I could type stuff until I'm blue and it's not going to prove anything. I'm not going to support the global warming theory. Ever. I get data that says one thing. Someone gets data that says the opposite. It's pointless. I believe the Earth warms in cools in cycles. Period.
Shorter route to the destination.
I'm disappointed you didn't read the links. In 2013, some 204 ships were able to cross the Arctic on a route that had previously been covered in ice for thousands of years. Zero ships were able to do this just 4 years ago. That's a rather startling jump in numbers. The question is, why is it possible to do this in 2013, but it was impossible to do in 2009? What changed? The shipping industry claims the difference between now and 4 years ago is that the Arctic ice has melted significantly.
Some denialists insist that the earth's temperature is stable. Other denialists insist that the earth is actually getting cooler. But if either of these assertions were correct, we wouldn't be witnessing such dramatic loss of Arctic sea ice. When NASA publishes satellite images of the disappearing Arctic ice, the denialists insist that NASA is scamming the public by rigging the data. Perhaps the evil NASA scientists are a bunch of liars.
But if the scientists are lying, why is the shipping industry also lying?
The global warming or "climate change" argument is really a simple one.
I'm a strong believer in progress, and I don't think we should stop burning fossil fuels to impede our progress. That said, what is the harm of moving to other forms of energy that probably do not have an impact on the future state of the planet.
Depends. If we were to harness all the wind energy, what would be the climate consequences?
It's not the global warming, it the hard work and dedication of breaking ice year after year for many decades.
How naive. Do you have any sources to back this up? The ice breakers work seasonally, and all their hard work in the summer is completely ruined by winter storms.
Forget the tree-hugging hippies in the liberal media, here's some analysis from the conservative Wall Street Journal: "The Northern Sea Route has become viable as a commercial shipping lane only in the past few years, as the season of thinning ice has grown longer. The speed at which it can develop is limited, though, as it is still navigable only around four months a year—although climate change may keep lengthening that."
My point is that by breaking ice for as long as possible in a season can cause ice thinning because it only had X number of months where breaking did not occur and only Y number of months where freezing was allowed. This thinning or thin ice will melt faster than ice that had not been broken up as much or at all.
I have no doubt the planet moves in and out of cold periods...
When you have quick changes in global temperatures (like over 100 years, not thousands of years), species can't adapt and they die off.
The ice is thinner because the arctic is warmer, which allows icebreakers to do their work much more easily and allow shipping through the northwest passage with not as much risk.
You're going to need extra blankets and maybe a generator. This is going to be 1 brutal winter. (north of I-80)