The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of February 22, 2021
Greenland Calls Snap National Election Over Mine Disputes
As reported by Arctic Today on February 17, an early parliamentary election has been forced in Greenland amid factional rivalry within the leading Siumut party. Now scheduled to take place on April 6, the national election came as a result of the collapse of the governing coalition. This happened as the Demokraatit party unexpectedly withdrew due to disputes over the large-scale rare earths and uranium mining project Kvanefjeld (also known as Kuannersuit). (Arctic Today, HNN, Nunatsiaq News).
Take 1: Deliberations over the mine have taken center stage in the island’s politics over the past decade, demonstrating the importance of this election for the territory’s future. Opinion is split: while backers of the project hope it will facilitate independence from Denmark by making Greenland one of the largest world-suppliers of rare minerals, opponents fear it would leave behind a legacy of pollution and environmental destruction. Yet the international community is also invested in this national election with equally ambivalent anticipation. For example, just last week more than 140 NGOs from around the world signed an appeal to leadership in Greenland, Denmark and the EU to halt the Kuanersuit project as well as all other large-scale mining in Greenland, arguing that the protection of Greenland is not only a national environmental issue, but a global one. At the same time, rare earths and uranium are critical minerals needed for renewable technologies, and represent a material deficit the European Union was desperate to meet in an upcoming purchasing agreement with the mine. The uncertain future of the project in the face of the election therefore potentially threatens the progress of the European Green Deal. These developments not only highlight the increasing interest in Greenland and its resources on the global stage, but expose the ironic paradox of a global green transition reliant on extractive Arctic industries. (EU Observer)
First-Ever Foreign Policy Opinion Poll in Greenland Reveals Public Views on Foreign Affairs
As reported by the Arctic Today on February 22, Ilisimatusarfik, the University of Greenland, has conducted the first-ever public survey on foreign relations and security amongst the Greenlandic population. Published on February 18, the survey is the result of interviews with a representative sample of over 700 individuals. The poll reveals that over two thirds of the population supports more cooperation with the U.S and Denmark, and that nearly nine out of ten respondents were in favour of working more with Canada and the Arctic Council. In contrast, opinions on China were more mixed: 46.6 percent of those asked wanted less cooperation with the country, while 38.7 wanted more. (Arctic Today, Ilisimatusarfik)
Take 2: Foreign and security policy has become an increasingly topical issue in the Arctic during the last decades. In recent years, Greenland in particular has attracted fervent international attention on a variety of scales. As major actors like the U.S. and China jostle for the best strategic position in a controversial tug of war covered eagerly by the media, the international public argues about how the territory’s environmental resources should best be managed or obtained. Yet in the midst of all this debate, the perspectives of actual Greenlanders themselves have been largely ignored. This poll is therefore an overdue insight into the opinions of the populace, and shows how these opinions do not necessarily align with the objectives of the government that represents them internationally. Most significantly, this poll shows that respondents were more preoccupied with economic concerns such as unemployment and rising cost of living than any growing foreign or military interest. Even though the results of this relatively small poll should be taken with caution until it is replicated, it is a reminder of how grand Arctic discourses of geopolitical alarmism and opportunism can often obscure the lived material problems and realities of the Indigenous Peoples that live there. (Arctic Today, KNR, Postcolonial Perspectives on the European High North)
Narwhals at Risk from Increased Shipping Traffic Caused by Nunavut Mine
On February 19, The Narwhal covered how various scientists are concerned that the drastic increase in shipping traffic from Nunavut’s Mary River Mine is having detrimental effects on the local narwhal population. The first study, presented to the Nunavut Impact Review Board by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography on January 18, found that shipping in Milne Inlet where the mine is located increased 583 percent between 2015 and 2019. They concluded that the associated underwater noise is disturbing the ability of narwhals to communicate and navigate. The second study, soon to be published in the journal Arctic Science, found that this traffic increase coincided with a doubling in the levels of cortisol, a stress hormone response present in narwhal blubber. (The Narwhal)
