Search

As the impacts of climate change grow, we need better ways to raise awareness and motivate action. Here we assess the effectiveness of an Arctic climate change card game in comparison with the more conventional approach of reading an illustrated article. In-person assessments with control/reading and treatment/game groups (N = 41), were followed four weeks later with a survey. The game was found to be as effective as the article in teaching content of the impacts of climate change over the short term, and was more effective than the article in long-term retention of new information. Game players also had higher levels of engagement and perceptions that they knew ways to help protect Arctic ecosystems. They were also more likely to recommend the game to friends or family than those in the control group were likely to recommend the article to friends or family. As we consider ways to broaden engagement with climate change, we should include games in our portfolio of approaches.

This first analysis of aggregated data from the Kahoot! game-based player response system demonstrates that it can provide assessments of overall US student polar knowledge and identifies differenc...

The polar regions are experiencing dramatic and tangible impacts due to climate change (IPCC, 2014; USGCRP, 2018). The Arctic is the first region on the planet to experience a major abrupt climate ...

The changing Arctic sea-ice cover is likely to impact the trans-border exchange of sea ice between the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of the Arctic nations, affecting the risk of ice-rafted contamination. We apply the Lagrangian Ice Tracking System (LITS) to identify sea-ice formation events and track sea ice to its melt locations. Most ice (52%) melts within 100 km of where it is formed; ca. 21% escapes from its EEZ. Thus, most contaminants will be released within an ice parcel's originating EEZ, while material carried by over 1 00,000 km2 of ice—an area larger than France and Germany combined—will be released to other nations' waters. Between the periods 1988–1999 and 2000–2014, sea-ice formation increased by ∼17% (roughly 6 million km2 vs. 5 million km2 annually). Melting peaks earlier; freeze-up begins later; and the central Arctic Ocean is more prominent in both formation and melt in the later period. The total area of ice transported between EEZs increased, while transit times decreased: for example, Russian ice reached melt locations in other nations' EEZs an average of 46% faster while North American ice reached destinations in Eurasian waters an average of 37% faster. Increased trans-border exchange is mainly a result of increased speed (∼14% per decade), allowing first-year ice to escape the summer melt front, even as the front extends further north. Increased trans-border exchange over shorter times is bringing the EEZs of the Arctic nations closer together, which should be taken into account in policy development—including establishment of marine-protected areas. Plain Language Summary We use data from satellite images to identify the formation, drift tracks, and melt locations of sea ice in the Arctic. Most ice melts locally: only about 21% is exported from the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in which it is formed. That export is nonetheless about 1,000,000 km2 each year. As the ice cover has thinned and the summer sea ice has retreated in a warming Arctic, formation and melt locations have moved further north, ice drifts have accelerated, and the area of ice formation and melt has increased. We looked at ice formation and transport between the EEZs of the Arctic nations, and broke the record into two periods: 1988–1999 and 2000–2014. As the Arctic warms, more ice is transported between EEZs and it is arriving at the receiving EEZ faster, than in the past. Between the two study periods: Sea ice velocity increased by about 14%/decade; Russian ice reached melt locations in other nations' EEZs 46% faster; and North American ice reached Eurasian destinations 37% faster. Exchanges of ice have increased as a result. For example, export of ice from Russia to Norway increased by 11% and export from Alaska to Russia by 16%.

Academic enterprises seeking to support society’s efforts to achieve global sustainability need to change their legacy reward systems. We need new structures to foster knowledge that is deeply integrated across disciplines and co-produced with non-academic stakeholders.

The patterns of sea ice retreat in the Arctic Ocean are investigated using two global climate models (GCMs) that have profound differences in their large-scale mean winter atmospheric circulation and sea ice drift patterns. The Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble (CESM-LE) presents a mean sea level pressure pattern that is in general agreement with observations for the late twentieth century. The Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4), exhibits a low bias in its mean sea level pressure over the Arctic region with a deeper Icelandic low. A dynamical mechanism is presented in which large-scale mean winter atmospheric circulation has significant effect on the following September sea ice extent anomaly by influencing ice divergence in specific areas. A Lagrangian model is used to backtrack the 80°N line from the approximate time of the melt onset to its prior positions throughout the previous winter and quantify the divergence across the Pacific and Eurasian sectors of the Arctic. It is found that CCSM4 simulates more sea ice divergence in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and less divergence in the Eurasian seas when compared to CESM-LE, leading to a Pacific-centric sea ice retreat. On the other hand, CESM-LE shows a more symmetrical retreat between the Pacific, Eurasian, and Atlantic sectors of the Arctic. Given that a positive trend in the Arctic Oscillation (AO) index, associated with low sea level pressure anomalies in the Arctic, is a robust feature of GCMs participating in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5), these results suggest that the sea ice retreat in the Pacific sector could be amplified during the transition to a seasonal ice cover.

