Still No Ships In The Arctic

Sixty years after the New York Times predicted Arctic shipping, there are still no ships in the Arctic. Arctic sea ice volume is the highest in thirteen years, the ice is melting at the slowest rate on record, and continued cold is forecast for the rest of the month.

The Changing Face of the Arctic; The Changing Face of the Arctic – The New York Times

FullSize_CICE_combine_thick_SM_EN_20180617.png (1337×1113)

Spreadsheet    Data

Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

10-Day Temperature Outlook

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Still No Ships In The Arctic

  1. feathers says:

    Yet today in the Detroit News they run this headline: Global warming brings sweeping change to U.S., Michigan

    https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/06/18/global-warming-michigan-temperature-increase-16th-highest-among-lower-48-states/705633002/

    • Squidly says:

      I find that curious … if it is truly “global” warming, then how can Michigan have the 16th highest temperature increase?

      That’s like saying San Diego has the highest sea level rise.

      If it is getting “globally” hotter, then everywhere is getting hotter at the same rate! … otherwise one cannot contend it is “global”.

    • Squidly says:

      Oh, and by the way, Tennessee hasn’t gotten hotter at all .. in fact Tennessee has gotten slightly cooler! … so how is it that Tennessee got cooler while Michigan got hotter?

  2. richard says:

    Same old, Same old-

    “The Soviet offer to open the Northern Sea Route to foreign shipping and provide icebreaking support for a fee was first extended in 1967. A demonstration voyage took place that summer in which a Soviet ship transported cargo from western Europe to Yokohama. Although the transit was successfully accomplished in only 27 days, foreign shippers never seized upon this initiative. Possibily the offer was tacitly withdrawn so that the Soviets would not offend their Arab allies by proposing an alternative to the Suez Canal.

    In 1977, the Soviets powered the first surface vessel to the geographic North Pole. The nuclear icebreaker Arktika departed Murmansk on August 9 and reached the pole on the 17th. The return to Murmansk, by way of Franz Josef Land, was completed on August 23rd. The 14-day experimental voyage, more than half of which was spent breaking through ice, covered 3852 miles at an average speed of 11.5 knots”

  3. Griff says:

    Once again, the main arctic shipping season starts only after end July…

    However the Russian Northern Sea Route expands every year:
    https://www.marineinsight.com/shipping-news/9737-million-tons-of-goods-shipped-on-northern-sea-route-in-2017/

    • Gator says:

      Once again Ms Griff places meaningless ice over human life. Mankind would benefit from shorter shipping routes, and if we stopped spending trillions trying to save meaningless ice, we could save millions of human lives annually.

      Alarmists are anti-science and anti-human scumbags.

      • Squidly says:

        You absolutely nail it every time Gator!

        This is exactly the problem. Progressives like Griff can’t think past the end of their nose. They can’t even pretend to understand the big pictures. As long as they get what they want (even if that is the wrong thing), they don’t give a rat’s ass about anyone or anything else. They don’t even see it.

    • tonyheller says:

      The Northern Sea Route is blocked by the thickest ice in at least 15 years.

      • Griff says:

        It won’t be later… and again you ignore the evidence of increased NSR shipping

        • Gator says:

          And you ignore the millions you help starve to death.

        • tonyheller says:

          Another prophet

        • Caleb Shaw says:

          And don’t forget the Russian ice-beakers are amazing and huge ships. The Russians are not building these ships because they think the ice is thinner. The ice could get thicker, for all they care. The Russians are building ships because they want to open the Northern Route by hook or by crook. They plan to bash a route for cargo ships even if the ice gets thicker. And I can’t say I blame them. If they can keep that route open they stand to make a fortune.

    • AndyG55 says:

      Those BIG HUGE icebreakers, and specially built ice-breaker transports, are doing a great job , hey griff

      Pity they will be needed for MANY years to come as the AMO starts to turn

      No respite for the people living up there , at all. !!

      Why do you think they should be frozen-in for most of the year, griff.

      Before the LIA, it was never that way.

      • Griff says:

        The icebreakers are only feasible because the ice isn’t as thick in former years

        • sunsettommy says:

          What a dumb reply since their new ice breakers are far bigger and more powerful than the older ones.

          • arn says:

            Well – if there are indeed far bigger new ice breakers(i did no research) than Griffs arguements are pointless as those new ice breakers have not been built without reason or to maintain the status quo
            but for the purpose to expand & be able to travel and open routes for ships through much stronger ice regions.

        • Kent Clizbe says:

          Here’s a reality check for you:

          Russian nuclear ice-breakers approaching the North Pole:

          “The doomsday media reports of an ice-free North Pole seem far-fetched…”

          https://youtu.be/Q6OHHGrVM3g?t=323

          • richard says:

            Ships have already been to the North Pole-

            “In 1977, the Soviets powered the first surface vessel to the geographic North Pole. The nuclear icebreaker Arktika departed Murmansk on August 9 and reached the pole on the 17th. The return to Murmansk, by way of Franz Josef Land, was completed on August 23rd. The 14-day experimental voyage, more than half of which was spent breaking through ice, covered 3852 miles at an average speed of 11.5 knots.

