On the far east side of Anchorage down a long and windy drive sits the Alaska Native Heritage Center. The large wooden structure is built on Dena’ina land, and has a low profile, the roofline sweeping from a shallow peak in the center nearly to the earth on either end, and blends in well with the natural surroundings. When we arrived, four youth were performing story songs and dances on a stage in the center of the building for a small but captive audience. We were given a private tour of the center by Yaari Walker, a St Lawrence Island (SLI) Yupik and Cultural Program Specialist who had been working at the center for nearly two decades. Behind the center is a tiny placid pond, reflecting the distant mountains and surrounded by several traditional structures representing the homes traditionally built and occupied by Alaskan Natives. In each, Yaari shared the cultural heritage of Alaskan Natives, as well as her own personal experience. She described the importance of family, community, and subsistence. The structures illustrate a rural, traditional lifestyle that is hard to find in modern times, but also cultures that are thriving and well.
Yaari Walker speaking with members of Arctic PIRE at the Alaska Native Heritage Center (photo credit: Carly Giddings)
Looking over the bucolic scene, it seemed an unlikely place to learn much about urban sustainability in Alaska. But 50% of Alaskan Natives live in the city of Anchorage, where they make up 14% of the urban population. Understanding urban communities therefore requires understanding the culture and experience of indigenous peoples, and understanding the importance of history and cultural heritage.
In Alaska, like many places in the lower 48, throughout the first half of the 20th century, indigenous children were forcibly removed from their homes and communities and sent to boarding schools run by missionaries where they were barred from speaking their native languages, banned from any other form of cultural expression including traditional dress and other customs, and in many cases experienced horrendous physical, sexual, and emotional violence. This was but one example of the systematic attempt to extinguish the culture of Native Alaskans. Fortunately, many Alaskan Native groups survived this trauma and actively engage in ongoing expression and preservation of their traditional cultures and languages, but the violent interruption impacted families and communities, and created a legacy of generational trauma. Children who spent their formative years in abusive boarding schools without the opportunity to bond with their parents and families became adults who were deeply scarred, often unable to form healthy bonds with their own children, and in many cases turned to drugs and alcohol as coping mechanisms. The era of boarding schools in Alaska led to the loss of languages, and the destruction of childhoods and created conflict for children who were taught to be ashamed of their culture and identity. The damage done by this and other anti-indigenous policies and practices continues to impact Native Alaskan communities who experience significantly higher rates of poverty, addiction, depression, and suicide than non-native Alaskans, both in urban and rural areas.
Subsistence activities continue to be an important part of both livelihoods and culture for native Alaskans, even those who live in Anchorage and other urban areas, something that was demonstrated by both Yaari Walker at the Alaska Native Heritage Center and by Dawn Biddison of the Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center at the Anchorage museum. Native peoples still identify with their ancestral home villages and regions even if they have never lived there themselves, and when possible, will return home during harvest seasons. Whaling continues to be an important part of life for northern coastal communities such as Nuiqsut and Kaktovik. Whales provide food, clothing, oil, and tools. But just like traditional practices in the past, whaling has come under attack by those who fail to understand either the cultural history and importance, or the sustainability of this type of whaling.
In cities throughout the circumpolar region, ethnic identity and the expression of that identity is important to both indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. Though difficult to quantify, cultural history and identity are important pieces to consider in measuring the social component of urban sustainability.
Kayaks built as part of a summer youth program at the Alaska Native Heritage Center (photo credit: Carly Giddings)
Last week, the Arctic PIRE team gathered in Anchorage, Alaska, to share ongoing research, to continue developing the Arctic Urban Sustainability Index (AUSI), and to meet with community stakeholders to gain a better understanding of what is important to consider when evaluating urban sustainability in the Arctic, and also to understand what the most important information or metrics that researchers can provide to policymakers and community leaders. Below are some of the highlights of meetings with stakeholders in Anchorage.
