in a single Arctic state. The follow- ing organizations are Permanent Participants of the Arctic Council: Aleut International Association, Arctic Athabaskan Council, Gwich’in Council International, Inuit Circumpolar Council, Saami Council and Russian Arctic Indigenous Peoples of the North. Working groups of the Arctic Council execute the pro- grams and projects mandated by the Arctic Council minis- ters. Each working group, with its supporting scientific and technical expert groups, holds meetings at regular inter- vals throughout the year, ahead of the meetings of Senior Arctic Officials and Arctic Council Ministers. The six working groups include: Arctic Contaminants Action Program; Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme; Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna; Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response; Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment; and Sustainable Development Working Group. Arctic Council require unprecedented levels of cooperation among the eight Arctic states and broad engagement with many non-Arctic stakeholders within the global maritime industry. Actions Leading to a Shipping Assessment The Arctic Council anticipated the need to evaluate current and future increasing use of the Arctic Ocean. In 2002 at the Council’s third Ministerial meeting in Inari, Finland, the ministers recog- nized “that existing and emerging activities in the Arctic warrant a more coordinated and integrated strategic approach to address the challenges of the Arctic coastal marine environment.” The min- isters agreed to “develop a strategic plan for the protection of the Arctic marine environment under leadership by the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) working group.” The Arctic Marine Strategic Plan (AMSP) was developed by PAME and approved by the Arctic Council in 2004. Four strategic goals were outlined in the AMSP: reduce and prevent pollution in the Arctic marine environ- ment; conserve Arctic marine diversity and ecosystem functions; pro- mote the health and prosperity of all Arctic inhabitants; and advance sustainable Arctic marine resource use. The AMSP addressed the need for future application of an ecosystem approach to management of the Arctic marine environment and also called for a comprehensive assessment of Arctic marine shipping. In November 2004, the Arctic Council released a major study, the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), which received global attention. The ACIA found that the Arctic: is extremely vulnerable to observed and projected climate change; is today experiencing some of the most rapid and severe climate change on Earth; and will experience accelerated climate change during the 21st century. Widespread physical, ecological, social and economic changes, many of which have already begun, were projected. Of particular relevance to marine use and Arctic transport, one of ACIA’s 10 Key Findings (#6) stated: “Reduced sea ice is very likely to increase marine trans- port and access to resources.” Consistent with the work of the AMSP and the ACIA, the Arctic Council Ministers in November 2004 in Reykjavik asked PAME to “con- duct a comprehensive Arctic marine shipping assessment as outlined in the Arctic Marine Strategic Plan (AMSP) under the guidance of Canada, Finland and the United States as lead countries and in collaboration with the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) working group of the Arctic Council and Permanent Participants as relevant.” AMSA data gathering and planning began in summer 2005. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION 9 Nautical Miles 500 0 Focus and Conduct of the Assessment The focus of the AMSA is marine safety and marine environmen- tal protection, which is consistent with the Arctic Council’s man- dates of environmental protection and sustainable development. The AMSA was designed to be circumpolar in breadth, but also considers regional and local perspectives where impacts, particularly on Arctic communities, are considered to be greatest. However, the overall scope of the AMSA focuses on ships and their infrastructure needs and impacts in the Arctic Ocean. The AMSA lead countries (Canada, Finland and the United States) recognized early in the planning the importance of contributions from the broader, global maritime community. Therefore, the AMSA reached out to such key stakeholders as non-Arctic states (examples include the United Kingdom and Germany), shipping companies, ship designers, shipbuilders, ship classification societies, non-commercial partnerships, marine insurers and non-governmental environmental organizations. With the assistance of the Permanent Participants of the Arctic Council, town hall meetings were organized in selected Arctic communities to listen to issues and concerns about future Arctic marine activity. AMSA also linked with the Arctic Council working group experts of the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) working group on issues related to spills, and response infrastructure requirements, and with the Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) on issues related to the human dimension. *Note: Ship traffic off the coast of Norway much higher than legend indicates. z Map 1.1 Shipping traffic in the Arctic for survey year 2004. Source: AMSA * 10 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION The AMSA covers all types of marine transport under the gen- eral topic of “shipping”: tankers, bulk carriers, offshore supply vessels, passenger ships, tug/barge combinations, fishing vessels, ferries, research vessels and government and commercial icebreak- ers. Knowing the sum of the voyages completed by these different ships will help to understand the potential environmental impacts (especially from discharges and emissions) of Arctic marine shipping operations. An AMSA Database Survey, requesting these ship types, was sent to the Senior Arctic Officials of the Arctic states in February 2006 to obtain the official shipping statistics of each state for the survey year 2004. The objective was to create the first baseline data- base of all ships (less naval vessels) operating in the Arctic during a single year. Each Arctic state defined its own Arctic waters for the purpose of the AMSA data collection effort. The AMSA data effort yielded an historic survey that provides a comprehensive estimate for how many ships had operated in the Arctic for the survey year. More than 185 experts participated directly in AMSA. Thirteen major AMSA workshops were held from July 2006 through October 2008; workshop topics included: scenarios of future Arctic navigation; indigenous marine use; Arctic marine incidents; environmental impacts; Arctic marine infrastructure; and the future of the Russian Federation’s Northern Sea Route. AMSA town hall meetings were held in northern communities in Canada, Iceland, Norway and the United States. AMSA leads and team members conducted outreach and pre- sented AMSA topics at 56 professional venues throughout the world during 2005-2008. A large number of source documents were collected from the following activities: the results of the AMSA workshops, reports of the AMSA town hall meetings, the AMSA Data Survey, special reports created by maritime experts, and reviews of AMSA topics drafted by lead and contributing authors. These documents, referred to collectively as the AMSA Research Documents, will be found on the PAME and Arctic Council websites. The AMSA Research Documents represent a significant body of work and, while they have not been reviewed by the Arctic Council, the documents provided the back- ground for drafting the AMSA 2009 Report, which was approved by the Arctic Council Ministers at the 2009 Ministerial meeting in Tromsø, Norway. © Fednav, Ltd. