July 28, 2022
It is, however weird, a geopolitical fact that the Russia-Ukraine conflict has brought to our attention the old and fabled Northwest Passage. The reason we suddenly "care" - not that we didn't before, but the pile-on now - has a lot to do with the subject of Russia and its interest in Arctic shipping.
Russia would be glad to just get Murmansk and Arkhangel operational for more of the year because of climate change. But the "real" issue that the shipping magnates are hoping can become enough of a trend that they can figure out how to profit off of it, is a New World issue.
The Northwest Passage has always been sort of a glorious fantasy for traders, but also something of a delusion too. The French explorers and fur traders were trying to find it, but it turns out it is further north than they thought it was, to the extent that it is usually iced out most of the year, precluding using it as a shipping route. The actual Northwest Passage is along the northern coast of Canada and Alaska: too cold for exploration except for climate change. As the globe warmed, the actual Northwest Passage has opened up.
The modern-day explorers want to try it out for the experience. Some guy is trying to do it on a paddle board and another group of three is trying to do it on kayaks. For the 'gram, as they say. This year, the global temperatures are high enough to probably be able to do it.
Of course, the zest for adventure is probably dulling the pain and consequence that the melting of that sea ice will cause, for two reasons: First, being the simple consequence of an Arctic no longer anchored by sea ice. Compare it to the southern latitudes at the roughly equivalent point: the open ocean around Tierra del Fuego is known for hosting some of the most violent storms in the world, powered by the rotation of the Earth and the open waters. If there is an open Northwest Passage, it will be one of the most treacherous sea routes known to man - steer your ship through those storms and around all those islands? No thank you. The second reason is the likely consequence of all that melting sea ice on the ocean ecosystem. Normally, ocean ecosystems are refreshed by "overturning currents" that bring up deeper waters into the shallower layers of the ocean. I had an Oceanography professor in college who talked about the consequence of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current (AMOC) being shut down because of melting polar ice: the consequence would be more "dead zones", ocean food webs shut down, no fish to eat. The same will happen anywhere. (The reason is, that meltwater is fresh water, and it sits "on top" of the salty layers of ocean water, preventing the standard overturning current action from happening; it doesn't easily "mix" either.) The likely outlook for an unfrozen Northwest Passage? Heavy storms, treacherous navigation requirements, no fish to eat.
The capitalists, especially those close to Canada (like Sen. Angus King) think they can make some noise about this, because, apparently, you can get a ship from Asia to Europe 15 days ahead of schedule through an unfrozen Northwest Passage, vs., say, Panama. That's not taking into account the treacherous conditions though, and proponents of this old old shipping fantasy/delusion are way overestimating the potential beneficial impact of developing that shipping route.
So, is it mostly a joke? It's not all that serious of a policy proposal, to be sure; it's about as serious as other policies about preventing the U.S. from conquering Canada, let's say. Now, I think we could take 'em and in pretty short order too, but I don't think it's a big enough priority for the U.S. geopolitically that we need to spend all this effort building economic ties with Canada to ensure perpetual peace.
I have little to no excitement about sending sailors into a treacherous unfrozen Northwest Passage, 15-day time savings or not, and I'm not sure that policy is even worth any more to the economy than some highly-specialized shipping, and a handful of jobs.
The real story here for serious men to note, is that the Arctic sea ice is melting enough that even this old familiar delusion is resurfacing.
We're being regaled with a lot of stories these days that are trying to make climate change "real" to the doubters and deniers. It's been such a long time since Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, and those who took the science seriously since then, are now supposed to do what? Say "I told you so?" Well, we were right.
Climate change is not going to be an adventure. "This adventure brought to you by humanity's inability to switch to green energy," leaves you feeling pretty empty. And we're not going to play judo with the planet. We're not going to fight the planet and win. We're going to have to play some judo with our current economy though. There's nothing that intrinsically connects our economy to carbon capitalism. If we decouple our economy from fossil fuels things will get better. Notice for instance all the perspectives from people during the pandemic realizing how much better their immediate environment was when the fossil fuel infrastructure was shut off: seeing clean canals in Venice, with dolphins in them, and clear skies in major Chinese polluting cities, had a noticeable effect on people worldwide. Shutting off the fossil fuel infrastructure has been shown to better people's lives and the environment. The other side of the equation - replacing people's energy needs with green energy - is a simple bet on the ingenuity and work ethic of people, when they're set free from oppressive structures like carbon capitalism, to do the work necessary to live: and I'll take that bet any day.
No comments:
Post a Comment