Rush to Arctic As Warming Opens Oil Deposits
It's a scramble for the spoils of global warming as the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice is opening access to previously unreachable deposits of oil and gas, setting off a race by northern nations - including the United States, Canada and Russia - to claim them.
The pursuit of those resources will be underscored this week as the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Healy sails north from Barrow, Alaska, on Thursday to map the sea floor of the Chukchi Cap, an area at the northern edge of the Beaufort Sea. The maps could bolster U.S. claims to the area as part of its extended outer continental shelf.
The U.S. Geological Survey confirmed last month what the oil industry had long suspected when the agency released an estimate that the area north of the Arctic Circle may hold as much as 90 billion barrels of oil and 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, or roughly 13 percent of the world's total undiscovered oil and 30 percent of the undiscovered natural gas.
The dash to stake out territory across the Arctic has accelerated since Russia sent one of its submarines last August to plant the country's flag on the sea floor beneath the North Pole, provoking an outcry by other nations that viewed it as an unauthorized land grab.
Earlier this month, Canadian officials at a geology conference in Norway detailed their territorial claims to the Lomonosov Ridge, an underseas mountain range that runs beneath the North Pole. Canada argues that the ridge is part of the North American continent, not part of Siberia, as Russia has asserted.
Denmark backs Canada
The Danish government joined in backing Canada's argument, even though those two nations have also clashed over claims in the Arctic. Why? Because Denmark, which controls Greenland, believes Canada's assertion could boost its own contention that part of the energy-rich ridge should be Danish territory.
These northern powers are all rushing to complete assessments of how far their underseas territory may extend. Under international law, countries control all natural resources within the "exclusive economic zone," which extends 200 nautical miles offshore. But if a country's continental shelf extends far into the ocean, the nation can claim underseas land up to 350 miles offshore under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The United States has signed the Law of the Sea Treaty, but the Senate has not ratified it. Margaret Hayes, who directs the State Department's Office of Oceanic Affairs, said on a conference call Monday that while the United States moves toward ratifying the treaty, it must gather all the scientific data it will need to justify its territorial claims.
During the Healy's three-week voyage, scientists from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and University of New Hampshire will use a device called an echo sounder to create a three-dimensional map of the sea floor. The Healy will make a second voyage, from Sept. 6 to Oct. 1, carving a path through the ice, while a Canadian ship, the Louis S. St. Laurent, follows, gathering seismic data about the thickness of the sediments along the sea floor.
While it's a scientific mission, USGS scientist Deborah Hutchison acknowledged that oil companies will be eager to see the results, which could yield major clues about the size and location of oil and gas deposits.
"The cruises are not intended to look for energy resources. ... That is not a primary or even a secondary objective," Hutchison said. "However, it's inevitable because there are so few data in this area (of the Arctic), there will be great interest in using this data" to assess the potential for drilling.
Alaska favors drilling
Alaskan officials, who rely on oil revenue and face declining oil fields along the North Slope, see more Arctic drilling as a way to keep the state's oil economy afloat. While the Atlantic and Pacific coasts have been off-limits to drilling under a federal ban for nearly three decades, the Interior Department is already leasing areas of the Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea.
Environmentalists warn of the perils of oil exploration in the region. Critics say that conditions in the Arctic - shortage of natural light in winter, extreme cold, moving ice floes and high winds - make it extremely difficult to respond to an oil spill.
"Ultimately what is going to be needed is a more comprehensive ecological study of that region and some indication as to whether or not any technology that we have today is likely to be able to clean up spilled oil in that set of conditions," said Richard Charter, a coastal advocate for Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund.
The voyage of the Healy this week is being made possible by the swift melting of the sea ice. Last year, Arctic sea ice retreated at a record-setting pace.
Northwest Passage open
The Inupiat residents of Barrow were stunned last fall when a cruise ship and 400 Germans showed up in their town. They had arrived from Europe via the Northwest Passage over Canada, which for the first time in recorded history was ice-free.
Larry Mayer, an oceanographer at the University of New Hampshire who helped lead a similar Arctic trip last summer, said he was shocked at how easily the team could navigate through the region. He noted the irony that the rapid melting "was bad for the Arctic, but very, very good for mapping."
© 2008 The San Francisco Chronicle
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
43 Comments so far
Show AllUhhhh ~KIMinator~ in addition, it is rather obvious that you suffer from a reading comprehension disability and a tendency to mind other's business. Not to be rude, just an observation based upon the obvious clues you project.
