The Battle for the Worldwide Natural Resources - International Strategies and their Impacts

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

List of Abbreviations

List of Figures

List of Appendices

1 Introduction
1.1 Preface/Problem Description
1.2 Objectives
1.3 Scope and Structure of Work

2 As-Is Situation
2.1 Global Allocation of Resources
2.2 Scope: The Arctic Region
2.3 Economic Portrayal of the Arctic Region
2.4 Summary

3 Applicants for the Arctic Region and Resources
3.1 Preface
3.2 Legislation terms
3.3 Scope-Definition of Applicants
3.4 Economic Portrayal of Applicants
3.4.1 Norway
3.4.2 Russia
3.5 Summary

4 Impact on the Applicants’ Economy
4.1 Preface
4.2 Scenarios
4.2.1 Discovery of New Deposits
4.2.2 Price Formation of Depletable Natural Resources
4.2.3 Differential Rent Theory
4.2.4 Isoelastic Demand Function
4.3 Examples & Approaches
4.3.1 The Resource Oil
4.3.2 The Resource Gas
4.4 Impact on Relevant Economies
4.5 Summary

5 Results
5.1 Preface
5.2 Results from Investigation
5.3 Visualisation of Results
5.4 Summary

6 Conclusion
6.1 Summary
6.2 Recommendation
6.3 Future Research Direction

Appendix

References

Executive Summary

This assignment contemplates the discussion about the present conflict for the Arctic region, including the applicants’ claims for Arctic natural resources. The major focus of this work therefore is, as mentioned in the assignment’s subject, analysing the ‘battle for natural resources’ as well as the impact for the involved economies.

During the investigation it was determined that experts of different scientific institutions do not come to the consensus about the available amount of raw materials, especially oil and gas, which are focused in this paper.

Due to the scarcity of depletable resources their importance increases and with it the run for the Arctic and its treasures. Although the amount of these resources in relation to the known sources is assumed to be low, every new discovered deposit is of great importance for the potential owner and for the world economy.

As the Arctic is located in the high seas, there is currently no existing legislation for the case of claiming the present resources except the admiralty law. Generally, this is a unique case in world history. Among the applicants for the different regions of the Arctic there are several conflicts about the exact borderlines.

This paper especially outlines the conflict in the Barents Sea between Norway and Russia. Both economies claim the area to extract the resources but they are depending on each other. Norway on the one hand is technically equipped and Russia on the other hand is sufficiently funded.

This assignment points out the differences between these two countries, their relation to the mentioned raw materials and the impact on their economies.

List of Abbreviations

illustration not visible in this excerpt

List of Figures

Figure 1 Reasons for the Run to Natural Resources

Figure 2 Increasing Proportion of Fossil Fuels

Figure 3 Worldwide Spread of Mineral oil

Figure 4 Breakdown of Mineral Oil Resources

Figure 5 Northeast Transit

Figure 6 Development of Price per Barrel Oil

Figure 7 Worldwide Oil and Gas Extraction

Figure 8 Map of the Arctic Region

Figure 9 Arctic Region: Entitlement of Economies

Figure 10 Admiralty Law

Figure 11 Conflict Zone of Russia and Norway

Figure 12 Increase of Depletable Resources

Figure 13 Price Formation at Depletable Resources

Figure 14 Isoelastic Demand Curve

Figure 15 Peak Oil

Figure 16 Hubbert Curve

Figure 17 Worldwide Gas Resources

Figure 18 Transport Costs of Different Resources

Figure 19 Production with Oil

Figure 20 Norway Total Oil Production and Consumption, 1990-

Figure 21 Main Oil and Gas Pipelines in Europe

Figure 22 Agreed Boundary Between Russia and Norway

Figure 23 Oil Extraction Costs

Figure 24 Arctic Oil Stock in Contrast to Worldwide Oil Stock

List of Appendices

Appendix 1 ITM-Checklist: 360-degree analysis

1 Introduction

1.1 Preface/Problem Description

It is a general fact that if an economy is faced with problems that this is based on human needs. Needs are feelings of a lacks.^[1] These days, our worldwide society is in a state of flux. The search for renewable energy sources and alternative raw materials increased in the recent years. Nevertheless, the demand for existing raw materials is unbroken.^[2]

