Refreezing Polar Regions Will Not Protect the World from Climate Change: Study

Geoengineering projects to “refreeze” the Arctic and Antarctic ice sheets are unlikely to protect the planet from global warming and could in fact make matters worse, warns a new study published in Frontiers in Science.

The research emphasizes that halting global warming requires rapid and deep decarbonization to achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, in line with the Paris Agreement targets. Attempts to engineer the climate through polar interventions may only divert attention from this urgent task.

Five Polar “Fixes” Rejected

A group of 42 leading climate and cryosphere scientists assessed five high-profile geoengineering proposals for the Arctic and Antarctic, including:

• Installing “sea curtains” anchored to the seabed to block warm waters from melting ice shelves.

• Pumping seawater onto thinning sea ice to artificially thicken it.

• Injecting aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the planet.

• Other large-scale technological manipulations of ice and atmosphere.

• The evaluation looked at technical feasibility, costs, ecological damage, scalability, governance, and ethical implications. The conclusion: none of these ideas withstand scrutiny.

Risks Outweigh Potential Benefits

The researchers argue these schemes are not only scientifically questionable but also environmentally dangerous and politically risky. They warn that such projects could:

• Harm fragile polar ecosystems and communities.

• Undermine international cooperation in already complex regions.

• Drain resources and public attention away from urgent emission reductions.

• Offer false comfort to industries resistant to phasing out fossil fuels.

• Billions in Costs, Little Gain

According to the review, these geoengineering projects could cost billions of dollars in setup and maintenance, while failing to deliver meaningful climate benefits. Instead, they may delay the very action needed most: cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Scientists Call for Focus on Real Solutions

Lead author Professor Martin Siegert of the University of Exeter said: “These ideas are often well-intentioned, but they’re flawed. Deploying any of these projects is likely to work against the polar regions and the planet. Our priority must remain reducing emissions and conducting fundamental research in polar science.”

The authors add that their analytical framework can be used to evaluate other geoengineering ideas worldwide. However, they stress that the most effective and urgent path forward is decarbonization, not speculative engineering experiments.

The writer of this article is Dr. Seema Javed, an environmentalist & a communications professional in the field of climate and energy