The melting of the huge polar ice has become synonymous with climate change. The possible devastating rise in sea level, as temperatures rise, worries the scientific community.

Thus the ideas for artificial cooling her Arctic and her Antarcticknown as ‘Polar Geomechanics’they are increasingly interesting. Academics have started research programs, start -ups, and investors show increased interest.

Supporters of Geomechanics argue that the urgent nature of the climate crisis requires investigating such solutions. But the authors of the study, published in the scientific journal Frontiers in Sciencewarn that these ideas are a dangerous distraction.

“These ideas often have good intentions, but they are incorrect,” said Martin Siegeert, glacier at the University of Exeter and researcher involved in the study.

The five main suggestions evaluated:

Pumping seawater on ice to artificially thicken.

Diploma of glass beads to increase the reflectivity of the sea ice.

Placing giant underwater curtains to block the hot water that melts the ice cream.

Spraying particles reflecting the sun in the stratosphere (solar geomechanical).

Adding nutrients (such as iron) to the oceans to enhance the growth of phytoplankton that absorbs carbon dioxide.

Scientists have evaluated every proposal for effectiveness, feasibility, dangers, costs, governance issues and the ability to apply a large scale.

None of the five proposals can withstand strict scientific evaluation and are all considered environmentally dangerous, according to the finding.

Polar Geomechanics: High ambitions, low realism

“Polar regions are one of the most extreme and hard environments on the planet. Many of these sentences far exceed what humanity has tried in the past, and ignore these challenges“, Says Siegeert.

None of the methods have been tested on a large scale in practice, and for some, such as marine curtains, there are not even experimental data, the report says.

Environmental Risks:

Marine curtains could disrupt the seal and falains ecosystems.

Perforation for pumping water under glaciers could infect virgin environments.

Spraying particles in the stratosphere may change global climate standards.

The proposal for spreading tiny glass beads on the surface of the ocean to reflect sunlight is considered particularly alarming.

The Arctic Ice Project, which conducted a research, suspended it earlier this year, following an ecotoxicity test that showed “potential risks to the Arctic food chain”.

Huge and the financial cost

In addition, the cost of these interventions is huge. All proposals are estimated to require at least $ 10 billion for installation and maintenance. Marine curtains are considered one of the most expensive costs, at a cost of $ 80 billion over 10 years for just 80 kilometers of curtain.

“Even if all obstacles are overcome, no proposal can be applied in a timely manner to cover the criticism of the situation“, Says Siegeert and added:”They just get our attention from what we know we need to do: reduce our broadcasts. I understand the attractiveness of these solutions, but the polar regions are sensitive, virgin ecosystems, and if we destroy them, they will be damaged forever. “

Disagreements and reactions

Some scientists warn that, although it is necessary to reduce pollution, research on polar geomechanics should not be abandoned.

Shaun Fitzgerald, Director of Center for Climate Repair at the University of Cambridge, stated:
“Unfortunately, we are facing serious environmental damage without geomechanical. We must not exclude the discussion, we must weigh the relevant risks“

Pete Irvine, Professor at the University of Chicago, He described the study one -sided because it focuses only on side effects and dangers, without considering the potential benefits. He said that the solar geomechanical, for example, is not a substitute for the reduction of emissions, but could offer a significant contribution to the health of the planet.

Hugh Hunt, Deputy Director of the same Center in Cambridge, He argued that research on Polar Geomechanics is now essential and urgent, especially in the Arctic.

Bethan Davies, Professor of Gamotology at the University of Newcastle, said:
“The study clearly and insightfully proves that these interventions are dangerous distraction from reducing emissions and are not a realistic or efficient solution“

Tina Van de Flierdt, head of the Department of Geosciences at Imperial College Londonadded:

“As a researcher who has worked on the spot in Antarctica, I would like to emphasize that all of these suggestions are either scientifically incorrect, unmistakable, dangerous, or accountingly inappropriate“