Reading about the Arctic

Posted on August 10, 2012 by Chuck Hill

I had family visiting for a few days early this week and was unable to post. While I was away a number of stories appeared concerning the Arctic. I will just reference them with short comments.

There is an article here, “On Thin Ice: U.S. Capability Lacking in the Race for the Arctic,” by a recent Annapolis graduate that provides a good primer on the state of US interest in the Arctic and why we should care. It also has some thoughtful recommendations.

Marine Log reports

AUGUST 7, 2012 — Bruce Harland, Vice President-Commercial Services of Crowley Maritime Corporation, testified this week on behalf of Crowley and the American Waterways Operators (AWO) before a Kodiak, Alaska, field hearing of the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. The hearing, which was held at the request of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (AK-R) and led by Subcommittee chairwoman Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), focused on the need for a robust U.S. Coast Guard presence in Alaska as the U.S. pursues expanding navigation opportunities in the Arctic region.

His recommendations included:

Accurate charting and hydrographic information;

Greater use of electronic charting and other aids;

Increased AIS coverage to help identify vessels;

A vessel traffic system for Unimak Pass and Bering Straits;

More accurate regional weather and tide information;

Improved Coast Guard incident response and search and rescue capabilities;

Greater ice breaking capabilities; and

Establishment of a Deepwater Arctic Port.

To confirm Mr. Harland’s concern about charts, NOAA is telling us the charts of the Arctic waters are terribly inadequate.

The Commandant advises that while leasing icebreakers may be helpful in the short term, leasing alone is not a long term solution.

Navy times reports the Commandant told a U.S. Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, regarding near term preparations in the Arctic. particularly in regard to Shell’s intention to drill exploratory wells,

“For right now, we are well prepared, because like we always do traditionally, we have multi-mission assets that we can deploy, that are very capable, and that are sufficient for the level of human activity that’s going on this summer and perhaps for the next three or four summers.”

The Coast Guard cutter Juniper (WLB-201) is participating in Exercise Nanook, with Canadian and Danish forces in the waters between Greenland and Canada. This is the third year of CG participation.

Meanwhile the Russians are building a huge new 568 foot long, 33,540 ton, 235,000 HP, nuclear icebreaker to add to their already large fleet, and the they also planning on investing Billions in Arctic infrastructure including bases for the Navy and Maritime Boarder Troops (Coast Guard). I don’t see this as a military threat, but it does seem like the Russians are paying a lot more attention than the US government. They are acting while we wrangle.

High Latitude Region Mission Analysis Study–Summary of Summary

Posted on March 17, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Thanks to the Coast Guard and http://www.fiercehomelandsecurity.co m, we have a summary of the”High Latitude Region Mission Analysis,” that was given to Congress last year. You can get see it in the form of a pfd here.

Bottom line:

The Coast Guard requires three heavy and three medium icebreakers to fulfill its statutory missions.
Naval Operations Concept 2010 (NOC 2010) included a requirement for a year-round continuous heavy icebreaker presence in both the Arctic and Antarctic. The Coast Guard would require six heavy and four medium icebreakers to fulfill its statutory missions and maintain that continuous presence, if they are all conventionally manned and based in the US.
Using multiple crewing and basing two heavy icebreakers in the southern hemisphere (presumably Australia or New Zealand) both statutory and NOC requirements could be met by four heavy and two medium icebreakers.

How soon?:

“U.S. Sen. Mark Begich says the Coast Guard is including $860 million in its five-year budget plan for a new heavy polar icebreaker.”

Even so, we probably will not see a new icebreaker before 2020. POLAR STAR commenced a major refit in May 2010 and is expected to return to service in late 2013, with a 6- to 7-year remaining service life. The Coast Guard’s only medium icebreaker, HEALY, will remain in-service until 2030. POLAR SEA is inoperative and is expected to be decommissioned this year.

So one operational icebreaker until 2013. One heavy and one medium icebreaker 2013-2019. In 2020, POLAR SEA goes away and we are still at one heavy and one medium. Any Catastrophic failure and we are back to only one icebreaker.

If we completed one heavy or medium icebreakers a year, by 2025, the Coast Guard could have the fleet required to meet our statutory responsibilities. Since we would be building OPCs concurrently, this would require a substantial increase in AC&I funding.

A final note: It is not clear from the summary what constitutes a medium icebreaker. (Maybe it is in the full report.) HEALY is identified as “medium” and the POLAR SEA is “heavy,” even if the HEALY is actually larger. Presumably “medium” is less capable, as an icebreaker, than the POLAR class but more capable than the 140 foot icebreaking tugs. Would the MACKINAW (WLBB-30) qualify? How about the 225 foot JUNIPER class WLBs? the old WIND class breakers? the Canadian Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessels? One clue is that the projected price starts at $590M for a single ship and goes down to less than $560M each for four ships. That is about 69% the cost of a heavy icebreaker so presumably about 70% the displacement–larger than USCGC_Glacier (WAGB-4). Would there really be a point in making one or two ships of a different class, if they so close in size to the Heavy icebreakers?

Canadian Icebreaker Design Contract Awarded

Posted on February 5, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Tim Colton’s “Maritime Memos” reports STX Canada Marine has been awarded a $9.5M contract to design Canada’s new icebreaker and goes on to make a suggestion:

“Say, Dave, could you please design it so that it meets the US Coast Guard’s requirements as well? Then maybe Vancouver Shipyards could build four of them, one for you and three for us? Why is Canada only building one, anyway, when you obviously need at least three?”

Lots of other good stuff there as well including: new Navy AGOR, Congress on harbor maintenance, changes in the Navy’s ship building programs.

Got Icebreakers? Show Me the Money!

Posted on November 11, 2011 by Chuck Hill

Apparently there has been some discussion of icebreakers in Congress. The arguments seem to be over the best way to help out, but don’t seem to be doing anything useful. Perhaps the best summary is here. There have been several reports, so to provide a bit more detail.

CNN reports,

“House Republicans, who say they want to force the administration’s hand, are pushing a Coast Guard authorization bill that would decommission the icebreaker Polar Star, which is now being repaired, in just three years, saying that keeping the 35-year-old ship afloat is ‘throwing good money after bad.’

“The Congressional Research Service said one potential concern for Congress is the absence of a plan for replacing the Polar Star upon completion of its seven- to 10-year life after it returns to service in late 2012.

“That is why Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-New Jersey, included the provision to decommission the Polar Star, said spokesman Jason Galanes. “We absolutely support the Arctic icebreaker mission,” Galanes said. “We’re forcing this decision rather then allowing the administration to kick the can down the road.”

“Regardless of the outcome of the dispute, a gap in icebreaking capabilities is almost certain, according to the CRS report. Following any decision to design and build new icebreakers, the first replacement polar icebreaker might enter service in eight to 10 years, the report says.”

If Rep. LoBiondo knows that it will take seven to ten years to complete a new Icebreaker, why does he want to decommission Polar Star after only three years?

In the Senate, Maria Cantwell, D-Wash, is attempting to prevent the planned decommissioning of the Polar Sea (WAGB-11) which the Coast Guard had planned to raid for spares to keep her sister ship, Polar Star (WAGB-10), in commission. She also notes that to meet Coast Guard and Navy mission requirements, the Coast Guard needs a minimum of six heavy-duty icebreakers and four medium-duty icebreakers (first time I’ve seen this stated).

DODbuz lays out the administration’s position, but finds the whole discussion disconnected from reality,

“The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 2838 because it includes a provision that would require the Coast Guard to decommission the icebreaker USCGC POLAR STAR. The Administration has requested, and Congress has appropriated, funds to reactivate the USCGC POLAR STAR by December 2012 and extend that vessel’s service life for seven to 10 years. This effort will stabilize the United States’ existing polar fleet until long-term icebreaking capability requirements are finalized. By directing the Commandant to decommission the USCGC POLAR STAR within three years, the bill would effectively reduce the vessel’s service life to two years and create a significant gap in the Nation’s icebreaking capacity.”

By way of comparison, we have already done a lot of planning for the Offshore Patrol Cutter including getting industry comment on the draft specifications. Money for the design is in the FY2012 budget, but we are still not expecting to see the first one until at least 2019, and I suspect it will be later than that. So designing, contracting for, and building an new design icebreaker for the Coast Guard in less than eight years is probably impossible assuming normal procedures.

Even if we started the procurement process for WAGB-21 in FY2013, the refurbished Polar Star will probably need to last a full ten years before it can be replaced by a second new construction icebreaker (WAGB-22) that would finally give the Coast Guard the three large icebreakers they say we need, and that includes the less capable Healy (WAGB-20). (Incidentally, where are WAGB-12 through 19?)

There are other ways we might get a capability quicker if the Coast Guard and Congress are really interested. When the National Science Foundation needed an icebreaker they chartered one. Presumably the Coast Guard could do the same. It provides the capability without the big up front cost and 30+ year commitment to a particular design. Actually there has been some support for this,

“The lone Alaska congressmen, Republican Don Young, opposes decommissioning icebreakers and wants to increase the number of vessels in any way possible, spokesman Luke Miller said. Young has introduced a bill that would authorize the Coast Guard to enter into long-term lease agreements for two new icebreakers.”

The Brits, in need of quick fix when their Arctic patrol ship was damaged by fire, did something even more radical, they took a three year lease on an existing Norwegian vessel that has been used to support the oil industry and added boats and weapons.

Thinking in more conventional terms, there are plenty of existing designs that can be modified and relatively quickly converted to provide icebreaking or ice-strengthened patrol vessels that could be built in the US. We have talked about Arctic Patrol Cutters before, but here is another ship only a little smaller than Glacier (WAGB-4), being built by Finland and Russia that looks adaptable.

