Sea Ice

Green - no Wild Card; Red - Wild Card.

This scenario was selected to give a counter point to the scenario ’Consistent Business’. It shows that even if the climate develops favorable for economic development, the political climate does not necessarily follow suit. Incidentally, this raw scenario has a two orders of magnitude higher plausibility than the most consistent one, while having low to moderate robustness and average consistency values and one partial inconsistency.

The scenario: The extremely mild climate in the Arctic has driven massive development efforts in the early 2020’s. However, territorial issues were never settled prior to exploration. Once it was clear just how rich the Arctic basin is in natural resources the territorial disputes became more and more heated. Short outbursts of aggression and the increased armament of the region lead to a stalemate between the Western littoral states and Russia, effectively shutting down any autonomous economic operation in the Arctic. And further, it interferes strongly with indigenous peoples way of life, due to pollution from military operations, weapons tests and restrictions of territory.
The smoldering conflict draws large amounts of economic resources, which slows down the economic growth around the globe and does not allow needed developments in the field of alternative energy. Leaving a weak economy at the whim of an ever oscillating oil price. This amplifies the worldwide regional conflicts that came with the massive and sudden change of the climate. Impoverished costal nations turn a blind eye on piracy, putting the shipping industry under extreme pressure. While insurance companies are no longer inclined to issue policies for maritime operations.
Wild Card: This scenario is consistent, and amplified, by the Wild Card ’Hot Cold War’. But completely inconsistent with ’Breakdown of the Thermohaline Circulation’ because of its expression of the Key Factor ’Climate’.