As Arctic sea ice recedes, the U.S. and other nations are increasingly eyeing the region as a promising source of natural resources. But America’s ability to exploit those resources could be hampered by its aging and ailing icebreaker fleet.

The U.S. currently has three polar icebreakers. But two of them, the Polar Sea and the Polar Star, have surpassed their intended 30-year service lives, and the Polar Star has been inactive and docked in Seattle for more than two years.

The third icebreaker, the Healy, was commissioned in 2000. But while the Polar Sea and Polar Star can break through ice up to 6 feet thick, the Healy can’t handle ice more than 4 1/2 feet thick, according to the CQ Politics Web site.

Russia, on the other hand, has 20 icebreakers in its fleet, seven of them nuclear-powered. One of those ships can break through ice more than 9 feet thick.

“While U.S. strategic interests in the Arctic region expand, both domestically and internationally, our polar icebreaking capability is at risk,” Thad W. Allen, commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, recently told members of Congress.

“I am concerned that we are watching our nation’s domestic and international icebreaking capability decline as reliance on foreign icebreakers grows.”

He also stated in remarks reported by CQ: “We are losing ground in the global competition. Like Russia, Germany, China, Sweden and Canada are all investing and maintaining and expanding their national icebreaking capacity.”

Back in September 2006, a congressionally mandated report from the National Research Council said the U.S. should build two new polar icebreakers to protect its interests in the Arctic and the Antarctic. The report noted that melting sea ice in the Arctic was opening new shipping routes and sparking economic activity, such as exploration for natural resources.

But a new icebreaker would cost between $800 million and $925 million, and would take as long as 10 years to construct, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The stakes are high, however. The U.S. has “billion-dollar, if not trillion-dollar, national interests” in the Arctic, said Mead Treadwell, chairman of the Arctic Research Commission, which advises Congress.

Despite the receding polar ice cap, large areas of the region are still covered by thick ice.

And Treadwell told CQ that tougher operating conditions, due in part to changing wind and weather patterns, “will only make icebreaking capacity more critical.”