Anchorage Mayor Ethan Berkowitz (second from right) speaking with members of Arctic PIRE (photo credit: Carly Giddings)
Mayor of Anchorage Ethan Berkowitz defined sustainability for Anchorage as a city that is ready, connected, and inclusive, but also as an ancient idea that has long been practiced by Alaska Natives. For Alaskans, both native and non-native, self-sufficiency is an important aspect of sustainability and a point of pride, but also a real challenge- Alaska relies on a colonial model of exporting its raw materials and importing much of its work force. Mayor Berkowitz emphasized the need to invest in human capital, to increase local (renewable) energy as an opportunity to create self-sufficiency and also create local jobs. Finally, Mayor Berkowitz highlighted the need for more data, and more metrics, saying that there is a dearth of good city-level data that can inform good policy and practice.
Dr. Mara Kimmel, the First Lady of Anchorage, shared her aspirations and ongoing work in building resilience in Anchorage. Dr. Kimmel talked about creating a resilient city, but also one that is welcoming and inclusive for both indigenous peoples and immigrants. Dr. Kimmel suggested that policymakers and planners must work more directly with scientists who can provide the data for better decision-making, and that research questions should come from the communities that need the data.
Andy Baker, engineer and owner of Your Clean Energy, shared his experience working on renewable energy projects in the Anchorage area over the last ten years. Baker talked about the importance of the 2010 net metering policy in spurring renewable energy development in Alaska. Baker also highlighted his work on the Alaska SeaLife Center heat pump system that uses Resurrection Bay to heat both the aquariums and the space at the Center. Baker echoed others when he highlighted the importance of investing in education in Anchorage and beyond, particularly at a university level,
Steve Colt, a professor of economics at Alaska Pacific University, has a background in electric utilities and working on renewable energy and distributed energy systems in Alaska. He talked about some of the challenges of renewable energy in Alaska related to policy, infrastructure, and implementation, including multiple energy players in Anchorage and Fairbanks and the resultant fractured system that requires coordination. Colt also emphasized the need to expand the energy discussion beyond electricity generation to include heat and transportation, and suggested that the transportation sector may present the best opportunities for gains in sustainable energy.
Kirk Rose, Executive Director of the Anchorage Community Land Trust, talked about working on revitalization, particularly in the Mountain View neighborhood of Anchorage, where homes were built originally to accommodate temporary pipeline workers, and are now home to many of the city’s low-income residents. Rose emphasized the important role of the private sector in sustainable community development in Mountain View and beyond. The Anchorage Community Land Trust has worked with the local community on planning and development, and has also worked to purchase some of the most blighted properties to redevelop for businesses and enterprises that benefit the community. Rose emphasized that this is not charity work, but rather illustrates the opportunities for the private sector, which to date includes a credit union, health clinic, and office space for NGOs and community groups.
Yaari Walker, Cultural Program Specialist at the Alaska Native Heritage Center led a tour of some of the traditional structures used by Alaska Natives, while sharing some of the cultural history and her own personal SLI Yupik heritage. Walker leant important perspective to the culture and identity of Alaska Natives, and the importance of considering the way culture impacts Alaska Natives living in urban areas such as Anchorage and Fairbanks.
Dawn Biddison, Museum Specialist at the Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center gave a brief history of the experience of Alaska Natives under colonialism first by the Russians and later by the Americans. Biddison particularly highlighted subsistence as both a practical way of life and an expression of culture and history, and a thriving practice even among urban Alaska. She then led us through the new Arctic Studies hall which displays cultural objects that were carefully curated and informed by Alaska Native elders. The Center also allows primary research by Alaska Natives, has several interactive video displays to explain objects in the exhibit, and has created a series of instructional videos demonstrating traditional method for things like basket-weaving and sewing with sinew.
Should Norway continue to develop its Arctic oil and natural gas resources or would Arctic communities be better off focusing on renewable energy? This was the hot topic of debate at the opening session of the 2017 Arctic Frontiers conference in Tromsø, Norway in January.
Columbia University Professor Jeffrey Sachs made the case for leaving resources in the ground. He praised Norway for its green domestic policies, which are a model of sustainability that he frequently holds up to countries around the world. However, he warned that continuing to extract oil and gas from the Arctic for export markets would ultimately tip the planet into irrevocable climate change.
Norway’s Prime Minister Erna Solberg (Figure 1) defended the ongoing drilling for oil and gas. She noted that Norwegians have used ocean resources sustainably for 10,000 years and emphasized the on-going cooperation with neighboring Russia on managing fish stocks in the Barents Sea. Solberg highlighted a difference between CO2 emissions and fisheries in explaining why it was hard to solve the energy problem even as the country was able to address the fish issues. The emissions are a global problem while the fisheries are a regional problem. She stressed the need to place a global price on carbon that would make it possible for the best producers to survive and eliminate less efficient ones.
