Towards a New Antarctic Architecture : Terra Nova II Expedition by Taylor
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Explorer's Gazette
EEXXPPLLOORREERR’’SS GGAAZZEETTTTEE Published Quarterly in Pensacola, Florida USA for the Old Antarctic Explorers Association Uniting All OAEs in Perpetuating the Memory of United States Involvement in Antarctica Volume 18, Issue 4 Old Antarctic Explorers Association, Inc Oct-Dec 2018 Photo by Jack Green The first C-17 of the summer season delivers researchers and support staff to McMurdo Station after a two-week weather delay. Science Bouncing Back From A Delayed Start By Mike Lucibella The first flights from Christchurch to McMurdo were he first planes of the 2018-2019 Summer Season originally scheduled for 1 October, but throughout early Ttouched down at McMurdo Station’s Phoenix October, a series of low-pressure systems parked over the Airfield at 3 pm in the afternoon on 16 October after region and brought days of bad weather, blowing snow more than two weeks of weather delays, the longest and poor visibility. postponement of season-opening in recent memory. Jessie L. Crain, the Antarctic research support Delays of up to a few days are common for manager in the Office of Polar Programs at the National researchers and support staff flying to McMurdo Station, Science Foundation (NSF), said that it is too soon yet to Antarctica from Christchurch, New Zealand. However, a say definitively what the effects of the delay will be on fifteen-day flight hiatus is very unusual. the science program. Continued on page 4 E X P L O R E R ‘ S G A Z E T T E V O L U M E 18, I S S U E 4 O C T D E C 2 0 1 8 P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R Ed Hamblin—OAEA President TO ALL OAEs—I hope you all had a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year holiday. -
Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute” Russian Antarctic Expedition
FEDERAL SERVICE OF RUSSIA FOR HYDROMETEOROLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING State Institution “Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute” Russian Antarctic Expedition QUARTERLY BULLETIN ʋ2 (51) April - June 2010 STATE OF ANTARCTIC ENVIRONMENT Operational data of Russian Antarctic stations St. Petersburg 2010 FEDERAL SERVICE OF RUSSIA FOR HYDROMETEOROLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING State Institution “Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute” Russian Antarctic Expedition QUARTERLY BULLETIN ʋ2 (51) April - June 2010 STATE OF ANTARCTIC ENVIRONMENT Operational data of Russian Antarctic stations Edited by V.V. Lukin St. Petersburg 2010 Editor-in-Chief - M.O. Krichak (Russian Antarctic Expedition –RAE) Authors and contributors Section 1 M. O. Krichak (RAE), Section 2 Ye. I. Aleksandrov (Department of Meteorology) Section 3 G. Ye. Ryabkov (Department of Long-Range Weather Forecasting) Section 4 A. I. Korotkov (Department of Ice Regime and Forecasting) Section 5 Ye. Ye. Sibir (Department of Meteorology) Section 6 I. V. Moskvin, Yu.G.Turbin (Department of Geophysics) Section 7 V. V. Lukin (RAE) Section 8 B. R. Mavlyudov (RAS IG) Section 9 V. L. Martyanov (RAE) Translated by I.I. Solovieva http://www.aari.aq/, Antarctic Research and Russian Antarctic Expedition, Reports and Glossaries, Quarterly Bulletin. Acknowledgements: Russian Antarctic Expedition is grateful to all AARI staff for participation and help in preparing this Bulletin. For more information about the contents of this publication, please, contact Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute of Roshydromet Russian Antarctic Expedition Bering St., 38, St. Petersburg 199397 Russia Phone: (812) 352 15 41; 337 31 04 Fax: (812) 337 31 86 E-mail: [email protected] CONTENTS PREFACE……………………….…………………………………….………………………….1 1. DATA OF AEROMETEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS AT THE RUSSIAN ANTARCTIC STATIONS…………………………………….…………………………3 2. -
Wastewater Treatment in Antarctica
