Rising atmospheric greenhouse gas 6.4.3 Anchoring over pipelines

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has documented that the world’s climate is changing. There is general agreement that most of the rise in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere has been caused by anthropo­

genic emissions. This rise has altered the heat balance of the earth-atmosphere system and enhanced the greenhouse effect. This will proba­

bly result in continued global warming and chan­

ges in the climate system. These changes may have major impacts on ecosystems and on society, and in the longer term this may be the most important pressure in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area as well.

The reports from the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), which was carried out for the Arctic Council, clearly show that climate change is already taking place in the Arctic. This was discussed further in the most recent white paper on the Government’s environmental policy and the state of the environment in Norway (Report No. 21 (2004–2005) to the Storting). However, according to the regional-scale climate models used by the ACIA, and the Bergen Climate Model (BCM), no major changes in any of the key cli­

mate parameters are expected in the area covered by the management plan in the period up to 2020.

This is because the climate models show long-term trends, and the period up to 2020 is too short for any significant changes to become apparent.

The annual mean air temperature is projected to rise by about 1 °C in the Arctic as a whole, and any impacts of climate change on ecosystems in this area are not therefore expected to exceed the range of natural variation before 2020. However, the temperature rise has been about twice as fast in the Arctic as in the rest of the world in the past few decades, and this trend is expected to accele­

rate. Melting of ice and snow is increasing, and as a result heat from the sun is being absorbed by the sea, soil and atmosphere rather than being reflected back to space. It is projected that the

accelerating global warming trend will result in a temperature rise of 4–7 °C in the atmosphere over the next 100 years. One result may be the total loss of summer sea ice cover in the Arctic seas over the next 60–80 years.

The uncertainty of the climate scenario after 2020 and of the impacts of the projected climate change is high. However, in the longer term it is expected that the marginal ice zone will move northwards and eastwards. By 2080, there may be no ice cover in the Arctic in summer, see figure 5.6.

However, in winter the marginal ice zone may still stretch as far south as Spitsbergen. The sea sur­

face temperature may rise by 1–1.5 °C throughout the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. It is estimated that mean wind strength will rise by 10–20 per cent during the course of this century. There may be fewer winter storms, but their intensity is likely to increase. There is a certain probability that the Icelandic Low will be displaced northeastwards, which may mean that more Atlantic water will flow into the Barents Sea. These changes in the climate may have major impacts on biodiversity

Figure 5.7 Main atmospheric transport routes for chemicals entering the Arctic. Long-range transport is the main source of environmentally hazardous substances in the Arctic, although there are also local sources. Svalbard and the surrounding seas are particularly vulnerable because atmospheric conditions and the Gulf Stream carry pollutants from major industrial centres in Europe and on the east coast of North America to this area.

Source: Norwegian Pollution Control Authority and Norwegian Polar Institute

Box 5.3 Environmentally hazardous substances follow food chains

Many chemicals are toxic, but there is special up over time. Species at the top of food chains, concern about substances that accumulate in such as birds of prey, polar bears, whales and the tissues of living organisms and become large predatory fish, are therefore particularly more concentrated from one level to the next in vulnerable to environmentally hazardous sub-food chains. They are dangerous because even if stances. People are also at the top of the food they are only found in low concentrations in pro- pyramid, so that such substances are also a long-ducts or are released in small quantities, their term threat to our own food supplies.

concentrations in animals and people can build

Glaucous gull: 36 000,0 ng/g fat weight

Fish: 20,0 ng/g fat weight

Zooplankton: 5,0 ng/g fat weight Particulate matter: 0,001 ng/g carbon

Water: 0,00005 ng/l

Figure 5.8 Bioaccumulation of PCBs (red spheres) in an Arctic food chain.

Source: Norwegian Polar Institute

and the distribution and biomass of different spe­

cies in the management plan area. For example, a rise in sea temperature may displace the southern distribution limit of cold-water species north­

wards, while southerly species shift northwards.