I don't know if wearing a diaper over one's head will treat those maladies, but I do believe the cause of the woes is having one's head shoved up their ass. It's self treatable if you have access to a tow truck or a bulldozer.
I have a good sense of humor huh ~kimTerminator~?
```
Hi ~KIMinator~, I see you are new here, welcome to Common Dreams. Thank you so much for the "pleasant" math lessons, you are obvioulsy far more educated and intelligent than I am. You will be a distict bonus for the C/D site.
I'd read that methane is from 20 to 25% more potent as a Greenhouse gas than Co2 is. Here is a fine link where the author states methane is (20 times) as potent as Co2, not (256 times) as potent. Maybe the author is stupid also. Perhaps you never have had the opportunity to read this ~KIMinator~? It's far more interesting and educational than your rude comments to me are. Again, WELCOME.
http://www.energybulletin.net/3647.html
K E M,
I guess ya forgot your Ginko Balboa today, or perhaps it's your Seasonal Idiocy Syndrome ( S I S y )as that's a factor of 20 - 25 times ( 2,000 to 2,500 % ) for CH4 effect.
You're only in error by 1,980 to 2,475 %
You must be pleased with this,
as that's pretty good for youPerhaps you're not really a compulsive LIAR, nor a hair triggered bipolar maniac, and you only have incontinent neurons - which is perfectly treatable, these days, by wearing a diaper over your head ?
I've read that a bright light at the end of a tunnel, might help you with that S I S y thang
Oops that post to the Lizard got on the wrong thread.
~Doctor Lizard~ if you will bother to read Mesanthorpe's obnoxious posts here, you may see what type of rudeness I have been hearing from the G/W deniers. Perhaps you could explain why you wish to select me for your goody lessons to be more cordial and ignore your sidekick Mesanthorpe and the others?
Taht is very interesting CTEPAH, I had always read CH4 was 20 to 25% more potent. Could you furnish a link on that 256 times more potent? Thanks.
This is a classic example, known to those in systems thinking, as a positive feedback loop. Global warming, caused in large part by oil consumption, has melted the pole making it easier to extract even more oil for consumption which will cause even more global warming...
The thing about this loop is that it's not endless.
Like vultures to a dead carcass . . .
And yes Nietzsche, the irony is a bit too rich for me too.
For PaulK and the record,
methane is 256 times more potent than carbon dioxide in regards to "greenhouse gas".
Tojo had created the problem long before 1945 ~MIMICCS~, he had establishe the mind set within those who still firmly ruled Japan and that was not their emperor. Don't understnd hw that subject got on this thread however.
PAULK's blog here (Aug 12, 11:31am ), was most appropriate.
But if Lyndon Larouche nuked himself ~FAKEDEMOCRACY~, what would MIMICCS and PRESENCE do with no one to worship and follow, they'd be lost. Of course they already are.
Use of "free fuel" energy sources such as solar, geo-thermal, wave, tidal and wind, would be an affordable manner to crack sea water and develop hydrogen and also that type of power sources could desalinate sea water in a very affordable manner.
for a clean car, get one of these.
http://aptera.com/
The international oligarchy's call for endless growth attempts to deflect the public's attention from its unwillingness to share its gargantuan booty.
And the topic was???
The more I read about the air car the more I like it. 2 models one is 100% compressed air and the other heats the air before it enters the engine expanding its volume so the compressed air tanks last longer with 100 to 150 MPG of gas. Hope to be forsale in 2010 in the US
Say Common Dream folk. Are you, your computer, modem, router, your internet connection on solar power? Why not? Any part of the homestead on non-fossil fuel power? Passive solar heat? Why not? Do like I say not like I do? It's the Liberal attitude. No? Partial solar and passive heat in the cold of Vermont since 1985. Time to get on with it, no?
The first paragraphs of this article identify the dangerous mindset we now have as a species.
In this instance the corporate world see the melting ice caps as presenting a business opportunity to boost oil production, overriding any consideration that increased oil development will escalate an already dangerous environmental situation.
Here is the perfect example of 21st century thinking that demands continuous profit growth from limited natural resources - it can't work - it won't work!
larouche can go nuke himself.
Goose2 must know that Tojo was no longer Prime Minister as he was given the boot in 1944. What he wanted was irrelevant.