Wastewater Treatment in Antarctica Sergey Tarasenko Supervisor: Neil Gilbert GCAS 2008/2009 Table of content Acronyms ...........................................................................................................................................3 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................4 1 Basic principles of wastewater treatment for small objects .....................................................5 1.1 Domestic wastewater characteristics....................................................................................5 1.2 Characteristics of main methods of domestic wastewater treatment .............................5 1.3 Designing of treatment facilities for individual sewage disposal systems...................11 2 Wastewater treatment in Antarctica..........................................................................................13 2.1 Problems of transferring treatment technologies to Antarctica .....................................13 2.1.1 Requirements of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty / Wastewater quality standards ...................................................................................................13 2.1.2 Geographical situation......................................................................................................14 2.1.2.1 Climatic conditions....................................................................................................14 -
Office of Polar Programs
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION DRAFT (15 January 2004) FINAL (30 August 2004) National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22230 DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA FINAL COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Comprehensive Environmental Evaluation (CEE) Process .......................................................1-1 1.3 Document Organization .............................................................................................................1-2 2.0 BACKGROUND OF SURFACE TRAVERSES IN ANTARCTICA..................................2-1 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Re-supply Traverses...................................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Scientific Traverses and Surface-Based Surveys .......................................................................2-5 3.0 ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................3-1 -
River Ice Management in North America
RIVER ICE MANAGEMENT IN NORTH AMERICA REPORT 2015:202 HYDRO POWER River ice management in North America MARCEL PAUL RAYMOND ENERGIE SYLVAIN ROBERT ISBN 978-91-7673-202-1 | © 2015 ENERGIFORSK Energiforsk AB | Phone: 08-677 25 30 | E-mail: [email protected] | www.energiforsk.se RIVER ICE MANAGEMENT IN NORTH AMERICA Foreword This report describes the most used ice control practices applied to hydroelectric generation in North America, with a special emphasis on practical considerations. The subjects covered include the control of ice cover formation and decay, ice jamming, frazil ice at the water intakes, and their impact on the optimization of power generation and on the riparians. This report was prepared by Marcel Paul Raymond Energie for the benefit of HUVA - Energiforsk’s working group for hydrological development. HUVA incorporates R&D- projects, surveys, education, seminars and standardization. The following are delegates in the HUVA-group: Peter Calla, Vattenregleringsföretagen (ordf.) Björn Norell, Vattenregleringsföretagen Stefan Busse, E.ON Vattenkraft Johan E. Andersson, Fortum Emma Wikner, Statkraft Knut Sand, Statkraft Susanne Nyström, Vattenfall Mikael Sundby, Vattenfall Lars Pettersson, Skellefteälvens vattenregleringsföretag Cristian Andersson, Energiforsk E.ON Vattenkraft Sverige AB, Fortum Generation AB, Holmen Energi AB, Jämtkraft AB, Karlstads Energi AB, Skellefteå Kraft AB, Sollefteåforsens AB, Statkraft Sverige AB, Umeå Energi AB and Vattenfall Vattenkraft AB partivipates in HUVA. Stockholm, November 2015 Cristian -
Mcmurdo STATION MODERNIZATION STUDY Building Shell & Fenestration Study
McMURDO STATION MODERNIZATION STUDY Building Shell & Fenestration Study April 29, 2016 Final Submittal MCMURDO STATION MODERNIZATION STUDY | APRIL 29, 2016 MCMURDO STATION MODERNIZATION STUDY | APRIL 29, 2016 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Overview PG. 7-51 Team Directory PG. 8 Project Description PG. 9 Methodology PG. 10-11 Design Criteria/Environmental Conditions PG. 12-20 (a) General Description (b) Environmental Conditions a. Wind b. Temp c. RH d. UV e. Duration of sunlight f. Air Contaminants (c) Graphic (d) Design Criteria a. Thermal b. Air Infiltration c. Moisture d. Structural e. Fire Safety f. Environmental Impact g. Corrosion/Degradation h. Durability i. Constructability j. Maintainability k. Aesthetics l. Mechanical System, Ventilation Performance and Indoor Air Quality implications m. Structural implications PG. 21-51 Benchmarking 3 Section 2: Technical Investigation and Research PG. 53-111 Envelope Components and Assemblies PG. 54-102 (a) Components a. Cladding b. Air Barrier c. Insulation d. Vapor Barrier e. Structural f. Interior Assembly (b) Assemblies a. Roofs b. Walls c. Floors Fenestration PG. 103-111 (a) Methodology (b) Window Components Research a. Window Frame b. Glazing c. Integration to skin (c) Door Components Research a. Door i. Types b. Glazing Section 3: Overall Recommendation PG. 113-141 Total Configured Assemblies PG. 114-141 (a) Roofs a. Good i. Description of priorities ii. Graphic b. Better i. Description of priorities ii. Graphic c. Best i. Description of priorities ii. Graphic 4 (b) Walls a. Good i. Description of priorities ii. Graphic b. Better i. Description of priorities ii. Graphic c. Best i. Description of priorities ii. -
A NEWS BULLETIN Published Quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC)
A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) An English-born Post Office technician, Robin Hodgson, wearing a borrowed kilt, plays his pipes to huskies on the sea ice below Scott Base. So far he has had a cool response to his music from his New Zealand colleagues, and a noisy reception f r o m a l l 2 0 h u s k i e s . , „ _ . Antarctic Division photo Registered at Post Ollice Headquarters. Wellington. New Zealand, as a magazine. II '1.7 ^ I -!^I*"JTr -.*><\\>! »7^7 mm SOUTH GEORGIA, SOUTH SANDWICH Is- . C I R C L E / SOUTH ORKNEY Is x \ /o Orcadas arg Sanae s a Noydiazarevskaya ussr FALKLAND Is /6Signyl.uK , .60"W / SOUTH AMERICA tf Borga / S A A - S O U T H « A WEDDELL SHETLAND^fU / I s / Halley Bav3 MINING MAU0 LAN0 ENOERBY J /SEA uk'/COATS Ld / LAND T> ANTARCTIC ••?l\W Dr^hnaya^^General Belgrano arg / V ^ M a w s o n \ MAC ROBERTSON LAND\ '■ aust \ /PENINSULA' *\4- (see map betowi jrV^ Sobldl ARG 90-w {■ — Siple USA j. Amundsen-Scott / queen MARY LAND {Mirny ELLSWORTH" LAND 1, 1 1 °Vostok ussr MARIE BYRD L LAND WILKES LAND ouiiiv_. , ROSS|NZJ Y/lnda^Z / SEA I#V/VICTORIA .TERRE , **•»./ LAND \ /"AOELIE-V Leningradskaya .V USSR,-'' \ --- — -"'BALLENYIj ANTARCTIC PENINSULA 1 Tenitnte Matianzo arg 2 Esptrarua arg 3 Almirarrta Brown arc 4PttrtlAHG 5 Otcipcion arg 6 Vtcecomodoro Marambio arg * ANTARCTICA 7 Arturo Prat chile 8 Bernardo O'Higgins chile 1000 Miles 9 Prasid«fTtB Frei chile s 1000 Kilometres 10 Stonington I. -
Land-Based Tourism in Antarctica
IP (number) Agenda Item: CEP 7b, ATCM 10 Presented by: ASOC Original: English Land-Based Tourism in Antarctica 1 IP (number) Summary This paper examines the interface between commercial land based tourism and the use of national program infrastructure, as well as recent developments in land-based tourism. Eight Parties responded to a questionnaire distributed by ASOC at ATCMs XXXI and XXXII. None of the respondents reported providing any support to tourism other than free basic hospitality, and most respondents explicitly opposed the notion of Parties being involved in tourism operations. Based on these responses it is apparent that some Parties have identified two locations where commercial land based tourism takes place using infrastructure from National Antarctic Programs. All land-based tourism operations rely directly or indirectly on some form of state support, including permits, use of runways, and use of facilities and terrain adjacent to research stations. The continued improvement of land-based facilities such as runways and camps, and the broad array of land activities now available to tourists, indicate that land-based tourism is growing. If no actions are taken soon, land-based tourism may well become consolidated as a major activity in a few years. 