An interesting question has arisen. Is it OK to pollute the Arctic Sea so long as the quest is “noble”? The Catlin Arctic Ice Survey likes to promote their trek as having a low carbon footprint because they are walking on the ice, rather than doing the more efficient flying ice survey (such has already been done), or driving to the north pole with vehicles.
What we don’t see much of from Catlin is how much fuel it takes to support their walking endeavor. They have to get resupplied by aircraft. And, because they have to get “rescued” at some point, refueling is needed for that too since the planes can’t make the flight on one tank. They have to leave a fuel cache on the sea ice.
So what happens to the empty fuel barrels? Or even worse, what happens to full barrels?
WUWT reader Richard Henry Lee writes:
On 26 April at http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/from_the_ice.aspx, the report was:
Yesterday, the plane took off from Resolute Bay, flew north for 3 hours to the weather station at Eureka. The CAS support team hopped off, the pilots re-fuelled and then flew out onto the Arctic Ocean, in order to cache fuel in advance of tomorrow’s flight out to the Ice Team. Once sufficient fuel had been cached, the pilots then flew back to Eureka where they spent the night.
On 3 May, they report:
From a logistical point of view, the main area of consistently bad weather at the moment is over the mid-way refuelling point, rather than at the team’s location or at Resolute. That being the case, the pilots at KBA and the London-based Ops team are currently looking at the possibility of putting in a new fuel cache, so that the aircraft can take a slightly more circuitous route to the team if necessary, in effect bypassing the original refuelling point. The possibility of an airdrop is also now being considered.
So it appears that the original fuel cache is out there on the ice and they are planning to store a new fuel cache because of the weather.
So, what will happen to the old fuel cache that they cannot get to due to bad weather?
If just left there, it would eventually get into the ocean, I presume.
Yes just what does happen to those fuel drums? That is the inconvenient question.
It seems that if they leave them on the ice, empty or full, Catlin may join the ranks of Arctic polluters.
Leon Brozyna (08:11:48) :
Now I wonder if the BBC will also breathlessly report on the state of the fuel caches?
I doubt whether Borek is being paid so well for their services to be able to abandon 100s of gallons of Jet A (avg price in Alaska $5.50/gal). Since they fly all over the Arctic for many clients I’m sure that the various caches get used regularly, on their return trips if not fully laden they would be able to carry empty drums back with them. My fuel supplier used to have a deposit on the drums so it was worth sending them back (except for the one we cut up to make a bbq grill!).
The Russians set an excellent example for stewardship with their NP stations, when they are abandoned everything is taken back.
Update from BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8033969.stm
Something most scientists forget is anything you observe you effect. So both have to be taken in to account when considering any exploration.
To Adoucette and Terry: It will take a lot longer than 4 million years, but trebling or quadrupling the rate of natural rotational slowdown of the planet is to cause real and serious threats to life – admittedly at a very great distance in the future, but I fail to see why deliberately causing harm, including death, to our distant descendants is any the less of a crime than doing it to someone tomorrow. It may be slow, but tidal power is the only non-renewable energy source that actually causes irreversible damage, as opposed to merely making the non-renewable resource unavailable. In that sense it is far worse than any other form of energy usage. To get a timeframe if all our energy came from tidal power, multiply the natural lengthening of the day by four or so.
Oh, and Terry, if you think this is just a giggle, you might try actually saying what’s wrong with my analysis so we can conduct a sensible discussion.
Does everyone really think the Catlin expedition would litter the Artic? Those are really biodegradable drums.
Get with the program people! Pffft!
Something odd seems to be happening with the ‘distance to pole’ values since they’ve been resupplied.
The distance has been decreasing dramatically compared to the distance travelled and doesn’t match the reported co-ordinates.
Here are the figures I’ve tracked so far:
Date, latitiude, longitude, dist travelled, dist to pole
28-apr, 85.126111, -123.961667, 382.25, 542
29-apr, 85.193333, -124.041389, 388.90, 535.6
30-apr, 85.230556, -124.625000, 392.60, 531.9
1-may, 85.211389, -124.289722, 391.14, 533.38
5-may, 85.279444, -124.951111, 397.81, 526.7
7-may, 85.315833, -125.011111, 403.37, 501.15
8-may, 85.386389, -124.809722, 411.14, 484.48
9-may, 85.466667, -124.265833, 421.14, 470.04
All looks ok up to 5-May but from 7-May onwards the distance to pole drops much further than the distance travelled.
eg. Compare 8-may to 9-may. distance travelled for the day is has changed by 10km, yet the distance to pole for the day has changed 14.4km.
I’ve also looked at the latitude/longitude co-ordinates using google earth to compare distances from the pole. All the co-ordinates match very closely the reported values until 5-may. After that things start to vary.
On 9-may google earth reports a distance of 505.8km to the pole, yet Catlin report 470km.
An honest mistake or are they deliberatly reducing the figure so they can at least report they made it half way?
Borek’s procedures for fuel caches briefly described here.
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/headline.aspx?postId=184
Now they have not made a report for three days.
There is a post today that says the team will be extracted this week. It also says that they take 75 ice and snow measurements per day.
A post last week said they spend “4-5 hours of science measurements per day. Measurements include snow thickness; the thickness of the freeboard (the layer of ice that sits above the waterline, usually 10-15% of the overall ice thickness); the draft (the layer of ice that sits below the waterline – usually 85-90% of overall thickness); the snow temperature and snow density.”
Hmmmmmm, how no they have time to each day to (1) break camp, (2) walk 10 kilometers (they almost never walk less), (3) take 75 measurements for 4 or 5 hours, and (4) set up camp, and (5) cook, eat, clean up, charge batteries, clean equipment, etc.?
Also, when they stay in the same place like they have now for some 2+ weeks, where do they take their 75 measurements each day?
…and now, for your summertime interest:
http://www.openpassageexpedition.com/
1944-
“It took only 86 days to sail from Halifax to Vancouver. The route taken, through Parry Channel, and then Prince of Wales Strait at its western end, will most certainly be the one first used by commercial shipping as global warming accelerates the thinning of the Arctic ice cover.”
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=ArchivedFeatures&Params=A2134
1977-
“The Belgian, Willie de Roos, sailing his 44 ft steel sailboat became the first sailboat to transit the passage and completing the voyage in one season.”
http://www.theoceans.net/story/NorthwestPassageSunstartingtoshineonFineToleranceApr72005.shtml
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.