USCGC Healy. Source: Henry Dick Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution / NSF
The U.S. Coast Guard only has one modern icebreaker - the Healy. It has two older icebreakers, the Polar Sea and Polar Star, but these have passed their original design lives. Ronald O'Rourke explores the U.S. options for the Congressional Research Service: Coast Guard Polar Icebreaker Modernization: Background, Issues, and Options for Congress. A fourth, smaller, icebreaker, the Nathaniel B. Palmer, is leased by the National Science Foundation from a private company.
How many icebreakers do we need? Should we fix up the Polar Star and Polar Sea? Should we replace them?
From the abstract:
Of the Coast Guard’s three polar icebreakers, two — Polar Star and Polar Sea — have exceeded their intended 30-year service lives. The Polar Star is not operational and has been caretaker status since July 1, 2006. A 2007 report from the National Research Council (NRC) on the U.S. polar icebreaking fleet states that “U.S. [polar] icebreaking capability is now at risk of being unable to support national interests in the north and the south.” On July 16, 2008, Admiral Thad Allen, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, testified that: “Today, our nation is at a crossroads with Coast Guard domestic and international icebreaking capabilities. We have important decisions to make. And I believe we must address our icebreaking needs now....”
The Administration is conducting an interagency Arctic policy review, and the Coast Guard is conducting studies on replacements for Polar Star and Polar Sea. Under the Coast Guard’s current schedule, the first replacement polar icebreaker might enter service in 8 to 10 years. The Coast Guard estimated in February 2008 that new replacement ships might cost $800 million to $925 million each in 2008 dollars, and that the alternative of extending the service lives of Polar Sea and Polar Star for 25 years might cost about $400 million per ship.
Potential policy issues for Congress regarding Coast Guard polar icebreaker modernization include the numbers and capabilities of polar icebreakers the Coast Guard will need in the future; whether to provide these icebreakers through construction of new ships or service life extensions of older ships; whether to accelerate the Coast Guard’s current schedule for acquiring replacement ships; whether new ships should be nuclear powered; whether new ships should be funded entirely in the Coast Guard budget, or partly or entirely in some other part of the federal budget, such as the Department of Defense (DOD) budget, the National Science Foundation (NSF) budget, or both; and whether, as an interim measure, the Polar Star should be repaired and placed back into service.
Congress’s options regarding Coast Guard polar icebreaker modernization include but are not limited to the following: approving the Coast Guard’s current plan; holding hearings to solicit additional information on the issue; directing the Coast Guard to include the option of nuclear power in its studies of requirements for future icebreakers; directing the Coast Guard to pursue a particular acquisition strategy for icebreaker modernization; accelerating the procurement of new icebreakers relative to the Coast Guard’s current plan; funding the procurement of new icebreakers partly or entirely in the DOD and/or NSF budget rather than entirely the Coast Guard budget; and directing the Coast Guard to reactivate Polar Star.
The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a hearing on Coast Guard icebreaking needs on July 16, 2008. Current legislation with provisions or report language relating to polar icebreakers includes S. 3181 and H.R. 2830/S. 1892. This report will be updated as events warrant.
I posted on this topic last spring: How many polar icebreakers does the U.S. need?
Corrected September 23, 2008 to mention the Nathaniel Palmer.
The national requirement for a strategic icebreaking capability is unquestionable. Having it ensures us access to parts of the world that are likely to see trouble in the future. As the ice cover shrinks, for whatever reason, more and more nations will take interest in the shipping lanes and natural resources available there. There's still a winter season, and the lanes still freeze, and only a capability like this can ensure we can get into the region should one of our ships get in trouble. Think pirates of the frozen north...
Posted by: r4i | February 05, 2010 at 02:03 AM