            1990- the nuclear icebreaker Rossiya (75,000 shaft horsepower) also made the third visit to the North Pole by a surface ship. (The second visit, by the Sibir’, was in 1987). The unique feature of this nine-day cruise was the fact that the ship was adapted to accomodate 40 foreign tourists, who paid $20,000 each for the trip. The cruise was considered such a success that the Sovietskiy Soyuz made two similar tourist trips in 1991 and 1992.

          • richard says:

            “1990- the nuclear icebreaker Rossiya (75,000 shaft horsepower) also made the third visit to the North Pole by a surface ship. (The second visit, by the Sibir’, was in 1987). The unique feature of this nine-day cruise was the fact that the ship was adapted to accomodate 40 foreign tourists, who paid $20,000 each for the trip. The cruise was considered such a success that the Sovietskiy Soyuz made two similar tourist trips in 1991 and 1992”

          • Johansen says:

            75,000 h.p.!

          • BruceC says:

            Two great hour or so long videos of North Pole expeditions aboard the older, err smaller Arktika class ice breakers, the ones which are being replaced by the new LK-60Ya class vessels. The first one was taken in 2005 and the second one in 2015.

            The first video has better footage of the immense power of these ships breaking through the ice as it approaches the North Pole (it was the first voyage in the 2005 season). Which brings me to a very surprising fact, the Russians have been doing North Pole expeditions for tourists for years between July – September. The second 2015 video, was the 103rd voyage to the Pole, the Yamal alone has made 47 voyages to the North Pole.

            Hope you enjoy.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdtAH-RqFH0

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRRy6t5K3R4

          • Johansen says:

            Interesting, Bruce, thanks. I’ve watched those ‘Flemming Yachts’ videos before, on different topics.

          • Phil. says:

            The Oden and the Louis S. St Laurent met at the N Pole Aug 2016.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            Returning from the pole the Yamal followed the track it cut on its way north and the monitor shows how the ice shifted to the SSW by then.

          • BruceC says:

            And it was only there for a few hours.

    • sunsettommy says:

      Once again you failed to see the big picture, the one you warmists keeps screaming about.

    • dave1billion says:

      And what currently makes up the majority of that shipping?

      From one source, “Ships will mainly transport liquefied natural gas (LNG), oil, and coal.”

      So the bulk of shipping will be of materials that are hastening the demise of the arctic? Maybe you shouldn’t be so happy.

      The fact is that Russia is develop the infrastructure to maximize the use of the narrow shipping corridor hugging their northern coast to further develop their fossil fuel and other industries. This includes new icebreakers and cargo ships designed to travel through waters that wouldn’t be navigable to traditionally designed ships.

      So please consider the fact that record shipping doesn’t necessarily directly to less ice.

    • BruceC says:

      Have a look at the videos I posted below Griff, and you’ll see why the NSR ‘expands every year‘ ;)

      Also note that the next generation LK-110Ya-class icebreaker (on the drawing board) will have year round capability.

  4. Pathway says:

    Collectivist never let the facts stand in the way of their totalitarian agenda.

  5. Steven Fraser says:

    For the 17th, the gap between 2018 (#4) DMI sea ice volume and 2005 (#3) narrowed by 92 cu km, and is now 781 cu km. Average daily narrowing of this gap for the last 7 days has been 95 cu km.

    Stay tuned!

  6. Psalmon says:

    For a future ice free world, the Russians sure seem keen on more, larger, and very powerful icebreakers.

    http://en.portnews.ru/news/259751/

    • Griff says:

      yes… because the thinning ice now means that with icebreakers they can massively extend the season for using th eNSR

      • BruceC says:

        Griff, “because the thinning ice”.

        LOL, these new ice-breakers, the LK-60Ya-class icebreaker (60MW), built to RMRS Icebreaker9 standards, can smash through ice up to 3.0 meters (9.8ft), fully-loaded at 2 knots.

        The scary thing is Griff, in May 2015 it was also reported that Russia had made a principal decision on the development of the conceptual design for a new, bigger nuclear-powered icebreaker. According to Sergey Kirienko, Director General of State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom, the new ‘LK-110Ya’ class icebreaker could move across the Arctic ice of thickness up to 4.5 metres (15 ft). The new icebreaker will reportedly have the propulsion power of 110 MW.

        • AndyG55 says:

          They also have a capability to actually MELT the ice around them.

          The ONLY evidence of ANY effect of humans on Arctic sea ice.

