View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Navigating the Arctic Rush
Heidi Kuusniemi
Professor, Director
Department of Navigation and Positioning
Finnish Geospatial Research Institute (FGI), www.fgi.fi
President
Nordic Institute of Navigation, www.nornav.org
Stanford's 2015 PNT Symposium
13th November 2015
Outline
Defining the Arctic
• Navigation requirements in the Arctic
• Challenges in the Arctic
• Possible solutions
• Conclusions
• Area north of the Arctic circle
• 66° 33′ 46.0″ north of the Equator
• 1/6 of the Earth´s landmass
• 30 mill km2 / 11.5 mill mi2
• 8 countries / 4 mill people
• 24 hours - all time zones
• 25% world reserves of oil & gas
• Shorter shipping routes
Defining the Arctic Source: CIA World Fact Book
• The Arctic is an area of growing strategic
importance
• The European Union has an important
role to play in supporting Arctic cooperation
• protecting and preserving the Arctic and
promoting sustainable use of resources
• Finland is a member of the Arctic Council, a
leading intergovernmental forum promoting
Arctic cooperation, coordination and interaction
• Finland’s Arctic strategy emphasizes creation of new
business opportunities, the region’s security and stability
and international cooperation
• core focus areas are on marine technology and shipping,
mining, energy and renewable energy sources
• increasing Arctic expertise through research
Finnish interest in the Arctic (1) Photo: Finnish Transport Agency
• Over 85% of Finnish gross
national product comes from
goods transported to and/or
from Finland via sea
• All Finnish seaports freeze
during normal winter
• Over 100 years of Finnish ice-
breaking history, starting from
1889
• Expertise in winter navigation
and ice-breaking in the Baltic
Sea
• Transferring the knowledge
more broadly to be applied to
the Arctic
Finnish interest in the Arctic (2)
Photo: Finnish Transport Agency
Ice melt in the Arctic (1) 10-year averages between 1979 and 2008 and yearly averages for 2007, 2012,
and 2015 of the daily ice extent in the Northern Hemisphere
Source: Comiso et al., Current
State of the Sea Ice Cover, NASA,
http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index
.php?section=234
2012
2015
Arctic sea-ice thickness in
October 2010, 2011, 2012 and
2013 based on data from
ESA’s CryoSat mission
Source: ESA
Ice melt in the Arctic (2)
Ice conditions in the Arctic
Types of ice
• New ice (< 10 cm)
• Young ice (10 cm- 30 cm)
• First-year ice (> 30 cm)
• Multi-year ice (2-4 m)
• Glacial ice (<1 m - > 5 m)
• Multi-year and glacial ice
most hazardous to even
ships with high ice-class
Source: Pixabay
Source: Silja Line, Finland
Increased navigation needs (1) • More activity in shipping
• N-W and N-E (Northern) passage
• Shorter distances than with the
traditional routes
• Access to remote areas for logistics Photo: Finnish Transport Agency
Source: Discovering the Arctic, UK
North America
Greenland
Siberia
Pacific
Ocean
North
Atlantic
Ocean
Northern
Sea Route
Northwest
Passage
Trans
Polar
Route?
Arctic
Ocean
Source: Jaakko Savisaari, Atlas Elektronic Finland Ltd.
N-W passage
30 October 2015
Nordica
Fennica
Source: Robin Berglund, VTT, Finland and Arctia Shipping Ltd., Finland
Finnish icebreakers returning from their summer season
ice management missions in the Chukchi Sea, off the coast of Alaska
Route plan with ice concentration
Ice-breaker
URHO
17.9.2015
VIDEO
Arctia Ltd.