Recent trends and climate models suggest that the Arctic summer sea ice cover is likely to be lost before climate interventions can stabilize it. There are environmental, socioeconomic, and sociocultural arguments for, but also against, restoring and sustaining current conditions. Even if global warming can be reversed, some people will experience ice-free summers before perennial sea ice begins to return. We ask: How will future generations feel about bringing sea ice back where they have not experienced it before? How will conflicted interests in ice-covered vs. ice-free conditions be resolved? What role will science play in these debates?

The main water masses in the northern Barents Sea are surface water, Arctic water, transformed Atlantic water, and cold bottom water. Using summer data from 1981 and 1982, the formation, distribution, modification and circulation of these water masses are discussed. Recent estimates show that about 2 Sv of Atlantic water enters the Barents Sea by the North Cape Current, balanced by a similar outflow through the strait between Novaya Zemlya and Frans Josef Land. Passing through the Barents Sea, Atlantic-derived water is modified by interaction with other water masses as well as with the atmosphere, and the end products are believed to be important contributors to the hydrographic structure of the Arctic Ocean.

Drifting sea ice in the Arctic may transport contaminants from coastal areas across the pole and release them during melting far from the source areas. Arctic sea ice often contains sediments entrained on the Siberian shelves and receives atmospheric deposition from Arctic haze. Elevated levels of some heavy metals (e.g. lead, iron, copper and cadmium) and organochlorines (e.g. PCBs and DDTs) have been observed in ice sampled in the Siberian seas, north of Svalbard, and in Baffin Bay. In order to determine the relative importance of sea ice transport in comparison with air/sea and oceanic processes, more data is required on pollutant entrainment and distribution in the Arctic ice pack.

The sea floor of Fram Strait, the over 2500 m deep passage between the Arctic Ocean and the Norwegian-Greenland Sea, is part of a complex transform zone between the Knipovich mid-oceanic ridge of the Norwegian-Greenland Sea and the Nansen-Gakkel Ridge of the Arctic Ocean. Because linear magnetic anomalies formed by sea-floor spreading have not been found, the precise location of the boundary between the Eurasian and the North American plate is unknown in this region. Systematic surveying of Fram Strait with SEABEAM and high resolution seismic profiling began in 1984 and continued in 1985 and 1987, providing detailed morphology of the Fram Strait sea floor and permitting better definition of its morphotectonics. The 1984 survey presented in this paper provided a complete set of bathymetric data from the southernmost section of the Svalbard Transform, including the Molloy Fracture Zone, connecting the Knipovich Ridge to the Molloy Ridge; and the Molloy Deep, a nodal basin formed at the intersection of the Molloy Transform Fault and the Molloy Ridge. This nodal basin has a revised maximum depth of 5607 m water depth at 79°8.5′N and 2°47′E.

The deep eastern Arctic basin between the Lomonosov Ridge and the Eurasian continental margin differs from other ocean basins in the very slow spreading of its floor and unusual depositional environment under perennial sea-ice cover. The recent expedition ARK IV/3 of RV Polar stern for the first time made geoscientific investigations from the northern margin of the Barents Sea north to the Nansen-Gakkel Ridge. Much deeper than most other mid-ocean ridges, this ridge is poorly-surveyed, but has a central valley which in places is deeper than 5.5 km, 1–1.5 km below the basin floors on either side. Heat flow in the central part of the valley is very rapid; both basement rocks and overlying sediments showed unexpectedly the influence of intense and long-term hydrothermal activity. The sediments on the northern and southern flanks of the ridge are slightly calcareous pelagic mud layers alternating with carbonate-free horizons, where up to 40% of the sedimentary section is soft mud clasts. Similar mud aggregates were observed on the surface of the multi-year sea ice, appearing to represent a special type of sediment transport by sea ice in the Transpolar Drift. In contrast to the western Arctic, Fram Strait and the Norwegian-Greenland Sea, gravel is rarely found in sediment cores. Recovered cores indicate that icebergs and sea ice carrying coarse sediment seldom rafted detritus to the study area during the last approximately 300,000 years.

