AbstractThis paper illustrates, expresses, describes, and emphasizesin detail the issue relating to the Arctic, its highly probable disappearance,and 2 possible refreezing solutions that could prevent and delay furthermelting. The Arctic’s disappearance would be devastating to the Earth’sclimate, especially to us. Sea levels would increase dramatically, therebycausing the submergence of many parts of world under water.
The Arctic alsoplays one of the most vital balancing roles in the Earth’s climate bystabilizing ocean circulation patterns which drive the weather system. Following my research, I have observed that many legitimateand reliable resources repeat the same issue, that there has to be afabrication that could possibly avert the impact that the Arctic’s melting ishaving on the Earth’s climate system. I am proposing the implementation of two policy frameworks:a scientific and regulatory because there are no any clear-cut policies, andmany of which that have been created have been shortly presented. These twopolicies seek to implement the project and maintain/preserve its process. Lastly, following the economic aspect of the paper, is asummary of an article published by the Washington Post of which is based on twonew Climate Change studies.
The article’s main purpose is to stress that thereis only a 5% chance of preventing detrimental warming. All in all, my main focus is to make an effort to restorethe Earth’s climate system so future generations do not suffer the consequencesof our unwise decision making regarding sustainable and unstainable ideas and conceptsthat people desire to put into action. Over the past several years, we have been observing adrastic decrease of the area that the Arctic covers. Since, 1979, the Arcticsea ice has decreased by 60%. At the moment, the remaining sea ice isdiminishing at a rate of 13.3% per decade. Unfortunately, completelyeliminating greenhouse gas/carbon emissions will not be enough to prevent thecomplete disappearance of the summer Arctic sea ice by the year 2030.1This is extremely detrimental to those countries and regions that are at theverge of being submerged under water.
The submergence of certain regions of theword would result in mass migration and high populations of refugees. Though,migration is not the main problem, it is the fact that if we do not create andimplement any methods that could possibly cease or slow down the melting, theoutcome could be irreversible. At the moment, the global sea level is rising at an averageof 3.2 millimeters per year, and is expected to increase between 0.2 and 2meters by 2100. Both the melting of the Arctic and Greenland Ice Sheets posethe most detrimental risk of further rising sea levels.
The reason this meltingis so impactful is because the total area of Greenland and the Arctic combinedis 2.6 million cubic kilometers.2The melting of the ice sheets would not only result in a drastic increase inrising sea levels, but it would raise sea levels through Thermal Expansion byincreasing the volume of water. What this signifies is that with the accumulationof more water in the ocean in the warmer climate, there will be more heatabsorption by the ocean. The Arctic plays one of the most important roles in theglobal climate system, and – its climate has great influence. Its decline canalter global ocean circulation patterns. Seawater travels through the AtlanticOcean as part of the Global Ocean Conveyor, the circulation pattern thatcontrols the movement of seawater through the world’s oceans. Thesepatterns are vital because the different climate regions are extremelydependent on them.
The Global Ocean Conveyor is able to circulate due todifferences in water density, which are generated by differences intemperature. There is a temperature difference between the warmer equator andthe colder Arctic drive weather patterns on Earth during the fall and winterseasons, and it is practically the cornerstone of the Earth’s climate. Warm water that resides near the equator moves at the surface of theocean into high latitudes, where it decreases in temperature. As itstemperature decreases, it becomes heavier and sinks to the depths of the ocean.The Arctic melting, which is occurring faster than studies show, causes sea athigh latitudes less dense, in result, the amount of cold water sinking decreasesand will not be able to circulate through the ocean, thus the melting isdelaying this process, affecting weather patterns as well. Alas, thetemperature difference has lessened. This difference is significant because asit decreases, the number of extreme snowfalls, storms, droughts, and heat waveswill dramatically and detrimentally proliferate.3 What I am proposing in my project are two possiblerefreezing methods which could possibly reverse the impact of ClimateChange/Global Warming.