1. Overview In 2008 ASOC submitted to XXXI ATCM IP 41, A decade of Antarctic tourism: Status, change, and actions needed. Among other issues relevant to Antarctic tourism, ASOC’s IP 41 discussed the interface between commercial land-based tourism and the activities of national Antarctic programs. The paper remarked on a disturbing lack of clarity with regard to aspects of land-based tourism – what an IAATO representative described aptly as “fogginess”.1 ASOC’s IP 41 included a table listing several facilities used to support land- based tourism, some of which were private commercial facilities and other facilities of National Antarctic programs. -
Station Sharing in Antarctica
IP 94 Agenda Item: ATCM 7, ATCM 10, ATCM 11, ATCM 14, CEP 5, CEP 6b, CEP 9 Presented by: ASOC Original: English Station Sharing in Antarctica 1 IP 94 Station Sharing in Antarctica Information Paper Submitted by ASOC to the XXIX ATCM (CEP Agenda Items 5, 6 and 9, ATCM Agenda Items 7, 10, 11 and 14) I. Introduction and overview As of 2005 there were at least 45 permanent stations in the Antarctic being operated by 18 countries, of which 37 were used as year-round stations.i Although there are a few examples of states sharing scientific facilities (see Appendix 1), for the most part the practice of individual states building and operating their own facilities, under their own flags, persists. This seems to be rooted in the idea that in order to become a full Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party (ATCP), one has to build a station to show seriousness of scientific purpose, although formally the ATCPs have clarified that this is not the case. The scientific mission and international scientific cooperation is nominally at the heart of the ATS,ii and through SCAR the region has a long-established scientific coordination body. It therefore seems surprising that half a century after the adoption of this remarkable Antarctic regime, we still see no truly international stations. The ‘national sovereign approach’ continues to be the principal driver of new stations. Because new stations are likely to involve relatively large impacts in areas that most likely to be near pristine, ASOC submits that this approach should be changed. In considering environmental impact analyses of proposed new station construction, the Committee on Environmental Protection (CEP) presently does not have a mandate to take into account opportunities for sharing facilities (as an alternative that would reduce impacts). -
Species Status Assessment Emperor Penguin (Aptenodytes Fosteri)
SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT EMPEROR PENGUIN (APTENODYTES FOSTERI) Emperor penguin chicks being socialized by male parents at Auster Rookery, 2008. Photo Credit: Gary Miller, Australian Antarctic Program. Version 1.0 December 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Program Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species Falls Church, Virginia Acknowledgements: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Penguins are flightless birds that are highly adapted for the marine environment. The emperor penguin (Aptenodytes forsteri) is the tallest and heaviest of all living penguin species. Emperors are near the top of the Southern Ocean’s food chain and primarily consume Antarctic silverfish, Antarctic krill, and squid. They are excellent swimmers and can dive to great depths. The average life span of emperor penguin in the wild is 15 to 20 years. Emperor penguins currently breed at 61 colonies located around Antarctica, with the largest colonies in the Ross Sea and Weddell Sea. The total population size is estimated at approximately 270,000–280,000 breeding pairs or 625,000–650,000 total