Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
A number of nations conduct research in Antarctica. To do research in Antarctica, you need to have an icebreaker. As the old saying goes, you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few icebergs … or something like that.
For the last few years, said icebreaker has been the Swedish ship Oden, leased to us by the noble Swedes, who (other than being a bit confused about how to spell the name of the god Odin) built a wonderful dual-purpose icebreaker and research vessel. Here’s a photo of the good ship “Oden”:
Given the dependence of the US McMurdo Sound and Amundsen-Scott South Pole bases on the availability of an icebreaker to allow resupply by ship, it must have been an unpleasant surprise for our Secretary of State, Hillary R. C., to receive the following missive from the aforesaid perfidious Swedes …
This is unfortunate for the scientific work in the Antarctic, as it will require extensive reshuffling of existing studies and projects. However, it does have its ironic side.
The first irony is that the main thing that is brought in by ship, the one thing that really can’t be brought in by plane, is fossil fuel. Can’t do global warming research without fossil fuel, particularly in Antarctica, and running a couple of US bases through an Antarctic winter takes a lot of fossil fuel.
The second irony is that research into global warming is being curtailed by, of all things, too much ice. Or as Mr. Bildt described it, “transport delays due to vessels having been blocked by ice.”
I do feel bad and have compassion for the scientists and the scientific studies that will be disturbed, and I know I’m on the primrose path to perdition for saying this, but it’s hard not to enjoy the spectacle of scientists who can’t do global warming research because the Northern Hemisphere is too cold.
w.
PS—As of a few days ago, the US has lined up an icebreaker, the Ignatyuk, to replace the Oden. It is run by a Russian firm, the Murmansk Shipping Company. So that’s good news. Unfortunately it is not set up as a research vessel, just an icebreaker, but it can break the path for the tankers.
It will steam off from Murmansk half way round the world, burning lots and lots of fossil fuel, to clear the ice to allow the tankers to deliver much more fossil fuel to McMurdo Sound and even send fossil fuel to the South Pole to power inter alia the global warming research …
So there’s the final irony—with the laying up of the US Coast Guard “Polar Star” icebreaker, and the decommissioning of the “Polar Sea” icebreaker, the US has only the lightweight “Healy”, not fit for the Antarctic needs. So the US is reduced to renting an icebreaker from a Russian shipping company … and some folks in Alaska are not happy about that state of affairs.
[UPDATE] From some of the comments below, it’s clear that my eco-felony in writing this is admitting to feeling “schadenfreude”, which means taking pleasure in your opponents misfortunes. It’s one of those emotions that everyone has, but nobody is supposed to admit they have. What, you never laughed when irony overtook your opponent? And you gotta admit, global warming research cancelled because of too much ice? That’s funny anywhere.
I’m no different than the rest in relishing life’s ironic turns, except for the fact that I’m willing to admit that I’m not PC (politically correct) in the slightest, and to take the inevitable heat for saying so. Consider it my small protest at the ongoing vanillafication of the planet.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sven-Ove Johansson says
Sept 7, 2011, at 2:44
Oden, or “Odin”, has the following additional names, all with correct Swedish spelling:
Sounds like some warmista trolls on this site, with multiple names like Moderate Republican / Bystander etc..
Oden a troll??! I hope there are no blasphemy laws in Sweden!
they could hire the old pulteney boys with there ice breaker row boat
highflight56433
Spoken like a true American with no understand of the questions he asks. You do know the Bahamas, Mexico, Caribbean, French Riviera are NOT US territories and is open to any nations at anytime they choose to visit – I hope.
Sorry Willis, Canada does NOT recognize the UN law of sea garbage in the Arctic or anything else coming out of the UN these days. We only claim to the limits of OUR continental shelf sea floor same as we do in Newfoundland/Labrador and in British Columbia two provinces that enforce that sea claim in those areas with the Canadian Navy and Coast Guard. Areas the Russian and the EU nations destroyed from over fishing completely wiping out Canada’s entire east coast fishery. Tens of thousand paid for that disaster in unemployment and shattered lives and twenty-nine years later the fishery is still wiped out. We learned our lesson there and are NOT about to repeat that disaster anytime soon in the Arctic. We claim no more than the Russian claim on their continental shelf as do the Americans off Alaska. Now Willis you can’t very well quote the UN Law of the Sea UN nonsense at your choosing unless and until YOU quote the UN IPCC garbage numbers – you can’t merely pick and choose what UN numbers you like then quote them to back up your claim when both are as faulty. Fact – there is NO Law of the Sea ruling on the Canada Arctic claim nor on the North West Passage. Canada understands why international nations want to access the Arctic for oil and gas – the fishery BUT it is us who stand to lose on ALL oil spills and lost fishery. US who have to clean up spills in a far northern environment not even possible in warm southern climates as demonstrated in the Gulf oil spill.Canada will NOT back down on this one and will fight who ever to the death if necessary – its that important to Canadians. The Russians will do the exact same as us. And yes we know full well the US nuke sub love to play in that area as do the Russians. And it is us who send fighter jets up every month intercepting the Russians probing OUR AIRSPACE.
Willis – I thoroughly enjoy your sense humor. Keep it up.
Just testing a long URL:
The whole article is at here.
Many thanks.
@ur momisugly Smokey
“Swedish is spelled just like it’s pronounced.”
