The Accidental Russophile

Over the past weeks, there have been numerous headlines barking over Russian geologists connecting the Lomonosov Ridge to the Eurasian landmass and Russia. These headlines lamented the loss of valuable oil, minerals, metals that might be claimed by Russia under the North Pole. Subsequently, a Russian ice-breaker and two mini-subs travelled to the North Pole, symbolically planting a titanium Russian flag on the floor of the Arctic Ocean. Comparisons were made to man’s landing on the moon – even though no one was walking on the floor of the Arctic Ocean and the Arctic Ocean is … you know … here on Earth and not 384,000 kilometers (230,000 miles) away.

So now, Canada is talking about an ice-breaker deficit. Canada’s foreign minister, Peter MacKay is complaining “This isn’t the 15th century, you can’t go around the world and just plant flags and say ‘We’re claiming this territory’.” Suddenly Canada sees a need for reinforcement of its patrols and military in the god-forsaken Arctic Circle (like who is going to trespass there?). Nevermind that, it’s high time to write a $7 billion dollar check to build eight new Arctic Patrol Vehicles. Canadian ship-builders say “Thank you, Russia!”

The United States is now planning its own ice-breaker expedition to the North Pole. You better believe there is going to be some stainless-steel U.S. flag dropped right next to that Russian one. Oh, and did I mention that Denmark has spent $25 million since 2004, seeking to prove that the Lomonosov Ridge is actually theirs, due to its connection to Greenland – and not Russia’s?

I suppose geologists specializing in plate tectonics have to make a living somehow.

The problem with all of this is – nothing has actually changed. Nations have been making claims or attempting to make claims on the Arctic since at least the 1930’s when the U.S. submarine Nautilus attempted (and failed) to travel to the North Pole. Remember the U.S.S. Skate? Ya, I didn’t think so. Do you know why you don’t remember? Because it isn’t important.

And for those who don’t already know how to look at a map – Russia already claims most of the Arctic Ocean. The first map on this page shows the current ocean borders between Russia, Canada, U.S., Denmark, and Norway. Damn, those Russki’s are so clever – how did they beat us to that? General, do you realize we are in a god-damn ICE DEFICIT to the Russki’s?! Yep, it’s true. Without even lifting a finger or changing a thing, the Russians have claim to a humongous chunk of frozen sea.

So, what have they been doing with it?

Drilling for oil? Nope.

Dredging for diamonds, emeralds, rubies? Uhh … nope.

In fact, they’ve barely been able to keep it free of ice – unlike in the Soviet Union days when ice-breakers patrolled the northern ocean due to its value as a shipping lane.

It’s also a fact that the division of the Arctic Ocean has been a discussion for a great many years. The maps I’m using here are from a 2005 New York Times article on the topic.

What, you don’t remember that scorching hot topic of dividing the Arctic Ocean in the New York Times? Do you know why? Because it’s not important.

There are several different methods that have been discussed for dividing the Arctic Ocean among the 5 nations which border that region. One of them involves tying landmasses to geologic plates. Others are simply cartographic methods of dividing the region.

The truth is, no matter how the region is divided, Russia is getting a big piece of it and nobody will be getting vastly rich exploiting hidden riches in the Arctic for a long, long time. Maybe not in your lifetime. Maybe not even in your children’s lifetime. While the USGS indicates there may be large oil and gas deposits in the region, this is a very unproven premise to date. (See further articles below). And even if there are gas and oil deposits in that region (a topic of some debate, based upon available geologic surveys and rock coring in the region) available to be exploited today, it won’t make a huge difference in available resources. It is damned difficult to get at, even with newer technologies.

The problem with the Arctic is ice. Big slabs of ice, 2 to 8 feet thick or more. And they move around – openings in the Arctic ice are common (called polynyas), but they close within hours. From the journal of a crew member of the U.S.S. Skate:

“the Skate found open water both in the summer and following winter. We surfaced near the North Pole in the winter through thin ice less than 2 feet thick. The ice moves from Alaska to Iceland and the wind and tides causes open water as the ice breaks up. The Ice at the polar ice cap is an average of 6-8 feet thick, but with the wind and tides the ice will crack and open into large polynyas (areas of open water), these areas will refreeze over with thin ice. We had sonar equipment that would find these open or thin areas to come up through, thus limiting any damage to the submarine. The ice would also close in and cover these areas crushing together making large ice ridges both above and below the water. We came up through a very large opening in 1958 that was 1/2 mile long and 200 yards wide. The wind came up and closed the opening within 2 hours. On both trips we were able to find open water. We were not able to surface through ice thicker than 3 feet.”

In other words, it is a hostile and largely unexplored environment.

Now, if you want to believe that the polar ice cap is shrinking due to global warming (which is, in itself, debatable) Russia still has an interest in claiming polar regions, simply for shipping routes. As explained by EarthSky blog:

Kathryn Moran of the University of Rhode Island studied the ridge as part of the 2004 Arctic Coring Expedition. She explained that the Lomonosov Ridge is a part of an extension of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, which spreads open the center of the Atlantic Ocean. 57 million years ago, the Lomonosov Ridge became active and broke off from the continental margin that is part of Russia and Northern Scandinavia. And over the past 57 million years, this sliver of continental shelf has moved closer to the center of the Arctic Ocean.

“When we drilled went into the sediment and the bedrock, we proved that the Lomonosov Ridge originated from that,” Moran said. “So that’s why they can claim it. But the Russians have never asked us.”