Figure 1: Norwegian PM Erna Solberg
Russia is also committed to developing its Arctic resources since exploiting these hydrocarbons is necessary for Russia’s development. Ambassador Vladimir Barbin, Russia’s Senior Arctic Official, noted that the Arctic provides 10 percent of Russia’s GDP and 20 percent of its exports, and these figures are only likely to grow. Russia intends to use the Arctic as a resource base, developing its fossil fuel reserves and the Northern Sea Route. Russia’s environmental initiatives focus on preventing the pollution of Arctic shipping waters and introducing nuclear ice breakers, which have zero emissions.
Nevertheless, Sachs stressed that the science is clear – we need to dramatically reduce emissions of CO2. He stressed that it is not realistic to think that the US can continue fracking oil and gas while drilling continues in other countries without severe consequences. Even as Norway focuses on decarbonizing domestic policies, it is expanding fossil fuel exports to the rest of the world. Canada has the same problem. World leaders have adopted goals to reduce carbon and these countries are serious about their domestic situation. But they continue to sell to the world market. If all countries do this, climate change might be irreversible. Sachs stressed that “I am not a pessimist.” Science shows us that it is possible to replace fossil fuels and that we must do it.
Sachs stressed that the world’s low-cost supplier of hydrocarbons is Saudi Arabia and that the Middle East and Russia should run down their low-cost reserves before extraction begins in more remote areas. We should not invest billions in new developments, he said. Investing in hydrocarbons means that either you wreck the Earth or waste money since there is not a case for additional investment now. The problem is to figure out how to work with Middle Eastern producers like Saudi Arabia and Iran. This is geopolitically complicated. Sachs advocated turning Norway’s StatOil, which bills itself as the world’s largest off-shore operator, into StatWind.
Prime Minister Solberg responded that in terms of per barrel emissions, Norway outperforms oil production in Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries. She also warned that the security problems associated with the Middle East were significant, which is why the US is now heading toward energy independence. Approximately 80 percent of energy consumed in the world is fossil fuels and Norway feels that it can make a contribution to addressing this demand.
Sachs noted that if climate change goes past certain thresholds it is irreversible and could leave to global disaster. At the same time, the Norwegian leader pointed out that we can’t make the Arctic a museum. Similarly, Alaskans often feel like sustainability policies are put in place to create a “snow globe,” a beautiful bauble, but one with little practical value. People live in the Arctic and they have to have jobs.
This debate is unlikely to be resolved any time soon given the various interests involved. However, at least one of the young people at the conference pointed the way forward. Ingrid Skjoldvaer, Head of Nature and Youth, Norway, which is the country’s largest youth environmental organization, noted that there was a test drilling rig in the Tromso harbor during the conference and it was destined for farther north. She stressed that it was necessary to ask those currently in a position to make decisions: What kind of development do you want for your children? Will you build Arctic communities that are based on renewable fuels or continue to invest in polluting fossil fuels which are depleting? In her opinion, it was necessary to say no to fossil fuels and yes to renewable resources in the Arctic. She noted that Norway’s politicians needed to think beyond the four years of the parliamentary term. She also stressed that usually when the Arctic is discussed, it is without young people. “Today I speak to you, two years ago I was outside the conference doors with a banner.”
Besides young people, pressure is likely to come from another source as well – China. The country has realized the advantages of alternative energy and is rapidly making strides in an effort to end its reliance on fossil fuels.
Last week the Arctic PIRE team was proud to reveal their official project logo! This logo will be used for visual branding and to increase recognition of project outputs related to the Arctic PIRE team both on social media platforms and on more traditional project returns.
The vast Arctic territory is rich in resources including minerals, hydrocarbons, and wildlife. However, high latitudinal regions receive little sunlight for several months each year, which severely limits the region’s ability to grow fresh produce. Many Arctic urban centers rely on long, complex supply chains to receive shipments of fresh fruits and vegetables from their southerly neighbors.
