The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of May 2, 2022

Norway Tries to Throw Out People vs. Arctic Oil Case

As reported by Arctic Today on April 29, the Norwegian government has asked the European Court of Human Rights to throw out a lawsuit filed against it by a group of environmental activists over Arctic oil exploration. The development comes after the activists disputed the previous ruling of the Norwegian Supreme Court that was in favour of the government. While the activists are arguing that Arctic oil exploration endangers the environment and deprives young people and future generations of their future, the Norwegian government has described the complaint as inadmissible. (Arctic Today)

Take 1: The Arctic is also home to vulnerable species and ecosystems, as well as numerous Indigenous and local communities- it is also warming at three two to three times the global rate. The Norilsk oil spill in Northern Russia was the biggest oil spill in the Arctic to date, an event that severely impacted local life. The latest IPCC report is clear: in order to mitigate climate change carbon capture is not enough; emission reductions must be implemented by all countries- especially those with high emissions. As a country in the Global North, Norway is part of the most carbon polluting countries. Oil production is simply incompatible with a sustainable future. Whether Arctic oil drilling is legal or not is beside the point. But as the law is one of the primary forms of governance enforcing the economic and normative interests of the powerful, it is no wonder that elites – from corporations, to individuals, to states – use it as a tool protect their interests.Nonetheless, these activists are continuing the decades-long legacy of international environmental activism in using the very tools designed by elites against them. Depending on its outcome, the class action might prove to be a turn for this oil-producing country. (IPCC, The Guardian, The New York Times) 

Finland, Russia and Vostok Oil: Checkmate for Russian oil?

As reported by The Barents Observer on May 2, despite the threat of increased European sanctions and embargo, Russia’s biggest oil producer Rosneft is set to continue the development of its Vostok Oil mega–project. While the project is currently the biggest of its kind in the Arctic – scheduled to produce over a 100 million tons of oil and natural gas per year by 2030 – key partners have begun to review and re-evaluate their support due to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and subsequent European sanctions. (The Barents Observer)

Take 2: The Russian Arctic is a key source of the natural gas that has been a cornerstone of the Russian economy. In 2021, Russian gas company Gazprom totaled a net profit of close to €31 billion in 2021 from Arctic gas production. However, the recent drastic changes in regional and international diplomatic relations will most likely damper such profits for the years ahead. The French energy company Total has taken a $4.1bn write-off in the first quarter of 2022 due to its involvement in Arctic LNG projects. Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell and Equinor have all ended their involvement in Russian energy projects. As a comparison, Russia is becoming more and more isolated from Europe as sanctions continue to roll in, and is as a result focusing on other markets, for instance in Asia. This opens new opportunities in Europe regarding the development of energy infrastructures and resilience. Norway is already considering increasing production capacity in gas and oil production; Sweden, and Finland are investing heavily in Arctic energy projects such as wind farms. While the human security aspects of these projects – from job security to respect for local Indigenous peoples – are at times dubious, this ongoing shifting of energy-production powers in the High North and Arctic is key for the future of economic development in the region. Whether that development will become sustainable for all is still up in the air. (Eye On The Arctic, High North News, The Arctic, The Barents Observer, Library of Congress)

From Siberia to China: ‘Oil’ On Board the Trans-Siberian Route

As reported by South China Morning Post on May 2, Russian Siberian natural gas exports to China have increased over 60 percent in the first four months of 2022. In February, Moscow and Beijing signed a US$117.5 billion contract which could supply China with Russian Siberian gas up to 48 billion cubic meters per year starting 2026. (SCMP)

Take 3: The cry for a unified global front against Russia at the beginning of the conflict has not seemed to echo as anticipated outside of the West. Siberian oil and gas is proving to become even more central to Asian energy needs- if the initial contracts hold up to mounting financial and economic pressures from European sanctions. The Asian market, especially the Chinese market, has been of importance for Russia for some time now, but the new diplomatic context might accelerate Russia’s so-called turn to the East. Leaving diplomatic tensions and European relations aside, the mounting economic sanctions on Russia have a direct impact on the income and employment opportunities for many in Russia, especially in industrial regions such as its Northern territories. The natural resources sector has not escaped that fate. As such, a rerouting of industrial focus towards Asia might also provide job security to the communities first affected by this decoupling- from energy production to the fishing industry. After all, people need to eat, and the government must keep itself afloat. However, reports show the difficult road ahead for Russian oil. Chinese buyers are also hesitant and wary of potential sanctions, with prices slashed as a result. With Russia’s influence beyond its national borders, how will this potentially closer but wavering link with Asian markets affect the post-Soviet Eurasian region? And most importantly to the topic at hand, how will this rerouting affect Siberian economic dynamics? (Financial Times, Reuters, The New York Times)

Climate Change and U.S. Institutions: Truly a National Security Threat?

As reported by High North News on May 3, a new U.S. Department of Defense study highlights the lack of resilience and preparedness of Arctic and High North military bases against the effects of climate change. The report highlights the discrepancy between the official stance of the U.S. government on climate change as a national security threat and the reality of damaged military infrastructures due to soaring temperatures and melting permafrost. (High North News)

Take 4: Climate change is a security threat; indeed a threat so large that it has been defined as a national security threat by the U.S. government. Despite this, the report highlights how even military leaders who are aware of the need for mitigation and adaptation are failing to comply. It would be easy to blame previous President Donald Trump for ingraining a mentality of climate change denial in American institutions. But while his legacy is indeed wide and deep, he is only a symptom of a much larger and historically-rooted colonial philosophy of exploitation. While the U.S. government has indeed declared climate change a national security threat, the country remains one of the biggest greenhouse gas polluters on the planet, and therefore one of the main drivers of climate change. Warming at three times the global average, the Arctic is especially vulnerable to the consequences of global warming. As such, if the U.S. government did indeed view climate change as the threat it is to its High North and Arctic territories, the measures implemented would go much beyond simple infrastructure preparedness and would include effective carbon emission reduction on a much grander scale. (Duke University Press, Our World in Data, Review of International Studies)

Sustainable Energy and the Economy: Two Birds with One Stone for Canada

As reported by Nunatsiaq News on April 29, the federal government of Canada is investing CAN$2.6 million into electric vehicle infrastructures in Nunavik, northern Québec. Power company TUGLIQ Energy Co. has received the funding to demonstrate and assess the use of electric vehicle technology by installing recharge stations at Raglan Mine and Bloom Lake. The company will invest an additional $1.8 million into the project. (Nunatsiaq News)

Take 5: One of the biggest challenges for electricity development in the Arctic and High North is the cold. The extreme temperatures in the region damage batteries and make them take longer to recharge. However, the need to move away from heavy fuel and coal is urgent, as the health and environmental impacts of ecosystems and communities pose a real threat. The decision of the Canadian federal government to fund electric vehicle infrastructures in the High North aligns with its position as a world leader in mining. Developing infrastructures and technology relying on critical minerals – such as cobalt, lithium or nickel – is politically and economically strategic for Canada. While Canada faces strong international competition and has been somewhat losing ground to other global super-producers since the early 2010s, Québec has implemented regional strategies in order to meet supply and demand. The U.S. has joined forces with Canada to boost the production of critical minerals necessary for the ‘green’ transition to counter international competitors such as China. China’s position in the Arctic is a constant subject of debate and controversies. With the additional geopolitical tensions with Russia, the political nature of energy is becoming even more visible in the circumpolar North. Canada’s emphasis on domestic mining and the electric vehicle markets is killing two birds with one stone: increasing its own revenues at the same time as continuing to be seen by the rest of the world as an example of sustainable development. (CBC, Financial Post, Reuters)