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION 11 Modes of Arctic Marine Transport In addition to the ship types to be addressed in the assessment, four modes, or types of voyages undertaken in the Arctic Ocean, were identified. They are: Destinational transport, where a ship sails to the Arctic, per- forms some activity in the Arctic and sails south. Examples include: large cruise ships sailing from southern ports to the west coast of Greenland in summer; LNG and oil tankers sailing from ports in northern Norway and northwest Russia to world markets; and an ice- breaker from Europe conducting scientific operations in the central Arctic Ocean in summer. Intra-Arctic transport, a voyage or marine activity that stays within the general Arctic region and links two or more Arctic states. A key example is the marine route between the port of Churchill, Manitoba, Canada on Hudson Bay and Murmansk, Russia, touted as an “Arctic-bridge” between the two continents. Two other examples include an Icelandic fishing vessel working in Greenlandic waters, and tug-barge traffic operating between Canada’s Northwest Territories and the U.S. Beaufort Sea off the Alaskan coast. Trans-Arctic transport or navigation, voyages which are taken across the Arctic Ocean from Pacific to Atlantic oceans or vice versa. These are full voyages between the major oceans using the Arctic Ocean as a marine link. There are several options for trans-Arctic navigation. Cabotage, to trade or marine transport in coastal waters between ports within an Arctic state. A prime example is the year-round traf- fic between the port of Dudinka on the Yenisei River and Murmansk - Russian-flag ships carrying nickel plates processed at the industrial complex in Norilsk to Murmansk for further distribution to Russian and international markets. Other examples are the summer sealift of cargoes to Canadian Arctic communities from southern Canadian ports and the delivery of consumer goods to Russian Arctic communi- ties using the Northern Sea Route. © Neste Shipping Oy 12 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment: PAME PAME is an example of the international cooperation that is a hallmark of the Arctic Council: while the PAME Secretariat is based in Akureyri, Iceland, its chairmanship in the spring of 2009 is held by Canada. Increased economic activity and significant changes due to climatic processes are resulting in increased use, opportunities and threats to the Arctic marine and coastal environments. These predicted changes require more integrated approaches to address both existing and emerging challenges of the Arctic marine and coastal environments. PAME’s mandate is to address policy and non-emergency pol- lution prevention and control measures related to the protection of the Arctic marine environment from both land and sea-based activities, including coordinated action programs and guidelines complementing existing legal arrangements. According to the Arctic Marine Strategic Plan, PAME aims to improve knowledge and respond to emerging knowledge of the Arctic Marine Environment. The AMSA is the primary action item for this objective. The plan also calls on PAME to determine the adequacy of applicable international/regional commitments and promote their implementation and compliance; and facilitate partnerships, program and technical cooperation and support communication, reporting and outreach both within and outside the Arctic Council. At the 2004 Arctic Council ministers meeting in Iceland, the Reykjavik Declaration asked the PAME work group “to conduct a comprehensive Arctic marine shipping assessment as outlined in the Arctic Marine Strategic Plan (AMSP) under the guidance of Canada, Finland and the United States as lead countries and in collaboration with the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) working group of the Arctic Council and Permanent Participants as relevant.” The Origin of the AMSA Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response: EPPR The EPPR Secretariat rotates with the chairmanship of the Arctic Council and as such is located in the spring of 2009 at the Norwegian Coastal Administration, Department for Emergency Response, Norway. Harsh conditions and lack of infrastructure in much of the Arctic create a higher vulnerability to emergencies than in more temper- ate climates. Consequently, prevention, preparedness and response must be adapted to Arctic conditions. Accordingly, international cooperation in this area is of major importance. The mandate of the EPPR working group is to deal with the prevention, preparedness and response to environmental emer- gencies in the Arctic. Members of the working group exchange information on best practices and conduct projects (for example, development of guidance and risk assessment methodologies, response exercises, training, etc.). EPPR is not a response agency. In 2004, EPPR was directed by the Arctic Ministers to expand its man- date to include natural disasters. Ongoing EPPR projects address oil pollution spill response in the face of increased Arctic shipping and development; technological support of radiological and other hazard assessments; and natural disaster response, particularly catastrophic river flooding. The Arctic Council Ministers in November 2004 in Reykjavik asked PAME to “conduct a comprehensive Arctic marine shipping assessment as outlined in the Arctic Marine Strategic Plan (AMSP) under the guidance of Canada, Finland and the United States as lead countries and in collaboration with the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) working group of the Arctic Council and Permanent Participants as relevant.” 185+Number of international experts who worked on the AMSA. © Ben Ellis ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION 13 The Assessment Report Structure The AMSA 2009 Report is designed to educate and inform the Arctic Council, the Arctic community, the global maritime industry and the world at large about the current state of Arctic marine use and future challenges. The topics presented in the report include: • Arctic Marine Geography, Climate and Sea Ice • History of Arctic Marine Transport • Governance of Arctic Shipping • Current Marine Use and AMSA 2004 Database • Scenarios, Futures and Regional Futures to 2020 • Human Dimensions • Environmental Considerations and Impacts • Arctic Marine Infrastructure The initial sections on Arctic marine geography and Arctic marine transport history provide background and context for the subsequent sections. The complex geography of the Arctic Ocean and its sur- rounding coastline influences all aspects of Arctic marine operations. The history section emphasizes that industrial and commercial uses of the Arctic Ocean date back to the 17th century. There is also a rich history of marine operations in the Russian and Canadian Arctic regions, around Svalbard and Greenland, and off Alaska. Governance is identified in the AMSA as one of the key uncertainties and driv- ers of future Arctic marine navigation, and this section provides a critical overview and current state of international and coastal state governance of Arctic marine activities. The section on current marine use provides a comprehensive and historic baseline of Arctic marine activity early in the 21st century, developed principally from the AMSA Data Survey. AMSA scenario workshops in 2007 and 2008 identified natural resource development and trade as key drivers and uncertainties. Two regional AMSA studies - for the Bering Strait and Canadian Arctic, as well as outcomes of ARCOP and INSROP - all emphasize oil and gas and hard minerals development as important indicators for future Arctic marine transport requirements. The human dimension section communicates the results of the AMSA town hall meetings and identifies important concerns and issues of the Arctic indigenous people. Impacts are also highlighted in the environmental considerations section where ship types and their specific impacts are characterized. The final section of the report on Arctic infrastructure identifies the Arctic Ocean as a region with limited infrastructure in most areas, lacking communications, response capability, salvage and other basic services that are readily available to the maritime community in lower latitudes. The Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment is a comprehensive study and evaluation of Arctic marine activity today and the future. The AMSA 2009 Report highlights a single set of findings and recommen- dations important to the future protection of Arctic people and the marine environment. The AMSA team of experts has also provided for each section in the report a list of non-negotiated research opportu- nities that can be considered by the Arctic research community and organizations such as the International Arctic Science Committee. The AMSA Report is a strategic guide for understanding the com- plexity and multiple factors that will determine the future of Arctic shipping operations. Z 14 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION Long known as a storehouse of untapped natural resources, high commodity prices and a growing worldwide demand in recent years have the Arctic poised as a significant contributor to the global economy. © Fednav, Ltd. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | INTR ODUC TION 15 Arctic Marine Geography Our Earth has two polar regions, each with a large marine environment, that are vital to the well-being of the planet: Antarctica and the Arctic. Unlike Antarctica, though, which is a continent surrounded by an ocean, the Arctic is an ocean surrounded by continents. The Arctic Ocean, at 14.056 million km2 , is the smallest of the world’s five oceans (Table 2.1). It is mostly an enclosed sea that has limited exchange of deep water with other oceans. Compared to the Mediterranean Sea, the Arctic has a much greater exchange of water, and it is more than 5.6 times larger. Consequently, the International Hydrographic Organization along with the International Maritime Organization recognizes the Arctic Ocean as one of the five major components of the world ocean that covers almost 71 percent of the Earth’s surface. More importantly, the Arctic Ocean is the least sampled of the world’s oceans and many areas remain where few, if any, soundings have been recorded. The implications of this lack of basic marine information are profound for charting hydrography and for basic Arctic navigation. The Arctic is bordered by numerous coastal seas, all of which are seasonally covered with sea ice. Working from Greenland eastwards, the waters adjacent to the Arctic basin itself are Greenland Sea, Norwegian Sea, Barents Sea, White Sea, Kara Sea, Laptev Sea, East Siberian Sea and Chukchi Sea - all fronting on the Eurasia continen- tal land mass. The Bering Sea, the Beaufort Sea, the waters within the Canadian Archipelago including those of the Northwest Passage, Hudson Bay and Hudson Strait, Lincoln Sea, Baffin Bay, Davis Strait and Labrador Sea are all bordering on the North American continent. Most Arctic marine activity, such as fishing, offshore hydrocarbon development and ship transits, takes place in these coastal seas. Bathymetrically, the Arctic marine area is relatively shallow (Map 2.1) with broad continental shelves. The shelf extends 100 to 200 kilometers from the United States and Canada, and more than 1,000 kilometers in places extending north from the Russian Federation. Depths over the shelves average between 100 and 200 meters but are variable, especially as the continental landmasses and islands are approached. At the continental slopes, the break between the shelf and the deep ocean basin, depths are between 300 and 500 meters. Arctic Marine Geography, Climate and Sea Ice 16 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE Nautical Miles 500 0 United States of America Canada Greenland Iceland Norway Finland Sweden Denmark Faroe Islands Russian Federation ArcticCircle Pole of Inaccessibility North Magnetic Pole North Pole z Map 2.1 The Arctic marine area. Source: AMSA Northwest Passage Northeast Passage Northern Sea Route Bathymetry (meters) 200 m 500 m 2500 m 4000 m 5000 m 4,000 meters +The depth of the Arctic Ocean at the North Pole. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 17 Size (million km2 ) Percentage of Earth’s Total Surface Greatest Depth (m) Average Depth (m) Pacific 155.557 30.5 10,911 4,300 Atlantic 76.762 20.8 8,605 3,300 Indian 65.556 14.4 7,258 3,900 Southern 20.327 4.0 7,235 4,000-5,000 Arctic 14.056 2.8 5,160 1,050 the world’s largest 10 islands. The next largest single island fringing on the Arctic marine area is Iceland (103,000 km²). On the west, the Arctic Ocean is bounded by Svalbard (Norway) of which Spitsbergen is the largest island; Franz Josef Land (Russian Federation) with 191 islands; Novaya Zemlya (Russian Federation) with two major islands (Severny at 47,079 km² and Yuzhny at 33,246 km²); Severnaya Zemlya (Russian Federation) consisting of four major islands and 70 smaller ones; and New Siberian Islands (Russian Federation) with the Anzhu Islands and the Lyakhovskiye Islands. Between the New Siberian Islands group and the Bering Strait lies Wrangel Island (7,300 km²). Given these fringing islands, the distance from the nearest land to the North Pole is as little as 707 kilometers (382 nautical miles) (Table 2.2), but this distance is different for each Arctic nation. Of interest to the marine world is the approximate 2,100 nautical mile (1134 kilometer) distance (direct) from the Bering Strait to the North Pole to Fram Strait (between Greenland and Svalbard). All other distances along the coastal routes within the Arctic basin are longer. Although technically not on the edge of the Arctic Ocean, the Aleutian Islands in the Pacific Ocean provide the southern limit of the Bering Sea, which links through the Bering Strait into the Chukchi Sea and the Arctic Ocean. A global maritime trade route - the North Pacific’s Great Circle Route - intersects with the Aleutian Islands and thousands of large ships pass north and south of these islands on voyages between the west coast of North America and Asian ports each year. The water connections linking the Arctic and the Pacific and Atlantic oceans are limited. The narrow and shallow Bering Strait (85 kilometer width; 30-50 meter depth) is the only link between the Arctic and the Pacific. There are more and wider passages between the Arctic and the Atlantic. Davis Strait between Canada and Greenland links Baffin Bay with the Labrador Sea and the North Atlantic. At its narrowest point Davis Strait is about 300 kilometers wide; at its widest it is over 950 kilometers. Between Greenland and Iceland lies Denmark Strait (290 kilometers wide at its narrowest). The widest passage is the Norwegian Sea at about 1,100 kilometers separating Iceland from Norway. These water passages between the Arctic Ocean and its northern coastal seas allow exchanges of water vital to the Arctic’s climate and marine ecosystems. By far the greatest exchange of water takes place between the Arctic and the Atlantic. Relatively warm dense salty water, as part of the North Atlantic Current originating in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, enters the Norwegian Sea con- tinuing into the Barents Sea. This warmer water means that the Southern Barents Sea is not generally ice-covered, a significant fac- tor in the regulation and control of marine traffic in this northwest There are two major deep basins - the Eurasia and Amerasia - sep- arated by the Lomonosov Ridge stretching from the East Siberian Sea to the Lincoln Sea. The ridge is an underwater mountain chain rising, on average, 3,000 meters above the abyssal plain. On the Eurasian side of the Lomonosov Ridge, the basin is again split into two by the Nansen-Gakkel Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge. Between the Lomonosov and Nansen-Gakkel Ridges lies the Pole Abyssal Plain in which is found the geographical North Pole at 90 degrees north. The depth of water at the pole is well over 4,000 meters. On the Amerasia side of the Lomonosov Ridge there are also two basins - the Makarov and Canada - separated by the Alpha and Mendeleev ridges. Of the two basins, the Canada Basin is the largest. Major islands and island archipelagos fringe the Arctic marine area and they help frame the marine routes, legal regimes and naviga- tional options in the Arctic Ocean. The largest island is Greenland at 2,166,086 km². The largest archipelago is the Canadian Archipelago with more than 36,000 islands including Baffin (507,451 km²), Victoria (217,291 km²) and Ellesmere (196,236 km²), which are among z Table 2.1 Arctic Ocean compared to other oceans. Source: AMSA Country Closest Point to the North Pole Distance to Pole (km) Greenland (Denmark) Kaffeklubben Island, Perry Land 707 Iceland Kolbeinsey, Eyjafjorour 2552 Norway Rossoya Sjuoyane, Svalbard 1024 Russian Federation Cape Fligely, Rudolf Island, Franz Josef Land 911 USA Point Barrow, Alaska 2078 Canada Cape Columbia, Ellesmere Island 769 z Table 2.2 Distances from nearest land of Arctic states to the North Pole. Source: AMSA 18 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE corner of Europe that is by latitude located in the Arctic region. After much mixing and cyclonic (counter-clockwise) circulation, cold, less salty water exits between Svalbard and Greenland and Greenland and Iceland. This exiting water consists not only of the modified North Atlantic waters but, more importantly, continental river water from Eurasia, especially from the Ob’, Yenisei and Lena rivers of the Russian Federation; freshwater from the Mackenzie River in Canada; and Pacific water which entered through the Bering Strait. The driv- ing