Alaska imports about 95% of its fresh produce, moving about $2 billion per year of grocery spending out-of-state. Produce destined for the Arctic has to be picked early and ripened in-transit to minimize rot during the long journey from farm to table. Such practices affect the quality of produce polar consumers can buy and drive up prices. Arctic residents often pay exorbitant prices for items as simple as a head of lettuce.
These problems have spurred interest in alternative farming methods in the Arctic, such as indoor farming using hydroponics and artificial lighting systems, sometimes called vertical farming (Figure 1).
In recent years, the use of vertical farming has grown in many urban areas, where land is scarce and people have become more aware of the environmental impact of long-supply chains. Urban indoor farms, or ‘plant factories with artificial light’ (PFAL) are expected to play a large role in agriculture during the coming decades, garnering interest from countries around the world. Recently a team of Japanese and American researchers published a comprehensive 400-page volume on the benefits and limitations of indoor farms in different climatic and economic environments.
The ability of PFALs to produce quality produce has been proven in a low cost and resource effective manner. For example, low-heat light emitting diode (LED) fixtures have been around since the 1980s, but recent studies have shown that advances in this technology have enhanced their brightness and energy-efficiency to the point where they are viable in commercial crop agriculture. As these global investments in urban farming continue, the resulting technological innovations could have a revolutionary effect on how Arctic communities source their fresh produce.
The unique environmental and economic conditions of the Arctic make it an attractive region to develop PFALs. Prices for imported fresh produce are high, while environmental conditions for local farming are poor. Moreover, communities in the Arctic are usually isolated, and their inhabitants tend to welcome innovations that increase self-subsistence and decrease reliance on imports.
Figure 2: One of Vertical Harvest Hydroponic’s Arctic-ready containerized growing systems being loaded onto a truck for delivery. Source: Vertical Harvest Hydroponics
Several start-ups have begun to fill this niche in the North American Arctic, among them Vertical Harvest Hydroponics. This company, founded in 2011 and based in Anchorage, Alaska, has designed and developed a “Containerized Growing System” in repurposed shipping containers using cutting edge technology (Figure 2). These containerized systems cost about $110,000 each to build and deploy. They are designed to withstand the harsh Arctic conditions, and are mobile—giving Arctic communities the ability to grow produce anywhere with potable water and power. Each unit can produce about 23,000 to 39,000 heads of lettuce per year.
Another Alaskan company, Alaska Natural Organics,has retrofitted an old dairy in Anchorage to house an indoor farm, which can produce up to 20,000 plants per month. The potential for expansion seems strong, as these companies are still young and operate on a relatively small scale compared to the mega-PFALs running in Japan, which can produce up to 10,000 plants a day (Figure 3).
Figure 3: An employee tending plants at Japan’s mega-PFAL, capable of producing 10,000 heads of lettuce per day. Source: National Geographic Magazine
Vertical farming in the Arctic has gained recent media attention due to its success. In 2016 several mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times, local CBS news stations, and farming magazines featured articles on indoor farming in the Arctic. Unfortunately, there is a lack of academic literature analyzing the practicality of PFAL systems and vertical farming in an Arctic-specific context, a subject which should be explored given the massive potential applicability of this technology in the region.
Interest in biological preservation and the development of agriculture in the Arctic is nothing new. In Svalbard, the Global Seed Vault is safeguarding a repository of all global plant seeds in an attempt to secure the genetic diversity of flora on this planet in case of a devastating disaster. The Norwegian government, which runs and administers the storehouse, has also taken steps toward increasing the study of sustainable agriculture in the region through the year 2021 with the BIONAER program. In Kirovsk, Russia, the Polar-Alpine Botanical Garden has been active since 1931, as a nursery, biological research institute, and tourist attraction. Interest in these new techniques is growing, with representatives of the city of Murmansk, Russia citing a planned project to convert abandoned industrial buildings into hydroponic farms during an interview. The Russian Arctic has many relatively isolated industrial and post-industrial urban centers, where the development of efficient PFAL systems could usher in a new era of sustainable agriculture. In all of these Arctic regions, the interest in using PFALs to increase the local quality of life is high, however there has been a lack of project feasibility studies and academic literature which could validate increased policy support for PFAL and urban indoor farming methods.