Increased navigation needs (2) • More overall activity
• Oil and gas exploration
• Tourism continuously
increasing
• Fishing in new areas, longer
season
• Mapping, surveying, and
scientific observations
• Land and off-shore: seismic
surveys, rig positioning
• Hydrography, marine charts,
seabed mapping
• Environment monitoring
Source: Visit Helsinki
Source: Pixabay
• More aircrafts are flying in the
Arctic
• Small aircrafts and helicopters are
very important for transportation of
goods and people to remote areas
• Increased en-route traffic in
Arctic air space
• Transpolar flights
Increased navigation needs (3)
Source: Pixabay
Source: ESA
Outline
Defining the Arctic
Navigation requirements in the Arctic
• Challenges in the Arctic
• Possible solutions
• Conclusions
• Minimum user requirements by the IMO*
• Horizontal positioning accuracies < 10 m in oceanic and coastal areas
as well as restricted waterways
• Critical traffic areas (ports) < 1 m
• IMO’s International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar
Code), starting from 2017, takes a stand also on navigation and
receiving information about ice conditions
• In aviation, the LPV 200 (Localizer Performance with Vertical
Guidance) for GNSS-based precision approach, defines the vertical
alert limit at 35 m
• the degree to which knowledge of the aircraft altitude must be protected
• Requirement in Arctic land and off-shore positioning is typically
high accuracy - at least sub-meter
• High integrity and availability
* International Maritime Organization Res. A.915(22), 2002
Navigation requirements in the Arctic
Outline
Defining the Arctic
Navigation requirements in the Arctic
Challenges in the Arctic
• Possible solutions
• Conclusions
Challenges in the Arctic (1) • Environment
• Rough weather
• Marine navigation: drifting ice patches and hull-penetrating multi-year ice
• The area is remote and distances large
• Very late emergency response
• Poorly mapped areas - both at land and sea
• Improved access to geospatial data could help better to predict, understand and react to changes in the Arctic
• Improved sea charts – quality and availability
Source: Canadian Ice Service
Challenges in the Arctic (2) • Darkness and limited visibility
Challenges in the Arctic (3)
• Changing ice conditions
After only one hour
Source: Finnish Transport Agency
Source: Finnish Transport Agency
Challenges in the Arctic (4) • Higher ecological impact of
an accident
• The Arctic environment is vulnerable and very slow in regeneration after for instance an oil spill
• Limitations with navigation technologies
• Poor heading accuracy – both magnetic and inertial
• Degraded GNSS performance
• Lack of communications infrastructure
• Lack of radio-navigation infrastructure
Source: NY Times,
www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/world/americas/24ship.htm
FGI’s test and data collection campaign
– M/S Viking Line ‘Amorella’
Northern Baltic Sea
February 2015
GNSS limitations - geometry
• GPS, Beidou and Galileo satellite
inclination angles: 55º, 55º and 56º
• Low elevation angles in polar areas
• Good for the HDOP
• Bad for VDOP – degraded altitude accuracy
• Multi-GNSS and sensor aiding helps
• Higher noise levels in observations
• Slightly better with GLONASS (65º)
• Difficulties with GNSS augmentation
• Poor visibility of GEO satellites (e.g.
EGNOS and WAAS)
• Sparse infrastructure for GNSS augmentation
Longyearbyen, Norway
~ N 78.2°, E 15.7°
2.1.2015 00:00 (UTC+2)
GNSS limitations - ionosphere (1) • In the Arctic the ionosphere is characterized by an enhanced
electron precipitation causing an increased ionospheric variability
• Solar activity driven ionospheric storms
• Scintillation: not as strong as in Equatorial areas, but may occur at
any time in the day
• Northern lights are a visible
example of the increased activity
at high latitudes
Lapland
NOOA: Intensity and location of the aurora http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/aurora-30-minute-forecast
GNSS limitations - ionosphere (2)
NOOA: Solar Cycle Sunspot Numbers http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-cycle-progression
GNSS limitations - augmentation systems (1)
Source: ESA, Navipedia
SBAS systems either operational, under implementation
or under feasibility studies
GNSS limitations - augmentation systems (2)
Source: Finavia
EGNOS performance at Ivalo airport
Ivalo
68° 39′ N 27° 33′ E At Ivalo:
EGNOS PRN 120 at 8°
EGNOS PRN 136 at 11°
(EGNOS PRN 126 at 11 °)
Year HPE 95% daily
average (m)
VPE 95% daily
average (m) EGNOS availability (%)
2012 1.37 1.99 96.7
2013 1.31 1.97 98.9
2014 1.40 2.26 98.7
ICAO* req. for EGNOS: HPE 95 < 3 m, VPE 95 < 4 m, Availability > 99%
* International Civil Aviation Organization
GNSS limitations - augmentation systems (3)
Source: Finavia
EGNOS performance at Ivalo airport (cont.)
GPS PRNs 9, 16, 19, 23
”Not monitored” by EGNOS
because the are on the border
of EGNOS coverage, not
reached by enough
monitoring stations
Source: ESSP
Kuusamo
EGNOS monitoring
stations
Outline
Defining the Arctic
Navigation requirements in the Arctic
Challenges in the Arctic
Possible solutions
• Conclusions
Possible solutions - ionosphere modeling and monitoring
• Single-frequency use of GNSS will be dominating still the
next 10 years or so in civilian maritime and aviation
• Improving ionosphere time/spatial variability models
• Combination of various types of observations of the
ionosphere
• Multi-frequency GNSS in
the future to compensate
for the ionosphere
• L1 and L5
Source: Pixabay
Possible solutions – GNSS augmentation and integrity • Corrections through
• MEO constellation
• Extensive ground monitoring still needed
• IALA (International Association of Lighthouse
Authorities) differential GNSS beacons
• Limited range and difficulties with maintenance
• Polar orbiting satellites or others
• Expensive (billions of €)
• Long endurance UAVs
• Advanced Receiver Autonomous
Integrity Monitoring (ARAIM)
for integrity Source: Pixabay
Possible solutions - ice-aware routing • Is it possible to create an algorithm that generates optimal maritime
shipping routes, taking into account ice conditions and available ice
breaker assistance?