As for hydrogen. We could produce hydrogen from water with nuclear power.
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_40-49/2007-44/pdf/49-55_743.pdf
But then we would have manufactured water shortages and uranium shortages to make it too expensive, and besides, nobody considers nuclear an option since we have plenty of oil and AGW is, well..........you know where that leads.
One day a man (it was likely not a woman) stood on a gentle slope. From there he could see the entire island because the island was not large, and because there was only one tree on that island, and so he knew it was the last, and he began to work, and he cut down that tree. The island was called Rapa Nui. He must have known what he was doing, and yet he did it anyway.
Our island is larger, and so it may not be quite as obvious to us when we have done such great damage and condemned future generations to a life that is "nasty, brutish and short" , but we know (don't we?) and yet continue to rape the earth.
Collective suicide.
To bad those planet looters are running their big ships through the thinning ice... sorta like shitting in your own bed. A bunch of vandals really.
zaz wrote: "The first thing our mothers taught us as toddlers was DON'T FIGHT and SHARE !!! These simple values should always be our foundation. Sadly, not with the ruling class."
zaz - are you so naive as to think this doesn't apply to EVERYONE? Do you see peace in the 'hood?
Yeah, wonderful opportunity. To burn more fossil fuel faster. To screw absolutely everything and good. Fools.
No oil? Got poop? No problems.
See: http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/08/12/bug.diesel/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
djan,
More people used to get their food from grass-fed animals and not corn-fed ones. Too bad Big Oil and Big Agri formed the most toxic alliances 50 years ago. It's time to stop supporting BIG GOVERNMENT'S over-subsidization of our tax dollars to BIG CORN !
We have been using solar energy since we started using energy. We burn what was built up by sunlight. It takes a while for a forest to grow and it takes a lot longer for an oilfield to develop, but essentially all our energy supplies are given to us by the sun. So what we should be looking for is faster ways of transforming sunlight into something that we can burn, preferably not creating any carbon oxides in the process. What we are aiming for of course is photosynthesis. Recently a MIT researcher developed a photosynthesis similar process to separate hydrogen and oxygen. It costs energy, but this energy is obtained straight from sunlight. So in man's earth-bound logic it is free energy. The article was published here on CD and as one poster commented, let's see how fast this story will be forgotten. Pretty fast, apparently.
>>"Hydrogen is not an energy source because we have to create it. Just like biofuels, this is nothing new"
Hydrogen isn't man-made.<<
He misspoke. He meant we have to separate the hydrogen from whatever it is bonded to. That process takes energy. In fact it takes more than it does to oxidize the hydrogen to make heat. Not much more, just an teensy tiny bit more...
You can make some argument that Hydrogen can be created (separated) by using some energy that is being used anyway like using the inertia from a car rolling downhill with the engine idling or by wind power. However thee net amount of energy created will be the same as it took to move the car uphill.
Physics sucks...
KEM - Interesting article for you re Tojo and Japanese Surrender. You are proven correct sir!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/08/12/international/i052255D29.DTL&hw=tojo&sn=00...
Has anybody checked out "Hydrogen From Water" on YouTube? It's amazing how simple and cheap you can "subsidize" your gas expenses by around 40% just by making these homemade "gizmos", and installing in your car.
The irony here is rich. The ice is melting because of burning oil and this is seen as an opportunity to drill for more oil.
"While it's a scientific mission, USGS scientist Deborah Hutchison acknowledged that oil companies will be eager to see the results, which could yield major clues about the size and location of oil and gas deposits."
Once again big oil uses info paid by the taxpayers for their own profit. Next the navy will have to secure the drilling platform. Same old story: we pay, they profit.
The first thing our mothers taught us as toddlers was DON'T FIGHT and SHARE !!! These simple values should always be our foundation. Sadly, not with the ruling class.
If you want to heat up Arctic Ocean waters in summer, releasing gigatons of methane from the methane clathrate ice formations on the continental shelves below, the way to do this is to coat the water with a sheen of oil. This reduces evaporation toward zero and turns the Arctic Ocean (and not an ice pack anymore) into an efficient solar absorber.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, something like 25 times as potent as carbon dioxide. The Arctic seems to have crossed into runaway methane warming mode as of the summer of 2007.
Things are certainly changing. Not that it makes up for any of the damage coming, but at least we are getting a map of the ocean floor. There is so much we don't know about the oceans except how to kill it appearantly.
