Sea ice thickening

Sea ice covered Coast in July, Sterlegova, Taymyr, Russia

?

Sea ice is simply frozen ocean water. It forms, grows, and melts in the ocean. In contrast, icebergs, glaciers, ice sheets, and ice shelves all originate on land.

Year: 1991


Photographer: Peter Prokosch

References

Arctic sea ice extent has rapidly decreased over the last few decades, with most multi-year ice disappearing altogether. This has already had major effects on local communities and ecosystems. The disappearance of the relatively reflective sea ice also leads to a dramatic decrease of albedo in the Arctic and subsequent high energy uptakes by the darker water during the Arctic summers.

Sea ice thickening is an idea to slow or reverse the decline of Arctic sea ice by artificially thickening it. Desch et al. (2017) suggested this could be done by pumping sea water on top of already existing ice during winter and letting it freeze. This thickened sea ice would then melt later, or even survive the summer to become multi-year ice. Desch et al. (2017) suggested a large amount of floating wind-powered pumps could be used as pumping devices.

Technological Readiness Level (TRL)

Low 1

This idea is still at a very initial state of development. Desch et al (2017) provided a rough design for the pumps. A recent Master's thesis by Laura van Dijke (2022) at the University of Delft further explored some engineering questions and the company Real Ice (https://www.realice.eco/) is trying to develop this design for real world application after its founders worked on the idea during their studies. However, apart from design issues, many questions remain, for instance about how to produce, distribute, and maintain such devices. 

Technological Readiness Level (TRL)

A technology with a TRL of 1-3: TRL 1 – Basic; TRL 2 – Concept formulated; TRL 3 – Experimental proof of concept

Scalability

Medium 2

Desch et al (2017) suggests that millions of pumps, spread across the Arctic Ocean, could remain frozen in the ice and operate throughout winter. There would likely be scaling benefits associated with increased pump production, although it is unclear how distribution and maintenance could be effectively organized.

Scalability

Physically somewhat scalable; linear efficiency

Timeliness for near-future effects

Medium 2

With many questions around the technology remaining, and large parts of the ice already gone, the potential window to implement such an intervention seems increasingly limited.

Timeliness for near-future effects

Implemented in time to make some difference, although questionable

Northern + Arctic potential

High 3

If, as model studies by Zampieri and Goessling (2019) and Pualing and Blitz (2021) suggest, the technology could postpone the melt of Arctic sea ice, this might be very beneficial to the Arctic as it would give more time to adapt to the effects of climate change, and would perhaps allow further research into other schemes.

Northern + Arctic potential

Very detectable impacts in the Arctic, above the global average; technology ideally/preferably located here

Global potential

Low 1

If more Arctic sea ice could actually be preserved, this might have some effect on the global energy budget. Zampieri and Goessling (2019) model study find a global - 0.08 W/m2 forcing effect for the period of 2061–2100. However, both Zampieri and Goessling (2019) and Pualing and Blitz (2021) also find that although certain pumping strategies might lead to better results, it would only delay the eventual disappearance of Arctic summer ice under expected warming scenarios.

Global potential

Insignificant to be detected at a global scale

Cost - benefit

Medium 2

Desch et al. (2017) give the rough estimate cost of $50 billion per year to increase ice thickness by one meter over 10% of the Arctic. The accuracy of this estimate is however highly uncertain as there are many unknowns, for example how the pumps would behave in the Arctic, how they could be maintained and repaired, and how this could be done without causing extra emissions that could break existing ice or spread albedo reducing particles.

To this it should however be noted that Hao et al. (2023) estimate that the melting of the sea ice would in any case costs the world an average of 6.7–13.3 trillion USD annually over the period 2020 to 2100, when the costs of the forcing effects of the ice are calculated in terms of equivalent costs of the forcing that is the result of GHG emissions.

Cost - benefit

Significant investment costs needed, but still much cheaper than the avoided damage costs (e.g., 30%).

Environmental risks

Medium 2

Miller et al. (2020) note that this kind of thickening would affect Arctic marine biochemistry in multiple ways. The pumping process would for example release aerosols, which would alter atmospheric chemistry, and might increase or decrease temperatures and 'could have myriad contrasting impacts on the Arctic atmosphere'. They also note that this scheme might also affect the availability of light for photosynthesising algae under the ice, and thereby reduce marine productivity, or reduce algae production directly by removing shallow, algae-rich waters, and pumping them on top of the ice. 