Photos by Tapio Nyman and the Canadian Coast Guard
What is needed for ice-aware routing?
1. Sea spatial model
2. Ship maneuverability model
3. Sea ice model
• Describes the sea ice conditions
at given point in space and time
4. Ship performance model
• Describes how the ship
performs as a function of ice conditions
• Also, takes into account possible ice
breaker assistance
5. A cost function (A*)
Ice-aware maritime route optimization in the Baltic Sea (1)
Current route (AIS data)
ARCSAT optimized route
Speed near open-water speed
ice-breaker waypoints
*
* *
* *
*
Tallinn
Helsinki
St. Petersburg
The Bay of Bothnia
The Gulf of Finland
The Baltic Sea
Source: Jakub Montewka, FGI
Vessels beset in ice
during winter 2011
Ice-aware maritime route optimization in the Baltic Sea (2)
Current route (AIS data)
ARCSAT optimized route
Speed near open-water speed
ice-breaker waypoints
*
* *
* *
*
Tallinn
Helsinki
St. Petersburg
Data collecting
* Oceanographic and
weather observations
forecasts, and analyses
* Route suggestions
• Icebreakers
• Merchant vessels
• Bridge integrators
• Authorities
• Ice service
• Logistics and port
operators
* Observations
* Engine power
* User needs
Other data sources: AIS, ice
breaker (IB) waypoints
Environmental and ship
models
Ice drift, ice thickness, ice
charts, iceberg monitoring
Route optimisation
Ship parameters
Data delivery
(internal, external)
Earth Observations •Cosmo-SkyMed
•Radarsat
•NOAA
•Modis
•Sentinel-1
Possible solutions - Ice navigation
support system V
O
R
I
C
Enhanced Situational Awareness
to Improve Maritime Safety in the
Baltic (ESABALT)
Common software platform for the
crowdsourcing of maritime
information for the benefit of all
maritime stakeholders
www.esabalt.org
Possible solutions
- Crowdsourcing
Enhanced Situational Awareness
to Improve Maritime Safety in the
Baltic (ESABALT)
Common software platform for the
crowdsourcing of maritime
information for the benefit of all
maritime stakeholders
www.esabalt.org
Possible solutions
- Crowdsourcing
FGI’s projects related to the Arctic • ARCSAT: Arctic Real-Time
Satellite Services for the Public
and Commercial End-Use
• Ice aware navigation for the
Arctic sea
• ESABALT: Enhanced Situational
Awareness to Improve Maritime
Safety in the Baltic
• STORMWINDS: Strategic and
Operational Risk Management for
Wintertime Maritime Transportation
System
• VORIC: Vessel Operations and Routing
in Ice Conditions
• FEGNOS: Finland’s EGNOS Monitoring
and Performance Evaluation
Outline
Defining the Arctic
Navigation requirements in the Arctic
Challenges in the Arctic
Possible solutions
Conclusions
Conclusions and recommendations (1) • Arctic “rush”
• North-East and North-West passages are being probed as
commercial sea routes
• Mining, oil and natural gas extraction industries are moving ever
northwards
• Research stations have sprung up in the Arctic territories of
almost every Northern country
• Governments have started
to invest in policies for
protection and sustainable
development of the fragile
Arctic environment
Wintertime marine highway, Finnish Transport Agency
• The challenges include
• presence of ice and snow
• coverage of GNSS constellations and satellite- or
land-based augmentation systems is not optimal
• access to radio navigation (other than GNSS) and
communications is limited
• atmospheric modelling is
not well-understood
• lack of maps and
sea charts
• The challenge is to attain similar levels of navigation
performance and reliability possible via traditional
technologies at lower latitudes
Source: Finnish Transport Agency
Conclusions and recommendations (2)
• What is needed:
• Cross-nation cross-sector cooperation
• Geodata infrastructure as the common
platform for all Arctic stakeholders
• Maps and sea charts
• Communication technologies
• Denser GNSS observation and
improved GNSS augmentation channels
• Organized crowdsourcing of information
• Knowledge from the Baltic will be
useful to be transferred to the Arctic
• Ice models, traffic data, ship performance,
route optimization, oil combating
Source: National Land Survey, Finland
Source: Finnish Transport Agency
Source: GSA
Conclusions and recommendations (3)
European Navigation Conference 2016
Helsinki, Finland, 30th May – 2nd June 2016
ENC 2016
www.enc2016.eu
Helsinki Finlandia Hall
IMPORTANT DEADLINES
Full-paper submission: 15th February, 2016
(full-paper-review track)
Abstract Submission: 15th February, 2016
(abstract-review track)
Acceptance Notification: 31th March, 2016
Early Registration: 15th April, 2016
Recommended