The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of 19 August, 2024

Thawing Arctic Permafrost Releases Large Amounts of Toxic Mercury

As reported by The Independent on August 21, scientists from USC Dornsife have developed a more accurate method to measure mercury release, suggesting that the levels of mercury, a toxic heavy metal, could be much higher in the Arctic than previously estimated. The study focused on the Yukon River Basin, where a collaborative team of researchers from Caltech, the Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council, MIT, and Delft University of Technology combined sediment sampling with satellite imaging to assess how river migration in permafrost terrain is mobilizing mercury. They found that natural river processes, such as erosion, are releasing large amounts of mercury into the surrounding environment, with some of this mercury being redeposited downstream. (The Independent)

Take 1: It has been estimated that atmospheric mercury levels have increased sevenfold over the past 500 years, largely due to coal combustion. Air currents transport this airborne mercury to the Arctic, where it is taken up by plants and subsequently deposited in the soil, which has led to a significant accumulation of the toxin. It is believed that, nowadays, Arctic permafrost contains more mercury than the combined total in the atmosphere, oceans, and all living organisms. Consequently, as temperatures continue to rise, the thawing permafrost is set to release these stored toxins into the environment, with scientists warning of an impending ‘mercury bomb’.This can result in severe health impacts, particularly for communities relying on subsistence fishing and hunting – practices central to the livelihoods of many Indigenous Arctic populations. As mercury enters the food chain, it accumulates in fish and other wildlife, posing long-term health risks to Arctic populations. The estimated risks of immediate widespread poisoning are low, but long-term effects could be disastrous with impacts extending far beyond the region as the toxin can travel globally through atmospheric and oceanic pathways. This is emblematic of the broader consequences of climate change in the High North, where warming temperatures not only disrupt the local environment but also mobilize previously sequestered pollutants, potentially accelerating global toxic metal pollution which would affect ecosystems around the world. The destabilization of the Arctic biosphere is increasingly becoming a global concern, necessitating a coordinated and proactive approach to environmental stewardship in the region and public health protection. (Euronews, High North News, The Independent, USC Dornsife, YaleEnvironment360)

China Deploys Third Arctic Icebreaker This Summer

gCaptain reported on August 20 that China’s third and newest Arctic icebreaker has reached the Bering Strait this summer after setting sail from the Chinese port of Qingdao earlier this month. The Ji Di (“Polar”) icebreaking vessel has a range of 26,000 kilometers and can carry a range of equipment used for deep polar seabed exploration, including unmanned surface vehicles, underwater autonomous robots, and drones. The vessel, managed by China’s State Oceanic Administration, is currently positioned west of Nome, Alaska. (gCaptain)

Take 2: China’s deployment of three icebreakers to the Arctic this summer comes at a time when the US is significantly struggling with limited operational capacity in the region. After a fire forced the US Coast Guard icebreaker Healy to return to its homeport in Seattle, the US is left without any Arctic surface presence for the rest of the year as the only other US Coast Guard icebreaker, the 55-year-old vessel Polar Star, is in dry dock to extend its service life. The aging American fleet and lack of efficient vessel construction is in sharp contrast with China’s proven ability to rapidly build and deploy icebreakers, signaling a looming shift in Arctic geopolitical dynamics. China is clearly committed to establishing a strong presence in the Arctic, which it perceives as a region rife with economic and strategic opportunities, including untapped natural resources and new maritime trade routes. As such, the implications of China’s growing Arctic presence are far-reaching. Its ever-expanding Arctic fleet facilitates extensive research and allows China to potentially lay claim to new resources, which entails significant environmental and security implications. Increased traffic and potential resource extraction can lead to serious environmental degradation and the strategic positioning of icebreakers can enable China to exert influence over key shipping lanes. This development is illustrative of a broader trend where authoritarian states like Russia and China are increasing their Arctic footprint, raising serious concerns about the militarization of the region and the ability of Western nations to respond to China’s growing presence. (Arctic Today, Brookings, gCaptain, News.Az, The Barents Observer)

Canadian Minister of National Defense Discusses Arctic Defense with Northwest Territories

The Canadian Department of National Defence announced on August 20 that Bill Blair, the Minister of National Defence, is visiting Inuvik, Northwest Territories together with Dan Vandal, Minister of Northern Affairs, to meet with municipal, territorial, and Indigenous leaders to promote the federal government’s updated Arctic defense policy, “Our North, Strong and Free”. His visit also includes discussions on recent defense investments aimed at enhancing Arctic security and completed training exercises by the Canadian NORAD Region CF-18 Hornet detachment. (Government of Canada)