An employee stands outside an indoor vertical farm in Kotzebue, Alaska. The unit provides fresh kale, various lettuces, basil and other greens to a community of nearly 3,300. Source: Will Anderson via AP
Given the interest in indoor-farming across the circumpolar region, PFAL systems could play an important role in the future life of Arctic communities. The success of the Alaskan start-ups shows the potential for the organic growth of the industry. These systems have the potential to benefit Arctic communities by cutting out expensive and unreliable supply-chains and increasing self-reliance. Indoor farming greatly improves the quality of life for Arctic residents by giving them a realistic path towards regular access to fresh high quality produce. Additionally, localized food production and research in PFAL technology has the added benefit of creating jobs and opportunities for innovation in the region. Nevertheless, the PFAL industry faces significant challenges, including high initial investment costs, which could hamper growth in the coming decades. Hopefully, this hurdle will not be insurmountable.
There has been a lot in the news over the past few months about Russia’s military activity in the Arctic, with many media channels portraying these actions as part of an aggressive geopolitical strategy, with a revived Cold War narrative from both the Western and Russian side. These sensationalist stories should be interpreted with healthy skepticism, as military activity in the region by an Arctic state is not unusual or unprecedented, and because the Arctic is a region that has a history of beneficial and peaceful international cooperation. However, we should not ignore the recent uptick in military activity (Figure 1) in the region because military investment is a strong economic driver of growth for urban centers in the Arctic.
Figure 1: The Arktichesky Trilistnik (Arctic Trefoil) complex of the Nagursky military base, on Franz Joseph Island. The most northern military base in the world. Photo Credit: RT.com
The growing accessibility of the Arctic region due to climate change will likely increase activity in the region, both commercially and militarily. Therefore, it is important to analyze the best practices for sustainable growth affiliated with military investment and to prepare Arctic communities for the benefits and drawbacks of such growth.
Military activity in the Arctic is not a new phenomenon. In fact, it has a long history, especially in Russia where Arctic exploration and settlement has been happening for centuries. Due to the expenses associated with exploring such a large and remote territory, as well as the significant danger, the government was always involved, beginning with the earliest monarchies. Most explorers, Arctic or otherwise, were affiliated with their governments through their militaries. English Arctic explorer John Davis fought for England against the Spanish Armada in the 16th century, and Danish-born Vitus Bering, served under the flag of the Russian Imperial Navy during the 18th century. The militaries were often the only institutions with enough resources and experience operating in harsh conditions to support such wild and dangerous expeditions.
This trend of military involvement in Arctic exploration continued, and was not limited to Russian and European actors. Immediately following the purchase of the Alaskan territory in 1867, the US military
Figure 2: The Alaska-Canada Highway was constructed during World War II. Its purpose was to connect the lower 48 states of the US to Alaska through Canada. It begins in Dawson Creek, British Columbia, and runs to Delta Junction, Alaska. Photo Credit: Wikipedia
began to develop bases and send out geographical exploration missions. The development of Alaska continued throughout the early 20th century and was accelerated by World War II and concerns of a Japanese invasion into this northern territory. In 1942 US military needs resulted in the construction of the Alaska-Canadian highway (Figure 2), a 1,420-mile long road linking the continental United States with the Alaskan territory. This road was heavily used during World War II for the lend-lease program which saw the US deliver about 8,000 military aircraft to the Soviet Union using the Alaska-Canada highway and the Airbases around Fairbanks, Alaska (Figure 3). Following the war, the highway opened to civilian use and provides a vital overland route between urban centers such as Fairbanks and Anchorage and the rest of North America. The important highway remains in use today, and such infrastructure would never have been built without significant military investment. These are but a few examples of the effects of military activity in the Arctic, and how it can have a positive effect on the development of Arctic communities, given a climate of peace and cooperation.
Figure 3: A monument to the Lend-Lease Program during WWII, which saw the US transfer control of ~8,000 military aircraft to the Soviet Union. A poignant example of successful cooperation between two world-powers in the Arctic. Photo Credit: Dmitry Streletsky
in Tiksi, Anadyr, Vorkuta and Temp, and on the Kotelny Islands. As the North Pole represents the shortest air-route between Russia and North America, such investments have certainly not gone unnoticed by the US and their NATO allies, who have their own bases in the region (Figure 4). However, western media has greatly exaggerated the scope of these Russian military activities and has made considerable assumptions on Russia’s intentions when reporting on these issues. If the US military isn’t overly concerned, then the public should not be worried. The United States and its allies also maintain significant forces in Norway and other Arctic territories to balance out Russian military resources there. Moreover, the number and scale of Russian military operations in the Arctic remains well below Cold War levels. The fact is that as the Arctic warms and become more accessible, both in terms of resource extraction and the development of trade-routes, such as the Northern Sea Route, the region will take on a new significance in the global balance of power. Up until now, the permanent Arctic bases (Figure 4) that Russia has reopened have been support oriented, not being developed enough to support a full-combat presence.