Moreover, the distribution and maintenance of the pumps could furthermore be a major source of Arctic emissions, and the pumps would have to be made out of non-toxic materials.

Environmental risks

More widespread and possibly regional impacts that extend beyond the immediate solution deployment location

Community impacts

Unknown 0

The worries about the potential biochemical effects of sea ice thickening expressed by Miller et al. (2020) might have significant effects on the livelihoods of local and indigenous communities who rely on hunting and fishing. Desch et al. (2017) suggested that the pumps might be maintained by local and indigenous communities, thereby providing social co-benefits, but it is unclear if this could actually be done in practice. 

Ease of reversibility

Medium 2

If the scheme is found to be undesirable, the pumps could probably be removed at some cost.   

Ease of reversibility

Possible with significant investment

Risk of termination shock

Medium 2

The technology would need to be continuously deployed, as the ice would most likely rapidly melt without it (Pualing and Blitz, 2021).

Risk of termination shock

Medium or relatively significant termination shock or damage

Legality/governance

Medium 2

Although it is not clear how the deployment of such pumps would be governed on the High Seas, the five Arctic coastal states would likely be able to deploy such pumps if they wanted within their Exclusive Economic Zone (Moore et al. 2020). Both Argüello and Johansson (2022) and Bennet et al. (2022) have recently called for discussions on security, ethical, and governance issues around sea ice thickening and other Arctic ice management techniques.

Legality/governance

Fits within existing structures to a certain degree, but some policy changes are needed to deploy at scale

Scientific/media attention

Medium 2

Sea ice thickening has been featured in popular media (See, for example, the prominent reports of Desch's 2017 plan by McKie in The Guardian and by Bukszpan on CNBC). There has been limited academic coverage of this idea besides the studies already cited here, and the company Real Ice seems to be the only commercial research project devoted to it.

Scientific/media attention

Some attention within the scientific community, including published research and funding programmes; some media attention; some commercial interest

References

Argüello, G., & Johansson, J. (2022). Ice Management Research and the Arctic Marine Environment. In: Regulation of Risk. (pp. 63-97). Leiden, The Netherlands. Brill Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004518681_004

Bukszpan, Daniel, 19 February, 2017), This physicist has a $500 billion plan to refreeze the melting Arctic, CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/19/this-physicist-has-a-500-billion-plan-to-refreeze-the-melting-arctic.html

Desch, S. J., Smith, N., Groppi, C., Vargas, P., Jackson, R., Kalyaan, A., ... & Hartnett, H. E. (2017). Arctic ice management. Earth's Future, 5(1), 107-127. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000410

Hao, H., Su, B., Liu, S., & Zhuo, W. (2023). Radiative Effects and Costing Assessment of Arctic Sea Ice Albedo Changes. Remote Sensing, 15(4), 970. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15040970

McKie, Robin, (12 February 2017), Could a £400bn plan to refreeze the Arctic before the ice melts really work?, The Guardian,  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/12/plan-to-refreeze-arctic-before-ice-goes-for-good-climate-change

Miller, L.,Fripiat, F.,Moreau, S.,Nomura, D.,Stefels, J.,Steiner, N.,Tedesco, L., and Vancoppenolle, M. (2020), Implications of sea ice management for Arctic biogeochemistry, Eos, 101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EO149927

Moore, J.C., I. Mettiäinen, M. Wolovick, L. Zhao, R. Gladstone, Y. Chen, S. Kirchner, T. Koivurova 2020 Targeted geoengineering: local interventions with global implications, Global Policy, 10.1111/1758-5899.12867.

Pauling, A. G., & Bitz, C. M. (2021). Arctic sea ice response to flooding of the snow layer in future warming scenarios. Earth's Future, 9(10), e2021EF002136. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12867

Real Ice. n.d. An active cooling project to preserve & restore Arctic sea ice. https://www.realice.eco/ [Accessed 8 July 2024]

van Dijke, L. (2022). The implementation of Arctic ice management: Counteracting the annual Arctic sea ice loss by distributing sea water on top of sea ice. Master's thesis. TU Delft. https://repository.tudelft.nl/record/uuid:1880b7bf-c115-4c4c-9e6e-33425933cdad 

Zampieri, L., & Goessling, H. F. (2019). Sea ice targeted geoengineering can delay Arctic sea ice decline but not global warming. Earth's Future, 7(12), 1296-1306. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001230

Related ideas