The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of 20 October, 2025

A New AI Data Center for the High North

On October 22, Rana Blad reported that Aker Nscale plans to build a new artificial intelligence data center in Korgen, Nordland, Northern Norway. The facility would match the scale of Aker’s ongoing Stargate Norway project in Narvik, developed jointly with OpenAI and Microsoft under a NOK 60 billion agreement. Aker Nscale has purchased power company Nordkraft’s rights to land adjacent to Statkraft’s hydropower facility in Hemnes municipality. The project awaits zoning approval and grid access from system operator Statnett, with an estimated power demand of 250 megawatts. (Rana Blad)

Take 1: Aker Nscale’s planned AI data center in Korgen marks another step in northern Norway’s efforts to transform from an industrial periphery to a digital frontier. Following Aker’s earlier Stargate Norway project with OpenAI and Microsoft in Narvik, the proposed 250-megawatt facility will reinforce how Arctic regions are being redefined as sites of computational extraction where renewable energy, land, and cool climates become increasingly desirable forms of capital. With anticipation that global data-center electricity demand could double by 2026, Nordic countries have become focal points of this expansion due to their hydropower surplus and political stability. However, Statnett’s reports already show grid congestion in northern Norway, raising concerns about whether “green” power serve external corporate interests only, providing little benefit to local communities. While development projects such as this one could generate jobs and infrastructure, they also will take energy and territory from north communities to serve growth elsewhere. Municipalities like Narvik and Hemnes are now negotiating industrial futures that hinge on data rather than oil. Geopolitically, the Korgen project also embeds the Arctic more deeply in Western digital networks, tying Norwegian hydropower to transatlantic AI industries. Whether this will empower or further peripheralize Arctic communities remains an open question. (High North News, IEA, Statnett)

Nuclear Cleanup or Distraction in Russia’s Arctic?

On October 20, 2025, The Barents Observer reported that Russia’s draft federal budget for 2026–2028 allocates 30 billion rubles to raise two sunken nuclear submarines from the Kara and Barents Seas. The vessels, the K-27 and K-159, contain large amounts of radioactive spent fuel. The K-27 was deliberately dumped in 1982, while the K-159 sank in 2003 during towing. According to state-owned nuclear energy corporation Rosatom, preparations will begin in 2026. (The Barents Observer)

Take 2: Russia’s plan to lift the K-27 and K-159 from the Arctic seabed aims to prevent long-term contamination risks to the Arctic marine environment, given the nuclear waste onboard the vessels. Russia is framing this as an effort to rehabilitate the Arctic from radiation hazards, recasting itself as a responsible Arctic power while distancing from decades of Western-led nuclear safety cooperation. Before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, projects addressing nuclear waste and submarine dismantlement in the region relied on international funding and expertise. Now, Russia’s commitment of domestic resources attempts to demonstrate post-sanctions self-reliance, while ignoring its unwillingness to be a partner in international nuclear safety efforts. While Russia strategizes over removing nuclear waste from its waters, it has simultaneously been building underwater surveillance capabilities that would protect it from nuclear weapons deployed from submarines. As the Arctic Council’s scientific cooperation has largely stalled since 2022, Russia’s unilateral actions emphasize sovereignty but risk reinforcing opacity and limited accountability with reduced communication and information-sharing between Arctic states. The stakes of leaving the submarines where they rest are real, however, there is potential for leakage of radioactive particles during the removal process, making the lack of communication, even on matters of science and safety, between Russia and the rest of the Arctic even more dangerous. While the government has been discussing removal of the submarines for over a decade, it has been postponed continuously, resulting from inadequate capacity and technology, verifiable risks of nuclear contamination, and high costs. (Carnegie Endowment, Euromaidan Press, Washington Post)

Trump’s Plans to Drill in the U.S.’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

On October 23, The New York Times reported that the Trump administration announced plans to allow oil and gas drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), including the coastal plain. The Interior Department also approved a road through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge,connecting the fishing community of King Cove to an airport. The decisions reinstate previously canceled oil leases and aim to hold a lease sale this winter. (The New York Times)