In addition, our society is confronted with a scarcity of raw materials worldwide. Important materials like oil and gas are available limitedly as different studies show.^[3]

Further, the greenhouse effect is a current topic in media. The increased CO2- (carbon dioxide), CH4- (methane) and CFC- (fluorochlorinated hydrocarbon) emissions are the most important and common greenhouse gases which lead to a climate change.^[4]

The above mentioned facts (human needs, scarcity of raw materials and climate change) are the reasons for the run to natural resources, especially in the Arctic area:

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 1 Reasons for the Run to Natural Resources^[5]

Due to the change of climate worldwide and especially in the Arctic region, the Arctic ice melts leading to the fact that raw materials are easier accessible.^[6] This effect is also afflicted with some problems and unanswered questions. For this reason, the following core-question has been formulated and needs to be verified:

Who owns the Arctic?

i. To validate this question, it will be examined, which effects the allocation of the Arctic territory for selected stakeholders have. It will also be examined, who the stakeholders are.
ii. Additionally, the impact of conflicts regarding natural resources and the importance for the economics of the stakeholder will be evaluated.
iii. It will be checked, which institutions, laws or organizations influence the entitlement and which political consequences the conflict of the Arctic region has.
iv. Furthermore, it will be explored, which raw materials are available in the Arctic region, which potential these resources have and how the worldwide availability resp. scarcity of the identified raw materials is.

This means that the first focus is on natural depletable resources like oil and gas^[7] and the second focal point is the conflict between the stakeholders.

1.2 Objectives

The objective of this assignment is to discover, in what way the natural resource conflict in the Arctic region impedes the economies of the stakeholder. This study also provides approaches how this competition can be solved and what the economic consequences might be.

The development of resources also includes welfare effects. Through the scarcity of goods, individuals or societies make decisions to achieve a high own welfare effect (individual or collective).^[8] These decisions influence an economy. The linked benefits will be examined too.

There were five stakeholders of the Arctic resources identified. Due to the fact that the greatest area of tension is between Norway and Russia, the focus of this study is on these two countries.^[9] Norway, on the one hand, is the fourth biggest gas exporter worldwide and strongly depending on exports.^[10] Russia, on the other hand, is the winner of the climate change. The most discovered resources are around Russia. In addition, these resources are easily accessible. Another important factor is the transport routes that are available through the climate change.^[11]

1.3 Scope and Structure of Work

Chapter 2 contains a global allocation of resources and a differentiation of renewable and non-renewable resources. In addition, it includes an overview of resources that are worldwide used focussing on oil and gas. Additionally, chapter 2 outlines the sensitive ecological system, affected by the climate change that the Arctic is faced to nowadays. Finally, the chapter presents the economic portrayal of the Arctic region. An explanation of the scarcity of natural resources is given, too.

In the course of this assignment, it will become clear, why the stakeholders are highly interested in the Arctic area. Chapter 3 therefore focuses on the applicants for Arctic resources and on existing laws. It describes present institutions with relevant rules to allocate boundaries. Furthermore, this chapter gives insights into the conflict of the applicants Norway and Russia.

Chapter 4 deals with the impact on the applicant’s economies. For this reason, the effects at a discovery of new deposits as well as the price formation of depletable resources will be presented. The differential rent theory describes the price impact to competitors. A detailed explanation of the resources oil and gas is given and helps to understand their importance. The description of welfare effects to an economy closes this chapter.

Chapter 5 contains the practical part of this paper. Based on the analysis of Norway and Russia, the impacts explained in chapters 2, 3 and 4 are used to examine the allocation of the Arctic region. The investigation is conducted by exploring the conflict in the Barents Sea. Furthermore, it illustrates the dependence of both countries on the resources oil and gas – for consumption and extraction.