Take 3: This commentary provides a new element of concern to a mine already plagued by controversy. Already Canada’s largest mine development, Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (BIMC) has been vying since last year to double Mary River’s iron ore production. However, the plan to expand has been met with public resistance. Just earlier this month, Inuit protest group the Nuluujaat Land Guardians blockaded access to the facility for a week, expressing concern over the validity of the negotiations and environmental risks. With the waters surrounding Milne Inlet home to around 10% of the world’s Narwhal population (and migratory route for nearly 90%), the species has been of particular focus. As the marine mammal already classified as the most vulnerable to climate change, the local research on further disturbances to Narwhals is of global relevance. However, this at-risk species is more than just a charismatic Arctic icon, but one critical to Inuit food security and culture. These studies therefore show how the risks already posed by climate change to Arctic biodiversity are compounded by the industrial development the melting Arctic is attracting. In addition, it is a cautionary reminder that the desire to exploit this so-called frontier of opportunity often encroaches on the co-existence between Indigenous Peoples and non-human life. (Arctic Today, Guardian, WWF, WWF)
Study Finds Melting Permafrost Could Release Far More Carbon Than Current Worst-Case Estimates
As announced by Science Alert on February 11, scientists have suggested that melting Arctic permafrost might release up to five times as much CO2 as current annual human fossil fuel emissions in a new estimation greatly exceeding those of current models. Published in Nature Communications on December 10, 2020, the international team of scientists from the University of Tübingen, the University of Bristol and the University of Copenhagen, analysed soil samples from the Stordalen mire in Abisko, northern Sweden. They found that organic carbon previously assumed to remain bound to iron in the soil even during permafrost thaw, is instead released into the atmosphere because of iron-eating bacteria. (Nature Communications, Science Alert, Science Daily)
Take 4: Permafrost has become an increasingly hot topic in the discussion of carbon sinks made more vulnerable by climate change. The permanently frozen soil characteristic of the Arctic region is estimated to contain amounts of CO2 up to four times greater than the entire cumulative amount emitted by modern humans. Researchers have long been aware that microorganisms aid the release of greenhouse gas emissions as permafrost melts. However, by showing that this role might be far more significant than anticipated, this study presents a major discovery of a previously unaccounted for emissions source. Unlike the majority of research on this topic, this study also does not solely re-evaluate the amount of potential carbon in the soil. Rather, this research helps improve our understanding of soil sequestration dynamics by focusing on the deeper mechanisms at play. This is important, because the exact ways in which iron impacts and responds to thawing Arctic permafrost is still largely unknown, and represents some of the greatest uncertainties in current climate models. It is still important to emphasize that this research still took place in only one bog and that the researchers remain uncertain about how much extra carbon could be released from the interaction. Nevertheless, by shining a light onto previously unknown mechanisms, this is a ground-breaking study that paves the way for more accurate representation of permafrost in global climate models. (Science Alert, The Scientist)
Extreme Weather Events in South Linked to Arctic Heating
As claimed by a slew of news publications including the Guardian on February 17, the current extreme cold weather events the southern U.S. and parts of Europe are facing are likely a result of Arctic warming. Scientists argue that warming can push freezing air from the Arctic further south. This cold Arctic air is caused by the circulation of the low pressure area also known as the polar vortex, usually held in place at the north pole by the northern jet stream. However, a decreasing temperature difference between the Arctic and mid-latitudes can weaken the effect of this high-level air current, resulting in cold episodes for places with typically more temperate climates. (Arctic Today, Financial Times, The Guardian, The New York Times)
Take 5: More often associated with rising temperatures, drought, and heat waves, it can seem strange to link climate change to the unusually extreme cold weather shocking the U.S. and Europe. However, rather than occurring in spite of climate change, abnormal cold weather events like this can actually be considered a counterintuitive symptom of it. With sceptics who might use cold bouts like these as evidence against human-induced climate change, this current media discussion reminds us why the language we use is important for tackling misinformation- as a term, ‘climate change’ captures the variability and extremity of the environmental changes occurring far better than ‘global warming.’ Furthermore, this discussion reminds us how the Arctic is central to climate change. The consequences of sea-ice loss and Arctic heating are not localised, but rather felt across the world in unexpected ways. However, we should also exercise caution when it comes to discussion of the polar vortex. Despite media headlines, the fluctuation of the vortex is a pretty established phenomenon, and it is difficult to link its variability directly to climate change. There is also no consensus among scientists over the exact interaction between Arctic heating and extreme weather events further south. Nevertheless, this uncertainty is in-of-itself a reminder of the physical complexity of the Arctic in climate science, and this year will certainly become an excellent subject of study for this still active area of research. (Arctic Today, Forbes)