engine conveying the Pacific water and the river waters eastward is the Beaufort Gyre north of Alaska and western Canada. This gyre - a clockwise circulation of relatively fresh, less dense water - is driven by prevailing winds. When winds shift and the current lessens some water escapes and is caught up in the Trans Polar current, eventually linking with the outflow water into the Atlantic Ocean. Cold waters also exit from the Arctic to the Atlantic through Baffin Bay, Davis Strait and Hudson Strait. An important geographical limit and a defining line is the Arctic Circle (66 degrees 33 minutes north). At this latitude places receive continuous light for 24 hours per day once a year and as one moves poleward the number of days of continuous light increases until at the North Pole continuous light is experienced for six months Arctic Circle The Arctic Circle is the circle of latitude at 66 degrees 33 minutes N (2606 kilometers/1619 miles from the North Pole) that encloses a northern area about 8 percent of Earth’s surface. The Arctic Circle is the southern limit of the midnight sun, where north of the circle there is at least one day each year when the sun does not set. © Canadian Coast Guard ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 19 between the Vernal (March 21) and Autumnal equinoxes (September 21). Conversely, continuous dark is experienced at the pole for the other six months and decreasingly in time as one moves south. Significant for marine operations is that much of the central Arctic Ocean is shrouded in winter darkness with very low temperatures for half the year. This seasonal or diurnal cycle in the polar environ- ment, while highly influential in the rhythmic behavior and adap- tation of Arctic communities and animal populations, has broad implications for maritime use throughout the Arctic Ocean and its coastal seas. The Canadian Maritime Arctic and Northwest Passage The Canadian maritime Arctic is located across the north of Canada from the Beaufort Sea in the west to Baffin Bay in the east, and south to 60 degrees north latitude. The Canadian Arctic Archipelago stretches longitudinally about 1,900 kilometers from mainland Canada to the northern tip of Ellesmere Island. From west to east, it covers a distance of about 2,400 kilometers from Banks Island (west side) to Baffin Island (east side). The size of this roughly triangular area, including land and ocean, is approximately 2.1 million km², about the size of Greenland. As mentioned previ- ously, it comprises approximately 36,000 islands, making it one of the most complex geographies on Earth. The area is sparsely popu- lated along the coastline. The largest settlement is Iqaluit, Baffin Island, at 6,100 people; the entire Baffin region includes most of the eastern and northern portion of the Archipelago including all of Baffin Island. The most northern settlement is Grise Fjord on Ellesmere Island. Resolute on Cornwallis Island and the shores of Barrow Strait are an important staging area for air and marine traffic. The Archipelago serves as a major impediment to shippers seek- ing a link between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans or for internal shipment of resources or community supplies. There are five recog- nized routes or passages, with variations, through the Archipelago (Table 2.3). They make up the much searched for Northwest Passage, which occupied European adventurers for more than 400 years. The NWP is the name given to the various marine routes between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans along the northern coast of North America that span the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. The first complete ship transit of the NWP took place from 1903-06 by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen following Route 3b (Table 2.3). In 1940-42 the first eastward passage, using Route 4, was made by the St. Roch commanded by RCMP Sergeant Henry Larsen. This trip was followed in 1944 by a westward passage following Route 1, marking the first time the Northwest Passage had been navigated in a single season. All passages have common eastern and western approaches. In the east, ships must proceed through the Labrador Sea, Davis Strait and Baffin Bay - the exception is for Route 5, which requires a transit through Hudson Strait. In the western approaches ships proceed through the Bering Sea, Bering Strait, the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea before deciding which route to follow. In general, the operating season is short - from late July to mid-October - depending on the route and year. Of the various passages, routes 1 and 2 are considered deep water ones, while the others have limiting shoals and rocks restricting the draft of vessels to less than 10 meters. The Arctic Ocean is the least sampled of the world’s oceans and many areas remain where few, if any, soundings have been recorded. Northwest Passage (NWP) The NWP is the name given to the various marine routes between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans along the northern coast of North America that span the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. 20 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE Water Routes of the Northwest Passage Route Routing (East to West) Physical Description Of Note 1 Lancaster Sound – Barrow Strait – Viscount Melville Sound – Prince of Wales Strait – Amundsen Gulf. Lancaster Sound: 80 km wide, 250 km long, deep at over 500 m. Barrow Strait: 50 km wide, 180 km long, deep, string of islands west of Resolute disrupts clear navigation. Viscount Melville Sound: 100 km wide, 350 km long, experiences multi-year ice from M’Clure Strait. Prince of Wales Strait: minimum width of less than 10 km about half way through the Strait, 230 km long, limiting depth of 32 m. Amundsen Gulf: irregular shape, 90 km wide entrance, approximately 300 km long. Suitable for deep draft navigation; the route followed by St. Roch in 1944 on westerly transit and the SS Manhattan in 1969. 2 Same as 1 but substitute M’Clure Strait for Prince of Wales Strait and Amundsen Gulf. Collectively Lancaster Sound – Barrow Strait – Vis- count Melville Sound is known as Parry Channel. M’Clure Strait: 120 km wide at east end, 275 km long to Beaufort Sea, deep at over 400 m, experi- ences multi-year ice from Arctic Ocean. SS Manhattan attempted this route in 1969 but was turned back. Russian icebreaker Kapitan Klebnikov suc- ceeded in a passage in 2001. In September 2007 was clear of Arctic pack ice for a limited time since satellite photos have been available; there was more ice in 2008. 3A Lancaster Sound – Barrow Strait – Peel Sound – Franklin Strait – Larsen Sound – Victoria Strait – Queen Maud Gulf – Dease Strait – Coronation Gulf – Dolphin and Union Strait – Amundsen Gulf. Lancaster Sound and Barrow Strait: see Route 1. Peel Sound: 25 km wide, deep at over 400 m at south end. Franklin Strait: 30 km wide. Larsen Sound: depths vary between 30 and 200 meters. Victoria Strait: 120 km wide, at southern end is blocked by Royal Geographical Society Islands, worst ice conditions along the mainland coast of Canada. Queen Maud Gulf: eastern entrance 14 km wide, but widens into an irregular area with width of up to 280 km before narrowing to 14 km at entrance to Dease Strait; numerous islands, reefsandshoals. Dease Strait: 14 – 60 km wide, 160 km long. Coronation Gulf: over 160 km long, many islands. Dolphin and Union Strait: 80 km wide at Amundsen Gulf, 150 km long, caution should be exercised in passage, several soundings of less than 10 m have been recorded. Amundsen Gulf: see Route 1. Of the 3A, 3B and 4 routes, this is considered the best option but with a draft limit of 10 m. 3B A variation of 3A. Rather than following Victoria Strait on the west side of King William Island, the route passes to the east of the island following James Ross Strait – Rae Strait – Simpson Strait. James Ross Strait: 50 km wide, but restricted by islands, extensive shoaling. Rae Strait: 20 km wide, with limiting depths of between 5-18 m in mid channel. Simpson Strait: about 3 km wide at narrowest point, most hazardous navigation area in 3B route. The route of Roald Amundsen. Also route of the MS Explorer, in 1984, the first cruise ship to navigate the Northwest Passage. 4 Similar to 3A. Rather than following Peel Sound on the west side of Somerset Island, the route passes to the east of the island through Prince Regent Inlet and Bellot Strait. Prince Regent Inlet: 80 km wide, free of islands, deep. Bellot Strait: short and very narrow, strong currents, limiting depth of 22 m. Route of St. Roch in 1940-42 on easterly transit. 5 Hudson Strait – Foxe Channel – Foxe Basin – Fury and Hecla Strait – Gulf of Boothia – Bellot Strait – remainder via routes 3A, 3B or 4. Hudson Strait: 100 km wide, 650 km long, deep, also serves as entrance to Hudson Bay and Churchill port. Foxe Channel: 130 km wide, deep, with limiting shoal in the middle that can be avoided. Foxe Basin: very large, many islands in northern end. Fury and Hecla Strait: 160 km long, very narrow with fast current. Gulf of Boothia: very large waterway connecting to Prince Regent Inlet to the north (see route 4). No problems for navigation except at exit of Fury and Hecla Strait where Crown Prince Frederick Island is to be avoided. Not generally considered a viable com- mercial passage for moderate to deep draft ships. z Table 2.3 Adopted from Pharand (1988) with additional material from Sailing Directions, Arctic Canada, Vol. 3, 5th edition, 1994 and Canadian Arctic Shipping Assessment, Transport Canada, 2007. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 21 Several forms of floating ice may be encountered at sea. The most extensive is that which results from the freezing of the sea surface, namely sea ice; but mariners must also be concerned with “ice of land origin” - icebergs, ice islands, bergy bits and growl- ers. Both icebergs and sea ice can be dangerous to shipping and always have an effect on navigation. • Young ice: newly formed sea ice less than 30 centimeters thick. It forms extensively in the autumn as ocean surface tempera- tures fall below freezing and on leads that open in mid-winter due to shifts in the pack ice. It is not a significant safety hazard for most Arctic vessels although, when placed under pressure by winds or currents, it can impede progress. • First-year ice: can easily attain a thickness of 1 meter but rarely grows beyond 2 meters by the end of the winter. It is relatively soft due to inclusions of brine cells and air pockets and will not generally hole an ice-strengthened ship operated with due caution. Under pressure from winds or currents, first-year ice can impede progress to the point where even powerful vessels can become beset for hours or even days. The Nature of Ice at Sea © Canadian Coast Guard • Old ice: If first-year ice survives the summer melt season, it is then classified as old ice (subdivided into second-year and multi-year ice). It is typically 1 to 5 meters thick and is extremely hard. During the summer melt process, the brine cells and air pockets that characterize first-year ice drain out the bottom of the ice, leaving a clear, solid ice mass that is harder than con- crete. Even ice-strengthened vessels are at risk of being holed by old ice. When under pressure, old ice can stop the most powerful icebreakers. • Icebergs: are large masses of floating ice originating from gla- ciers. They are very hard and can cause considerable damage to a ship in a collision. Ice islands are vast tabular icebergs orig- inating from floating ice shelves. Smaller pieces of icebergs are called bergy bits and growlers and are especially dangerous to ships because they are extremely difficult to detect. 22 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE The Russian Maritime Arctic and Northern Sea Route The physical environment of the northern coast of Eurasia - the Russian maritime Arctic - presents unique challenges to the mariner and to modern ship technology and systems. Shallow waters generally characterize the length of the coastline from the Norwegian-Russian border in the west (in the Barents Sea) to the Bering Strait. The average depths of the East Siberian and Chukchi seas are 58 meters and 88 meters respectively, making the entire coastal region in the east quite shallow for all marine operations. The average depth of the Laptev Sea is 578 meters (its northern limit extends into the Arctic Ocean basin); however, 66 percent of its area along the coast is in depths of 100 meters or less. The Kara Sea has an average depth of 90 meters and the Barents Sea is rela- tively shallow along the coast (10-100 meters) in the southeastern region and slopes to depths of 200-300 meters to the northwest. From the early years of exploration in the 17th century to today’s offshore development and use of shipping routes, the consistently shallow bathymetry of this broad Arctic coast has been a key facet in all maritime affairs. The Northern Sea Route is defined in Russian law as the set of Arctic marine routes between Kara Gate in the west and the Bering Strait. A number of narrow straits represent a significant constraint to navigation along the NSR. Yugorskiy Shar Strait is located along the south coast of Vaygach Island and is the southernmost entrance from the Barents to Kara seas (21 nautical miles long, 13-30 meters deep). Kara Gate is the main shipping strait between the Barents and Kara seas (18 nautical miles long, minimum depth of 21 meters) and shipping uses an established traffic separation scheme. Vilkitskiy Strait separates Severnaya Zemlya from the northernmost extremity of the Eurasian land mass, Cape Chelyuskin. This is a key NSR strait between the Kara and Laptev seas (60 nautical mile length, 100-200 meter depths), but it is ice-covered except for a short period in some summer seasons. Shokalskiy Strait is located in Severnaya Zemlya north of Vilkitskiy Strait and is a second possible shipping route between the Kara and Laptev seas (80 nautical miles long, minimum depth of 37 meters). In the eastern reaches of the NSR, Dmitry Laptev Strait, oriented east-west, is the southernmost passage between the New Siberian Islands and the Russian mainland, linking the Laptev and East Siberian seas. This strait is 63 nautical miles long and has depths of 12-15 meters; however, the eastern approach has only depths of 10 meters or less, restricting traffic to ships with less than a 6.7 meter draft. Sannikov Strait is a second passage through the New Siberian Islands linking the Laptev and East Siberian seas (160 nau- tical miles long, minimum depths of 13 meters). From a navigation perspective, the low surrounding New Siberian Islands make visual and radar observations difficult to obtain, especially during long periods of reduced visibility. Long Strait separates Wrangel Island from the Russian mainland and links the East Siberian and Chukchi seas (a 120-nautical mile southern route along the coast with 20 meter minimum depths; a 160-nautical mile northern route with 33 meter minimum depths). Several marine route distances are notable: from Murmansk to the Bering Strait is 3,074 nautical miles; and the Northern Sea Route from Kara Gate to the Bering Strait is 2,551 nautical miles. The Dudinka to Murmansk marine route that is maintained year- round is 1,343 nautical miles, while it is approximately 500 nauti- cal miles between the offshore region of the Pechora Sea (site of new oil terminals) in the southeast corner of the Barents Sea and Murmansk. Compared with the Canadian Arctic, the Russian mari- time Arctic has many more viable ports located along the length of the NSR. Primary NSR ports from west to east include: Amderma, Dikson, Yamburg (Ob’ Gulf), Dudinka (north Yenisei River), Igarka (south Yenisei River), Khatanga (Khatanga River on the Laptev Sea), Tiksi (Tiksi Gulf near the Lena River), Zeleny Mys (Kolyma River) and Pevek. Northern Sea Route (NSR) The NSR is defined in Russian Federation law as a set of marine routes from Kara Gate (south of Novaya Zemlya) in the west to the Bering Strait in the east. Several of the routes are along the coast, making use of the main straits through the islands of the Russian Arctic; other potential routes run north of the island groups. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 23 Arctic Climatology One defining threshold of the Arctic environment that is often used is set by the 10°C July isotherm. This isotherm marks the southern Arctic boundary where the monthly mean temperature in July is below 10°C. This limit also closely corresponds to the northern limit of the treeline. Because of the mix of landmasses, water and ice in the northern latitudes the isotherm pushes north above the Arctic Circle in all of Eurasia, but is south of the Arctic Circle in much of central and eastern Canada, southern Greenland and the Aleutian Islands. For example, the mean monthly July tem- perature at Honningsvåg, Norway (latitude 70° 58’ N) is 10.3°C; at Murmansk, Russia (latitude 68° 58´ N) it is 13.4°C. However, at Inukjuak, Quebec, Canada on the east side of Hudson Bay (58° 27´N) the average July temperature is only 9.4°C; at Paamiut, Greenland on the south west coast (62° 00´ N) it is 5.5°C. In January, mean temperatures everywhere within the Arctic Circle are all below 0°C, varying from about -5°C along the north coast of Norway to greater than -35°C in central Greenland, the northern part of the Canadian Archipelago and in northern Siberia. The average January temperature at the North Pole is estimated at between -30 and -35° C; however, this is difficult to know given that no permanent recording station exists at the pole. Over virtually all of the Arctic Ocean mean winter air temperatures are not as cold as they are in fringing continental land masses in Siberia, Alaska and Canada. Precipitation, generally, is light within the Arctic at less than 250 millimeters per annum. Only along exposed coastal regions in southern Baffin Island, western Greenland and northern Scandinavia are amounts greater than this regularly experienced. The main com- ponent of the precipitation in the central and high Arctic is snow, but it too is light, at less than 25 centimeters per annum. Although light, snow tends to be blown in all regions and accumulates in drifts and around structures; in marine environments drifting snow accumulates along ice edges and other features on the sea ice cre- ating considerable additional barriers to normal navigation. Almost all snow disappears nearly everywhere in the summer, except in glacier areas. One of the factors explaining the climatic patterns and annual weather events in the Arctic is the distribution of high and low pressure systems through the year. In winter two semi-permanent low pressure areas set up in the region: one over Iceland and the Geographic North Pole The Geographic North Pole, the Earth’s northernmost point, is located at the northern end of the Earth’s axis of rotation. The latitude of the Geographic North Pole is 90 degrees N and it is the point where all the meridians of longitude and all 24 of the world’s time zones converge. © Harald Finkler 24 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE z Graph 2.1 Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent. Source: J. Walsh, W. Chapman North Atlantic extending into the Barents Sea, the other over the Gulf of Alaska in the North Pacific. In contrast, high pressure areas are established over Siberia and the Yukon in Canada. The pres- sure differences bring about frequent and intense cyclonic storms moving generally from west to east. In summer, the lows weaken, the Siberian high disappears and the Canadian high shifts north over the Canadian Archipelago. As a result, pressure gradients are less and cyclonic activity declines, providing a fairly benign Arctic marine environment for voyages and regional operations. By October, the winter configuration begins to take effect and stormi- ness increases with declining temperatures. Again, the seasonality of the polar environment, in this case the overall annual weather patterns over the Arctic Ocean, is a critical, strategic aspect for planning current and future marine transport systems throughout the Arctic basin. Arctic Sea Ice: Changing Operating Conditions in the Arctic Ocean Introduction The Arctic sea ice cover is undergoing an extraordinary trans- formation that has significant implications for marine access and shipping throughout the Arctic basin. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, released by the Arctic Council at the Iceland Ministerial meeting in November 2004, documented that Arctic sea ice extent has been declining for the past five decades. Research has also indicated that sea ice thickness has been decreasing during the same period, and the area of multi-year ice has also been declining in the central Arctic Ocean. Global Climate Models used in the ACIA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC AR4 released in 2007) simulate a continuous decline in sea ice coverage through the 21st century. One ACIA model showed it is plausible that during mid- century, the entire Arctic Ocean could be ice-free for a short period in the summer, a finding that garnered significant media attention. Recent research (2006-2008) has indicated this plausible ice-free state of the Arctic sea ice cover may occur as early as 2040, if not sooner. It is important to note that despite the remarkable, ongo- ing changes in Arctic sea ice and some uncertainty surrounding the output of the GCMs, no research and none of the GCM simulations have indicated that the winter sea ice cover of the Arctic Ocean will disappear during this century. This fact alone - that there will always be an Arctic sea ice cover to contend with - has important implications for all future Arctic marine activity and for the development of ship standards and mea- sures to enhance Arctic marine safety and environmental protection. The resulting sea ice conditions for future Arctic marine operations will be challenging and will require substantial monitoring and improved regional observations. This new Arctic Ocean of increasing marine access, potentially longer seasons of navigation and increas- ing ship traffic requires greater attention and stewardship by the Arctic states and all marine users. In assessments of ongoing and projected climate change, Arctic sea ice is a critical and highly visible element. Observed sea ice extents derived from satellite passive microwave data for 1979-2006 indicate a decrease or annual loss of 45,000 km 2 of ice (3.7 per- cent decrease per decade). The same data analysis shows negative ice extent trends for each of the four seasons and each of the 12 months; the decline in summer extent (6.2 percent decrease per decade) is larger than in winter (2.6 percent decrease per decade). Future Arctic navigation and all marine activity will depend on more frequent, reliable and near real-time sea ice thickness measurements. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 25 Interestingly, the five smallest September ice-covered areas for the Arctic Ocean during the modern satellite record (1979-2008) have occurred in the five most recent seasons (2004-2008). Map 2.2 shows the sea ice coverage derived from satellite at the time of minimum extent of Arctic sea ice on September 16, 2007. This snapshot represents the minimum coverage of Arctic sea ice in the satellite era of observations. Striking are several notable features: the largely ice-free areas across the Russian Arctic coastal seas (north of the Eurasian coast), except for a small region in the western Laptev Sea; an ice edge that has retreated north of Svalbard and well north in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas; several ice-free passages through the Canadian Archipelago; and a large area of the central Arctic Ocean that previously has not been observed open or without even a thin ice cover. These extraordinary changes in the summer ice cover of the Arctic Ocean, represented by a single, iconic satellite image for September 16, 2007, are major factors in the potential lengthening of the navi- gation season in regional Arctic seas, particularly in the summer. It should be noted though that during the same timeframe, the Fram Strait contained more ice than normal, underscoring the regional variability of sea ice extent. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment The ACIA, approved by the eight Arctic countries, was called for by the Arctic Council and the International Arctic Science Committee. The assessment found that the Arctic is extremely vul- nerable to observed and projected climate change and its impacts. The Arctic is now experiencing some of the most rapid and severe climate change on earth. During the 21st century, climate change is expected to accelerate, contributing to major physical, ecological, social and economic changes, many of which have already begun. Changes in Arctic climate will also affect the rest of the planet through increased global warming and rising sea levels. Of direct relevance to future Arctic marine activity, and to the AMSA, is that potentially accelerating Arctic sea ice retreat improves marine access throughout the Arctic Ocean. The assessment confirmed, using a wealth of current Arctic research, that declining Arctic sea ice is a key climate change indi- cator. During the past five decades the observed extent of Arctic sea ice has declined in all seasons, with the most prominent retreat in summer. While the ACIA models have now been surpassed by more capable GCMs, each of the five GCMs used in the ACIA did project a continuous decline in Arctic sea ice coverage throughout the 21st z Map 2.2 Satellite images of summer sea ice cover. Source: University of Illinois – The Cryosphere Today 26 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE z Map 2.3 Arctic sea ice simulations for the 21st century. Source: Arctic Climate Impact Assesment century (Map 2.3). From a strategic planning perspective, this is a key factor for evaluating future Arctic marine transport systems. As noted previously, one of the models simulates a summer ice-free Arctic Ocean by 2050, a future scenario of great significance for Arctic shipping and offshore development. Such a physical occur- rence would mean that multi-year ice could possibly disappear in the Arctic Ocean. All of the next winter’s ice would be first-year: no ice will have survived a winter season (and be able to gain strength and thickness). GCM projections to 2100 suggest that in the summer the Arctic sea ice will retreat further and further away from most Arctic coasts, potentially increasing marine access and extending the season of navigation in nearly all Arctic regional seas. One critical limitation of the GCMs is that they are not useful for determining the state of sea ice in the Northwest Passage region. Their spatial resolution is much too coarse to be applied to the complicated geography of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. In the ACIA, the only reliable observed data for the region comes from the Canadian Ice Service and this information, archived since the late 1960s, shows a mean negative trend of sea ice coverage in the Canadian Arctic, but very high year-to-year variability. The ACIA models, however, could be applied very crudely to the more open coastal seas of the Russian Arctic. The ACIA sea ice projections for Russia’s Northern Sea Route indicated longer periods of ice-free conditions which could translate into a longer navigation season throughout the 21st century. The ACIA confirms that the observed retreat of Arctic sea ice is a real phenomenon. The GCM projections to 2100 show extensive open water areas during the summer around the Arctic basin. Thus, it is highly plausible there will be increasing regional marine access in all the Arctic coastal seas. However, the projections show only a modest decrease in winter Arctic sea ice coverage; there will always be an ice-covered Arctic Ocean in winter although the ice may be thinner and may contain a smaller fraction of multi-year ice. The very high, inter-annual variability of observed sea ice in the Northwest Passage and non-applicability of the GCMs to the region prevent an adequate assessment of this complex region. Northern Pole of Inaccessibility Located at 84 degrees 3 minutes N, 174 degrees fifty-one min- utes W, the Pole of Inaccessibility is the point farthest from any Arctic coastline, making it the most difficult to attain. Projected Ice Extent (5–Model Median) September March 2010–2030 2040–2060 2070–2090 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 27 Although the ACIA projections indicate an increasing length of the navigation season for the Northern Sea Route (20-30 days per year in 2004, to 90-100 days by 2080), detailed quantification of this changing marine access also tested the limitations of the ACIA GCMs. Since the work of the ACIA, advances and refinements in the models may allow them to provide more robust strategic informa- tion on the length of time regions remain ice-free and year-to-year regional sea ice variabilities. There is a definite need for improved Arctic regional models to adequately assess future changes in sea ice extent and thickness, and their considerable implications for expanded marine use of the Arctic Ocean. And, there is a significant need for more sea ice observations to improve the calibration and validation of the GCMs. The final ACIA report lists 10 major findings that are essentially the key impacts of climate change on Arctic people and the envi- ronment. The ACIA key finding #6 states, “Reduced sea ice is very likely to increase marine transport and access to resources.” One of the follow-on Arctic Council activities addressing this ACIA finding is the AMSA. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment and Beyond The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was estab- lished in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization of the United Nations Environment Programme. IPCC is an intergovernmental body that provides scientific and technical information to policy makers. The 2007 IPCC 4th Assessment report indicated the lack of compre- hensive sea ice data prior to the satellite era. However, observed data analyses have been able to confirm a sustained decline in Arctic sea ice since the early 1970s, notably during the summer melt sea- son. The report also comments that the accuracy of satellite-derived ice concentration is usually 5 percent or better; errors of up to 10-20 percent can occur during the melt season as the passive microwave sensors measure the thin surface layers of melt water on the sea ice surface. Of critical importance to future navigation, the assess- ment also summarizes the information on the remarkable decrease in multi-year ice throughout the Arctic Ocean. The possibility of an ice-free Arctic Ocean, even for a brief period, was advanced as an intriguing outcome of the ACIA. Recent analyses of GCM sea ice simulations using models from the IPCC AR4 (applying global warming scenarios) show near-complete loss of Arctic sea ice in September for 2040 to beyond 2100. However, addi- tional research also indicates abrupt reductions in sea ice coverage during the 21st century are a common feature in many of the GCM simulations. Whether these periods of accelerated summer sea ice retreat might provide windows of opportunity for improved marine navigation is unknown. However, these research results and recent model inter-comparisons show the many uncertainties that remain in simulating the future ice cover of the Arctic Ocean. North Magnetic Pole The North Magnetic Pole is a non-stationary pole in the Arctic to which compass needles point from any direction. The magnetic field at this point points straight down or is at right angles to the Earth’s surface. The position of the Pole continues to wander and is currently northwest of the Canadian Arctic. It is important to note that despite the remarkable, ongoing changes in Arctic sea ice and some uncer- tainty surrounding the output of the GCMs, no research and none of the GCM simulations have indicated that the winter sea ice cover of the Arctic Ocean will disappear during this century. 28 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE z Map 2.4 Hadley Centre Arctic Sea Ice Simulations, 2050. Source: IPCC4 - 2050 © Fednav, Ltd. HADGEM–January 2050 HADGEM–February 2050 HADGEM–March 2050 HADGEM–April 2050 HADGEM–May 2050 HADGEM–June 2050 HADGEM–July 2050 HADGEM–August 2050 HADGEM–September 2050 HADGEM–October 2050 HADGEM–November 2050 HADGEM–December 2050 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 29 Further research on the performance of the IPCC AR4 models (Map 2.4) reveals that none of the GCMs have negative trends for sea ice as large as the observed sea ice coverage trend for the period 1953- 2006 (7.8 percent per decade reduction). The observed trend is three times larger than the multi-model mean of a 2.5 percent per decade loss. This is an extraordinary development that also means the current summer sea ice minima are as much as 30 years ahead of the mean of the model simulations. With continued greenhouse gas emissions, it is highly plausible that the Arctic Ocean could become completely ice-free for a short summer period much earlier than 2040. Just as important to ship navigation, these simulations indicate large areas of the coastal Arctic seas to be ice-free for longer periods in the spring and autumn months. Arctic marine access continues to increase in nearly all the scenarios posed by the ACIA and the more recent IPCC assessments. Additional Sea Ice Trends and Research Earlier observations from aircraft and ships, and three decades of daily satellite observations, suggest that the September 2007 minimum sea ice extent (Map 2.2) was the lowest since the early 1950s; however, the September 2008 minimum extent indicated a slightly larger area of sea ice coverage. The Arctic sea ice cover is at a maximum extent in March and this