The conclusion in chapter 6 sums up all main points of this assignment. A summary will be given which answers the initial questions. This is followed by recommendations for solving the territory conflict between the stakeholders. Finally, an outlook will be given.

2 As-Is Situation

2.1 Global Allocation of Resources

Adam Smith, who lives from 1723 until 1790, is considered as one of the pioneers of the traditional economics and founder of the resource-allocation theory, an analysis of the resources being used and its effect on the productivity. In these times, the factors of productivity were defined as labor, land and capital. Nowadays, the factors of productivity need to be defined more differentiated. Labor means coordinated human acting and know-how. Capital is defined as the sum of all equipment such as machinery, building and infrastructure and land stands for natural resources.^[12] Natural resources are substances that exist naturally in the earth and were not made by but necessary or useful to human beings. From an economical and geographical view, natural resources can be separated in renewable and non-renewable resources. Renewable resources are those resources that can be brought back to the original state without human effort after being used.^[13]

Consequently, non-renewable natural resources cannot be brought back to the original state within a human-term time horizon. Natural gas and mineral oil are so called non-recyclable non-renewable resources as they will be destroyed by burning them in order to produce energy. Minerals and metals are recyclable non-renewable resources, but will become slightly useless due to a higher degree of pollution caused by the recycling process. Natural non-renewable resources are running out, but the world has an increasing demand of those resources as they are said to be mandatory to ensure the growing of developing and emerging markets. Thus, the battle for the worldwide natural resources is already in progress for years.

There is a multitude of different raw materials such as minerals, metals, fossil fuels and agricultural commodities. Generally, raw materials can be classified in seven groups:

- Agricultural commodities
- Air and water
- Minerals
- Stones and sediments
- Salts
- Metallic ore
- Fossil fuels

The majority of the most valuable raw materials belong to the group of non-renewable resources as the value is mainly rareness driven. Jewellery and noble metals are the most valuable material based on the price per gram but as the demand for those materials is relatively low in comparison to natural gas and mineral oil, the battle for the resources in the Arctic region is about fossil fuels. As this work is about analysing the battle for the worldwide resources with regard to the Arctic region, fossil fuels, mainly mineral oil, will be in focus of this research.

The worldwide consumption of oil is increasing for decades. Emerging markets such as China and India and industrialized countries like the United States of America, covering more than 40% of the worldwide population, have an increasing demand for fossil fuels to keep the engine of the economic growth running.^[14] The dependency on oil that nearly every country has leads to a worldwide dependency on the non-renewable resources of oil that carries a high potential for economical and political conflicts. When analysing the supply and demand of oil, the authors Seifert and Werner declared the world to be on a drip.^[15] Oil becomes of utmost importance for transportation, the chemical industry and for generating heat and electricity.

In 1993, 62% of the electricity worldwide was produced by burning fossil fuels. 21% was provided by renewable energy sources such as water power, wind power or solar power and 17% was made by nuclear energy. In 2003, the percentage of fossil fuels increased up to 66%, whereas nuclear energy decreased down to 16%, renewable energy decreases to 18% worldwide.^[16]

Given this fact, the change from non-renewable to renewable energy sources has not yet taken place on a global level. The figure below illustrates the increasing proportion of fossil fuels.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 2 Increasing Proportion of Fossil Fuels^[17]

There are basically two different types of mineral oil that experts differentiate, based on the techniques of extraction. Classical or conventional mineral oil is directly accessible as the high pressure ejects the oil from the oil field. Non-conventional mineral oil such as oil shelf, oil sand and bitumen are less liquid as they fixed to other materials and cannot be extracted easily. Depending on whether the experts consider non-conventional oil as oil, the specialists’ opinions differ about the calculation of mineral oil resources, but they all agree the oil stock will not last for a very long period. The assumption that are made today with regards to the oil and gas stocks are primarily based on exploratory drills and monitoring. In 2007, a geological survey by the United States projects the overall potential of conventional mineral oil at 400 gigatons, which is 400 billion tons of mineral oil.^[18]

From a geographical point of view, the resources are unequally spread. The Middle East region, Russia and the United States have the biggest resources of oil. The figure below illustrates the worldwide allocation of mineral oil. With regards to this figure, a resource is the sum of oil that is geologically detected but cannot be extracted due to economical reasons, or oil that is not yet detected, but the chance to detect additional oil is quite high. A reserve is the sum of oil that is already detected and that can be extracted, whereas extracted stands for the sum of oil that has been used.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 3 Worldwide Spread of Mineral oil^[19]

70% of the overall oil potential and even 73% of the oil potential still to be extracted is allotted to a maximum of ten countries. Most of these countries are members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), an organization that aims to take control of the worldwide oil price. Experts assume that the OPEC’s power will increase in future as they currently hold 40% of the worldwide oil production, but 73% of the oil stuck.^[20] The following figure provides an overview of the country relating breakdown of oil resources, reserves and extracted oil. The countries highlighted in blue are members of the OPEC.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 4 Breakdown of Mineral Oil Resources^[21]

The predicted development of an increasing power of the OPEC will probably have enormous impact on the worldwide economy. From a high-level view, the world can be classified in those countries, which are forced to import oil in order to cover its demand, as they do not have access to oil resources or already exhausted its sources and those countries, which are able to export oil as their resources exceed their demand. The intention of the oil exporters is to keep the price per barrel high, whereas the importers strive to keep the price low. The exploitation of resources that have not been allotted yet presents a unique opportunity for importers to decrease its satellization on oil exporters. By contrast, oil exporters that explore additional oil resources will increase their dominating market position. In recent years, the Arctic region became of major interest for abutters of the Arctic. Section 2.2 deals with an analysis of the type and quantity of the assumed natural resources in the Arctic region in reference to ecological and economical impact of the climate change.

2.2 Scope: The Arctic Region

The Arctic region is a highly sensitive ecological system. The impact of the climate change for the Arctic region is of utmost dramatic form as the global warming takes place twice as fast on overage as in other areas.^[22] This is caused by the so called Albedo-effect. The global warming leads to the melting of snow and ice. The snow and ice covered Arctic Ocean area was reduced by 30% over the last 30 years. This effect will probably emphasise over the coming years. Snow and ice reflect up to 80% of the sunlight streaming in, whereas the Arctic water absorbs most of the solar energy and reflects only approximately up to 8% of the sunlight.^[23] Thus, the Arctic Ocean gets heated up, the snow and ice melting increases, glaciers thaw and the sea-level rises. The natural transfer of warm sea water coming from the south and cool sea water from the north is called conveyor belt and essential and mandatory for the living in this region. The melted ice and snow fresh water intermixes with the warm seawater from the south becoming less to cool and salty to drop down and cannot be transferred back to the south consequently. Thus, the flow of the water will disrupt, the livelihood of the existing biota will change significantly. Although it sounds paradoxical, a global warming might lead to a boulder period in the Nordic region. A problem, which ecological and economical consequences cannot been foreseen yet. By contrast, at this stage, the climate change provides good economical opportunities with regard to the battle of the resources in the Arctic region. There are mainly two developments that are directly connected with the climate change generating positive economical impact on the abutters and those countries, which want to participate in the run for resources in this area.^[24]

The melting of ice in the Arctic region leads to the fact that new trade routes can be used, which implies an enormous saving of time and money. In 1932, a Russian boat crossed the Arctic the first time within one season using the northeast transit starting from Hamburg, Germany and ending in Tokyo, Japan. The figure below provides and illustration of the northeast transit, a distance of 13,000 kilometers, which is by 8,000 kilometers shorter than the common transit route through the Suez Canal. The northwest transit between Tokyo and New York in the United States saves at least 4,200 kilometers in contrast to the common transit through the Panama Canal.^[25]

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 5 Northeast Transit^[26]

Given the fact that modern super tankers spend 100,000 dollars of fuel each day, it is expected to save billions of dollars for the shipping and trade industry by spending less time and consequently saving more fuel for the oil tanker.^[27] At this time, the use of the northeast and northwest transit is still not very popular. Both transit routes are still dangerous as they are ice free only for approximately 30 days in summer times and they are quite expensive as Russia charges the shipping and trade industry to keep the transit passable with its nuclear submarines. Depending on the organisation, latest forecast predict the transit routes to be free of ice between 2013 and 2050.^[28]

The second impact of the climate change is the extraction of raw materials that could not be extracted due to technical and economical reasons in the past. A detailed analysis of the existing and assume raw materials and an estimation of its quantity would go beyond the scope of this research. Thus, this section deals with the sum of raw materials quite briefly, but focuses on mineral oil and natural gas in more detail. The Arctic region is high in valuable raw materials. Mines extracting ore and minerals like copper, iron ore and phosphate already exist, mainly located on the landside of Russia, Canada and Greenland. Noble metals such as gold, silver and platinum as well as rare materials like gallium and indium that used in the semiconductor technology have already been found on the sea bed. The extraction and production of the above mentioned raw materials from the bottom of the seas is highly challenging from a technical point of view. Although it is technically possible to drill and consequently extract raw materials up to a deepness of 3,000 meters, it is still uneconomical in most of the cases. This leads to the fact that some experts assume minerals and ore not to be extracted from the sea bed on a large scale within the coming 20 to 30 years.^[29] Some of them even say that the mankind will not produce those materials from the deep sea within this century.^[30] By contrast, mineral oil and natural gas stored in the Arctic deep sea are exploitable as they are stored under considerable pressure. The effort, which has to be done in order to extract those materials from the sea bottom, is by far lesser than the extraction of metals and minerals. Russian analysts calculated a break-even-price of 100 dollar per oil barrel for the production of Russian mineral oil offshore in the Arctic region.^[31] As the below mentioned figures illustrates, a price that has already been achieved in 2008.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 6 Development of Price per Barrel Oil^[32]

Even if the price per barrel oil slumps in the meantime, from a long term perspective the price per barrel will probably increase. Thus, the production of oil seems to be profitable, even though the extraction of oil is connected with additional effort. Until now, 550 oil and gas field have been indentified beyond the Arctic circle, located on the landside or in the shelf sea, with a depth of water less than 500 meters. Given this fact, 10.5% of the worldwide oil production even 25.5% of the worldwide natural gas production takes place in the Arctic region. It is mainly Russia that extracts oil and gas from this region as it owns 9 of the 10 biggest oil fields and 44 of the 50 largest natural gas fields in this area. The following map of the Arctic region highlights the areas, where oil or gas extractions and mining are already in progress and marks those areas, where further oil and gas resources are presumed.^[33]

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 7 Worldwide Oil and Gas Extraction^[34]

The measurement of the resources in the Arctic Ocean with regards to the extent and manner of resources is quite imprecise. In the very first years of this millennium, scientist assumed one fourth of the worldwide oil and gas resources to be located in the Arctic.^[35] Recent studies are much more pessimistic. The circum Arctic resource appraisal report published in 2008 essentially assumed 90 billion barrel of so far undetected mineral oil to be stored on the bottom of the Arctic Ocean. This equates to 13% of the worldwide assumed, but no yet detected oil resources. With regards to the natural gas, 47.3 trillion cubic meter and additional 44 billion barrel of liquid gas, 30% respectively 20% of the worldwide undetected gas and liquid gas resources are presumed in this region. Most of the resources, namely 84% of this resources are expected to be offshore. Although these figures sound enormous, the resources of the Arctic region will never be comparable with the resources of the Middle East. In 2008, the leading oil extracting company British Petroleum, which is the second largest company of the world based on revenue, accounted reserves of 1.24 trillion barrel of oil in its financial statements.^[36] This is by 14 times more oil than the expected oil resources in the Arctic region. Oil from the Arctic might cover the worldwide demand for a maximum of three years, based on the current demand. Furthermore, considering that most of the resources in the North are not easily accessible, some parts of the resources will never be extracted. Nevertheless, there are already a couple of projects ongoing that aim to produce further resources from the sea bed. To spread the costs and risks of such projects, technical, economical and political alliances have been syndicated. Three more or less promising projects from Russia, Norway and Canada are briefly presented, representing several more or less similar activities of other companies, alliances or countries.

