23 October 2020, NIICE Commentary 6380
Dr. Suprita Suman
The global warming led to melting of cryosphere and the polar regions are the most susceptible to this. The melting of snow caps has facilitated accessibility of the polar regions and benefitted the commercial and economic activities, though environmental costs are certainly present. Both are geographically contrast to each other. The North Pole is an ocean ringed by the land where as the South Pole is landmass surrounded by the Antarctica Ocean. The melting of ice in the Arctic and the Antarctica Ocean has unleashed opportunities for expanding blue economy on a profitable scale because the absence of ice reduces the cost of operating the vessels without icebreakers. The Arctic is surrounded by the powerful sovereign countries but the Antarctica is an unmanned territory and has been declared as the demilitarized zone through the Antarctica Treaty of 1959. Now it is declared as common heritage of the mankind and reserved for the research purposes. This made the territorial sea and the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Antarctica global common or unclaimed in absence of sovereign government in this vast territory. The pristine beauty and bountiful marine resources in the shallow part of the Antarctica is being eyed by several tourists and fish trawlers all around the world. It is also being signalled that some countries are interested in the resource exploration in the coastal areas of the Antarctica.
These activities have posed challenges for the fragile marine environment in these polar seas yet the commercial interests always remined a guiding factor for the human being and occasional sensitiveness has been experienced in critical times when the great powers find themselves perplexed. Apart from the environmental degradation, the marine resources of these two oceans are also facing threat of being depleted. The term ‘Blue Economy’ which includes the oil exploration, aqua culture, shipping and other activities as a sub sector of an economy, the blue economy includes all economic activities including the sum of output, employment and wages, taking place on or near the coast. This involves the small fishermen to business tycoon operating with huge ships and contributing from food security to energy security. The concept of “Oceans Economy” or “Blue Economy” is recently originated from the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 2012. According ‘to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), “oceans are indeed correctly compared to a cornucopia for humanity, by providing us with food, oxygen and livelihoods”. The basic element of the blue economy is the oceans which provide connectivity, resources, and sustenance to climate and weather. The oceans facilitated global trades and adding nutrition to a major section. When the world witnessed all these stories, the two Oceans of the world, the Arctic and the Antarctica, remained relatively isolated because of presence of thick icecaps which essentially served as a protective shield. The climate change has penetrated this shield and brought them on the forefront of the global geo-strategy for harvesting commercial profits. Now the navigable shipping lanes in the Arctic, unclaimed continental shelf and EEZ of the Antarctica which has coastline as long as 17.968 km is now a vulnerable target for commercial appetite of the global powers. The burgeoning of blue economy has severe environment costs like depletion of marine resources, damage to animals and oil spill, which both the oceans have been experiencing.
Overfishing
The Arctic Ocean is connected to several significant breeding areas of fish stocks, which are expected to move northward with the rising temperature of the Arctic waters. In fact, this change has been underway for the last 40 years. The availability of sufficient fresh oxygen in the Arctic waters support breeding and sustaining the large quantity of high quality fishes like Atlantic Cod, Pacific Cod, Halibut, Redfish, Haddock, King Crab, Snow Crab and Pacific cod. Due to the varieties of marine resources, the Arctic has emerged as a fishing heaven which has resulted in overfishing leading to depletion.
Similarly, the Antarctica Ocean is also rich in fishes, as it a home of 379,000,000 tonnes of Krill. The Krill is the food for the wildlife of the region, such as whales, seals, penguins, squid, and fish and nearly half of the Krill are being consumed by these animals. Though Krill are plentiful in the Southern Ocean, their catch has raised significant uncertainties about its population, and its relationship with the ecosystem. These include long-term trends regarding the amount of Krill in the water, its spatial distribution, amount needed to sustain predator species, and the impact of climate change on its populations. The population of the Antarctic Krill is intimately tied to seasonal sea ice conditions, climate, and ocean currents. The Western Antarctic Peninsula is the important region where the fishery operates. This area has experienced major warming over the last 50 years, and as a result, the extent and duration of winter sea ice are being reduced. This represents an important challenge in the management of the Krill fishery.
According to the Antarctica Wild Life Research Fund, the Antarctic Krill fishery started in the early 1970s and reached the peak in the late 1980s by USSR and Japan, which gradually reduced during the mid-1990s. However, there has been a renewed interest of countries like Norway, Korea, China, and Chile due to its growing market, making the situation alarming.
Oil Spill
Due to icy waters and long dark night, the polar sea can’t bear the consequences of increasing shipping activities which can led to incidents of oil spill. The oil spill takes significantly long time to breakdown, even decades, in the polar seas due to its low temperature. The flowing oil gets sandwiched under the various levels of ice and then released when the ice melts again. The Arctic ecosystem has not got rid of the devastating impacts of the Exxon Valdez oil spill that occurred in 1989. According to BBC News, “around 250,000 seabirds, nearly 3000 sea otters, 300 harbour seals, 250 bald eagles and up to 22 killer whales died as a result of this spill.” Similarly, an oil spill in the Russian Arctic in late April 2012 lasted for 36 hours until the leakage came under control and it led 2,200 tons of oil spilled in 1.5 square kilometres of tundra and shallow water areas that were important to organisms and the Arctic food chain. The oil spills in such areas cause physiological damage, altered feeding behaviour and reproduction, and genetic injury that would reduce the overall viability of populations in the animals. Because the Arctic animals tend to be concentrated around open areas of water within the ice, a nearby spill could have a “devastating population level effect.”
Moreover, the Antarctica also experienced the oil spill cases on 28 January 1989, when the Bahia Paraiso, a 435-foot, double-hulled tourist ship operated by the Argentine navy, ran aground in clear weather off the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. It had a 30-foot gash in its side. About 250,000 gallons of diesel fuel were stored on board, in bulk and in 55-gallon drums; about 170,000 gallons of fuel were spilled in the water. Within few days of the accident, a 15-mile-long slick covered an area of about 10 square miles and had reached the beaches and rookeries surrounding the United States’ Palmer Station research centre, killing Krill and oiling seals, penguins, cormorants, skuas, and giant petrels, while the entire brood of skua chicks in the Palmer area was lost. The accident raised several question and concerns about the Antarctica’s fragile environment. Even failure of countries conducting research in Antarctica are poorly equipped to deal with the incidences of oil spill.
Despite these examples, the global commerce is ready for using the Arctic shipping lane keeping this in the minds that these sea routes are shorter, and thus, would save time and fuel consumption and would trim off the price of goods. However, the real reasons are geopolitical in nature which has questioned the reliability and environment sustainability of the of blue economy.