Figure 4: A map of the various military bases either active or being reopened in the Arctic. Though Russia is increasing its presence, the new and renovated bases seem to be geared towards support and logistics for now. Map Credit: Business Insider
It is more likely that these bases will improve Moscow’s ability to keep tabs on activity in the Arctic, including the monitoring of conditions and ships on the Norther Sea Route, as well as serving as support bases to further develop the region. While these new military investments are strategic in nature and meant to assert control over Russia’s Arctic territory, they are not a viable platform for Russia to threaten the national security of the US.
Historically, military investment can result in the growth of large urban centers in the Arctic, and, more importantly, provide a significant economic boost to these cities. This was the case in Murmansk, Russia, a trading-post whose year-round ice-free harbor was strategically enticing to the Russian Empire in World War I. The construction of a railroad connecting the region to the rest of Russia resulted in the growth of the town and the construction of a port and naval base. The city continued to grow and was an important port during World War II and beyond, being nicknamed the “gateway to the Arctic.” The presence of the Northern Fleet of Russia’s navy in Severemorsk, just a few miles north of Murmansk, has continued to play an important role in the city’s economy, alongside the more traditional industries such as mineral extraction. Renewed investment in the Northern Fleet and the expansion of Russia’s nuclear ice-breaking fleet has resulted in the improved maintenance of infrastructure in the region, but has also supported the secondary economy with soldiers and officers representing a new and relatively well endowed customer base. Arctic cities in the United States also have benefited from military presence, with Fairbanks, Alaska playing host to several US Army and Airforce bases (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks, Alaska, is one of many US military installations in the Arctic region. Photo Credit: MilitaryBases.com
The military built its first base near Fairbanks in 1939 and its presence has continued to support the growth and sustainability of the city, both in terms of infrastructure development and the growth of a secondary economy based on spending by military personnel. Though the US has pondered reducing the size of its military in Alaska, such a move no longer seems likely in the context of increased Russian activity in the region. The major cities of Murmansk and Fairbanks will continue to benefit from an existing military presence, while the urban areas such as Tiksi, Anadyr, Vorkuta and Temp could see significant growth from investments in transport infrastructure and the influx of military and research personnel.
However, it is important to realize that military investment can also have negative impacts on Arctic communities. Though there is no overt reason for concern, whenever you have an increase in military presence in a region, there is a heightened risk of an accident or conflict. This is especially true given the state of the broader globally oriented geopolitical situation currently. While military investment in the Arctic itself has been focused on scientific and support activities, which can be hugely beneficial to Arctic communities, an actual flare-up would be devastating. Luckily, there are still many voices of reason among the global community of think-tanks and policy advice institutions. The Brookings Institution published a report in 2016 calling for increased cooperation between the US and Russia in the spheres of research, natural resource exploration, and search-and-rescue (Figure 6).
Figure 6: A US Coast Guard vessel CG Svalbard W303 and the Russian vessel “Arctic Princess” outside Svalbard. Russia operates a sizable Arctic Sea fleet compared to the US, which only has one active Polar-class icebreaker. Both countries remain open to opportunities for cooperation in search-and-rescue and research. Photo Credit: Torbjørn Kjosvold/Forsvaret
This kind of press promotes a climate of healthy and honest dialogue between the two countries, while helping soothe fears over an arms-race in the region. Kenneth Yalowitz, Director of the Conflict Resolution Program at Georgetown University, Global Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center, and former U.S. Ambassador to Belarus and Georgia, sees Russia’s military presence in the Arctic as defensive in nature, welcoming constructive Russian activity in researching climate-change, and supporting economic development. The Arctic region has long been an example of beneficial international cooperation and successful diplomacy, even in the face of broader geopolitical tensions, such as the peaceful resolution of the Russia-Norway Barents Sea territorial dispute (Figure 7). Therefore, it is imperative that all actors in the Arctic do their very best to conserve and further develop the precedent of strong cooperation in the High North, and not pay too much attention to the fear-mongering tales of aggression or tension in the region which have been propagated by the mainstream media.
