Up north, a sea to explore

  • Article by: Juliette Kayyem , Boston Globe
  • Updated: May 17, 2013 - 5:54 PM

It’s summertime in the Arctic, and the U.S. still has no effective strategy for coping with the big melt.

  • 7
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 7 of 7
jarlmnMay. 17, 13 9:10 PM

Coping with the melt? While we reactively moan and wring our hands over "global warming" and act like children, stamping our little feet in protest of climate change and impotently try to hold the warming back with magical 'carbon offsets' etc.... the Russians and the Chinese are preparing to proactively exploit the temperature change! We need to do more than merely cope with the melt. We need to both cope with and exploit it! Sadly, others have beat us to it and there are absolutely no signs that US leadership even remotely has a clue. If people are serious about global warming being real, they are being clownishly unrealistic in dealing with it. Rather than reactively trying to hold back or avoid the change, we desperately need to plan to live in a changed world! And this changed world will include not only temperature change, but being at the mercy of nations that were more clever than us in dealing with it.

4
11
elind56May. 18, 13 8:10 AM

"...the U.S. still has no effective strategy..."------------------------The U.S. is a collection of individuals, a great many of whom are collectively wringing their hands over the alleged climate change that is allegedly taking place, and I would ask them; What are YOU doing to reduce YOUR impact. Is your living space larger than, say, 400 square feet per person and does anybody really even need that much living space for basic survival? When you look around your home, do you see any creature comfort items you could easily do without whose manufacture and use needlessly burns fossil fuel? Is there anything at all that YOU could do to reduce YOUR personal 'footprint'? Of course there is so why aren't you doing these things? Why are you waiting for government to 'do something' before taking action yourself? This extreme hypocrisy makes it quite clear what the real goal is.

2
9
sundialMay. 18, 1310:18 AM

Yes, by all means, let's exploit this opportunity. We don't need to change anything about how we live on this planet. With gas over $4.00 a gallon, we need more oil, regardless of the environmental cost. Who needs polar bears anyway? Besides, if the arctic is melting, it must be God's will.

1
4
owatonnabillMay. 18, 1310:21 AM

This could be a godsend. Not only does the open water make mineral exploration and harvesting much easier and cheaper, but the possible trans-arctic shipping routes will make the transport of these products and many others much cheaper and quicker. We should not be wringing our hands in sorrow. We should be jumping for joy.

2
9
pumiceMay. 18, 1310:43 AM

Here's some relevant information from KSL broadcasting for anyone who's contemplating moving to Utah or Nevada: "A shrinking Lake Mead has left Nevada expecting the lake to drop too low for the existing drinking-water intake to function. They are working to create a new intake 300 feet lower than the current one.... And without the new intake project, Mulroy believes Lake Mead will drop too far to serve Las Vegas. "I think it's a matter of when, not if."

From Deseret News: "Towing icebergs to California, diverting Mississippi River water to the Colorado Front Range or building massive plants to desalinize water from the Sea of Cortez are among the options to counter future water shortages in the two basins of the Colorado River."

Hmmmmmm. Didn't owatonnabill say we should be jumping for joy because the icebergs are melting? What are owatonnabill's thoughts on the economic and social costs of redistributing water so dry states can sustain population growth??? What are owatonnabill's thoughts on the economic and social costs of using water to extract fossil fuels?

8
1
elind56May. 18, 1311:09 AM

@ sundial (and all the other AGW enthusiasts): Are you doing your part to avert climate disaster or are you just part of the problem? What is government going to force you to do that you can't already do yourself?

1
8
sundialMay. 19, 1310:20 AM

ellnd56: In case you didn't realize it, I was being sarcastic. I don't see the melting of the arctic as a good thing. Regarding what I am doing to avert the problem, for starters I give to organizations who are fighting against climate change, and I drive a hybrid. The government didn't force me to do these things. However, government does have a role in addressing the problem. Think what our environment would be today without the clean air and water acts. You may or may not be old enough to remember the river of fire in Ohio that was caused by industrial pollution. Government itself is not the problem. Government can be used for good or evil. The issue is the proper role of government. Now, back to you, what are you doing to address climate change?

1
0
  • 1 - 7 of 7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT