During the investigation, conclusions have been reached such that the mortality rate of small crustaceans, which serve as food for larger species, has been alarmingly increased and the plankton respiration rate has increased, being, therefore, therefore, the greater the amount of CO2 produced in the sea. The oceans have been, to date, a source to bury CO2 and the consequences could be fatal if this situation were reversed.
But, as in everything, not all countries are interested in ending this destruction of our environmental balance.
In the May issue of the National Geographic magazine in Spanish - which I bought in Colombia just before embarking for Europe - I found a report on the struggle that will face countries such as Norway, Sweden, Denmark within a decade - or less - sovereign of the vast area of Greenland - Russia and the United States. All moved by a single cause, as always lucrative: the rights of exploitation of the Arctic seabed to obtain natural gas and oil.
And that, people, is what really makes the issue not appear in the media of those countries with the seriousness that it should.
For them, who hope to take a part of the cake, the melting of the Arctic can mean succulent benefits. Although - according to the National Geographic article - nobody knows exactly how much will be from one and the other - although it is believed that there is more gas than oil - all the contestants want to start the exploitation race in the first row of the starting grid , having already begun disputes over ocean water rights.
For this, maps of the marine relief are made through studies that cost a fortune.
Well, that, with oil and gas being increasingly scarce fuels, the options for saving the mythical and almost impassable ice sheets of the North Pole and the animal species that depend on them are increasingly pyrrhic. Very, very sad to think that I will be part of the generation that saw the ice disappear from the North Pole.