Five of the most-publicised polar geoengineering ideas are highly unlikely to help the polar regions, according to a new study involving our geographers.
The assessment said the proposals could harm ecosystems, international relations, and reduce our chances of reaching net zero by 2050.
Geoengineering has been proposed to delay or address the impacts of climate breakdown in these polar regions.
Professors Mike Bentley and Chris Stokes, in our Department of Geography, were part of an international team who looked at the most developed geoengineering proposals currently being considered for Antarctica and the Arctic.
These proposals are:
The research finds that the proposals could cost billions in set-up and maintenance, while diluting the focus on policymakers and carbon-intensive industries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The proposals were also likely to introduce additional ecological, environmental, legal, and political problems.
The climate of the polar regions is changing faster than almost any other part of the planet. Ideas about geoengineering the climate of these areas can be well-meaning but they are a distraction. Our assessment shows they won’t work, will be extremely expensive, and may take many years to develop, even if political agreement is possible. And they won’t address other problems from rising CO2 such as ocean acidification. We are actually making progress in emission reductions and we do know that will work to bring our climate back to a safe level. We should avoid being distracted and continue to focus our efforts in pushing further and harder on emissions reductions.
According to the assessment, none of the geoengineering ideas currently benefit from robust real-world testing, while the scale of polar geoengineering needed would require a human presence in the polar regions unlike anything ever considered.
The researchers say the proposals would bring environmental damage, including ozone depletion, disruption to the habitats, feeding grounds and migration routes of whales, seals and seabirds or triggering shifts in natural ocean chemical cycles.
It is estimated that each proposal will cost at least £7.4 billion ($10 billion) to set up and maintain, with sea curtains projected to cost a minimum of £60 billion ($80 billion) over 10 years for an 80km structure.
All proposals would require extensive political negotiation and the creation of new governance structures and infrastructure.
Even if the proposals offered some benefit, there may be serious unintended consequences and none can be deployed on a sufficient scale, or fast enough, to tackle the climate crisis within the limited time available.
We already know that some of the proposed interventions almost certainly won’t work and may actually make things worse, as well as being extremely damaging to fragile polar ecosystems. My biggest worry is that those with vested interests in continuing to burn fossil fuels will use some of these geoengineering ideas as an excuse not to take action because they perceive a solution is near. That’s simply not true. The solution is rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Read the full research paper in the journal Frontiers in Science. The research was led by the University of Exeter.
See more about Professor Mike Bentley and Professor Chris Stokes.
Our Department of Geography is ranked 11th in the QS World University Rankings by Subject 2025. Visit our Geography webpages for more information on our undergraduate and postgraduate programmes.
/prod01/prodbucket01/media/durham-university/central-news-and-events-images/83431-1920X290.jpg)