Arctic is getting heated quickly, but scientists say that polar geoiyanaring is ‘unreal’ and ‘dangerous’

Over the years, scientists have been with the idea of ​​artificially modifying the climate through geoenignering – especially in the Arctic, which is warming Four times faster like the rest of the world,

The main proposals include artificially thick sea ice, fertilizing the sea with iron and releasing the sunlight-reflected particles in the atmosphere to reduce the effect of the sun’s warmth.

Although the viability of these ideas was always doubtful, researchers are now saying in a new study that they are certain that they are a waste of time and money.

Most of the group’s people met in Dubai through a joint attempt after COP28, when they came together to condemn the polar geoenignering. For paper, he saw in five of the most developed Geoenizering proposals being considered in the current polar regions and found that they all failed basic viability criteria and could “severe environmental damage”.

His findings were published in the magazine Limitations in science On Monday.

“A lot of false hope is being created, suggesting that a little intervention will solve the problem,” said Martin Somorcorn, a co-author of the World Wildfire Fund, said.

“There are actually no shortcuts to fix climate change. … Our research really reveals that many, long -term commitment is required over many years.”

We don’t know enough

Helen Amanda Fricks, one of the scripts institution and study of a scripps institution and study of Oceanography Professor at UC San Diego, said, “At the inscribed price, many of these techniques are logically understood … but once you start thinking about it in a practical sense, it is not just,” a one of the Ocean Professor in UC San Diagi. Helen Amanda Fricks, one of the leading writers of Scripps Institution and Studies, said.

The issue, he said, is that most people do not realize the scale of some sheets of snow – “Beyond human understanding.”

He focused on passing all published literature on taking out the basal water from the glaciers under the glaciers to prevent them from moving forward quickly. He said that there were many logistic issues in the strategy.

The recent paper was an attempt by a group, but researchers worked on specific classes, which, given the most proposed geoenigenizer methods and evaluating their viability, effectiveness, costs, how they will be ruled and will be the potential negative consequences.

“We did it very well and it took a long time and was organized,” said Fikr.

Julien Strove, co-writer of Manitoba University paper, also said that even though the solutions were to work locally-although he would not find them realistic-other parts of the world would still have other order results.

“Even if you try to cool the arctic by helping the sea ice stay for a long time, you are still heating the middle-ahead or equator,” Strooves told CBC News.

“Then you are just going to strengthen all your storm systems to bring all your storm systems to the polar regions, because what do our weather patterns do.”

Projects such as solar geoenizenizing in the Arctic may be technically possible, said, but can have unexpected results such as interrupting rain systems in the global south.

The paper also mentions how more resources will be invested in geoenizering research, which researchers say that really required: reduction in carbon emissions – rapidly.

A distraction from decarbonization?

However, other people disagree.

Steve Desch is a professor of astronomy at Arizona State University. They believe that many approaches will be required to deal with climate change, but is not surprised by paper conclusions.

He said, “This is not the first time we have faced such an attitude, and I think it is a very knee response and a gullible on the reality of our time,” he said.

“I think the role of scientists is to detect physical effects and technical viability of various things and to present stakeholders with the cost and benefits of various options and then let everyone decide.”

The Desch clarified that he does not think that anyone involved in Geoeninizing would say that he should replace a revision.

“We all agree that the dikrbonization is important,” he said. “But in the meantime, should we not detect these other options so that things can be kept worse even due to malfunction?”

Desch has seen progress in his own research, where he is artificially thickening thick ice by pumping water on it. Although he says that further research is required, he sees the ability to do so in one part of the Arctic.

“We feel confident that whatever effect will be paid compared to the full loss of sea ice is, for which we are moving forward.”

Governance challenges

Greg Henry has worked in Arctic for more than 40 years. He has seen for the first time how fast the Arctic is changing.

He said, “Whatever is happening, its speed is a scary part, and I can understand why we are on the platform where these scientists and engineers are mandatory to purchase the projects on the scale of these planets,” he said.

Emeritus Henry, a geography professor at the University of British Columbia, says he understands why people are looking for a solution, but still geoenizering finds it very risky.

They believe that resources should be focused on decarbonization instead.

Henry said, “We do not really understand what will happen if we throw a full bunch of particles in the stratosphere.”

While some large volcanic eruptions are shown to cool the planet, they say that it is difficult to repeat anything on that scale, and it is not clear how such projects will affect indigenous communities in Arctic.

“These projects are very large and so expensive and are very frightening with unexpected results, it seems almost silly to take them.”

Henry indicates China as an example of a country that moves towards decarbonization and solar energy. He says that it is for political reasons – to reduce its dependence on foreign oil – and due to its current political system it is easy to implement, but it shows that it is possible to change.

“You can argue that our own more progressive government in Canada is not really jumping for the challenge here,” he said. “I personally think (decarbonization) should be one of the large projects of the liberal government.”