Hi All
I have sent a message to Anja Chalmin to ask if she would like to see
calculations about the use of marine cloud brightening to save the
Arctic ice. On reasonable assumptions we would need fewer than 100
spray vessels operating for a month either side of the summer equinox in
water flowing north, but clear of the ice. They could move to the Cape
Verde Islands for the rest of the year to moderate hurricanes. I will
let you know if she asks for them but nobody from the ETC group or the
Heinrich Bőll Foundation has replied to my previous invitations.
If anyone else would like to check my calculations or suggest other
input assumptions, please send me your email address.
Stephen
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering,
University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
[email protected], Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704, Cell 07795 203 195,
WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs, YouTube Jamie Taylor Power for Change
On 20/12/2019 15:33, Andrew Lockley wrote:
http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2019/12/current-geoengineering-proposals-for-the-polar-regions/
CURRENT GEOENGINEERING PROPOSALS FOR THE POLAR REGIONS
DEC 19 2019
Weddell seals are one of the many members of the Antarctic ecosystem
that would be affected by massive geoengineering proposals. photo:
GRID-Arendal
by Anja Chalmin
The recently-published IPCC “Special Report on the Ocean and
Cryosphere in a Changing Climate” states that surface air temperatures
in the polar regions are rising at a rate higher than the global
average and that polar areas continue to lose sea ice and snow cover.
In the face of fossil fuel use that is likely to burn through carbon
budgets, geoengineers have put forward large-scale proposals with the
stated aim of restoring polar-ice or to slow the melting processes
through interventions in the polar regions. Some of the proposals, and
the concerns that have been raised about them, are outlined below.
Reflective materials as surface-cover
An organisation called Ice911 has proposed covering Arctic ice with a
layer of floating reflective material to reflect more sunlight and to
slow the melting of Arctic ice. The non-profit was founded in 2007 by
Leslie Fields and is based in Menlo Park, California. The proposed
cover material is a reflective silica glass and consists mostly of
silicon dioxide. The silica glass has the shape of tiny glass spheres.
Since 2010, Ice911 has conducted outdoor trials at five different test
sitesi. Different materials were tested for their suitability and
reflectivity on frozen lakes in the US and Canada.
The project’s largest test site is the Arctic North Meadow Lake near
Utqiaġvik, in Alaska. The surface of the shallow lake is used to test
various reflective materials as well as the efficiency of different
application techniques. The outdoor trials on North Meadow Lake
started during winter 2015/2016. In the following two years the
testing area on the lake covered 15,000 to 17,500 m².
According to Ice911 these works were carried out in partnership with
Indigenous, local, regional and global communities. However, some
community members say they have little or no knowledge of the trials,
while raising questions about the ecological impacts of the project
activities. The effects on photosynthesis, on animals’ feeding
patterns, changes to the hydrologic cycle and weather patterns, and
other unintended effects in delicate arctic ecosystems are among the
concerns that have been raised.
Since 2018, Ice911 has been looking for funding and governmental
permissions to conduct large-scale testing with reflective materials
on arctic ice. These tests form part of Leslie Field’s proposal to
cover 15.000 km² to 100.000 km² with silica glass in selected arctic
regions, e.g. in Fram Strait or Beaufort Gyre. In May 2019 she
announced the first tests on sea ice within a period of one to three
years.
Perhaps most importantly, the current knowledge of the silica glass’
behaviour in the environment and on plant and animal life is
insufficient. The impacts in the target regions or on regional cycles
or global weather patterns are difficult to determine.
Sea walls and artificial islands for the stabilisation of outlet glaciers
Increased melting of glaciers and ice sheets may also be caused by
warm ocean currents. In 2018, John C. Moore, Michael Wolovick, and
others from the US-American Princeton University and the Finish
University of Lapland proposed three different potential megaprojects
that they hypothesize could delay global sea-level rise by stabilizing
three fast-moving outlet glaciers: Pine Island glacier and Thwaites
glacier in western Antarctica and Jakobshavn glacier in Greenland. The
three glaciers spread from the continent to the ocean and float on top
of the ocean water. Warmer ocean currents at a water depth of 300 to
500 metres melt the glaciers from below. To avoid that the glaciers
lose more ice than they gain or at least to slow down the melt, the
team outlined three different approaches:
(1) The construction of a 100-metre high wall on the seabed, in order
to block warm water from melting the floating bottom of the glaciers;
(2) The construction of several hundred metres high artificial islands
in front of the glaciers to hold back the glaciers and limit the
amount of glacial ice reaching the ocean;
(3) Slowing the sliding of the glaciers by drying subglacial streams
with the help of huge pumping station or by freezing water at the
glacier bases.
In western Greenland, warmer ocean currents reach the Jakobshavn
glacier at a water depth of 300 metres. To block the warm currents,
Moore and Wolovick’s team suggested a 100-metre high wall on the
seabed across the 5 km wide Ilulissat Fjord at the end of the
Jakobshavn glacier. In western Antarctica, the Thwaites glacier
encounters warmer ocean currents at a water depth of 500 meters. In
this case the length of the wall necessary to block the warm water is
estimated at 120 km and the wall would be located 600 metres under the
water surface. The amount of construction material needed to build a
similar wall in front of Pine Island glacier is estimated at 6 km³.