δ18O profiles in drifting Arctic sea ice are coupled with back trajectories of ice drift and an ice growth model to reconstruct the surface hydrography of the Arctic Ocean interior. The results compare well with δ18O values obtained by traditional oceanographic methods and known water mass distributions. Analysis of the stable isotopic composition of sea ice floes sampled at strategic and relatively accessible locations, e.g., Fram Strait, could aid in mapping spatial and temporal variations in Arctic Ocean surface waters.

Recent studies have indicated that drifting Arctic sea ice plays an important role in the redistribution of sediments and contaminants. Here we present a method to reconstruct the back- ward trajectory of sea ice from its sampling location in the Eurasian Arctic to its possible site of ori- gin on the shelf, based on historical drift data from the International Arctic Buoy Program. This method is verified by showing that origins derived from the backward trajectories are generally con- sistent with other indicators, such as comparison of the predicted backward trajectories with known buoy drifts and matching the clay mineralogy of sediments sampled from the sea ice with that of the seafloor in the predicted shelf source regions. The trajectories are then used to identify regions where sediment-laden ice is exported to the Transpolar Drift Stream: from the New Siberian Islands and the Central Kara Plateau. Calculation of forward trajectories shows that the Kara Sea is a major contributor of ice to the Barents Sea and the southern limb of the Transpolar Drift Stream.

Much of Arctic sea ice forms over the shallow continental shelves along the perimeter of the basin. Ice which escapes the shelf is transported several years within the Beaufort Gyre and Transpolar Drift stream, before exiting the Arctic Basin through Fram Strait. This ice, and especially that in the Siberian branch of the Transpolar Drift stream in the Eurasian Basin, may incorporate large quantities of particulate matter during formation on the shelf. Subsequent seasonal surface melting and winter freezing on the ice underside results in surface accumulation of particulate matter. Rafting of floes over and under each other results in a complex ice stratigraphy and redistribution of sediment accumulations. In contrast, Antarctic sea ice has only limited sources for sediment incorporation, and most of the ice-cover melts each year. These variations in Arctic and Antarctic ice characteristics are illustrated by analyses of ice crystal texture, c-axis orientations, salinity, δ 18O on ice cores and discussion of potential sediment input.

During the summer 1987 expedition of the polar research vessel‘Polarstern’in the Eurasian Basin of the Arctic Ocean, sea ice at about 84-86°N and 20-30°E was found to have high concentrations of particulate material. The particle-laden ice occurred in patches which often darkened more than half the ice surface at our northernmost positions. Much of this ice appeared to be within the Siberian Branch of the Transpolar Drift stream, which transports deformed, multi-year ice from the Siberian shelves westward across the Eurasian Basin. Lithogenic sediment, which is the major component of the particulate material, may have been incorporated during ice formation on the shallow Siberian seas. Diatoms collected from the particle-rich ice surfaces support this conclusion, as assemblages were dominated by a marine benthic species similar to that reported from sea ice off the coast of northeast Siberia. Based on drift trajectories of buoys deployed on the ice it appears that much of the particle-laden ice exited the Arctic Ocean through the Fram Strait and joined the East Greenland Current. Very different sea ice characteristics were found east of the Yermak Plateau and north of Svalbard and Frans Josef Land up to about 83-84°N. Here sea ice was thinner, less deformed, with lower amounts of lithogenic sediment and diatoms. The diatom assemblage was dominated by planktonic freshwater species. Trajectories of buoys deployed on sea ice in this region indicated a tendency for southward transport to the Yermak Plateau or into the Barents Sea.

GEOMAR was founded in June 1987 as an institution dedicated to marine geosciences and technological development. The institution consists of three interacting organizations: the Research Center for Marine Geosciences, the “Technologie GmbH,” and the Technology Park. The GEOMAR Research Center for Marine Geosciences is central to this new institution. The director of the Research Center is Joern Thiede.

Potential aeolian input of lithogenic sediment to sea ice and possible contribution from sea ice to sedimentation in Eurasian Arctic deep basins are discussed for modern and glacial environments. Low atmospheric fluxes estimated by previous investigations of snow samples from Amerasian Basin sea ice and the Greenland ice cap indicate that atmospheric deposition from long range sources probably provides only low quantities of lithogenic material to the Eurasian ice surface. Other likely sources for the predominantly fine-grained sediment in the Eurasian Arctic ice are entrained river, nearshore and shelf sediments.