maximum coverage has also been observed to decrease at approximately 2 percent per decade during the period 1979-2008. These extent reductions have been observed in all seasons of a year, but perhaps more significant have been observations of a rapid decline of thick, multi-year sea ice in the central Arctic Ocean. A study of satellite data for winter during 1978-1998 revealed that the multi-year sea ice cover had declined by 7 percent per decade. A second trend analysis for 25 years of sum- mer ice minima (1978 to 2003) reports a decline of multi-year sea z Graph 2.2 Sea ice variability in the Canadian Arctic and Northwest Passage. Source: Canadian Ice Service 30 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE z Map 2.5 Sea ice depictions for the AMSA shipping survey year of 2004. Source: AMSA January February March April May June July August September October November December Monthly Arctic Sea Ice Extent and Coverage, 2004 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 31 ice as high as 9.2 percent per decade. One important result of these trends should be a decrease in the presence of multi-year ice in the Arctic’s coastal seas where seasonal navigation and marine activity are highest. Arctic sea ice thicknesses have been much more difficult to moni- tor and evaluate during recent decades. Direct measurements of first- year sea ice in the Arctic coastal seas by the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute in St. Petersburg, the Russian Federation, along the Russian Arctic, generally yield 1-2 meter thicknesses. For the central Arctic Ocean, thicknesses of multi-year sea ice can be as high as 4-5 meters. One pioneering study using sea ice draft data acquired on submarine cruises (data from 1958-1976 compared with cruise data for 1993-1996) indicated a decrease in thickness at the end of the melt season for the central Arctic Ocean from 3.1 to 1.8 meters. This represented a volume decrease of 40 percent and a widespread decrease in sea ice draft. This 40 percent reduction was adjusted to 32 percent in a subsequent study once additional submarine tracks were added. One key issue is that future sampling of Arctic sea ice thick- ness requires enhanced monitoring systems for more effective spatial and temporal measurements. Modern measurement systems such as electromagnetics, upward looking sonars and satellites have been developed that are improving thickness observations. Future Arctic navigation and all marine activity will depend on more frequent, reli- able and near real-time sea ice thickness measurements. Sea Ice Regional Trends Canadian Maritime Arctic and Northwest Passage The observed record of minimum sea ice extent for the eastern and western regions of the Canadian Arctic is illustrated in Graph 2.2. Although the observations for both regions show negative trends for the period 1969-2008, the year-to-year variability in coverage is quite extreme. Both regions also exhibit large differ- ences for a given year; for example, in 1991 the western Canadian Arctic showed one of the highest or largest ice coverage areas, while in the eastern region a more normal coverage area at the summer minimum was observed. These regional variabilities cre- ate a challenge for seasonal operations. While these observations indicate an overall decrease in the ice cover of the waterways that comprise the Northwest Passage, the two key variabilities - year- to-year and spatial - create challenges for planners judging risk and the reliability of an Arctic marine transportation system for the long-term. The five models used in the ACIA revealed that the last regions of the Arctic Ocean with sea ice coverage in summer would be in the northern waterways of the Canadian Archipelago and along the northern coast of Greenland. The flow of more mobile multi-year ice through these waterways presents another potential challenge to marine operations. Enhanced satellite monitoring (with high resolu- tion imagery) of this complex region will be a necessity if expanded marine operations beyond summer are to be realized. The five models used in the ACIA revealed that the last regions of the Arctic Ocean with sea ice coverage in summer would be in the northern waterways of the Canadian Archipelago and along the northern coast of Greenland. © Erik M. Eilers 2004 32 ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE Research Opportunities q Research to improve regional models for increased under- standing and enhanced forecasting of regional Arctic sea ice variability. New regional models should include ice thickness, snow cover and ice ridging, all key parameters of importance to Arctic navigation. q Comprehensive analyses of current and future Global Climate Model simulations of Arctic sea ice extent to quantitatively assess the range of plausibly ice-free and partially ice-covered conditions. q Considering the ongoing development of the Sustained Arctic Observing Network (SAON), develop and contribute a set of parameters to be observed and more observa- tions that will be relevant to enhancing marine safety and marine environmental protection. q Continued data analysis and updating of the International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBACO) with a long-term goal to create a comprehensive, integrated digital database of all bathymetric information for the Arctic Ocean. Russian Maritime Arctic and Northern Sea Route Map 2.2 indicates that a nearly ice-free summer passage could have been made in 2007 and 2008 from Kara Gate through to the Bering Strait along the length of the Northern Sea Route except for sea ice in the western Laptev Sea. Passive microwave satellite obser- vations of sea ice in the Russian Arctic seas from 1979 to the present show large reductions in sea ice extent in summer and reductions in winter extent in the Barents Sea. All of the ACIA model simulations and more recent IPCC AR4 model simulations confirm that large sum- mer ice edge retreats should occur in the Laptev, East Siberian and western Chukchi seas. With a continued shrinkage of the fraction of multi-year sea ice in the central Arctic Ocean, it is plausible that fewer multi-year ice floes may be observed along the navigable east- ern passages of the Northern Sea Route. The physical environment of the northern coast of Eurasia - the Russian maritime Arctic - presents unique challenges to the mariner and to modern ship technology and systems. © Fednav, Ltd. ARC TIC MARINE SHIPPING ASSESSMENT | AR C TIC MARINE GEOGR APHY, CLIMATE AND SEA ICE 33 Northeast Passage (NEP) The NEP is defined as the set of sea routes from northwest Europe around North Cape (Norway) and along the north coast of Eurasia and Siberia through the Bering Strait to the Pacific. A global maritime trade route - the North Pacific’s Great Circle Route - intersects with the Aleutian Islands and thousands of large ships pass north and south of these islands on voyages between the west coast of North America and Asian ports each year. Long-term fast ice thickness measurements of the four Russian marginal seas (Kara, Laptev, East Siberian and Chukchi seas) have been analyzed for trends using 65-year observational records (1930s to 1990s). Long-term trends are small and inconclusive: the trends are small (approximately 1 centimeter per decade); the trends for the Kara and Chukchi seas are positive and the trends for the Laptev and East Siberian seas negative. A review of recent assessments, observations and studies indicate that there remains much to understand about the present and future trends in Arctic sea ice. The operating conditions for Arctic ships will remain challenging, particularly in winter. It is also highly plausible that Arctic sea ice will be more mobile, particularly in spring, summer and autumn, as the cover continues to retreat from Arctic coast- lines. Arctic coastal seas may experience increased ridging of sea- sonal sea ice, potentially creating more difficult operating conditions for marine navigation. The observed records of sea ice extent in the Canadian and Russian Arctic areas display high inter-annual variabili- ties. Such year-to-year variability poses a serious challenge to risk and the overall reliability of Arctic marine transport systems. Three key conclusions with direct relevance to Arctic shipping include: • Arctic sea ice has been observed to be diminishing in extent and thinning for five decades. Also, model simulations indicate a continuing retreat of Arctic sea ice throughout the 21st century. However, no research indicates Arct