Politico struggling valiantly to see the bad side of longer growing seasons, more abundant crops and a vast wealth of newly accessible resources.
How Russia and China are preparing to exploit a warming planet
POLITICO’s latest Global Translations podcast explores how climate change is reshaping power dynamics among America’s adversaries.
By LUIZA CH. SAVAGE
08/29/2019 05:11 AM EDTHurricanes, floods, and wildfires aside, climate change is delivering another threat: a remaking of geopolitics that stands to empower some of America’s adversaries and rivals.
As Arctic ice melts, Russia stands to gain access to oil and gas fields historically locked beneath northern ice — and is building up capability to launch cruise missiles from newly navigable waters to threaten America’s coastlines.
As polar seaways open up, China is eyeing a new “Polar Silk Road” — shorter shipping routes that could cut weeks off of shipping times from Asia to Europe.
And as drought drives more farmers and herders off their lands, extremist groups in Africa and the Middle East are finding fresh recruits.
…
A global quest for resources is already underway in the Arctic, said Goodman, now a senior fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center Polar Institute. “There are thought to be vast stores of fossil fuels, oil and gas and minerals across the Arctic that have not yet been tapped. Russia is doing so today across its vast Arctic coastline with the help of China,” she said.
Russia is vying for control of Arctic seaways and has built some 40 icebreakers — ships that can channel through ice. “Russia envisions under Putin a northern sea route that is essentially a toll road that requires Russian Arctic escorts in the form of icebreakers or other patrol boats, escorting not only the Chinese but others who want to ship across the Arctic,” she said. By contrast, the U.S. has only two icebreakers, she said.
Meanwhile, China, which is not a polar country, has launched aggressive Arctic diplomacy and gained non-voting observer status for itself at the Arctic Council, the international forum that addresses policy in the Arctic. Last year, China issued its first arctic policy.
…
Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/29/russia-china-climate-change-1691698
The Politico article goes on to rehash old CO2 bogeymen like “reduced nutrition” in faster growing CO2 enhanced crops (tell that to all the greenhouse growers who use enhanced CO2 right now).
But the question which really struck me when reading the Politico article – why isn’t the USA in this picture?
By my rough estimate Russia has around 40 icebreakers, around 13 which are nuclear powered.
The USA has around three icebreakers in service or about to go into service.
With this level of Arctic commitment, the USA might as well erect a big sign in Chinese and Russian which says “all yours, help yourselves”. Any reasonable reading of the situation would be that the USA doesn’t care about what happens in the Arctic.
A share of all this treasure is there for the taking; all USA has to do is demonstrate they take the Arctic seriously.
Correction: (h/t Bear) replaced “shorter growing seasons” with “longer growing seasons” in the first paragraph.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Why Russia needs ice breakers :
https://images.app.goo.gl/oadEcadnH99VngBF9
Yeah, right. Did CNN tell them that? It’s one of the sillier recent exaggerations about Russian military capabilities and intentions. Not only does it make no military sense, the Russian navy couldn’t punch its way out of a wet paper bag, never mind compete with US naval forces.
Here, you could do something. Get another ice breaker built.
Griff still bleating on about ice loss at the Arctic?
That Russian icebreaker pictured takes 2 months to start up. And once fueled runs for about 5 years IIRC. Can easily crunch through 3 metres of ice and has two reactors each can power 60,000 homes IIRC.
The Russians are building bigger ice breakers, I wonder why?
Come on Patrick. A home is NOT a unit of power. Could we have 60,000 homes expressed in Megawatts please.?
At least, being nuclear and therefore reliable the conversion is clear. If it was a wind farm it is meaningless without backup.
Perhaps that is why the wind industry uses this “Homes” nonsense. – purported meanless truth to addle the mind.
I think this is the vessel featured in the image above;
https://www.ship-technology.com/projects/fiftyyearsofvictoryi/
From the article;
“Two OK-900A nuclear reactors provide a power output of 27.6MW.”
I don’t know what that equates to in terms of numbers of homes it could power.
So Trump’s idea of buying Greenland was not such a dumb idea.
No, Trump had a good idea in buying Greenland.
Maybe the good folks who live in Greenland could take a vote as to whether they want to join the United States or not. Trump could offer some very large, monetary incentives along with other guarantees.
Let the people decide.
Right now the Danes won’t let Greenlanders actually own land. As with the reservations in the US, the result is increased poverty. If we let the Greenlanders actually own their land, it would be a huge benefit to them, and to us.
You may call it a possession, or a tree, or a tuba, or anything you like, but in the real world, amongst those who respect accuracy, it’s known as a state. We have 50 states, and some possessions. The U.S. possessions are not states, nor are the U.S. territories. Also, the fact that Alaska was purchased is meaningless, regarding its statehood. Some U.S possessions and territories were not purchased; they were merely conquered. Alaska, otoh, had it’s application for statehood accepted, thus becoming a state. Next, you’ll probably be claiming that Virginia is a possession, when it is, under the Constitution, a separate country, which put itself within a federation, with the legal right to leave, if it so chooses.
Va, NYS, and Connecticut included, in their constitutional signing documents, language that reserved their right to leave. The docs were accepted with that reservation. Since no state can have any rights, duties, obligations, or priveleges that all other states don’t have, then every state has the right to secede, and Lincoln didn’t rewrite the Constitution, much as he may have wanted to; only an amendment can do that.
Indeed!?
Just how would that fantasy play out?
China’s most northern port is over 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers) just from the Bering Straits; in an opposite direction of Europe.
China does not have any openings to the Arctic ocean. Russia owns all of that landscape.
I would not recommend that any country try to develop Arctic territory along Russia’s Northern lands.
Unless, China looks to provoke a war with Russia; it is doubtful that China will consider provoking most countries bordering the Arctic ocean.
Leaving Politico’s babbling as ignorant daydreaming. Another alarmist publication bumble where alarmists think-tank a worry; then hype that worry without investigation, research or common-sense.