5 ms·

Tanker becomes first to cross Arctic without icebreaker

68 points by mcone 9y ago

smcg 9y ago
As the article mentions, this was enabled by climate change making the ice much thinner than usual this summer.
- stephenr 9y ago
  Also because the ship was specially designed to break ice like an ice breaking ship does.
bluGill 9y ago
You see headlines like this every couple years. The first ship to do this did it in 1906 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gj%C3%B8a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gj%C3%B8a, and it was done again in in 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Roch_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Roch_(ship)
- valuearb 9y ago
  I'm sure we'll be seeing these articles much more often than in the past now.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    Articles claiming it is the first have no more reason for being written after this one.
    - stephenr 9y ago
      Except, this was a specially designed ship that likely would have made the journey alone anyway. When a non-specialised ship goes through without an ice breaker will be another first.
- RijilV 9y ago
  But not articles saying "operate in the harsh Arctic waters year round rather than just the summer months." Agree that navigation of the northern passage of itself is not new, but the anticipated year round transit without icebreaker is.
- rjsw 9y ago
  The article isn't describing a crossing of the Northwest Passage, it is about a crossing of the Northeast Passage.
- cfmcdonald 9y ago
  These aren't at all the same thing as the current story. The 1906 expedition took three years. The St. Roch took two years. i.e. these were major expeditions of the "visit the South Pole" sort, not commercial ventures that took a couple weeks.
xgbi 9y ago
I like how the ship is named after the Total CEO :)
TwoNineA 9y ago
CNN article fails to mention that tanker is an icebreaker. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/24/russian-tanker-sails-arctic-without-icebreaker-first-time https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/24/russian-... "On its maiden voyage, the innovative tanker used its integral icebreaker to cross ice fields 1.2m thick"
- tantalor 9y ago
  You're quibbling over semantics. The article clearly mentions the ships ability to navigate through ice, specially designed to sail independently through ice as thick as 2.1 meters Does that make it "an icebreaker"? The 2 articles seem to use the term to describe a ship specifically designed to break ice, e.g. "massive, nuclear-powered Russian icebreakers", not a cargo transport ship.
  - stephenr 9y ago
    The article specifically says the tanker is designed to operate independently, without need for an ice breaker: > But the Christophe de Margerie, named for a former CEO of French oil giant Total, is specially designed to sail independently through ice as thick as 2.1 meters (nearly 7 feet), its owner said. So, the article is interesting but the stated "first" seems like it would have happened anyway, because the ship was designed specifically for the task.
sp332 9y ago
I'm really dreading the first major spill. The ecosystem up there is pretty fragile to begin with, lots of species that don't live anywhere else, and as the article mentions a cleanup would be impossible.
- pantalaimon 9y ago
  I'm afraid this ecosystem will die anyway as the ice thaws. The fossil fuels that are transported that way will further that process one way or the other.
JaggerFoo 9y ago
So what is the record it broke? - for crossing the Arctic or a record for a non-Arctic route? Other than the significance of depleted Arctic ice, the significance in the record-breaking time it took is lost on me. Broke the record by a second perhaps?
- igravious 9y ago
  Second paragraph: “The ship, the Christophe de Margerie, traveled from Norway to South Korea in 19 days, about 30% quicker than the regular route through the Suez Canal, its Russian owner, Sovcomflot, said this week.”
daxfohl 9y ago
It's always so weird to see maps from the arctic perspective. That these routes are all fairly close parallel lines, and moderately short by global standards, is so strange. I remember thinking the same thing when first seeing the ICBM routes from USSR to USA, how they just straight over the arctic and how counterintuitively close USA and USSR really were.
petraeus 9y ago
I want free trade with Europe! btw im Canada

68 points by mcone 9y ago

smcg 9y ago

As the article mentions, this was enabled by climate change making the ice much thinner than usual this summer.

stephenr 9y ago
Also because the ship was specially designed to break ice like an ice breaking ship does.

bluGill 9y ago

You see headlines like this every couple years. The first ship to do this did it in 1906 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gj%C3%B8a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gj%C3%B8a, and it was done again in in 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Roch_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Roch_(ship)

valuearb 9y ago
I'm sure we'll be seeing these articles much more often than in the past now.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  Articles claiming it is the first have no more reason for being written after this one.
  - stephenr 9y ago
    Except, this was a specially designed ship that likely would have made the journey alone anyway. When a non-specialised ship goes through without an ice breaker will be another first.
RijilV 9y ago
But not articles saying "operate in the harsh Arctic waters year round rather than just the summer months." Agree that navigation of the northern passage of itself is not new, but the anticipated year round transit without icebreaker is.
rjsw 9y ago
The article isn't describing a crossing of the Northwest Passage, it is about a crossing of the Northeast Passage.
cfmcdonald 9y ago
These aren't at all the same thing as the current story. The 1906 expedition took three years. The St. Roch took two years. i.e. these were major expeditions of the "visit the South Pole" sort, not commercial ventures that took a couple weeks.

xgbi 9y ago

I like how the ship is named after the Total CEO :)

TwoNineA 9y ago

CNN article fails to mention that tanker is an icebreaker. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/24/russian-tanker-sails-arctic-without-icebreaker-first-time https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/24/russian-... "On its maiden voyage, the innovative tanker used its integral icebreaker to cross ice fields 1.2m thick"

tantalor 9y ago
You're quibbling over semantics. The article clearly mentions the ships ability to navigate through ice, specially designed to sail independently through ice as thick as 2.1 meters Does that make it "an icebreaker"? The 2 articles seem to use the term to describe a ship specifically designed to break ice, e.g. "massive, nuclear-powered Russian icebreakers", not a cargo transport ship.
- stephenr 9y ago
  The article specifically says the tanker is designed to operate independently, without need for an ice breaker: > But the Christophe de Margerie, named for a former CEO of French oil giant Total, is specially designed to sail independently through ice as thick as 2.1 meters (nearly 7 feet), its owner said. So, the article is interesting but the stated "first" seems like it would have happened anyway, because the ship was designed specifically for the task.

sp332 9y ago

I'm really dreading the first major spill. The ecosystem up there is pretty fragile to begin with, lots of species that don't live anywhere else, and as the article mentions a cleanup would be impossible.

pantalaimon 9y ago
I'm afraid this ecosystem will die anyway as the ice thaws. The fossil fuels that are transported that way will further that process one way or the other.

JaggerFoo 9y ago

So what is the record it broke? - for crossing the Arctic or a record for a non-Arctic route? Other than the significance of depleted Arctic ice, the significance in the record-breaking time it took is lost on me. Broke the record by a second perhaps?

igravious 9y ago
Second paragraph: “The ship, the Christophe de Margerie, traveled from Norway to South Korea in 19 days, about 30% quicker than the regular route through the Suez Canal, its Russian owner, Sovcomflot, said this week.”

daxfohl 9y ago

It's always so weird to see maps from the arctic perspective. That these routes are all fairly close parallel lines, and moderately short by global standards, is so strange. I remember thinking the same thing when first seeing the ICBM routes from USSR to USA, how they just straight over the arctic and how counterintuitively close USA and USSR really were.

petraeus 9y ago

I want free trade with Europe! btw im Canada