Upgrading russian icebreaker fleet: an acknowledgement of business conditions or a strategic requirement?

Lately, the keel-laying of new icebreakers has been systematically substantiated as a necessity. The need is related to the inevitable ageing of existing vessels, and to the prospects of the Arctic development. At the same time, insufficient freight turnover on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) leads to the inadequate workload of active vessels of the nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet. In part, diesel-electric icebreakers owned by shipping companies are in a long-term leasing to foreign countries. The hypothesis of global warming also casts doubts on the expediency of a larger icebreaker fleet.

Lately, the keel-laying of new icebreakers has been systematically substantiated as a necessity. The need is related to the inevitable ageing of existing vessels, and to the prospects of the Arctic development. At the same time, insufficient freight turnover on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) leads to the inadequate workload of active vessels of the nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet. In part, diesel-electric icebreakers owned by shipping companies are in a long-term leasing to foreign countries. The hypothesis of global warming also casts doubts on the expediency of a larger icebreaker fleet.

To start with, global warming is just a scientific hypothesis. Modern science is unable to produce mathematical models which can take into account all factors determining the climate change. Seasonal temperature leaps are registered in the Arctic, while quite the opposite trends are observed in the Antarctic. Even with the peak of warming in 2007-2009 the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage are still closed for the year-round navigation. It gives grounds to a discussion on cyclic climate fluctuations. Another proof of the above were unexpectedly rough navigation conditions in the winter of 2010-2011 in the Gulf of Finland and the Sea of Okhotsk, which demanded active involvement of a significant part of the icebreaker capacity. Besides, even a probable thinning of the ice cover in the Arctic resulting in higher economic activity can substantially increase the workload on icebreaker fleet, especially in winter.

The Russian Reality

Russian icebreaker vessels are gradually deteriorating. All six active nuclear-powered icebreakers will be decommissioned in 2014-2025. A greater part of diesel-electric icebreakers of Rosmorport will be subject to decommissioning by 2017-2019. The same applies to the “sea-river” class icebreakers operated by regional river shipping companies. Patrol icebreakers built in 1960-1970 are still operational in the Russian Navy and Border Guard Service of the Federal Security Service. The problem still high on the agenda is the construction of new vessels capable of carrying out both military and civil missions (freight delivery, scientific research, environmental monitoring) and stay operational at the Northern Sea Route from June through October, and year-round in non-Arctic freezing seas.

An entirely different situation has developed as regards the vessels involved in the implementation of major resource projects. The participants thereof develop their own multifunctional icebreaker capability: among other ships it incorporates transport and auxiliary vessels of ice-reinforced class which are capable of operating without icebreaking escort. A significant part of such vessels are built at the shipyards of Germany, Finland, Singapore and South Korea.

Norilsky Nikel company owns six icebreaker cargo container ships manufactured by Nordic Yards Wismar (earlier – Aker MTW Werft), a German shipyard. Lukoil company fleet counts ten icebreaker tankers, a half of which were built by the same shipyard in Wismar, as well as the Varandei multifunctional icebreaker and Toboi icebreaker tugboat launched by Keppel Singmarine (Singapore). Gazflot operates two multipurpose icebreaker carriers built in the Ukraine and equipped in Norway. In the Barents and Okhotsk Seas a Rosneft subsidiary, FEMCO, runs icebreakers built in 1970-1980 and bought from Canada and Japan. Sovcomflot places a larger part of its orders for the construction of ice-rated tankers in South Korea (Samsung Heavy Industries, Hyundai Heavy Industries) and Finland (STX Finland shipyard). The company operates two multifunctional icebreakers built in Finland and Norway, by the year 2013 two new icebreakers shall be set afloat by the joint Russian-Finnish venture Arctech Helsinki Shipyard.

Nevertheless, ensuring the year-round delivery of resources by sea to West European countries and the Far East will depend on the availability of icebreaker vessels, nuclear-powered in the first place. The traverse speed of ice-rated tankers in ice does not exceed 2-4 knots while the use of icebreakers can increase it to 10-12 knots, a more economically advantageous speed.

Plans for Upgrading the Russian Icebreaker Fleet

The program of Russian icebreaker shipbuilding in 2012-2014 provides for the construction of a multipurpose nuclear-powered icebreaker and four diesel icebreakers with the power output of 16-25 megawatts. According to the Russian Executive Order the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC) is the sole executive entity to implement state orders for shipbuilding of diesel-electric icebreakers. The USC and Rosmorport Federal State Enterprise signed a contract for the construction of an icebreaker with the power output of 25 megawatts worth 7.5 billion RUR and three contracts for the manufacture of icebreakers with the power output of 16 megawatts for four billion RUR each.

The Government plans provide for the construction of three nuclear icebreakers before 2020. The design of such icebreakers with the power output of 60 megawatts for the year-round freight transit over the Northern Sea Route have already been developed, and the cost of construction is estimated at 90 billion RUR. The USC management intends to secure the contracts: the USC and Baltiysky Zavod shipyard have already signed an agreement for the preparatory works to launch the construction of nuclear-powered icebreakers. The USC’s chances to become a sole contractor of this state order are extremely high.