      • R. Shearer says:

        Ice was knowing thinner in the 1950’s and 1930’s than today and in fact there is more Arctic ice today than in the majority of the last 6 or 7 thousand years.

        • terak says:

          I bet you cannot find a reference stating that the total amount of arctic sea ice was less in the 30’s or 50’s.

          • sunsettommy says:

            Then you are ignorant since there are actual published papers on it.

          • AndyG55 says:

            But Sunset.

            How would he be expected to know that..

            He was never shown them during his failed Al Gore climate 101 propaganda course.

    • Squidly says:

      Because Russians aren’t quite as stupid and dangerous as the MSM like to make them out to be. They know AGW is a scam. They always have.

      • Caleb Shaw says:

        One thing the Russians are considering is a sort of massive aircraft carrier built for Arctic sea-ice situations. This will be an airbase, able to be mobile, in the Arctic Sea. They are not planning to preserve the arctic, like some sort of National Park, but rather to exploit it to the hilt. And again, I can’t say I blame them. The arctic coast is a major part of their nation. With China to heir south, it may very well be a case of “use it or lose it.”

        • RAH says:

          I don’t believe that stuff about an Arctic AC for a minute. An aircraft carrier is an offensive weapon that specializes in the ability to project the power of a nation to the place it is needed. Even if Russian could build such a ship it would be a sitting duck without support ships that can go anywhere it can and that deploy around it at a pretty good distance to provide stand off protection. Also an aircraft carrier need to sail into the wind at a pretty good speed to launch and recover heavily loaded fixed wind aircraft. It’s flight deck must be kept clear of solid debris, including chunks of ice, that can be sucked up into the intakes of the jet engines. The aircraft must be able to pushed around for positioning. And then we’re talking months of night operations where all of that must be accomplished. And the simple fact is neither Russia nor any other nation has mastered the technology or operational efficiency that the US carriers have. The stability system used in our carriers is still highly classified and a critical element that makes US aircraft carriers superior to any others ever produced. What they have on cruise ships these days is nothing compared to the system used on our carriers.

          An Aircraft carrier is in essence on bit floating bomb. It must carry massive amounts of aviation fuel and then there is the ordinance for the aircraft and it’s own close in air defense systems. Because of the realities of stability and space all of that has very little armored protection.

          • Johansen says:

            Also, you need really big (and complex) shipbuilding facilities, which I’m not even sure the Russians have. Then you need carrier based aircraft, as you mentioned. The only Russian carrier I’ve seen is a piece of crap in military terms. The entire GDP of modern Russia has a value of like Google and Apple added together

          • RAH says:

            Yep. Positioning the fabricated lower bow section of what would become the USS Gerald Ford.

          • BruceC says:

            Johansen; “Also, you need really big (and complex) shipbuilding facilities, which I’m not even sure the Russians have.

            I wouldn’t be so sure about that.

            Remember the LNG tanker Christophe de Margerie, that was widely reported by the Climate Hypochondriac press was the first to sail through the NSR ‘unassisted’ last year? It was built in Russia.

            Not only that, it is built to Russian Arc7 certification, which means it is capable of travelling through ice up to 2.1m thick … bow first. If it needs to, it can turn around and break through ice up to 2.5m stern first.

            The only Arctic vessels to have a higher ice breaking rating are dedicated ice breakers.

          • BruceC says:

            Notice it’s already heading into the ice ‘stern first’ … the ice is +2.0m thick.

          • BruceC says:

            Oh, and this should make Griff happy with his evidence of increased NSR shipping, there are another 14 being built!

          • BruceC says:

            Oh, before Griff asks, photo was taken on it’s maiden voyage … August 2017.

          • BruceC says:

            Oops, correction required, my apologies. They’re built in South Korea by Daewoo.

    • Squidly says:

      Yeah, and I just won the US Open for the 4th time in a row …

    • Stewart Pid says:

      The chicken little press needs to put out a lot of scary stories, scarier than the last scary stories so the mouth breathers like Griff forget how long and cold the past winter was. Best skiing in years and record snow …. GLOBALONEY warming my cold, frozen CANUCK ARSE.

  7. AndyG55 says:

    That DMI chart is remarkably similar to 1976 !

  8. Eric Simpson says:

    “the ice is melting at the slowest rate on record”

    Yes, and that’s caused by global warming.

    Or if you don’t believe it then it’s caused by climate change. Either way we better start getting serious about cutting CO2 way back or soon the world will face absolute disaster. ///

  9. AndyG55 says:

    Check NSIDC NH , a little upward jump. !

  10. richard says:

    Interesting that 19th century ships were 150 kilometers short of completing the NWP.

    Today, completing the passage is seen as the definitive sign of climate change though if we make a comparison in power of ships then and now we can see that a sailing ship would struggle today as they did in the past.

    19th century sailing ships 3000hp

    Modern Ice breaker- 75,000hp

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *