Summary of Working Paper No. 150-1999
I.1.6
In an earlier study, we created a Monte-Carlo based numerical model that
calculated the time and cost required for shipping by way of the Northern Sea Route
for three cargo ship types during the four seasons of the year. The model used
historical probabilities of occurrence for sea-ice cover, meteorological, and
oceanographic conditions to establish the physical environment at each transit
way point in the model. It then set the speed of the ship for the upcoming trip
segment or the need for icebreaker escort according to a series of decisions
related to the physical conditions. Shipping costs were related to the type of
ship, the time of year, how long the transit takes, and how much of the time an
icebreaker escort is needed.
For this study, we conducted an extensive sensitivity analysis of the transit
model to reveal the most significant parameters determining the shipping time
and cost. We provided this information to other researchers to help them decide
which variables to include and their degree of resolution in their creation of
an improved transit model. We then modified the CRREL model, further segmenting
its spatial grid by a factor of ten and adding the necessary environmental
data files that were provided to us from another INSROP project. Obtaining and
incorporating more recent cost data or ship performance criteria were outside the
scope of work for this project. The cost data used herein were those which was
available as of 1993. The cost calculations therefore are useful only in a
relative sense. Our new model results indicate that better information in these two
areas is needed.
In this report, we compare the structure, the data, and the logic used in the
old and the improved CRREL models. We describe our sensitivity analyses and
identify those variables having the greatest influence on time and cost. We
present and discuss the new model results, and compare those with results from the
original CRREL model.
Whereas our earlier model results agreed reasonably well with historical
experience, these were somewhat less successful in that way. The new results were
similar to the earlier model for April transits but their August transits
differed significantly. In fact, the new August time and cost results were not much
different from those calculated for April. This was contrary to historical
experience, which indicates that shipping in August requires half the time for
shipping in April.