Though, one of the solutions was rejected by the UN dueto its possible repercussions of further melting the ice sheets, or a globaldrought. Therefore, my focus is on the possible refreezing solution ofconstructing and placing 10 million wind-powered pumps which would cover 10% ofthe Arctic region.4Currently, this idea is theoretical, yet feasible.5In order to create a possibility of putting this into action, I would like tocreate and implement scientific policy and international regulatory policyframeworks. The scientific policy framework would highlight the implementationof the refreezing of the Artic region. The regulatory policy would guide thepreservation, maintenance and improvements as needed, of the process and itsresults, such as the Kyoto Protocol (Adaptation to Climate) and the UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Both policy efforts wouldentail the coming together of the international community of nations to committo such a process, as well as of the financial resources to carry them through.Scientific PolicyThe Arctic Ice Cap: Refreezing Solutions (2)Over the past several years, we have been observing adrastic decrease of the Arctic ice caps to the extent of witnessing 60% of theregion’s disappearance.
The Arctic’s climate system is one of Earth’s mostimportant, if not, the most important. The presence of the Arctic climatesystem stabilizes and balances ocean circulation patterns, as well as beingdepended on by the different climate regions around the world. Therefore, as itdiminishes more, the Earth’s climate system becomes more unstable, resulting inan increase of extreme snowfalls, droughts, storms, and heat waves. The mostdetrimental outcome of the melting are rising sea levels. My proposition is torefreeze the Arctic by two possible methods:1. Injectingaerosol particles into the atmosphere.2.
Redirectingthe water beneath the ice and dispersing it onto the surface of the ice. The injection of particles in theatmosphere would consist of a few wind-powered jet engines, but unfortunately,the UN rejected this idea due to its possible repercussions of further meltingthe ice sheets, or creating a global drought.6The second method though is somewhat feasible, yet at the moment, it istheoretical. It would comprise of 10 million wind-powered turbine pumps thatwould cover 10% of the Arctic region. If we were to cover the entire Arctic,100 million pumps would have to be constructed. Presently, this project costapproximately $500B. Since the Arctic is melting faster than studies show, wecould see the complete disappearance of the Arctic summer sea ice by the year2030. Simply completely eliminating CO2 emission is not sufficient this preventthis outcome.
The pumps would be built with a wind-turbine. The basic elements of the pump would include: a large buoy, a windturbine with blades, 6 meters in diameter (19 feet), a tank for storing water,and a delivery system that will take the water from the tank and disperse ontolarge areas of the ice. This device would have to be manufactured and deliveredto the Arctic region, and repositioned annually.
The challenges of this beingapplied to the rasping environment of the Arctic are intimidating. Gusts mayaccelerate wind speeds, which could reduce the efficiency of the pump byinterfering the delivery system. It will also be difficult to prevent the waterin the tank from freezing. Moreover, it would need half of the currentworldwide container ship capacity. Now,the other question is how long will this process take? Well, an estimate basedon research would be roughly 10 years, but fortunately, the construction ofthese devices will not be more complex than that of an automobile. This would require about 4,000kg of steel(8,818 pounds), and in order for it to float it would need a buoy.
In total,10,000 kg of steel will be needed, and ten million tons of steel per year. TheU.S. already produces 80 million tons a year, and the world 1.6 billion tons.7The project is predicted to take 10 years to completely put into action, andsince it is desired that coverage of 10% of the Arctic region with these pumpswould be sufficient, 1 million pumps would be required to be constructed andshipped per year. One downside of the construction of these devices is thatevery ton of steel produced would create 1.
8 tons of CO2; therefore, theconstruction of 10 million pumps per year with 10 tons of steel each wouldrelease 0.18 Giga tons of CO2 annually. Though, the worldwide yearly productionresults in 36 Giga tons released.
8Now, the question is who will contribute, collaborate, andparticipate? Initially, there was 11 that were thought of: the Arctic States,the Non-Arctic States, the UN, the Green Climate Fund, GreenpeaceInternational, NASA, MIT, the Global Environment Facility, the World Bank, theWorld Climate Research Program, BP, and ExxonMobil. If others decide to jointhis, they will be permitted as long as they abide by the process. All in all, Climate Change/GlobalWarming is humanity’s biggest threat, and our future depends on what our homewill be like in years to come and the Arctic is the key. Regulatory In the following, there will be laws and regulations listed thatnecessitate the decrease of petroleum-powered vehicles, the improvement andadjustments of waste management, and the implementation of renewable energysources.