- Russia – The Schtokman-Field

Gasprom form Russia, Total from France and StatoilHydro from Norway built an alliance extracting the natural gas of the Schtokman-Field. At this point, the ocean is about 350 meters deep; the gas resources are additional 2.000 meters under the bottom of the sea. 3.8 trillion cubic meters of natural gas are presumed in this area, gas should be extracted for 50 years. The overall spending for this project is about 30 billion dollars.^[37]

- Norway – Snohvit-Field

Norway built a fully automatic conveyor system offshore on the Arctic sea bed. The gas should be extracted and directly transferred to the landline via a pipe line system. The gas should be cooled and thus become liquid. Gas amounting to 1.4 billion dollars should be extracted for 25 years, but the gas production was incredibly low against Norway’s expectations and technical problems with the pipe line system caused an ecological disaster as gas directly streams out. The responsible decided to burn the gas and a flame of 130 meters blazes for months, generating additional 3.5 million tons of carbon dioxide.^[38]

- Canada – Beaufortsea

Canada sold the right of exploration drills in the Beaufortsea on a grand scale. In 2007, Imperial Oil and Exxon Mobile Canada started looking for oil in areas, where oil has been found in the 1970’s. The extraction of oil in the past has been stopped due to a low barrel price for oil in these times. ConocoPhilips and Chevron, Shell and British Petroleum reserved the right to exploration drills in the meantime as well following all the same aim, which is to detect oil or gas in a so far undetected extent.^[39]

2.3 Economic Portrayal of the Arctic Region

In order to understand which region is investigated in this work, this section is about to introduce the Arctic.

The Arctic is usually defined as the region inside the northern polar circle, thus at a latitude of 66° 30' N. The Arctic comprises a region of approx. 14.056 million km², depending on the fraction of the land area included in the Arctic. The following islands belong to the Arctic:^[40]

Greenland (2,175,600 km²; Denmark territory)

Ellesmere-Island, (197,235 km²; Canada territory)

Svarbar-Islands, (61,022 km²; Norway territory)

Kolbeinsey-Islands (90 km²; Iceland territory)

The below mentioned map gives a general overview over the Arctic region from a geographical perspective:

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 8 Map of the Arctic Region^[41]

From a historical and political perspective, there is no international approved owner of the Arctic in excess of the 200-nautical mile border.^[42] In the early 20th century, there has been a conflict concerning the ownership of the North Pole region for the first time, but rather driven by individual motives than by political interests. The intervention of countries occurred in a relevant matter at first in 2007, when Russian submarines set their flag on the sea bottom of the geographical North Pole in order to claim for this region.^[43]

International nautical laws indicate that the national coast inside a 12 nautical mile zone is stated as territorial water. Relevant due to economic exploitation is the 200 nautical mile zone, called exclusive economic zone. This area does not directly belong to the countries’ territory, but the according state has the right to use and exploit any resources that can be found in this district. Any regions outside this 200-seamile zone are international waters. However, the region around the North Pole is more than 200 sea miles away from any country and therefore an international zone without any proprietor. Therefore, the concept of the exclusive economic zone does not cover the control of this region.^[44]

The following map illustrates, where the 200 nautical mile borders are situated and how large the international North Pole-zone is and shows the regions with the according claims in the Arctic:

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 9 Arctic Region: Entitlement of Economies^[45]

One alternative to extend the 200 sea mile border is to apply for a border expansion at the UNO. For this purpose the applicant has to prove that a territorial continental shelf reaches beyond the exclusive economic zone into international waters without any abyssal plains. This application then has to be verified by a commission of geologists, the ‘Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf’ (CLCS).^[46]

2.4
Summary

To sum up, it is to say that the Arctic region was chosen due to the fact that actually there is a conflict between several stakeholders for scarce natural resources.