The range of species such as cod and herring is expected to extend northwards, whereas the dis­

tribution of capelin, polar cod and Greenland hali­

but will shrink. Migration patterns are also expec­

ted to change, but the degree to which this hap­

pens may vary over the year: for example, herring may respond differently during spawning, larval drift and in winter. The polar bear population will decline as a result of lower reproductive success and higher mortality, because suitable habitat will be lost as the ice cover retreats. Blooms of cocco­

Box 5.4 Environmentally hazardous substances of very high concern, and radioactive substances

The most environmentally hazardous substan- fore pose serious risks to the environment.

ces are persistent and bioaccumulative as well Endocrine disrupters can affect the hormone bal­

as toxic (PBT substances). Because such sub- ance in humans and animals, and for example stances persist in the environment after they are reduce their reproductive capacity.

released, they can cause irreversible long-term Radioactive substances emit ionising radia­

damage to health and the environment. They tion. Some occur naturally, whereas others are can be transported over long distances to other formed by human activities. Radiological toxicity parts of the world, and thus end up in vulnerable varies widely from one substance to another areas such as the Arctic. Many of the most dan- depending on how readily they are absorbed by gerous of these substances condense out of the living organisms, the type of radiation they emit atmosphere in the cold Arctic climate and then and its intensity. Radioactive substances are enter food chains. unstable and decay over time. Half-life is used as

Substances that are very persistent and very a measure of how long-lived a radioactive sub­

bioaccumulative are also of high concern, even stance is, and can vary from only a few seconds if we do not currently know what kind of dam- to several hundred thousand years. Substances age they can cause to health or the environment. with long half-lives, like PBT substances, can be A number of heavy metals and organic pollut- transported over long distances and bioaccumu­

ants can bioaccumulate and are toxic, and there- late and harm living organisms.

lithophorids have become more frequent in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area in the last few years, and some species, such as the blue whiting, are expanding into the area. Greater changes in cli­

mate are expected in the northern part of the management plan area than further south. Impro­

ving knowledge of climate change and its causes and impacts is a global task that requires further effort, see Chapter 8.

5.5.3 Long-range transboundary pollution Long-range transport of persistent organic pollut­

ants and certain metals from the rest of the world is currently the most important pollution-related pressure on the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, see box 5.4. Pollutants are transported into the area by winds, ocean currents, rivers and ice.

Atmospheric transport is the most rapid route for persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury.

These substances mainly enter the Arctic through long-range transport from sources in Europe, North America and Asia. There are no large rivers that transport pollution directly into the management plan area. However, there are indica­

tions that PCB pollution in the Barents Sea may derive indirectly from releases in Russia. Polluta­

nts such as PCBs and oil components in large

Russian rivers such as the Yenisey and Ob can be carried into the Kara Sea where they are incorpo­

rated into ice and can be transported onwards into the Barents Sea. In addition, ocean currents, par­

ticularly the Norwegian coastal current, transport pollution into the Barents Sea. Transport routes and the deposition of organic compounds and heavy metals in the Arctic may be strongly influ­

enced by climate change, especially after 2020.

Levels of heavy metals such as mercury and cadmium are so high in certain species of sea­

birds and marine mammals today that they are expected to cause damage to the nervous system and disrupt the hormone balance and immune system in species at the top of the food chains (top predators), for example glaucous gulls and polar bears, see box 5.3. The rise in mercury pollution is expected to continue up to 2020, whereas inputs of other metals such as lead and cadmium are expected to drop as a result of international regu­

lation of their use, such as the phase-out of leaded petrol. However, levels of metals such as plati­

num, rhodium and palladium are rising rapidly as a result of emissions from catalytic converters fit­

ted in car engines. It is not known what the impacts of these metals may be.

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as PCBs, dioxins and dioxin-like compounds and DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) have

also been shown to have negative impacts on top predators. They cause such serious damage that whole populations can be affected. One reason is that the pollution load they carry impairs the abil­

ity of such species to withstand other forms of stress like food shortages. Despite international efforts to reduce the use and releases of these substances, DDT and other POPs are still enter­

ing the Arctic, and elevated levels will persist for many years. Inputs of new substances with the characteristics of POPs are expected to rise. For example, rising levels of the extremely persistent compound PFOS perfluorooctyl sulphonate have been registered in Arctic animals.