Chop down the rest of the Amazon because it's full of stupid-looking birds anyway and just plant lots of corn for ethanol.
Am I missing something? I have to go along with sbrownn. I do not see how water can be a fuel.
Burning is accomplished through fast oxidation, that is adding oxygen molecule(s)to something else. Water is actually "burned" hydrogen technically speaking, right? Removing oxygen from water to produce hydrogen and then putting the oxygen back in the process of burning will yield less than nothing.
How is this water fuel thing not the mythical mirage of energy policy? Is is being promulgated by innocent people who do not know basic chemistry or by those who want to side-track the development of viable green energy sources such as wind and solar?
abelito August 12th, 2008 12:16 pm
My husband has been working on building these water hydrogen plants for a few months. He now has them installed on his pickup, our son's car, and on a 4020 John Deere tractor. We do not have mileage reports yet, but they report their vehicles are running better.
For futher information google Hydrogen Garage.
hydrogen gizmoes:
It is true it takes power to make hydrogen from those gizmoes. But.....this is the kicker. The added hydrogen helps the gas burn more efficiently.....and there is actually data that it will help mileage.
Same as ethanol. I have a 2008 Honda Civic. With ethanol we get 44 mpg, plain gas get around 38-39 mpg. I told the wife that she had screwed up with our test, so repeated it, same results. I did some studying, and the ethanol as an oxegen agent helps the gas burn better, hence, if you have a new enough engine the puter will adjust for that and improve your mileage.
So let's just tell people to cut back on oil dependence and pay no attention to BIG GOVERNMENT and BIG OIL tossing our taxpayer money back and forth, eh? The mess can be solved but who the fuck wants to end that "war on drugs" or get rid of the CIA? Solar, wind, geothermal? Great renewables but unfortunately in the US, Canada, much of the Americas, and even Europe to some extent, these nice renewables only make "nice" science fair experiments. Let's all just shut up and SLOP up all that coal, oil, gas, and nuclear and let the system finish collapsing. After all, we're a fucking "entitlement" society you see. We're an AMORAL nation that says "Saving is for sissies ! I gotta have my oil and you can't have it !!" So let's continue to keep ourselves distracted with infotainment and sexy BULLSHIT and just stay the PIGSHIT course off the cliff !
There isn't going to be a market for arctic oil/gas. We're shifting the world to locally owned/operated small scale renewable energy enterprises. People, enjoy your economic/political self-determination. Elites, please stand back.
When someone constructs an apparatus to raise the energy state of water to hydrogen and oxygen, or HHO, it is correct to say that the resulting hydrogen gas has been man-made. Of course naturally occurring hydrogen is not man-made, but that is obviously not what the author was implying.
The process of converting water to hydrogen and oxygen or HHO is less efficient that the reverse process of burning hydrogen, so putting one of these devices on your car can actually result in a net loss. Most people simply do not understand the process or do a scientific enough comparison on engine efficiencies to validate the fact. There is usually an assumption on the part of the general public that the electricity used in the electrolysis process is free as the alternator is running anyway. This is not the case. It takes power from a ~25% efficient engine to generate the electricity used.
"Hydrogen is not an energy source because we have to create it. Just like biofuels, this is nothing new"
Hydrogen isn't man-made.
abelito
Yes I've seen this crap and while it can be made to work there is no real savings. Physics is really neat in this respect and won't let you get away with producing more energy than you put into making it. We should have all done the "electrolysis" experiment in our high school chem class (I did this in elementary school). Hydrogen is not an energy source because we have to create it. Just like biofuels, this is nothing new.
YouTube is full of this type of nonsense mostly pushed by people hoping to trick someone into investing in their new (actually old) invention. Also notice the resurgence of all the old gas savings scams that have been around. The Internet has provided a new venue for contraptions that used to only be found in the back of "Popular Science" magazines. So devices like magnets, air intake inserts, and pills you drop in your gas tank are having a comeback. None of them work and in some cases , like air intake fins, actually reduce your gas mileage.
As for this article: This is also nothing new. Because I make a point of being prepared to debate anybody that doubts global warming, nothing is more convincing then pointing out the premise an article such as this. Pointing out to a denier that various companies were buying up land in strategic areas in the Arctic in anticipation of new shorelines appearing is pretty convincing.