Laws and Regulations The nations of the global community must reduce carbon and petroleum usage by 30%-50% depending on which countries’ carbon production and consumption is being the most-to-least impactful, and most needed. Create and establish detecting devices that monitor the activity of the devices and their progression. An organization will be established to focus on the task of preserving the process and the resulting effect that it has on the Arctic. Nations shall provide certain resources that are scarce in the developing countries in order to help them transition in order for the majority of the global community can contribute.
Such scarce resources include renewable energy sources and the utilities to construct them. Participatory Budgeting will be established so that the economic aspect of certain nations can focus on these projects in a sustainable manner, and to prevent any negative economic impact of the nation(s) itself. Nations shall provide the capital that is needed to maintain and preserve the systems in Arctic region in accordance to their economic state.
Coal and oil industries shall transition to to renewable energy sources of their choice, and must re-train their employees. If there are any additions or improvements, this policy willinclude them. This policy must be implemented if this project(s) were tosucceed because it is vital that we create methods by which the results and theoutcome of the project can be maintained and progressed. Thicker ice in the Arctic during the summer there wouldchange current weather patterns. As a matter of fact, it would counteractpresent, worsening conditions. Half of the sea ice has an annual thickness of1.
5m, and adding one meter will create a substantial difference. The increasingair temperature in the Arctic region would also be counteracted (a possible 1degree Celsius increase).9 On the other hand, Julienne Stroeve, a senior scientist atthe National Snow and Ice Data Center10refutes the success of this project because she stated that, “Global warming in response to rising CO2concentrations would continue despite efforts to grow ice in the Arctic,”she said. “Thus, the excess heat at lower latitudes would still betransported towards the Arctic via atmospheric and oceanic circulation and thiswould counter efforts to grow ice in the Arctic.”11 Recently, on 7/31/17, The Washington Post posted an articlebased on two new studies conducted by Nature Climate Change which statesthat there is possibly only a 5% chance of avoiding ‘dangerous’ warming.
Christina Figueres, the former head of the United Nations’ Framework Conventionon Climate Change collaborated with a group of climate scientists and policy toemphasize that there are only three years left to further decrease carbonemissions before it is too late for the elimination of carbon emission to makeany difference. Furthermore, the research of the first study12concluded that the median warming is likely to be 3.2 degrees Celsius, and thatthere is only a 5% chance that it can be decreased to below 1.5 degrees Celsiusby reducing carbon emissions.13 The second study analyzes the commitment that the world hasalready given, expressing the possibility of having already committed to 1.
5degrees Celsius.. Glen Peters, a climate policy expert at the Center forInternational Climate Research stated that he thinks that there is a smallchance of holding warming to 2 degrees Celsius unless we create “negativeemissions” technologies that withdraw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere laterin the century.14″Less than 2 degrees of warming is unlikely if we don’t try,” said Peters. “I’mone that says that 2 degrees is not likely anyway — but if we try, at leastit’s an option that we can get to 2 degrees.” Since this project is very expensive, I took the initiativeof researching the GDP of the Arctic States (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland,Norway, Russia, Sweden, and The United States) and the G20 member nations(Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India,Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, SouthAfrica, Turkey, United Kingdom, the United States, and the E.
U.), and thetotal military spending of 30 countries which are known to have very powerfulmilitaries so that there is a clear understanding of how much of thisinvestment would affect the global economy.15· ArcticStates total GDP: 22.8287 Trillion USD · G20Member Nations Total GDP: 77.7381 Trillion USD · MilitarySpending (30 nations): 1500.4 Billion USD (1.5004 Trillion USD)16 Top 5: 1. UnitedStates: 597.
