Skip to main content

Arctic shipping guidance from the CMIP6 ensemble on operational and infrastructural timescales

This article has been updated

Abstract

The expectation of a seasonally ice-free Arctic by mid-century has sparked economic and geopolitical interest in potential Arctic opportunities and risks. But substantial sea ice variability across timescales suggests an uncertain future for forecasts of marine accessibility, especially over operational (< 2 years) and infrastructural (> 5 years) time spans that significantly influence decision-makers planning ship routing, emergency management, port investment, and more. Here, we use three marine accessibility schemes applied to CMIP6 scenarios to quantify Arctic shipping season variability and uncertainty across these decision-relevant timescales. We compare route projections across climate models and accessibility schemes to show that the choice of methodology significantly affects information important for decision-making. We find high variability and uncertainty in voyage time notably in the critical “shoulder” seasons on both timescales. This leads to increased risk over the next several decades, with high short-term uncertainty particularly at the end of the shipping season for the next 25 years. Navigation risk is expected to decline from 2045 onward. Knowledge that accounts for sea ice variability, simulation quality, and accessibility algorithm allows for better investment decisions and the minimization of unforeseen costs due to delayed and canceled voyages. Here we develop and demonstrate a framework for developing more timely and salient information to guide decisions on Arctic shipping relevant to both operational and infrastructural horizons as climate projections become spatially and physically better resolved.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Data availability

The datasets used in this study are freely available at esgf-node.llnl.gov/search/cmip6.

Change history

  • 31 August 2021

    The wrong Supplementary file was originally published with this article; it has now been replaced with the correct file. Duplicate Supplementary files were also removed

References

  1. Aksenov Y, Popova EE, Yool A, Nurser AJG, Williams TD, Bertino L, Bergh J (2017) On the future navigability of Arctic sea routes: high-resolution projections of the Arctic Ocean and sea ice. Mar Policy 75:300–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bailey DA, Holland MM, DuVivier AK, Hunke EC, Turner AK (2020) Impact of a new sea ice thermodynamic formulation in the CESM2 sea ice component. J Adv Model Earth Syst 12:e2020MS002154

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bekkers E, Francois JF, Rojas-Romagosa H (2018) Melting ice caps and the economic impact of opening the Northern Sea Route. Econ J 128:1095–1127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett MM, Stephenson SR, Yang K, Bravo MT, De Jonghe B (2020) The opening of the Transpolar Sea Route: logistical, geopolitical, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts. Mar Policy 121:104178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonan DB, Lehner F, Holland MM (2021) Partitioning uncertainty in projections of Arctic sea ice. Environ Res Lett 16:044002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brigham L (2015) Future perspective: the maritime Arctic in 2050. Fletcher F World Aff 39:109

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brigt D, Berit K (2018) Post-petroleum security in a changing Arctic: narratives and trajectories towards viable futures. Arct Rev 9:244–261. https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v9.1251

  8. Christiansen M, Fagerholt K, Ronen D (2004) Ship routing and scheduling: status and perspectives. Transp Sci 38:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cooley SW, Ryan JC, Smith LC, Horvat C, Pearson B, Dale B, Lynch AH (2020) Coldest Canadian Arctic communities face greatest reductions in shorefast sea ice. Nat Clim Chang 10:533–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Davy R, Outten S (2020) The Arctic surface climate in CMIP6: status and developments since CMIP5. J Clim 33:8047–8068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Day JJ, Tietsche S, Hawkins E (2014) Pan-Arctic and regional sea ice predictability: initialization month dependence. J Clim 27:4371–4390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Eicken H (2013) Arctic sea ice needs better forecasts. Nature 497:431–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fedi L, Etienne L, Faury O, Rigot-Müller P, Stephenson S, Cheaitou A (2018) Stakes, benefits, and limits of POLARIS system for arctic navigation. J Ocean Technol 13:54–67

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fedi L, Faury O, Etienne L (2020) Mapping and analysis of maritime accidents in the Russian Arctic through the lens of the Polar Code and POLARIS system. Mar Policy 118:103984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fiedler T, Pitman AJ, Mackenzie K, Wood N, Jakob C, Perkins-Kirkpatrick SE (2021) Business risk and the emergence of climate analytics. Nat Clim Chang 11:87–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Flato G, Marotzke J, Abiodun B, Braconnot P, Chou SC, Collins W, Cox P, Driouech F, Emori S, Eyring V (2014) Evaluation of climate models. Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 741-866