birds. Emperor penguin depends upon stable fast ice throughout their 8–9 month breeding season to complete the rearing of its single chick. They are the only warm-blooded Antarctic species that breeds during the austral winter and therefore uniquely adapted to its environment. Breeding colonies mainly occur on fast ice, close to the coast or closely offshore, and amongst closely packed grounded icebergs that prevent ice breaking out during the breeding season and provide shelter from the wind. Sea ice extent in the Southern Ocean has undergone considerable inter-annual variability over the last 40 years, although with much greater inter-annual variability in the five sectors than for the Southern Ocean as a whole. -
Hnitflrcitilc
HNiTflRCiTilC A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) ,m — i * Halley, the British Antarctic Survey's station on the Brunt Ice Shelf, Coats Land,, was rebuilt last season for the third time since 1956-57. This picture taken in March shows one of the four wooden tubes, each of which houses a two-storey building, under construction in a pre-shaped and compacted snow hollow. BAS Copyngh! Registered at Post Office Headquarters, Vol. 10, No. 2 Wellington, New Zealand, as a magazine. SOUTH GEORGIA -.. SOUTH SANDWICH Is «C*2K SOUTH ORKNEY Is x \ 6SignyluK //o Orcadas arg SOUTH AMERICA / /\ ^ Borga T"^00Molodezhnaya \^' 4 south , * /weooEii \ ft SA ' r-\ *r\USSR --A if SHETLAND ,J£ / / ^^Jf ORONMIIDROWNING MAUD LAND' E N D E R B Y \ ] > * \ /' _ "iV**VlX" JN- S VDruzhnaya/General /SfA/ S f Auk/COATS ' " y C O A TBelirano SLd L d l arg L A N D p r \ ' — V&^y D««hjiaya/cenera.1 Beld ANTARCTIC •^W^fCN, uSS- fi?^^ /K\ Mawson \ MAC ROBERTSON LAN0\ \ *usi \ /PENINSULA' ^V^/^CRp^e J ^Vf (set mjp Mow) C^j V^^W^gSobralARG - Davis aust L Siple USA Amundsen-Scon OUEEN MARY LAND flMimy ELLSWORTH , U S A / ^ U S S R ') LAND °Vos1okussR/ r». / f c i i \ \ MARIE BYRO fee Shelf V\ . IAND WILKES LAND Scon ROSS|N2i? SEA jp>r/VICTORIAIj^V .TERRE ,; ' v / I ALAND n n \ \^S/ »ADEUL. n f i i f / / GEORGE V Ld .m^t Dumom d'Urville iranu Leningradskayra V' USSR,.'' \ -------"'•BAlLENYIs^ ANTARCTIC PENINSULA 1 Teniente Matienzo arc 2 Esperanza arg 3 Almirante Brown arg 4 Petrel arg 5 Decepcion arg 6 Vicecomodoro Marambio arg ' ANTARCTICA 7 Ariuro Prat chile 500 1000 Miles 8 Bernardo O'Higgms chile 9 Presidente Frei chile - • 1000 Kilomnre 10 Stonington I. -
Mount Harding, Grove Mountains, East Antarctica
MEASURE 2 - ANNEX Management Plan for Antarctic Specially Protected Area No 168 MOUNT HARDING, GROVE MOUNTAINS, EAST ANTARCTICA 1. Introduction The Grove Mountains (72o20’-73o10’S, 73o50’-75o40’E) are located approximately 400km inland (south) of the Larsemann Hills in Princess Elizabeth Land, East Antarctica, on the eastern bank of the Lambert Rift(Map A). Mount Harding (72°512 -72°572 S, 74°532 -75°122 E) is the largest mount around Grove Mountains region, and located in the core area of the Grove Mountains that presents a ridge-valley physiognomies consisting of nunataks, trending NNE-SSW and is 200m above the surface of blue ice (Map B). The primary reason for designation of the Area as an Antarctic Specially Protected Area is to protect the unique geomorphological features of the area for scientific research on the evolutionary history of East Antarctic Ice Sheet (EAIS), while widening the category in the Antarctic protected areas system. Research on the evolutionary history of EAIS plays an important role in reconstructing the past climatic evolution in global scale. Up to now, a key constraint on the understanding of the EAIS behaviour remains the lack of direct evidence of ice sheet surface levels for constraining ice sheet models during known glacial maxima and minima in the post-14 Ma period. The remains of the fluctuation of ice sheet surface preserved around Mount Harding, will most probably provide the precious direct evidences for reconstructing the EAIS behaviour. There are glacial erosion and wind-erosion physiognomies which are rare in nature and extremely vulnerable, such as the ice-core pyramid, the ventifact, etc.