The Arctic is burning. Yep - that's bad. Very bad.

Arctic wildfires in June released more polluting gasses than ever before

The last few years have seen ‘unprecedented’ fires decimate parts of Australia, the USA, The Amazon, and more recently New Zealand. Few would associate wildfires with the Arctic, but in June of 2020 wildfires discharged ‘59 million metric tons of carbon dioxide’, an amount exceeding all the carbon emissions of oil producing Norway. The Arctic fire’s emissions did not stop there, by the end of the summer the fires had emitted 244 megatonnes of carbon dioxide, an increase on the record making previous year by 35%.

This map shows the extent of fires in the Arctic - a place that should not be on fire...

A case study stated that since 1979 the amount of ice in the Arctic has decreased not only in each season, but in every decade, with temperatures annually rising about 2-3 degrees, and up to 4 degrees in the winter since the 1950’s.

So... why?

‘Arctic amplification’ is one cause of this, with the effect worsening in recent years. The Arctic is warming at two-three times the rest of the planet. The National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) reports that this rapid warming has dire consequences for the whole planet, not just the Arctic. As ice melts, it opens dark areas of water which absorb extra heat from the sun, this heat melts more ice and the cycle continues. The loss of permafrost is also a worrying trend, as it thaws, plants and animals that were icebound begin to decay, leading to more methane and carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. A highly probable major contributor to these dizzyingly high emissions are burning peatlands. A report revealed that just under half of the world’s peatland can be found in the Arctic circle. Peatlands are the most carbon rich systems on Earth, releasing dense carbon into the atmosphere when it burns. Previously frozen peatlands are now thawing due to warming temperatures, making them more susceptible to fires, and increasing the likelihood of releasing carbon, creating the ‘feedback loop’ of thawing, burning, releasing. Another study concludes that the future of peatlands may shift from being significant storers of carbon to significant sources of carbon.

Burning peatlands.

So what will result from this?

This change in climate obviously has many negative results, not only the impact on indigenous peoples dependent on hunting for survival, but the animals and biota themselves.. The WWF International Arctic Program states that climate change will result in ‘major changes’, such as plant species found in the South beginning to migrate North, stifling existing plants and directly affecting the species reliant on them. Pollinating insects will struggle with warmer climates resulting in earlier flowering, these changes in flora affecting herbivores – like musk oxen and reindeer which are reliant on their sustenance. Migratory birds nesting patterns will shift and stocks of fish dependent on changing sea temperatures and changing spring algal blooms with retreating ice will also be affected. The increased acidification of the water will additionally alter organisms such as coral reefs and crustaceans, and retreating ice sheets will negatively impact species like walruses and seals who use the ice as breeding grounds and areas to moult, the decline in populations then also impacts the polar bear,

Arctic foxes are just one of the species being affected by the changing area - the moving treeline makes these foxes compete for food with Red foxes, and they aren't winning...

As stated in this report, leadership on a political level is crucial to combat climate change, planning for the long term and not simply implementing a quick fix. Although the Arctic circle consists of nine countries, it is a world-wide problem, and one that each and every government should adapt legislation to combat.