Helsingin Sanomat Summarizes the Icebreaker Market
Finland's newspaper of record provides a good summary of current icebreaker projects
Finland’s largest circulation newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat, ran an editorial Sunday titled:
With Whom Will We Break the Ice? The aging of icebreakers and the race to the polar regions are causing a spike in demand for new icebreakers.
The article focuses on the icebreaker market from the Finnish perspective, noting that demand for icebreakers is heating up this year:
The Finnish government plans to launch an icebreaker renewal program in the autumn. Finland has just received EU funding for a new icebreaker. Its construction is scheduled to begin next year. A decision on a new icebreaker is also expected from Sweden. In March, a joint project between Helsinki Shipyard and the Canadians to build an icebreaker in Canada was also announced.
Finland, Sweden, and Canada all have icebreaker construction projects underway or coming soon. Helsinki Shipyard already has a deal to build a Canadian icebreaker, and orders are likely coming soon from Finland and Sweden. But the most interesting prospective customer is the USA. In describing the icebreaking situation in the USA, Helsingin Sanomat gives an excellent, succinct summary of the current situation concerning U.S. icebreakers:
Trump has long been interested in icebreakers. He is concerned that Russia has dozens of icebreakers, while the United States has only two in operational use. In the United States, icebreaking is the responsibility of the Coast Guard. The country negotiated the construction of icebreakers in Finland in 2019–2020, i.e. at the end of Trump's first term. The project ultimately collapsed with Trump's defeat in the presidential election, because the Joe Biden administration did not continue the project.
Peter Rybski, the then Naval Attaché at the US embassy, wrote on his blog in January that if Trump’s deal had been successful, the US Coast Guard would now have two new icebreakers designed and built in Finland at its disposal, and in addition, the US would have leased the icebreaker Fennica.
The US Coast Guard estimates that it will need 8–9 icebreakers to fulfill its assigned tasks. About half of these would be so-called polar security cutters and half would be arctic security cutters.
The functional difference between these two classes is that a polar icebreaker must be able to operate in the Arctic as well as in the Antarctic. In other words, polar icebreakers must be able to maintain the US McMurdo Research Station in Antarctica.
The US decided already in the last decade that it would acquire three polar icebreakers from American shipyards. A contract was signed for the first one, and the ship was supposed to be completed last year. It turned out differently.
The design of the icebreaker turned out to be so difficult that construction of the ship is only now starting. The price has also increased many times over, reaching around $2.4 billion – and this is only the first ship. It will be interesting to see whether the United States will see such an expensive project through to completion.
This spring, the United States also asked foreign shipyards for information on whether they would be able to quickly manufacture Arctic security cutters. This suggests that the United States' faith in its own capabilities has waned, and there is some willingness to buy icebreakers from abroad.
(Translation via google translate with some minor changes for clarity)
Thoughts and Comments
As noted above, this is a very good summary of the status of the U.S. Coast Guard’s icebreaking force. And I’m not just saying that because they quoted me.
I found one line particularly interesting. It may even be prescient:
It will be interesting to see whether the United States will see such an expensive project through to completion.
Just last week, the Department of Homeland Security cancelled part of its contract with Eastern Shipbuilding Group. From a Department of Homeland Security Press Release:
Eastern Shipbuilding Group (ESG) has been slow to deliver four OPCs, harming the U.S.’s defense capabilities and wasting American’s hard-earned money. In light of that, Secretary Noem partially canceled ESG’s contract for two out of the four OPCs expected from ESG in Panama City, Florida because it was not an effective use of taxpayer money.
Notable is this quote from the same press release indicating that the U.S. Coast Guard is reviewing other contracts as well:
“This Administration is unwavering in its commitment to the American taxpayer and to a strong, ready Coast Guard,” said a Senior Homeland Security official. “We cannot allow critical shipbuilding projects to languish over budget and behind schedule. Our Coast Guard needs modern, capable vessels to safeguard our national and economic security, and we will ensure every dollar is spent wisely to achieve that mission. This action redirects resources to where they are most needed, ensuring the Coast Guard remains the finest, most-capable maritime service in the world.”
As part of that commitment, the Coast Guard is reviewing contracts which are failing to meet delivery agreements.
Perhaps the Polar Security Cutter program is not as ‘safe’ as has been suggested. I could see perhaps the second ship of the class being cancelled, with the money directed to building a capable ‘Polar Icebreaker’ in one Finnish shipyard, while the other builds Arctic Security Cutters. That would be one way to more quickly acquire vessels, and at a lesser cost.
A year or even six months ago I would have said that such a move would be politically impossible. But with both Davie/Helsinki Shipyard and Rauma Marine Constructions discussing supporting icebreaker construction in the United States, such a deal might actually be within reach.
I’ll keep watching and reporting, so be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss any updates. I’m particularly interesting in learning more about non-Finnish shipyards or proposals to build icebreakers, but at this stage I don’t know much beyond press releases.
I will keep looking for this information while tracking all of the ongoing projects. For this reason, be sure to subscribe so that you don’t miss an update in this fast-moving situation.
Until next time.
All the Best,
PGR
Peter, do you have insight into how ESG got the icebreaker contracts to begin with? It seemed to me kind of...beyond their capacity.
Beginning of this month they announced a big contract with WA state--"hybrid electric" ferries. That seems more fitting with their scale/scope.
There was all that changing-hands-of-yards about 20 years ago...ESG, Halter Marine, ST [Singapore].... I lost the storyline when several marine news outlets got paywalled or sunk.
Also used to read HS's English online service till it got paywalled. So very much appreciate you passing this along. And thank you for everything you track.
The state of the USCG fleet is deplorable, especially the icebreaker situation, with data indicating earth will be moving into a cold (not warmer) phase, perhaps in our lifetimes, and the vision of a hemispheric geopolitical reconfiguration.
I had to look up HEALY to jog my memory...and realized with shock she was laid and launched nearly 30 years ago. Absolutely appalling neglect of the fleet.
Always enjoy the updates, especially from other countries local news.
Interesting to see their perspective on the US. Thank you!