5 Billion USD2. China:145.8 Billion USD3. SaudiArabia: 81.9 Billion USD 4. Russia:65.6 Billion USD5. UnitedKingdom: 56.
2 Billion USD Total: 102.0672 Trillion USD 500B USD is 0.0000049% of the total above. This investment is feasible if we all contribute. Though, the nations,institutions, and organizations that I would like to see drive this processare: the Arctic States, Non-Arctic States, the UN, the Green Climate Fund,Greenpeace International, NASA, MIT, the Global Environment Facility, the WorldBank, the World Climate Research Program, BP, and ExxonMobil.
Entities, such asNASA, MIT, BP, the World Bank, and ExxonMobil can provide the capital and thetechnology. If others are interested in joining in the collaboration, they willbe permitted to as long as they abide by the procedures. 1 Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could GiantMachines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’srole in the climate.
The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreezethe Arctic region.2The Climate in the Arctic Has ImpactWorldwide.” Norwegian Polar Institute, Norwegian Polar Institute,www.npolar.no/en/themes/climate/climate-change/global-climate-change/the-climate-in-the-arctic-has-impact-worldwide.html.
Short description of the Arctic’s vital role in the Earth’s climate. 3 “The Climate in theArctic Has Impact Worldwide.” Norwegian Polar Institute, Norwegian PolarInstitute,www.npolar.no/en/themes/climate/climate-change/global-climate-change/the-climate-in-the-arctic-has-impact-worldwide.html.Short description of the Arctic’s vital role in the Earth’s climate.
4 Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could GiantMachines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’srole in the climate. The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreezethe Arctic region.5 Crew, Bec.
“Scientists HaveAnnounced a Plan to ‘Refreeze’ The Arctic – And It’s Wild.”ScienceAlert,BEC CREW, 15 Feb. 2017, www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-announced-a-plan-to-refreeze-the-arctic-and-it-s-wild. 6Gayle, Damien. “Could We Refreezethe Arctic? Scientists Suggest Radical Solution to Global Warming.” DailyMail Online, Associated Newspapers, 11 Dec.
2012, www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2246556/Could-refreeze-Arctic-Scientists-suggest-radical-solution-global-warming.html.7 Crew, Bec. “Scientists Have Announced aPlan to ‘Refreeze’ The Arctic – And It’s Wild.
“ScienceAlert, BEC CREW,15 Feb. 2017, www.sciencealert.
com/scientists-have-announced-a-plan-to-refreeze-the-arctic-and-it-s-wild. 8 Desch, Steven J., et al. “Arctic IceManagement.” Earth&Apos;s Future, Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 24 Jan.2017, onlinelibrary.
wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full. 9 Desch, Steven J., et al. “Arctic IceManagement.” Earth&Apos;s Future, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
, 24 Jan.2017, onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full.
10Mantha, Moitreyi. “Can Giant PumpsHelp Refreeze The Arctic?” DOGOnews, Dog News, 6 Mar. 2017,www.dogonews.com/2017/2/26/can-giant-pumps-help-refreeze-the-arctic.11Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could GiantMachines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,www.
cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’srole in the climate. The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreezethe Arctic region.12 Raftery, Adrian E., et al. “Less than 2?°CWarming by 2100 Unlikely.
” Nature Climate Change , Nature Climate Change, 31 July 2017, www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3352.html?foxtrotcallback=true.First Study of the warming by 2100.
13Mooney, Chris. “We Only Have a 5 PercentChance of Avoiding ‘Dangerous’ Global Warming, a Study Finds.” TheWashington Post, WP Company, 31 July 2017,www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/31/we-only-have-a-5-percent-chance-of-avoiding-dangerous-global-warming-a-study-finds/?utm_term=.
08838557d07e. 14Mauritsen, Thorsten, and RobertPincus. “Committed Warming Inferred from Observations.” Nature ClimateChange, Nature Climate Change, 31 July 2017,www.nature.
com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3357.html. Study ofcommitted warming by the global community.
15 “List of Countries by Projected GDP.” Listof Countries by Projected GDP 2017 – StatisticsTimes.com, InternationalMonetary Fund, 23 Apr. 2017,statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-projected-gdp.php.16″List of Countries by MilitaryExpenditures.
” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 9 Aug. 2017, en.wikipedia.