Do I understand correctly that the light-green area covering the entire polar region north of Island is due to VIIRS registering light radiating from the polar ice and snow? Surely it isn't because of data collected during polar day and therefore sunlit 24/7, then it would be more in a straight line and not having a dip around Greenland?
If it is ice and snow, does it affect visual observing in any significant way compared to a site closer to equator, if both sites are equally distanced from any artificial light sources and are equal in every other way?
It seems that most of the large modern observatories are build down south, and not in polar regions. I have read some articles about Polar astronomy, but there are not many to find, except of the obvious Aurora Borealis research.
Why is Polar regions not popular for professional or amateur astronomy? Myself is living in Oslo, Norway, but frequently I am traveling to Northern Norway and neighbouring Russian city of Murmansk. Weather is so-so: many clouds, winter-storms, cold. Apart from that we have 9 months of darkness, and that should count for something.
I see that my post started with one question, but indulged into an area of discussion in the second part, perhaps suited for another forum or topic. Disregard the second question then, if that is so.
PS: I am a visual observing beginner with many questions, (probably not uncommon). Still working on making an observation routine and find an area to focus on. Leaning towards double stars and planetary. But first learning how to orientate myself in the night sky, using equatorial mount and charts, and learning the technical and theoretical aspects of optics and mechanics of a telescope setup by building a refractor with GEM on a steel pier.