The place to start here is to address a mistaken assumption that's often made with respect to the issue you've identified. Some people see the impact of climate change in the Arctic as creating opportunities, and they talk about access to resources and new shipping routes. There's excitement about all the untapped oil and gas in the region.
As someone who spends a lot of time in the Arctic and a lot of time talking with Arctic scientists, the risks and the costs associated with climate change in the Arctic greatly exceed the opportunities.
Let's just speak here of the impact of climate change on melting permafrost and the absolutely massive impact on infrastructure, roads, pipelines, and communities. We could talk about the erosion of coastlines, especially along the Arctic Ocean, the impact on communities as a result of that erosion caused by the melting of the sea ice, allowing weather and waves to impact on the coastline. Then, of course, there's the increase in extreme weather events that we see linked with climate change. There was a massive Arctic cyclone last summer—an unprecedented climatic event. It accelerated the melting of the ice and may well have had an impact on weather systems farther to the south.
The costs are greatly in excess of the opportunity, and it's important for northern countries to realize that.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't seize the opportunities that arise. Yes, we should. But let's not be naive about what's happening and about our need to do something.
In terms of Arctic countries dealing with climate change, I've already mentioned the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment from 2004. It was a massive study initiated by the Arctic Council, tapping into the world's top Arctic climate researchers, tapping into indigenous knowledge and making it part of the science report, and coming out with a very clear picture as to what was happening. It was assumed that the Arctic Council countries would meet and decide on real action to address climate change. Unfortunately, that next step of real action was essentially vetoed by the Bush administration.
My message to you on this is that the Arctic Council has been ready before to act in concert. It was prevented by an administration eight years ago that didn't realize the full impact and potential consequence of climate change. We know better today, across party lines, that this is a real problem, and the Arctic Council is a place.
In terms of regional impacts, I mentioned black carbon, Arctic haze, places where we could lead specifically at the Arctic Council. We shouldn't think that these things can be done informally. We all know that when it comes to the most important issues in the world, countries negotiate binding treaties because they can be enforced. These issues are of such importance that we need to be talking about law-making.