As outlined in section 2.1, global natural resources are classified roughly into the segments renewable and scarce resources. Scarce in this case means that resources once exploited are gone. The most important scarce resources for today’s world appear to be energy resources. A major part of global energy resources already are already allocated to according economies or rather countries. By contrast there are still regions with existing reserves in resources that are not accordingly allotted to a stakeholder. For this reason the Arctic region was chosen in order to analyse the conflict between selected stakeholders applying for these resources. The present and available resources in the chosen Arctic are energy resources on the one hand, such as gas and oil, and ore and minerals like copper, iron, and phosphate on the other hand.

The effects of climate change and melting Arctic ice not just opens the barrier for shipping as pointed out in section 2.2, it rather offers the opportunity to exploit resources that are assumed to be in regions that have been hardly accessible in the past due to the Arctic frost crust.

[...]

---

^[1] Cf. Fischbach, R., Wollenberg, K. (2003), pp. 8.

^[2] Cf. Fräss-Ehrfeld, C. (2009), pp. 110.

^[3] Cf. Wengenmayr, R., Bührke, T. (2008), pp. 84.

^[4] Cf. Jöst, F. (1994), p. 33.

^[5] Own creation.

^[6] Cf. http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01/the-melting-of-ice-at-the-global-poles-and-glaciers-that-what-we-call-the-three-global-poles-is-bound-to-bring-benefits-to-some-but-potential-warfare-to-others-global-warming-may-ignite-borders/.

^[7] Cf. Wacker, H., Blank, J. E. (1999), p. 1.

^[8] Cf. Heertje, A., Wenzel, H.-D. (2008), pp. 6.

^[9] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 277.

^[10] Cf. Kneissl, K. (2008), p. 123.

^[11] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 214.

^[12] Cf. Rogall, H. (2008), p. 57.

^[13] Cf. Liu, P. (2005), p. 13.

^[14] Cf. http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,635430,00.html.

^[15] Cf. Seifert, T., Werner, K. (2008), p. 7.

^[16] Cf. Ramonet, I. (2006), p. 20.

^[17] Own creation.

^[18] Cf. http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_144/nn_330718/DE/Themen/Energie/Downloads/Energierohstoffe

__2009__Teil1,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Energierohstoffe_2009_Teil1.pdf.

^[19] http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_144/nn_330718/DE/Themen/Energie/Downloads/Energierohstoffe__

2009__Teil1,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Energierohstoffe_2009_Teil1.pdf.

^[20] Cf. http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_144/nn_330718/DE/Themen/Energie/Downloads/Energierohstoffe__

2009__Teil1,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Energierohstoffe_2009_Teil1.pdf.

^[21] http://www.bgr.bund.de/cln_144/nn_330718/DE/Themen/Energie/Downloads/Energierohstoffe__

2009__Teil1,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Energierohstoffe_2009_Teil1.pdf.

^[22] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 68.

^[23] Cf. Seidler, C.(2009), p. 70.

^[24] Cf. Seidler, C.(2009), p. 144.

^[25] Cf. Seidler, C.(2009), p. 146.

^[26] http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/download.html.

^[27] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 144.

^[28] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 72.

^[29] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 102.

^[30] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 103.

^[31] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 105.

^[32] http://www.finanzen.net/rohstoffe/oelpreis.

^[33] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), pp. 107.

^[34] Seidler, C. (2009), p. 107.

^[35] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 105.

^[36] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 120.

^[37] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 132.

^[38] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 131.

^[39] Cf. Seidler, C.(2009), p. 137.

^[40] Cf. http://www.goruma.de/Laender/ArktisAntarktis/Arktis/Landkarte/geografie.html.

^[41] http://www.goruma.de/Laender/ArktisAntarktis/Arktis/Landkarte/index.html.

^[42] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 54.

^[43] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), pp. 51.

^[44] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), pp. 53.

^[45] http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1290290,00.jpg.

^[46] Cf. Seidler, C. (2009), p. 56.