Saturday 7 November 2015

What’s the deal with Antarctica and the Arctic?

So before I got side tracked by Exxon Mobile (still not over those articles! but moving on…) I planned define the term “The Poles” (a term which I have used quite loosely in my first 3 posts) and in doing so address a comment on my first blog post. I aim to look at the differences between the North-South Polar regions and how the regions response to climate change individually.

Geography of the poles:
The table, below, describes some of geographical characteristics of The Polar Regions.

Despite having similar conditions the dynamics of the north and south Poles differ tremendously. The Arctic, by definition, consists of a series of large ice caps floating on the ocean. This differs from Antarctica, which is a large continent, surrounded by sea ice (Tyrsina, 2011). To further this difference, Antarctica, experiences seasonal variability in the total amount of sea ice, whereas Arctic totals remain generally constant throughout the year. During the summer months sea ice in Antarctica contracts, due to warmer temperatures. Despite the seasonal variability it is thought the Arctic is more vulnerable to the wrath of global warming (Lewis, 2013).

Oil:

Oil has been the driving topic of 2 previous posts. The Arctic contains 13% of global undiscovered oil resources (The Guardian, 2015). Many of the anticipated future conflicts will stem from disagreements over ownership of these Arctic resources.

This is less of a threat to Antarctica. Firstly it is uncertain which resources lie below the continent. Secondly, The Antarctic treaty, 1959, has prevented any governing body staking a claim to any potential reserves.

Ecosystems:

Despite the common misconception that polar bears and penguins live in the same place, they don’t. This is a myth mostly created by commercials and post cards. Polar bears are restricted to the North Pole (Arctic) and penguins the south. This is logic, otherwise the polar bears would just eat all the penguins, surely?

Polar Eco systems are the most threatened by oil exploration (Greenpeace, 2011). It is hard to place an economic value on an Eco-system (Balmford et al., 2002) and this is helpless when trying to talk the single language of oil companies: profits.

Response to climate change:

How do many of these differences influence the dynamics of these regions? I’m not going to lie, I am unsure how penguins will have that much of an influence… Geographical differences such as the seasonal ice melts and presence of the Antarctic continental shelf have larger controls over the differential response of the Polar Regions to Global Warming. Anthropogenic warming has resulted in large sea ice melting events in the Arctic. The northern ice cap recorded lowest ever levels of ice, 1.32 million square miles, in September 2012 (Lewis, 2013). As sea temperatures rise (after a decade of warming) melting in this area escalates. Warmer waters undercut ice sheets creating increased instability and consequently greater rates of ice loss.

However this is not the case for Antarctica, which is currently experiencing the greatest extent of sea ice, since records began in 1979. Many, including climate change skeptics, believe the expanding Antarctic ice sheets disprove the existence of climate change (Rose, 2014). However, general consensus between academics and scientists believe (to be frank) this is a load of rubbish (a view I have to agree with). Heffernan (2013) states melt water (as a result of global warming) has the potential to refreeze, forming a fresh layer on the ocean surface, and thus expanding the ice caps (fresh water being easier to freeze than sea water). A second theory for this expansion is the fact climate change is altering wind patterns, especially in the region of Antarctica. Cold winds travelling from the ice covered continent over the sea, causing it to freeze and thus expanding the ice sheet (Phillips, 2014). It is unsure if this alone would be able to form the total of ice seen today.

The Antarctic expansion is a debate in itself and one I aim to address at a later point. I have dragged this post on long enough now... but please feel free to comment any questions, challenges or ideas you have!

4 comments:

  1. Further to your penguin / polar bear comment, interestingly The Guardian ran a series where readers answer other readers' questions. Wednesday 14 November 2012 - Notes & Queries, the subject was the problem for polar bears caused by their decreasing food stocks and asked whether anyone had thought about transporting penguins from Antarctica to the Arctic to solve the issue?

    This provoked the following responses:

    I have heard this question phrased in terms of polar bears being located to the south pole but I believe the flaw in the plan is the same. Penguins have not evolved to deal with big predators and so would be easy prey. The polar bear population would increase as a result of this, but as the penguins failed to sustain their numbers there would be a subsequent food shortage and crash in bear numbers.

    Rebecca Linton, Leicester

    I was told when I was in the Antarctic that someone did try to introduce penguins to the Arctic during the late 19th or early 20th century. They did not breed successfully because of predation of nests by arctic foxes, mink, arctic stoats, wolves and predatory birds such as skuas, and died out after a few years

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oh how interesting! I will definitely read more into the topic in my spare time! Thank you for commenting.

      Delete
  2. You say' Many of the anticipated future conflicts will stem from disagreements over ownership of these Arctic resources.' This sounds scary. Who do you think these future conflicts might involve?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obviously most of these conflicts are surrounding oil in the Arctic and ownership of such resources. On August 2nd 2007 a Russian submarine planted a flag in the Arctic, staking a claim to any resources there. Russia are currently "maneuvering for positions" with Norway in the Barents sea as well as with Denmark concerning claims to the sea bed in Greenland. I am not an expert in Geopolitics and will never claim to be but from what i can gather as oil will become a more finite resource these Arctic reserves will become in higher demand, thus the potential for conflicts.
      This paper is a very good read if interested in the Geopolitics in the Arctic http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=2937852&fileId=S0032247408007791
      The paper discusses various strategies for governance in the Arctic regions and is very informative on topics beyond oil, such as fishing and gas reserves.

      Delete