Here’s part of my August, 2012 interview with Mike MacCracken that has not made its way into any videos, but deserves some attention. There is a serious effort underway to consider mitigation of arctic ice losses. Mike starts with a brief discussion of black carbon, which is kind of standard, but the real interesting item is at about 1:12, where he talks about the effects of ice breakers, and how they might be recruited for geo-engineering.
Below, if you haven’t seen it, compare current events with Mike’s 1982 lecture at Sandia labs. What we Knew in 82.
Considering how the sea ice over nearly the entire Arctic Ocean was broken up by wind and air pressure this month, perhaps ice breakers will not be necessary.
By the time this would be approved it will be too late, another twenty years and there wont be any ice summer or winter. Look at the exponential fit for the ice maximum volume. True there will probably be very thin winter ice for years after that, but not of a thickness to be in any way meaningful.
That is such a scary thought, all that energy that goes to melting the ice each summer going elsewhere into the system. Let alone the extra energy from the loss of albedo.
How many icebreakers would be needed for this? Would they be able to offset the amount of GHGs created or released through their own manufacture or fuel use?
Ships use some pretty nasty stuff for power generation.
Since we’re talking about geo-engineering let me put my 2 cents in.
The Bering Strait is 50 miles long and only 100 to 160 feet deep. How would damming it effect the climate in the Arctic? Would cutting of the currents that go through the strait make the Arctic Ocean colder?
well, about 3 million years ago, the isthmus of Panama, which had been open between the Atlantic and Pacific – closed.
It is thought that that event kicked off the series of glaciations that we have been living in since then.
So, the potential for havoc in an experiment like that is pretty large.