When Russia planted its flag last year on the Arctic seabed, 4km under the North Pole, it raised fears that the rush to claim the remote area’s oil and gas resources would provoke conflict between nations making competing claims to the area.

Yet the first comprehensive governmental assessment of the region, by the US Geological Survey (USGS), revealed last week that most of the big finds appear to be in areas already under territorial claim.

Indeed, US government scientists said the North Pole itself did not appear “very interesting’’ as a home for fossil fuels. Besides that, Andrew Latham, vice president for Wood Mackenzie’s Upstream Consultancy, said the 4km water depth of the North Pole would be beyond deepwater production technology, even if it was not thick with summer ice.

The result is likely to be a shift in focus from the potential for Arctic conflict to how quickly each of the countries whose territorial claims stretch into the Arctic circle can develop their respective resources.

Given the recent heightened concerns over global energy supplies, the Arctic gives the industry a much-needed new frontier to exploit.

“The USGS review confirmed that the Arctic is an area with significant potential to meet future oil and gas needs,’’ says David Pumphrey, deputy director of the Energy and National Security Program for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

According to the USGS estimates, 25 Arctic provinces contain a combined total of 90bn barrels of oil – thought to be 13 per cent of the world’s undiscovered oil – and 1,669,000bn cubic feet of natural gas, or an estimated 30 per cent of the world’s undiscovered gas reserves.

Some countries already are working toward developing the Arctic, using the ­proceeds from high energy prices to advance research into new technologies to handle the Arctic’s harsh conditions.

But huge technical, logistical and economic challenges remain, says Mr Pumphrey.

Current production in the region is mostly onshore but the USGS believes 84 per cent of the Arctic’s undiscovered oil and gas is offshore, where the environment is even more challenging.

“Offshore development will require technologies that can withstand the harsh environment,” Mr Pumphrey says.

Norway is rolling out such new technologies in the development of its Arctic Snovit field, while Russia is developing plans for the Shtockman gas field which is further offshore.

“The extent of development of the oil and gas resources will be a function of continuing high prices, strong demand and development in other regions,” Mr Pumphrey points out.

The work might be made simpler by melting Arctic ice amid global warming.

“We believe that the melting of Arctic ice is, ironically, opening up a large new business opportunity for oil and gas companies and oil service companies, as great areas of ocean, with prolific hydrocarbon potential, become accessible for the first time,” Neil McMahon, a Sanford Bernstein analyst, wrote in a recent report.

Given Russia’s declining production in 2008, he wrote, the time will soon come when the Kremlin begins thinking about its first Arctic lease sale to provide the government with cash to fund urgently needed tax breaks to stimulate existing mature assets.

According to the USGS findings, Russia will be the biggest benefactor of Arctic exploration and production.

The combined oil and ­natural gas in its West Siberian Basin would add up to the equivalent of 132.6bn barrels of oil, the USGS estimated, almost double the next biggest gas province in the Arctic, Arctic Alaska, with 72.8bn barrels of oil equivalent.

The Russian East Barents Basin was ranked third, with the equivalent of 61.8bn barrels of oil.

More broadly, more than 70 per cent of the undiscovered oil resources are believed to occur in five provinces: Arctic Alaska, Amerasia Basin, East Greenland Rift Basins, East Barents Basins and West Greenland-East Canada. More than 70 per cent of the undiscovered natural gas is estimated to occur in three provinces: the West Siberian Basin, the East Barents Basins and Arctic Alaska.

Those estimates are based on conventional resources recoverable through a well bore. But there could be more in these and other Arctic provinces, trapped in heavy sands, shale or other unconventionals, the USGS estimates.

Still, the picture of the Arctic resources remains an uncertain one.

The USGS plans to conduct a follow-up assessment on which resources are ­technologically recoverable, given the depths of sea and ice in the area.

That report will be closely followed by those vying to commercialise the region as just what could be realistically extracted from the Arctic remains the crucial unanswered question.