Take 3: Opening Alaska’s Arctic wilderness to drilling and infrastructure development is a stark example of industrial priorities overriding environmental and Indigenous rights, as it will affect 1.56 million acres of critical wildlife habitat, including areas used by polar bears, caribou, migratory birds, and lands traditionally used by Alaska Native communities. The coastal plain of ANWR contains pristine tundra, critical denning habitats for polar bears, and caribou calving grounds, all under pressure from climate change. Expanding oil and gas development here will fragment ecosystems, pollute waterways, and disrupt migratory patterns. This decision reveals a distressing pattern where the Trump administration prioritizes short-term economic and industrial gains over long-term ecological stewardship and Indigenous sovereignty and despite outcry from citizens across the country. The policy undermines Indigenous governance and land rights, particularly for the Gwich’in, who rely on caribou for subsistence and cultural practices. Their opposition highlights that these decisions do not represent all local voices, raising concerns about consent and equitable governance. Additionally, the announcement was made during the ongoing government shutdown, bringing into question whether due process was observed and proper procedures followed. Historically, attempts to lease ANWR for hydrocarbon development have failed to attract major industry interest, which has shied away from ANWR due to high costs, logistical challenges, and reputational risks associated with drilling in such a sensitive and publicly scrutinized environment. While the current administration emphasizes economic and energy gains, the commercial feasibility of large-scale drilling, though highly destructive, remains uncertain. (Politico, National Public Radio, The New York Times)

Vatican to Return Indigenous Artifacts to Canada

As reported by Eye on the Arctic on October 23, 2025, Indigenous leaders in the Northwest Territories confirmed that several traditional artifacts, including an Inuvialuit kayak, uluit, harpoons, and other hunting tools, currently held at the Vatican Museums, are set to be returned to Canada. The return is part of ongoing discussions between Indigenous organizations and the Vatican, and leaders expressed a desire for the artifacts to be displayed within the Inuvialuit Settlement Region. (EOTA)

Take 4: The repatriation of Indigenous artifacts from the Vatican to Canada represents a critical act of cultural restoration and reconciliation for northern Indigenous communities. These traditional items carry centuries of ancestral knowledge, spiritual significance, and survival skills. Many of these items were removed under coercive colonial and missionary practices, including during Canada’s residential school era, and were often displayed in European museums without consent. As such, their return is both symbolically and practically crucial, helping Indigenous communities reclaim authority over their cultural heritage. The Vatican’s “church-to-church” handoff, as they first return items to the Canadian Bishops before Indigenous communities, is a cautious, precedent-sensitive approach but still allows Indigenous leaders to determine the artifacts’ care, display, and educational use. For the Inuvialuit and First Nations, this provides an opportunity to revive traditional knowledge, engage younger generations, and reinforce cultural identity in tangible ways. This return is also part of a broader process of healing and acknowledgment of past harms, linking the restitution of material culture to the spiritual and emotional recovery of residential school survivors. Moreover, integrating the artifacts into local museums and educational programs will ensure that Indigenous narratives, rather than colonial interpretations, shape their meaning. This repatriation underscores that reconciliation extends beyond apologies and symbolic gestures and requires tangible acts that restore control and visibility to Indigenous communities over their heritage, knowledge systems, and cultural continuity. (CBC, CBC)

Denmark to Finance Greenland’s Amitsoq Mine

As reported by Arctic Today on October 23, Denmark’s state export and investment fund (EIFO) extended a €5.2 million convertible loan to GreenRoc Strategic Materials to support the redevelopment of the Amitsoq graphite mine near Nanortalik, southern Greenland. The funding will be used for bulk sampling, drilling, and the commissioning of a pilot plant to process graphite concentrate into active anode material. (Arctic Today)

Take 5: The Amitsoq mine, which aims to produce roughly 80,000 tons of graphite concentrate annually from a high-grade deposit, is being positioned as a strategic initiative to strengthen Europe’s supply of critical minerals for batteries and select defense applications. The EIFO loan represents a significant step in Europe’s effort to diversify critical mineral supply chains, reducing reliance on China, which currently dominates global graphite extraction and processing. Graphite is essential for lithium-ion battery production and energy storage, both crucial for Europe’s green transition and for defense technologies. By financing GreenRoc’s next development stages, EIFO says it is supporting economic development in Greenland while asserting a strategic foothold in a mineral sector increasingly viewed through a geopolitical lens. The timing and framing of the loan underscore the EU’s designation of graphite as a critical raw material, signaling that Greenlandic resources are seen by the EU as both economically valuable and strategically important. GreenRoc emphasizes how it will address environmental, social, and governance concerns through impact assessment. However, the push for European self-sufficiency raises questions about the broader environmental and social impacts on Greenland’s population. Mining in Greenland has historically posed challenges for local communities and fragile ecosystems, and the rapid advancement of extraction projects could exacerbate these pressures. While GreenRoc says it will have minimal environmental impact, the development of large-scale graphite operations risks disrupting local landscapes and requires ongoing monitoring to ensure that social and ecological safeguards are implemented effectively and community consent is consistently given. (AP News, EIFO)