Pretty much, yes. Or maybe vice versa.
It’s certainly better than Danish, which isn’t pronounced at all.
A. Watt:
if we built a non nuc icebraker it would have to have diesel engines fueled by recycled deep fat frying oil. and with the greenies luck it would freeze to jellow in the cold, then they would have to get on the fantail and row.
possibly an argentinan or newzealander tug would salvage them and then own the whole works.
C
Sorry mods – my last was supposed to go in Test (feel free to snip it)!
Stephen Skinner says “This was in the Independent Wednesday 1 Sept 1993”. So was the September 1994 article following (so you actually have the whole article) whose themes were “Shipbuilding comes second only to agriculture in its addiction to government support” and “Past blunders and complacency have left [the industry] so weak that it will never be able to attract the vast investment needed to rebuild itself”. And in 1985 the industry had already been privatised.
The whole article is here
On a different topic entirely, has anyone else noticed that icebreakers seem to have no gender (“the Ignatyuk … is not set up as a research vessel, just an icebreaker, but *it* can break the path for the tankers”) whereas ships generally are female (“she sailed on …”). Are icebreakers too muscular perhaps – or is it something to do with farting?
I hope this works.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/kevster1346/oden.jpg
[REPLY: img tags removed. Just cut ‘n’ paste the link. ~dbs, mod.]
Correction dear moderator please..
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/kevster1346/oden.jpg
whoa!
i thought it was spelled Wednes!!!!
oh, well – it’ll be easier tomorrow- Thorsday.
Oh. those evil, evil, Swedes, wanting to use their own icebreakers for what they were originally intended for!
(Though I once took a ferry from Stockholm to Helsinki in late winter, and it cut it’s own way through the ice in the Gulf of Finland.)
And now it is time to again recall that ice in the Baltic and the Gulf of Bothnia can be variable. In a story En konstig blandning Engström tells us that he had long wanted to go hunting seals on the ice, but there had been a period of around thirty years without any ice worthy of the name. (The book was first published in 1929, and thus is proof that Global Warming started in 1899!)
(Also, in the story, Engström uses an older form of the Swedish for “seal” – själ – but spells it “skäl”. They are pronounced in the same way! The modern word is “säl”. Or he is making some weird pun on “skäl” – “reason, motive”.
Aren’t Scandanavian languages fun!)
Aaaaaaaargh! It cut ITS onw way …
It cut its OWN way ….
Now I can’t even write Englsih. That’s what Global Warmgin does to me.
We’re dmooded.
@Bengt Abelsson
You’re thinking like a corporate entity would think. The government is in charge of antarctic research. No intelligent solutions will be tolerated. Besides, not sailing the Russian ice breaker all the way down yonder and sailing the additional tankers necessary for resupply would result in freeing up money that could go to less settled science, such as the James Webb space telescope, which is on the chopping block. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/47009
That’s where all the missing summer arctic sea ice has been hiding! It’s moved to the Baltic sea winter!
RoHa,
Let me translate that for you…
Yorn desh born, der ritt de gitt der gue,
Orn desh, dee born desh, de umn bork! bork! bork!
Wil says:
September 7, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Dang, Wil, step back and take a deep breath there, when you go on for that long your brain runs short on oxygen.
First, I’m not quoting any “Law of the Sea nonsense.” Canada ratified the UN Law of the Sea Treaty in 2003. You may not like it, but claiming that Canada doesn’t recognize the UNLOTS Treaty is simply not true. Canada has until 2013 (ten years after ratification) to put forth its proposal on the division of the Arctic. Canada hasn’t done so yet, which is why, as you correctly point out, that “there is NO Law of the Sea ruling on the Canada Arctic claim nor on the North West Passage”. You seem to think that’s a fault of the UNLOTS Treaty, when in fact it is because you haven’t made your freakin’ claim yet …
Next, you say
No, it’s not just Canada who stands to lose from oil spills and lost fishery. Every nation that borders the Arctic Ocean faces exactly the same risks you do, so don’t bother trying to claim that some “uniqueness” gives you special rights. Russia and Greenland and the US all face what Canada faces if the oil spills.
And “fight whoever to the death”? Dude, we’re talking about Canadians here. If the UNLOTS ruling goes against you, what, are you going to storm the doors of the United Nations Building?
w.
Smokey says:
September 7, 2011 at 7:18 pm
I think the modern Swedes spell that “björk” …
w.
To both Smokey and Willis I haven’t laughed this hard reading the comments in a long time thank you for the chuckles. As for the chuckle-head Timothy Hanes grow a sense of humor you will need one as the wheels fall off of the little red wagon of AGW.
Jean Meeus says:
September 7, 2011 at 10:24 am
Danish: Odin
Evil fossil fuels? Heaven forbid who’s bringing in the Jello??!!
http://www.real-science.com/uncategorized/jello-wrestling-bringing-giant-crabs-antarctica
GregO says:
September 7, 2011 at 8:06 pm
I think the focus on Jello wrestling is unfair. If you are dug in and hunkered down for an Antarctic winter, you’d have to do something crazy to keep from going crazy. Jello wrestling works as well as anything. There may be reasons to not have a base at the South Pole, but scientists involved in jello wrestling isn’t one of them for me.
w.
I’ve got a lot of chuckles from this thread, too. Thanks for the smiles. 🙂