Figure 7: 40 years of border dispute between Russia and Norway ended with the signature of a delamination agreement between the two countries. Another example of successful diplomacy between two Arctic states. Map Author: Luis Suter
This past weekend, we were delighted to host the inaugural annual meeting of the Arctic PIRE: Promoting Urban Sustainability in the Arctic project. Roughly 30 members of our international research network were in attendance, discussing issues including the framework for our Arctic Urban Sustainability Index, the selection appropriate sustainability indicators, and strategies for strengthening the outreach of our important research. We also discussed future research trips to the Arctic, cooperation with media organizations, such as Planet Forward to increase our accessibility to new audiences, and the creation of an educational resource database for Arctic Sustainability issues.
The conference culminated with a Public Panel discussion on Friday, October 21st, where over 50 members of the public visited The George Washington University to attend the event. Attendees included professors and students, as well as representatives of the National Science Foundation, embassies, and think-tanks based here in Washington DC. As our project builds momentum we will continue to look for more opportunities in research cooperation and outreach, in order to maximize the outreach and accessibility of our project. A full meeting report including notes and results will be published soon!
Last week, three of our distinguished researchers, Dmitry Streletskiy of The George Washington University, Valery Grebenets of Moscow State University, and Oleg Anisomov of Russia’s State Hydrological Institute, were featured in a Guardian article on the effects of thawing permafrost on Arctic cities. The Russian city of Norilsk, discussed a few weeks ago in this blog, stood at the center of attention. This time the focus was on the condition of buildings and the housing stock, which is suffering as a result of thawing permafrost. This issue is well known within Russia with Valery Tereshkov, the deputy head of the emergencies ministry in the Krasnoyarsk region, writing an article a few weeks ago stating that nearly 60% of all buildings in Norilsk have been deformed in some way. Problems caused by climate change and thawing permafrost have also been on the radar of global media, but mostly through the traditional Arctic lens of remote islands and coastal settlements being eroded, or indigenous communities having to move from their ancestral homes. The Guardian article was one of the first times that the global media examined the effects of climate change and thawing permafrost on the scale of a major Arctic city.
Figure 1: Location of Norilsk Photo Credit: BBC
Both in terms of population and economic output, Norilsk is one of the most important Arctic urban centers. With local engineers estimating that more than 100 residential buildings, about one-tenth of the housing stock, “have been vacated here due to damage from thawing permafrost,” this city is facing an existential crisis. Thawing permafrost under vital infrastructure is not a new problem for Arctic engineers, who have been building in the Arctic for many centuries with the largest development happening in Russia. Arctic PIRE member Valery Grebenets of Moscow State University regularly lectures his students on these issues, which include buckling roads, soil runoff killing flora and fauna, and the release of toxic substances trapped in the ice. These experts are also familiar with impact of urban areas on permafrost, such as the heat given off by buildings through their foundations. For many decades, engineers have been finding creative solutions to offset these “technogenic factors,” such as placing buildings on stilts to lessen their transfer of heat into the ground. However, none of these engineering plans took into account the effect of global warming, which has deepened the yearly permafrost thaw and significantly increased the speed of natural degradation. With the Arctic experiencing annual temperature increases that far exceed those recorded in the rest of the world, this ongoing crisis looks set to increase in scale and severity.
Figure 2: An example of the effects of thawing permafrost on a news-stand in Norilsk
Unfortunately, when infrastructure and buildings were planned, climate change was not taken seriously enough by city planners and government officials. As Arctic PIRE member Dmitry Streletskiy of The George Washington University told the Guardian, “In most cases the effect of climate change was not accounted for properly or at all, so the story is not about one building falling, even though there are examples of that, but about thousands of people living in buildings which have the potential to fall.” This is a clear example of the unfortunate lack of input that the scientific community often has in terms of planning for sustainable urban development. This issue compounded in the Arctic region due to the high cost of adapting cities to change. Our colleague Oleg Anisomov, Arctic expert and Nobel Prize holder, laments that the high north will suffer from lack of strong support in terms of government funding and strategic investment in adaptive engineering solutions. Our project aims to Promote Urban Sustainability in the Arctic hope to alter this trend and increase the voice of the scientific community in the Arctic through our upcoming Arctic Urban Sustainability Index and by increasing global attention on these important issues. Through continuous engagement and communication with policy makers, urban planners, and Arctic development planners, our scientific network will advise on the effects of climate and socio-economic changes to Arctic cities and help these important communities adapt to their rapidly changing surroundings.