  17. Goldstein MA, Lynch AH, Yan R, Veland S, Tallieri W (2021) Regional reinvention and economic viability in a changing Arctic. Proc Natl Acad Sci (In review)

  18. Gunnarsson B (2021) Recent ship traffic and developing shipping trends on the Northern Sea Route—policy implications for future arctic shipping. Mar Policy 124:104369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gunnarsson B, Moe A (2021) Ten years of international shipping on the Northern Sea Route: trends and challenges. Arct Rev 12:4–30. https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v12.2614

  20. Hauser DDW, Laidre KL, Stern HL (2018) Vulnerability of Arctic marine mammals to vessel traffic in the increasingly ice-free Northwest Passage and Northern Sea Route. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115:7617–7622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hausfather Z, Peters GP (2020) Emissions - the ‘business as usual’ story is misleading. Nature 577:618–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hawkins E, Sutton R (2009) The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 90:1095–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Holland MM, Landrum L, Bailey D, Vavrus S (2019) Changing seasonal predictability of Arctic summer sea ice area in a warming climate. J Clim 32:4963–4979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hunke EC, Hebert DA, Lecomte O (2013) Level-ice melt ponds in the Los Alamos sea ice model, CICE. Ocean Model 71:26–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. IMO (2016) Guidance on methodologies for assessing operational capabilities and limitations in ice. MSC.1/Circ.1519, 6 June, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.nautinst.org/uploads/assets/uploaded/2f01665c-04f7-4488-802552e5b5db62d9.pdf

  26. Izaguirre C, Losada IJ, Camus P, Vigh JL, Stenek V (2020) Climate change risk to global port operations. Nat Clim Chang 11:14–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00937-z

  27. Khon VC, Mokhov II, Semenov VA (2017) Transit navigation through Northern Sea Route from satellite data and CMIP5 simulations. Environ Res Lett 12:024010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Labe Z, Magnusdottir G, Stern H (2018) Variability of Arctic sea ice thickness using PIOMAS and the CESM Large Ensemble. J Clim 31:3233–3247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Landrum L, Holland MM (2020) Extremes become routine in an emerging new Arctic. Nat Clim Chang 10:1108–1115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Li X, Lynch AH, Bailey DA, Stephenson SR, Veland S (2021) The impact of black carbon emissions from projected Arctic shipping on regional ice transport. Clim Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05814-9

  31. Liu M, Kronbak J (2010) The potential economic viability of using the Northern Sea Route (NSR) as an alternative route between Asia and Europe. J Transp Geogr 18:434–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lynch AH, Serreze MC, Cassano EN, Crawford AD, Stroeve J (2016) Linkages between Arctic summer circulation regimes and regional sea ice anomalies. J Geophys Res-Atmos 121:7868–7880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Massonnet F, Vancoppenolle M, Goosse H, Docquier D, Fichefet T, Blanchard-Wrigglesworth E (2018) Arctic sea-ice change tied to its mean state through thermodynamic processes. Nat Clim Chang 8:599–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Melia N, Haines K, Hawkins E (2016) Sea ice decline and 21st century trans-Arctic shipping routes. Geophys Res Lett 43:9720–9728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mills CM, Walsh JE (2014) Synoptic activity associated with sea ice variability in the Arctic. J Geophys Res-Atmos 119:12,117–112,131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. National Snow and Ice Data Center (2020) Northern Sea Route shipping rises as sea ice falls. November 2020. Retrieved from https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2020/11/

  37. Perrette M, Yool A, Quartly GD, Popova EE (2011) Near-ubiquity of ice-edge blooms in the Arctic. Biogeosciences 8:515–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Petrick S, Riemann-Campe K, Hoog S, Growitsch C, Schwind H, Gerdes R, Rehdanz K (2017) Climate change, future Arctic Sea ice, and the competitiveness of European Arctic offshore oil and gas production on world markets. Ambio 46:410–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rodrigue J-P (2020) The geography of transport systems. Routledge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Serreze MC, Stroeve J (2015) Arctic sea ice trends, variability and implications for seasonal ice forecasting. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 373:20140159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Shen Z, Duan A, Li D, Li J (2021) Assessment and ranking of climate models in Arctic sea-ice cover simulation: from CMIP5 to CMIP6. J Clim J Clim 34(9):3609–3627. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0294.1

