Artic Ownership
Angus Bryan
In late 2007, a Russian expedition team dove to the innermost reaches of the
Arctic Seabed and drove their flag into the ocean floor. Although the mission
was symbolic in nature, it is this action that sparks the international debate
over the ownership of the
Arctic and its
valuable resources. What was originally overlooked has now become a spotlight
in the eyes of many countries, including
Canada
and the
United States of
America. The
Arctic
now represents a valuable asset that has large stocks in petroleum and natural
gas. While some may think that the Arctic is just another piece of land to be
bargained and sought after, I believe that the
Arctic
is an invaluable part of both the environment and our society today.
The Arctic region is a large continent located at the northern-most part of
the world. Continental shelves connect it to such northern countries as
Russia,
Canada,
Denmark,
Norway,
Sweden,
Iceland, and the
United States, who are using this information to
support their claim on the
Arctic. On the
outside, the
Arctic seems desolate and inhospitable,
with temperatures reaching −60 °C and glaciers covering most of the surface.
Underground, however, lies the riches that have attracted nations throughout
the world. Oil and gas are a prime resource that runs people's day-to-day
lives. They are a profound part of our economy. When the first surveys of the
Arctic were complete, companies such as BP and Shell became convinced that the
Arctic held unimaginable amounts of natural resources, beginning
their campaign to stop and nothing to acquire them. Many other companies from
countries such as
Russia,
Norway,
Sweden,
Finland, and
Canada are also prospecting the
Arctic, while its future still lies in doubt.
There are many cons and pros to the question of mining resources in the
Arctic. Some support the good of the people, while others
protect the environment, peace, and the very basis of our morals and ethics.
Although the extraction of valuable resources would benefit the economy, the
damage to the wildlife and the environment would be catastrophic. The already
unstable population of polar bears, who have made the
Arctic
their home, would spiral out of control and start a chain reaction that would collapse
the entire eco-system in the Arctic region. The drilling into the ice may also
cause the ice caps to break down faster than they already are, speeding up the
effects of climate change and global warming. On the other hand, other researching
done suggests that taking advantage of the
Arctic's
resources could have an effect on you and your government for the better.
Billions of barrels of oil would make refuelling your car that much cheaper,
and the vast amounts of natural gas would decrease the cost of heating.
The
Arctic itself is not only an invaluable
piece of land, but a part of our society and culture as well. The destruction
of such a monumental symbol in our everyday life would not only affect us, but
our later generations as well. The preservation of the environment should be
more important than the success of industry and the economy. Even despite the
scientific evidence, the chaos that would precede the negotiations of ownership
would arise conflict between nations, and put stress on foreign relations. The
decision weather to protect the
Arctic or
surrender it to a single country will be a monumental shift in power that will
change the world forever.
I believe that the
Arctic should not belong
to any one nation, nor that it should be shared between them. The
Arctic should be protected as it is a part of our culture
and our future generations, as well as the profound impact that the desolation
of it would have on climate change and the environment. The possible gain that
could be made from extracting the resources would be counter-productive against
the progress humanity has made in protecting the environment and recognizing
the damage we are doing to it. I hope others will also see that destroying the
Arctic would be a major mistake, no matter who would be
doing it. The
Arctic is worth far more that
the resources it holds than to the people to whom it affects.
Resources
No comments:
Post a Comment