Figure 3: A building is temporarily braced against collapse.
Over the past two weeks, the Alaska Dispatch News has written several stories about the discovery of an offshore oil deposit in Smith Bay, Alaska. Smith Bay is on the North Slope of Alaska (Figure 1) which is a region historically rich with oil. However, the region has been on the decline in terms of oil production with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System carrying only 500,000 barrels per day or about one fourth of its designed maximum capacity. The company released a statement on October 5th, estimating the site could provide an additional “200,000 barrels per day of light, highly mobile oil.” The discovery was hailed as a game-changer by the CEO of Caelus Energy, who expects a multibillion-barrel find and the potential for an additional four-billion barrels in an adjoining deposit. With the company envisioning production on the scale of Kuparuk oil field, the second largest in Alaska, Smith Bay would be subject major development, with an initial 250 wells proposed.
Figure 1: Smith Bay on the North Slope is isolated, over 90 miles from the nearest development
After a few days of feverish excitement, realities began to set in. Development is estimated at around $8-10 billion, including $800 million for a 125-mile underwater pipeline, buried in the seabed to protect it from ice flows. Smith Bay is a very remote location, over 90 miles from the closest neighboring development with oil infrastructure. Moreover, every autumn Smith Bay plays host to migrating bowhead whales, heightening concerns among Inupiat communities who hunt the whales for subsistence and the state environmental regulators. Caelus Energy is also very worried about the future of generous tax credits granted to oil companies starting in 2013. As the two-year slump in oil prices continues to squeeze state coffers, some Alaskan legislators have called for a halt to the estimated $750 million annually in tax breaks to oil companies. Meanwhile, Caelus Energy is already owed about $100 million in tax credits for the exploration of Smith Bay. With all this uncertainty, expectations for timely and effective development of the field, hoped to be within five years, have been tempered. However, due to Smith Bay’s great potential, the development of this field is sure to be a major topic for years to come.
Figure 2: The estimated size of the Smith Bay Oil deposit relative to other Alaskan Oil Fields
After 168 years frozen below the ice in Terror Bay, the British Royal Navy’s HMS Terror was located last week by a team from the Arctic Research Foundation thanks to a tip from Sammy Kogvik, an Inuit hunter on their crew. The HMS Terror and her sister ship the HMS Erebus (rediscovered in Queen Maud Gulf in 2014) were part of an 1845 expedition led by Captain Sir John Franklin. The expedition was the most deadly in the polar history of the British Royal Navy, taking the lives of all 129 men, but there have always been questions about exactly what happened. The hunt for the vessels immediately following the disaster was abandoned in 1859 after nothing turned up, and wasn’t resumed for another 150 years.
While the rediscovery presents the opportunity for polar historians to learn what really happened to the Franklin expedition, the motives for finding these historical ships has far more to do with politics and national identity. As the Arctic warms and seasonal ice dwindles, the Northwest Passage may become a viable shipping option through the Arctic, and Canada is anxious to proclaim its sovereignty over the passage. Canada inherited Great Britain’s historical claims to Arctic waters, and a 1997 agreement between Canada and Britain secure Canadian ownership of the ships, with separate provisions for the artefacts and gold that might be found on them. The rediscovery of the HMS Terror and HMS Erebus demonstrate those historical claims to Arctic waters, and focus the country’s attention on a region that is of increasing importance for both the economy and national security.
Local Inuit have not been involved in the discovery of the ships thus far, according to Cathy Towtongie, who runs Nunavut Tunnagavik, an organization that enforces the Nunavut land claims act. But the Canadian government says that it will honor a 1993 Land Claims Act that stipulates joint ownership over all archaeological sites within Nunavut.
Sketch by George Back, illustration from the Toronto Public Library