Take 3: Bill Blair’s visit to Inuvik underscores a critical development in Canada’s national security strategy and reflects the growing strategic significance of the Arctic. Climate change is opening previously inaccessible areas, bolstering economic and military interests from various states. This has prompted Canada to update its defense policies through the “Our North, Strong and Free” initiative, with substantial defense investments aimed at enhancing Arctic security and sovereignty, including CA$218 million for Northern Operational Support Hubs and CA$1.4 billion for maritime sensors. While these investments are aimed at strengthening Canada’s ability to monitor and defend its Arctic territory, they also reflect a broader trend of regional militarization with nations seeking to protect their interests and assert their presence. This raises several concerns, including the potential for increased tensions between Arctic and non-Arctic states, particularly as Russia has been reinforcing its Arctic military infrastructure and countries like China are expanding their capabilities in the region. This shift towards militarization threatens to trigger a security dilemma that will destabilize the region, undermining long-standing efforts to promote cooperation and peaceful coexistence in the Arctic. This dynamic not only increases the risk of conflict but also diverts attention and resources away from crucial issues like climate change mitigation, sustainable development, and the protection of Indigenous communities. Next to environmental degradation, the focus on military capabilities can perpetuate a cycle where the needs and rights of Indigenous peoples are subordinated to broader geopolitical interests, further exacerbating inequalities and undermining efforts toward reconciliation and self-determination. (Cabin Radio, CBC News, Government of Canada, My True North Now)

Activists Submit New Evidence to European Court of Human Rights Against Norwegian Expansion of Arctic Fossil Fuel Extraction

Down To Earth reported on August 22 that Norwegian activists, supported by environmental organizations Nature and Youth and Greenpeace Nordic, have submitted additional arguments to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in their ongoing lawsuit, initiated in 2021, against the environmental impact of Norway’s oil and gas expansion in the Arctic. The ECtHR is now set to assess whether Norway’s actions violate human rights, with a ruling expected later this year. (Down To Earth)

Take 4: In 2021, the lawsuit was initiated when Norwegian activists, alongside environmental organizations Nature and Youth and Greenpeace Nordic, first filed an application with the European Court of Human Rights after Norway’s decision to approve the development of 19 new oil and gas fields in the Arctic, arguing that this is in direct violation of the Norwegian constitution and international human rights commitments due to its contribution to the climate crisis. The decision by the ECtHR has the potential to set a global legal precedent, reinforcing the idea that climate action is not just an environmental issue but also a human rights imperative. The potential consequences of Norway’s expansion of fossil fuel extraction in the Arctic are severe. The region is already warming much faster than the global average and the expansion of fossil fuel extraction would only exacerbate this while further threatening the region’s fragile ecosystems and the Indigenous communities that depend on them. The potential environmental degradation from oil spills, increased maritime traffic, and industrial development could irreparably damage the Arctic’s unique biome. In addition, experts warned that exploiting Arctic resources could unleash 12 billion tons of CO2, further destabilizing the climate and leading to more extreme weather events, loss of biodiversity and severe impacts on vulnerable communities. The outcome of this case is thus crucial for the Arctic, as it could determine the future trajectory of fossil fuel development in one of the world’s most environmentally sensitive areas. (Down To Earth, Greenpeace, Greenpeace, Nordsip)

Russia and China Formally Increase Arctic Cooperation 

The South China Morning Post reported on August 22 that Chinese Premier Li Qiang and Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin have signed a joint communiqué to reinforce their nations’ commitment to deepening economic and technological ties. This includes jointly developing Arctic shipping routes, consolidating partnerships in oil and gas production, expanding cooperation in emerging sectors like science, technology and the digital economy, as well as defending their mutual sovereignty. (South China Morning Post)

Take 5: The Arctic partnership between Russia and China is particularly important in the context of their broader geopolitical struggle against the West. By increasing cooperation and jointly developing the Arctic shipping routes, they are not only securing critical economic advantages but also challenging the dominance of traditional Western-controlled maritime routes. This would reshape global trade patterns and give China and Russia greater control over critical supply chains. This is part of a broader power shift in the Arctic, where Russia – as the largest Arctic state – already has a significant military and economic presence. China’s involvement further strengthens this presence, potentially altering the strategic calculations of the other Arctic nations. Deepening ties between Russia and China, paired with Russia’s efforts to strengthen its Arctic military capabilities, are bound to increase the militarization of the High North to a significant extent, heightening the risk of conflict and further eroding the former notion of the Arctic as a zone of peace. This formalized cooperation also significantly advances China’s ambitions as a self-proclaimed “near-Arctic state” by securing access to strategic shipping routes and critical natural resources, enhancing its trade network, and strengthening its geopolitical presence. In addition to vital security concerns, the environmental risks associated with increased shipping traffic and resource extraction in the region cannot be overlooked. The fragile Arctic ecosystem is already under severe threat from climate change, and the expansion of shipping routes and industrial activities by countries without a track record of environmental stewardship would only exacerbate existing challenges and degradation. (Oreanda News, Reuters, South China Morning Post, The Economist)