NB506507-Supply-vessel

Reportedly they are 99.2 m (325′) in length and 21.7 m (71′) in breadth. Their four engines have the total power of 18,000 kW and the propulsion power of 13,000 kW (17,426 HP). They reportedly are designed to operate independently in ice 1.7 m (5.6′) thick. With parts built in both Finland and Russia the price is about $100M each.

“As multipurpose vessels, these vessels are capable of carrying various type of cargo and they are equipped for oil spill response, fire fighting, and rescue operations. The rescue capacity is for 195 persons.”

Looks like it would not be too hard to add a hanger and flight deck.

Drilling in the Arctic–Ready or Not

Posted on November 9, 2011 by Chuck Hill

gCaptain points out that the administration is planning to expand offshore drilling and in this particular case the expansion will include drilling off the North Slope.

“U.S. officials acknowledged they lack a full understanding of the Arctic’s environment and ecosystem. For that reason, the U.S. decided to delay lease auctions in the Arctic until 2015 and 2016 “to use the intervening years to better address the science gaps,” Interior Deputy Secretary David Hayes said.”

This puts a rush on the Coast Guard to develop infrastructure in this area. Considering the pace of Congressional action and the hesitance to add to appropriations, it will be very difficult for the Coast Guard to be fully ready when the initial capability is required.

Denmark Supports China Permanent Observer Status at Arctic Council

Posted on November 1, 2011 by Chuck Hill

Canadian media reports Denmark has told China that they support China’s application for permanent observer status on the eight member Arctic Council (Canada, Russia, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and the United States).

As a great maritime trading nation, China certainly has an interest in the possibility of shortening the shipping route between Europe and Asia, but their interest goes beyond that:

“Wright ( University of Calgary history professor David Wright)… points out that Chinese scholars are examining Canada’s claims of historical sovereignty over the Arctic, especially in regard to the Northwest Passage. China, he says, wants the Arctic, with its sea passages, oil and natural gas wealth, minerals and fishing stocks, to be international territory or the ‘shared heritage of humankind.’…Such a view is contrary to Canada’s insistence on its territorial sovereignty of the Arctic islands and the waterways between them.” (emphasis applied)

As noted earlier Canadian and US interest don’t exactly coincide here, with the Canadians claiming sections of the Northwest Passage as internal waters, while the US considers them an international strait. The Canadian position that they have the right to deny passage bears some resemblance to the position China has taken with regard to its EEZ. The Chinese position, claiming “indisputable” sovereignty over most of the South China Sea, while considering the Arctic the “shared heritage of humankind” smacks of the the old saying, “What’s mine is mine; what’s yours is negotiable.”

Russia Opens Its Maritime Arctic-USNI

Posted on October 27, 2011 by Chuck Hill

The Naval Institute has a good review of recent developments in the Russian Arctic, written by Captain Lawson Brigham, USCG (ret.).

Looks like the Russians are opening up this formerly closed area for commerce and exploitation. Moreover they have settled their boundary dispute with Norway and their handling of hydro-carbon deposit that straddles the new Russia-Norway EEZ boundary will provide precedence for handling other similar situations. The infrastructure appears to be growing rapidly and year round operations are planned.

(Note the US and Canada still have an outstanding dispute over a boundary line in the Arctic.)

Chinese Interest in the Polar Regions–VOA

Posted on October 14, 2011 by Chuck Hill

Some interesting info about Chinese interest in the polar regions from the Voice of America.

China Goes to the Poles

Posted on September 30, 2011 by Chuck Hill

China Defense Blog has a photo essay from China’s recent expedition to the Arctic, as well as pictures of their station in Antartica. Below is a photo of their large Russian built icebreaker from the post, with the Wiki link for the specs. Note in the link above, their helo looks an awful lot like an H-65. There is also some photos of their new support aircraft, a modified DC-3.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-08/21/c_13455724.htm
ABOARD XUELONG, Aug. 21 (Xinhua) — A group of Chinese scientists reached the North Pole on Friday afternoon, extending their research on the Arctic Ocean to Earth’s northernmost point.

Fourteen Chinese scientists were flown in by helicopter from icebreaker the Xuelong, or Snow Dragon, which carried a Chinese exploration team and reached a point at 88.22 degrees north latitude and 177.20 degrees west longitude.

Photo: MV Xue Long

Icebreaker Envy

Posted on September 22, 2011 by Chuck Hill

Ryan Erickson has published the Arctic SAR boundaries on the Naval Institute Blog. Looking at this chart got me thinking about ice capable ships. That of course lead to looking for similar information on Antarctica, so this is going to be a survey of What nations are interested in the Polar regions? and What do their ice capable fleets look like?

Continue reading →

Chuck Hill's CG Blog

Tag Archives: Arctic