  42. SIMIP Community (2020) Arctic sea ice in CMIP6. Geophys Res Lett 47:e2019GL086749

    Google Scholar 

  43. Smith A, Jahn A (2019) Definition differences and internal variability affect the simulated Arctic sea ice melt season. Cryosphere 13:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Stephenson SR, Pincus R (2018) Challenges of sea-ice prediction for Arctic marine policy and planning. J Borderlands Stud 33:255–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Stephenson SR, Smith LC (2015) Influence of climate model variability on projected Arctic shipping futures. Earth’s Future 3:331–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Stephenson SR, Smith LC, Agnew JA (2011) Divergent long-term trajectories of human access to the Arctic. Nat Clim Chang 1:156–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Stephenson SR, Smith LC, Brigham LW, Agnew JA (2013) Projected 21st-century changes to Arctic marine access. Clim Chang 118:885–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Stephenson SR, Brigham LW, Smith LC (2014) Marine accessibility along Russia’s Northern Sea Route. Polar Geogr 37:111–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sturm M, Goldstein MA, Huntington H, Douglas TA (2017) Using an option pricing approach to evaluate strategic decisions in a rapidly changing climate: Black–Scholes and climate change. Clim Chang 140:437–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Tokarska KB, Stolpe MB, Sippel S, Fischer EM, Smith CJ, Lehner F, Knutti R (2020) Past warming trend constrains future warming in CMIP6 models. Sci Adv 6:eaaz9549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Veland S, Lynch AH (2017) Arctic ice edge narratives: scale, discourse and ontological security. Area 49:9–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Veland S, Wagner P, Bailey D, Everett A, Goldstein M, Hermann R, Hjort-Larsen T, Hovelsrud G, Hughes N, Kjøl A, Li X, Lynch A, Müller M, Olsen J, Palerme C, Pedersen JL, Rinaldo Ø, Stephenson S, Storelvmo T (2021) Knowledge needs in sea ice forecasting for navigation in Svalbard and the High Arctic. Svalbard Strategic Grant, Svalbard Science Forum. NF-rapport 4/2021

  53. Walsh JE, Ballinger TJ, Euskirchen ES, Hanna E, Mård J, Overland JE, Tangen H, Vihma T (2020) Extreme weather and climate events in northern areas: a review. Earth Sci Rev 209:103324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang Z, Silberman JA, Corbett JJ (2020) Container vessels diversion pattern to trans-Arctic shipping routes and GHG emission abatement potential. Marit Policy Manag: 48:4;543–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1795288

  55. Wei T, Yan Q, Qi W, Ding M, Wang C (2020) Projections of Arctic sea ice conditions and shipping routes in the twenty-first century using CMIP6 forcing scenarios. Environ Res Lett 15:104079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Zahn M, von Storch H (2010) Decreased frequency of North Atlantic polar lows associated with future climate warming. Nature 467:309–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang Z, Huisingh D, Song M (2019) Exploitation of trans-Arctic maritime transportation. J Clean Prod 212:960–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), which makes the CMIP6 datasets available from the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). We would also like to thank Dr. Simon Donner and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

Funding

This research was jointly funded by the National Science Foundation through grant NNA/CNH-S 1824829 and grant NNA 2022554.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

X. Li led the data preparation, analysis, and writing of this paper. S.R. Stephenson and A.H. Lynch contributed to the orientation, structure, design, and writing. M. A. Goldstein, D. A. Bailey, and S. Veland contributed to data preparation and analysis. M. A. Goldstein contributed to writing the final version of the draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xueke Li.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 10.7 mb)

ESM 2

(MP4 8771 kb)

ESM 3

(MP4 9867 kb)

ESM 4

(MP4 9867 kb)

Scheme 1

Daily ice data (MP4 8771 kb)

Scheme 2

Daily adjustment (MP4 9867 kb)

Scheme 3

Sub-grid scale ice variations (MP4 9867 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, X., Stephenson, S.R., Lynch, A.H. et al. Arctic shipping guidance from the CMIP6 ensemble on operational and infrastructural timescales. Climatic Change 167, 23 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03172-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Decision-relevant climate information
  • Arctic maritime accessibility
  • Sea ice variability
  • CMIP6
  • Navigation risk