The concentrations of radioactive substances of anthropogenic origin in the Barents Sea–Lofo­

ten area are not so high that current knowledge indicates any likelihood of adverse environmental impacts. However, an accident involving releases of radioactivity could result in considerably higher inputs of radioactive substances.

5.5.4 Pollution originating in neighbouring areas

5.5.4.1 Petroleum activities outside the management plan area

Operational discharges from petroleum activities outside the management plan area are not expected to have any significant impacts on this area, although it is possible that pollutants dis­

charged to the North Sea and Norwegian Sea can be transported to the Barents Sea–Lofoten area with ocean currents. Pollutants released by the Russian oil and gas industry will mainly be trans­

ported away from areas off mainland Norway, but may have some impact on the northern Barents Sea and Svalbard. Chapters 4.4 and 5.3 give fur­

ther information on sources of pollution from the petroleum sector, how the industry is regulated, and its environmental impacts.

There have been few studies of the extent to which individual pollutants (for example alkyl phenols) released during petroleum activities in the North Sea and Norwegian Sea are in fact transported into the management plan area. Until now, measurements have not revealed the pre­

sence of alkyl phenols or any negative impacts of petroleum-related pollutants in the management plan area. However, methods for effects monito­

ring in the sea have not been sufficiently standar­

dised. Methods for identifying and monitoring the effects of releases from the oil and gas industry are being developed and tested further

Figure 5.9 Concentrations of environmentally hazardous substances increase from one level to the next in food chains. Polar bears and other top predators are therefore particularly vulnerable.

Source: Norwegian Polar Institute (Photo: Magnus Andersen)

south on the Norwegian continental shelf. The most recent research results from investigations of alkyl phenols indicate that these substances do not have population-level effects on cod, and that effects are only likely in the immediate vicinity of discharges. As a result of dilution, and given the distance to the Barents Sea–Lofoten area, dis­

charges further south on the continental shelf are not expected to have effects in the management plan area. A research programme on the long-term effects of discharges to the sea from petro­

leum activities (PROOF) will add to our know­

ledge in this field and develop methods for effects monitoring. Continual efforts are being made to improve effects monitoring methodo­

logy, particularly in view of the rising discharges of produced water on other parts of the Norwe­

gian shelf.

Acute oil pollution originating from a field south of the Barents Sea–Lofoten area could have far-reaching effects, as could a tanker accident.

Either type of accident could affect important fish stocks, seabirds and beaches. However, even a

Figure 5.10 Red king crab

Source: Photo: Bjørn Gulliksen

major spill is not expected to pose a threat at pop­

ulation level, except in the case of species that are already vulnerable and where a significant propor­

tion of the population could be affected, for exam­

ple common guillemot and puffin. The probability of a major spill is low.

There is no offshore oil or gas production in the Russian sector of the Barents Sea today. How­

ever, a number of possible deposits have been dis­

covered on the Russian continental shelf, some of them in the Barents Sea. At present, there is so lit­

tle activity in the Russian offshore industry that there is only a low probability of an acute pollution incident in the period up to 2020. Discharges from the Russian sector would mainly affect the mar­

ginal ice zone and populations of animals that migrate between Russian and Norwegian waters.

Pollution released from Russian onshore petro­

leum facilities may be transported into the north­

ern part of the management plan area if oil com­

ponents or other pollutants are incorporated into ice from the large Russian rivers or into sea ice.

5.5.4.2 Maritime transport outside the Barents Sea–Lofoten area

The growing tanker transport of crude oil and petroleum products represents the greatest risk of acute pollution that could have an impact on the management plan area, see section 5.7. A ship­

wreck just south of the management plan area could affect the Lofoten Islands and waters around them, and have effects on important fish stocks, seabirds and the shoreline. However, even a major spill is not expected to pose a threat at population level, except in the case of species that are already vulnerable and where a significant proportion of the population could be affected, for example common guillemot and puffin. A spill northeast of the management plan area would only affect Norwegian waters if conditions were unfavourable, since the current systems would normally carry oil away from these areas. How­

ever, oil could be frozen into the ice and later transported into the northernmost part of the management plan area and towards Svalbard.

This could have local effects when the ice melts.

In document Report No. 8 to the Storting (2005–2006) (sider 70-75)