Such haste and a forceful and non-competitive choice of the main contractor ruling out the participation of foreign companies, alongside with the nonexistence of any program for radical updating of shipbuilding facilities as well as construction projects of new competitive shipyard, reveal the tasks sought by the program. It provides for the maximum utilization of the available shipbuilding potential disregarding the need for its HR and technological renovation in order to implement Arctic energy and transportation projects focused, among other things, on the Chinese markets (for one, the construction project of a liquefied natural gas plant on the Yamal Peninsula).

The task to increase the volume of transit over the Northern Sea Rout from current three million tons to 50 million per year is also on the agenda. On the one hand, the task is unfeasible without a strong icebreaker fleet. On the other hand, it is impossible to turn the Northern Sea Route into an operating transit lane without hydrographic and hydro-meteorological support, restoration of seaport infrastructure etc. In spite of certain efforts undertaken in this respect (establishment of search-and-rescue centers, restoration of the NSR Administration, discussion of the draft law on the NSR), they are still insufficient. Whether icebreakers would be strongly sought-for largely depends on whether the NSR would become appealing to foreign shipping companies.

The Foreign Potential

Russia is the only country to have a nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet on hand. Theoretically, the US is the only country capable to build nuclear-powered vessels. However, the US icebreaker capability is represented by three Coast Guard vessels: Polar Star (1976) and Polar Sea (1977) heavy diesel-electric icebreakers, and Healy medium icebreaker (2000) unprepared for year-round operation at high latitudes. Older icebreakers designed for 30-year lifetime have been out of operation for several years already. Later in 2011 a decision to decommission Polar Sea was taken, and to undertake a major overhaul of Polar Star – planned to be completed by 2013 extending its service life until 2020.

American experts lobby for the construction of new icebreakers and ice-rated vessels. They are intended to be used for scientific research, search and rescue operations, environmental protection, as well as protection of the US sovereignty, international law enforcement and showing the flag in the international waters. The Coast Guard command believes that the implementation of the above tasks would require three heavy and three medium icebreakers with the further growth of their number (six heavy and four medium vessels). Expectedly, soon the US would take a decision to build one or two heavy icebreakers to ensure the year-round navigation in the Arctic and Antarctic.

Canada has a substantial icebreaker capability (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/330623-0910e.pdf) under the authority of the Coast Guard. Apart from the icebreakers, it incorporates a significant number of heavy and medium multipurpose ice-rated vessels capable to carry out ice breaking missions. The National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy (http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=629989) was endorsed on October 19, 2011. It provides for the reforming of the Royal Canadian Navy and Coast Guard capability through commissioning of 28 vessels over the next 30 years with the total value of 33 billion USD. The program substantiates former plans of the Harper Government.

Firstly, despite the prognosticated Arctic ice melt the government decided to renew construction of Diefenbaker heavy polar icebreaker for the Canadian Coast Guard. The keel-laying is planned for 2013, and by the year 2017 it will replace another vessel, St-Laurent heavy icebreaker. Secondly, financial support was granted to the construction of eight combat icebreakers for the Royal Canadian Navy designed under the Norwegian Svalbard project. At present the Royal Canadian Navy has no icebreakers of its own and relies on cooperation with the Canadian Coast Guard. New vessels are designed to carry out patrol missions, navigation control, search-and-rescue operations, environmental safety in the exclusive economic zone of the country and Arctic latitudes. First ships of the lot can be commissioned by the Navy in 2014.

Scandinavian countries – Norway, Sweden and Finland, as well as the majority of the countries running their scientific facilities in the Antarctic – Australia, Argentina, Great Britain, Germany, Holland, Spain, France, Chile, South Africa, South Korea and Japan also have their own icebreaker capabilities. The most ambitious plans of polar research belong to China. So far, China has the only converted icebreaking vessel, Xuelong (1993), however, by 2014 China expects to launch a new research vessel of its own design and development.

By the year 2014 the EU countries expect to build Aurora Borealis heavy icebreaker capable of the year-round operation in all polar waters combining the functions of a drilling ship and a multipurpose research platform. It would be equipped to drill the sea bottom more than 1.000m deep with the water depth of up to 5.000m. The design provides for two moon-pools dipped into the sea under the ship bottom for drilling operations. In package, it would allow deep-water drilling in drifting ice without support icebreakers, as well as to run remote-operated underwater vehicles under the conditions of solid ice cover. Expectedly, such wide opportunities would facilitate data collection necessary to comprehend the climate evolution as well as tectonic and paleographic Earth development.

***

Russia, as a country with the access to the Arctic Ocean, cannot do without an icebreaker fleet destined to carry out nationwide tasks in search-and-rescue operations, support of polar research expeditions, weather monitoring, as well as to accomplish missions assigned to the Russian Navy. However, whether the icebreaker vessels under construction would be used to resolve the entire range of the above problems or the primary goal thereof would be the development and further shipping of energy resources would depend on the vector of national economic development chosen by the Russian leadership.