The actual realisation of the walls would mean the construction of one
of the largest structures in the world under very difficult
conditions. In addition, there is no guarantee for success, e.g. it
cannot be fully ruled out that blocking warm water from one glacier
does not lead to increased melting in neighbouring glacial regions.
The proposed projects would cause significant and poorly-understood
disruptions to water currents, sea life migration, water cycles and
potentially weather patterns. Negative effects on marine ecosystems
and fisheries have been raised as significant concerns by the team
members themselves.
Restoring polar-ice: Various proposals
In March 2019, researchers from India proposed rebuilding polar ice by
sprinkling desalinated sea water on the surface of the ice. The
process involves a pumping unit, able to bring up cold ocean water, a
desalination plant, and a spraying system. At sub-zero temperatures,
the desalinated sea water is to be sprayed from a height of 50 to 60
metres above the ice, in order to turn into snow or ice. The
researchers suggest placing sprinklers along the edges of the polar
ice caps, e.g. 3 to 5 km away from the edges and spaced at 0,5 km
intervals. While details related to possible ecological effects, costs
or technical implementation are not available, the potential negative
impacts on delicate ecosystems are significant.
In 2016, fourteen researchers at Arizona State University presented
the results of a modelling study which also includes pumping water to
the surface for restoring sea ice and thickening the polar caps. The
proposed pumps are wind-powered and pump sea water to the ice surface,
where the water freezes if allowed by the outside temperature. The
study estimates that one pumping unit is able to cover an area of 0.1
km² with one meter of ice during one winter. The concept suggest
covering 10% of the arctic regions with pumping units: This involves
the installation of 10 million pumps at an estimated cost of US$500
billion.
Computer simulations were used to reach the conclusion that shooting
very large amounts of artificial snow onto two glaciers in western
Antarctica could thicken and stabilize the West Antarctic ice sheet
and slow down global sea level rise. The study was conducted by
researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
and published in July 2019. The two selected glaciers, Pine Island
Glacier and Thwaites Glacier, occupy an area of more than 50,000 km².
The approach would require 74 trillion tonnes of sea water over a
period of ten years. PIK has further estimated that more than 12,000
wind turbines would be needed to lift, desalinate and spray this great
quantity of cold water. The water would need to overcome an elevation
of 640 meters from the sea level to the top of the ice sheet.
According to the authors of the study, the realisation of the project
“would mean the loss of a unique natural reserve” with ecological
damages on a very large scale. The study notes that further unwanted
effects or risks, e.g. a possible disrupting of ocean circulation
patterns cannot be excluded.
In spring 2019, designers in Indonesia proposed covering arctic waters
with icebergs produced by ice-making submarines. Each submarine would
possess the capability to fill a hexagon-shaped well with sea water,
to desalinate and freeze the water, and to release hexagon-shaped
icebergs: 25 meters in diameter, 5 meters thick and with a volume of
2,027 m³. A sizeable number of smaller icebergs could form a larger
ice floe. The proposal did not detail costs, energy consumption or
energy sources.
Outlook
The modelling of such projects is much easier to accomplish in
comparison to the actual realisation. Polar regions do not offer good
conditions for large-scale building projects, e.g. in terms of
maintaining a workforce, weather conditions and availability of
building materials. Due to the complexity of marine cycles, there is
no guarantee for success. Unwanted effects – such as increased melting
in neighbouring glacial regions or disruption of ocean circulation
patterns – cannot be ruled out. This also applies for possible – and
highly likely – adverse effects on marine ecosystems. On these
grounds, the above proposals raise more questions than they answer.
The level of disruption caused by some of the proposals amounts to
sacrificing ecosystems in order to continue the use of fossil fuels.
The level of resources required by many of the proposals compares
unfavourably to the cost of projects that would drastically reduce
fossil fuel consumption while benefitting humanity, such as green
housing or electrified rail transport. In spite of the substantial
works and inputs required, the activities do not address the root
problem of greenhouse gas emissions.
i. Ice911 test sites: North Meadow Lake (near Utqiaġvik, Alaska), Lake
Miquelon (Alberta, Canada), Lake Elmo (Minnesota, USA), Serene Lake
(California, USA), Truckee area (California, USA)
Resources for further information:
Ice911 experiment briefing.
The Interactive Geoengineering Map contains details and references for
the above mentioned and further climate geoengineering projects.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-07v5B_18JdfOFE%3DdNK_nEdwK9x72HMY%3DnxeERjKn5hWMQ%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-07v5B_18JdfOFE%3DdNK_nEdwK9x72HMY%3DnxeERjKn5hWMQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/360e25da-210b-2b0d-fb0f-fb9bff935af3%40ed.ac.uk.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/360e25da-210b-2b0d-fb0f-fb9bff935af3%40ed.ac.uk.
