Last major U.S. icebreaker forced back into action |

Last major U.S. icebreaker forced back into action

The Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO — The last icebreaker capable of crushing through the thickest ice of the Antarctic and Arctic is about to resume its mission after the latest repairs to postpone its already past-due retirement.

Climate change makes the 38-year-old Polar Star Icebreaker’s science and security missions ever more vital, according to scientists and other backers of rebuilding the country’s dwindling ice fleet.

Crew members of the Coast Guard’s Polar Star icebreaker were drilling early Tuesday before leaving the former naval shipyard at Mare Island, across the bay from San Francisco. Shipyard workers replaced worn, 18-foot-high propellers for refitting and carried out other work on the country’s sole remaining heavy icebreaker, now eight years beyond its scheduled decommissioning date. The icebreaker is expected to head for Antarctica shortly after Thanksgiving.

By late January, the Polar Star will loom over the western Antarctic on its key annual mission — breaking through ice for the yearly resupply of researchers at the McMurdo Research Station and another U.S. research center at the South Pole.

With 75,000 horsepower and a hull strong enough to batter through six feet of ice at running speed, the Polar Star is the only operational U.S. vessel capable of getting the food, fuel and research material to the two Antarctic research stations.

If they “didn’t get that resupply, it would shut down or severely curtail the amount of science” at the two U.S. Antarctic centers, Capt. Matt Walker, the Polar Star’s commander, said Monday afternoon from the Polar Star, with the icebreaker’s gangway up for departure.

“It puts a huge weight of responsibility that we cannot fail, we cannot suffer catastrophic casualty to our equipment, because the resupply of McMurdo wouldn’t occur,” Walker said. “We have no redundancy in the U.S. system.”

Engine troubles in 2010 took the only other heavy U.S. icebreaker, the Polar Sea, out of service.

The Coast Guard has one other icebreaker, a medium-size one, which mainly works in the Arctic. The National Science Foundation has a still-lighter icebreaker for research. The Russian government, by contrast, has 18 icebreakers, including four, nuclear-powered and operational heavy icebreakers. Russia on Monday announced the planned start of work on a new icebreaker to supply that country’s growing military presence in the Arctic and tug Russian combat ships through Arctic ice.

While the Obama administration, Congress and the Coast Guard all say maintaining at least one heavy icebreaker is essential for maintaining U.S. security and science, no funding proposals have yet gained momentum to have a new heavy U.S. icebreaker built before age forces the Polar Star out of service, any time from five to 20 years from now.

Without active heavy icebreakers, “the control of the Arctic is in the hands of Russia,” California U.S. Rep. John Garamendi, the ranking Democrat on the House subcommittee that oversees the Coast Guard and maritime affairs, said Tuesday.

The Arctic is estimated to hold more than 10 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves, nearly one third of undiscovered gas reserves, and remains a strategically critical area for the United States, congressional researchers said earlier this year.

Melting ice means traffic has increased in the Bering Strait, between Russia and Alaska, 118 percent since 2008. More melting means more vessels will be coming within harm’s way of ice.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.