Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

President Obama is in Alaska to rename a mountain and talk about climate change.  We all know about the controversial announcement about changing the name of Mt. McKinley back to its original Native American name Denali, but today he is going to request more ice breakers for the Arctic. But if global warming is melting Alaska and the Arctic, why is he ordering ice breakers?

President Obama on Tuesday will propose speeding the acquisition and building of new Coast Guard icebreakers that can operate year-round in the nation’s polar regions, part of an effort to close the gap between the United States and other nations, especially Russia, in a global competition to gain a foothold in the rapidly changing Arctic.

On the second day of a three-day trip to Alaska to highlight the challenge of climate change and call for a worldwide effort to address its root causes, Mr. Obama’s proposals will touch on one of its most profound effects. The retreat of Arctic sea ice has created opportunities for shipping, tourism, mineral exploration and fishing — and with it, a rush of marine traffic that is bringing new difficulties.

But if the Arctic is melting why doesn’t Obama order regular ships?

Perhaps this is the reason…instead of retreating Arctic ice is growing.   The picture below came from Steven Goddard’s Real Science:

(Aug. 20) Green shows ice growth since September 2012. Red shows ice loss. Extent is 38% larger than the 2012 minimum. Extent will shrink some before mid-September, so the minimum coverage for 2015 will be a little lower than it is now.

I suppose that answers the ice breaker question…but then why is he talking climate change? Is Obama warning us about too much Arctic ice?

Become a Lid Insider

Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to friend