“I’ve looked at where they’re laying their claim and where we drilled is their outside edge, and there is no oil there,” she said. “There’s other resources they’re interested in. One of the other issues I think will be important is controlling the transportation routes. Let’s say there is increased sea-ice degradation over the next 20 to 30 years. That means that the Northeast Passage, which is the route across the Arctic Ocean, reduces the distance from a European port to Japan by about a third. If you control those waterways you can have fees, and basically control one of the most lucrative transportation routes in the world.”

More Reading:

Arctic Dreams, by Dave Cohen of Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas.

The size of the resources in the Arctic is unknown. However, the answer is becoming better delineated due to the high stakes involved. An often quoted (Houston Chronicle) estimate from the USGS Assessment 2000 report places 25% of the world’s remaining oil in the Arctic. It is not clear whether that 25% is in addition to, or, is part of, some estimate for the world’s ultimately recoverable conventional oil reserves. However, a quick look at a summary of the study reveals that the USGS made no “official” estimate whatsoever for resources in the Arctic as a whole, although some polar regions, such as the petroleum systems in the Timan-Pechora basin and the North & South Barents Sea basins (both Former Soviet Union) were evaluated. All cited USGS numbers for the entire Arctic refer to undiscovered, or “yet-to-find,” oil.

Arctic Not a Refuge for Oil, by Carolyn Gramling, January 2007 Geotimes.

The United States shouldn’t lose OPEC’s number just yet: The Arctic contains far less undiscovered oil than previously thought, according to a new study. The report, released jointly on Nov. 1 by energy analyst group Wood Mackenzie and oil and gas consultancy Fugro Robertson, suggests that the United States can no longer consider the Arctic strategically for its long-term energy needs, and will instead need to continue to look to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Companies (OPEC) and other international sources.

The study’s findings contrast with those of a 2000 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) report on the world’s petroleum reserves, which estimated that nearly one-quarter of the world’s undiscovered oil was likely to be found in the frozen north and has therefore been touted by supporters of drilling on Alaska’s North Slope. Despite the contrast in findings, however, USGS notes that the two studies may not be directly comparable, as the USGS study focused only on the Arctic’s potential resources, rather than recoverable reserves.

Polar Expedition Means ‘Very Little’ For Territorial Claims Radio Free Europe interview with Lindsay Parson, head of the Law of the Sea Group at the National Oceanography Center, United Kingdom

In a very straight answer to you, it means very little in terms of the legal claim to maritime territory. It’s a tremendous scientific and logistical endeavor to do what those guys have done, and I take my hat off to them, but in terms of claiming the seabed and any sovereign rights in terms of any of its resources — that is a completely separate and maritime legal process which is governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was signed in 1982, and which Russia is a signatory party to. And they have to develop a scientific case based on the criteria that are inside the convention in order to claim that area of the Arctic Ocean as part of their sovereign territory.

From Johnson’s Russia List, a letter from Dr. Kathleen Crane:

Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007
From: Kathy Crane
Subject: Russia and Arctic Exploration

This is a comment on the recent articles about the dives of the Russian Mir submersibles to the North Pole.

This expedition has been in the making for many years; first as a part of the Explorer’s Club activities (headquartered in New York) and later as an outgrowth of both Russian and International private interest in “conquering” or visiting the North Pole seafloor.

Flags have been planted all over the Arctic seafloor… It seems to be something that people like to do…. like climbing Mt. Everest.

For example, one multinational expedition to the Canada Basin in 2002 (partly NOAA funded) left behind the flags of Canada, U.S. China and Japan.. also in international waters. If Russia had been with us on the ship, we would have put that flag down as well.

All marine geologists and international law specialists know that just visiting the seafloor in one small location will not provide enough information to actually go out and claim the territory. The MIRs are actually great submersibles, and provide platforms for a multitude of ocean floor experiments. However, the information needed for an UNCLOS submission, requires seismic exploration to determine the nature of the subjacent crust, the sediment thickness, in addition to high resolution bathymetric data. This information cannot be obtained during a submersible dive.

Dr. Sagalevitch (the head of the MIR team) certainly knows this as well, but I noticed that he was not interviewed. His team is very professional, and has been used by many American agencies to carry out exploration and sampling on the ocean floor. (Yevgeney Chernayev, the pilot of MIR 2 is known as “the Golden Arm” in the submersible world, because of his excellent navigation and sampling skills). The most difficult part of the operation is not diving to the ocean floor, but getting recovered in the ice, hence the need for the escort vessel, Rossiya. So I commend them for their success. I myself have been a Chief Scientist on MIR operations in the Norwegian Greenland Sea and on the Reykjanes Ridge.

What caught my attention was the tendency of the media to pit one country against another. This reality is different.

During the International Polar Year, many nations will be working together in the Arctic. A notable program will be RUSALCA 2008 (Russian-American Longterm Census of the Arctic) where scientists from many Russian institutions and agencies will join with scientists from many U.S. institutions and agencies to carry out exploration and monitoring of Climate Change in the waters shared by our two countries. There are also plans to incorporate the participation of China, Korea and Canada into a larger program.

It is clear that our future as an Arctic nation lies in collaboration with our neighbors, not in extreme nationalism, for no man lives alone on this planet.

Kathleen Crane PhD
Arctic Research, Climate Program Office
U.S. Program Manager, RUSALCA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration