AbstractThis the Arctic sea ice has decreased by 60%.

AbstractThis paper illustrates, expresses, describes, and emphasizes
in detail the issue relating to the Arctic, its highly probable disappearance,
and 2 possible refreezing solutions that could prevent and delay further
melting. The Arctic’s disappearance would be devastating to the Earth’s
climate, especially to us. Sea levels would increase dramatically, thereby
causing the submergence of many parts of world under water. The Arctic also
plays one of the most vital balancing roles in the Earth’s climate by
stabilizing ocean circulation patterns which drive the weather system. Following my research, I have observed that many legitimate
and reliable resources repeat the same issue, that there has to be a
fabrication that could possibly avert the impact that the Arctic’s melting is
having 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, and
many of which that have been created have been shortly presented. These two
policies seek to implement the project and maintain/preserve its process. Lastly, following the economic aspect of the paper, is a
summary of an article published by the Washington Post of which is based on two
new Climate Change studies. The article’s main purpose is to stress that there
is only a 5% chance of preventing detrimental warming.  All in all, my main focus is to make an effort to restore
the Earth’s climate system so future generations do not suffer the consequences
of our unwise decision making regarding sustainable and unstainable ideas and concepts
that people desire to put into action.   Over the past several years, we have been observing a
drastic decrease of the area that the Arctic covers. Since, 1979, the Arctic
sea ice has decreased by 60%. At the moment, the remaining sea ice is
diminishing at a rate of 13.3% per decade. Unfortunately, completely
eliminating greenhouse gas/carbon emissions will not be enough to prevent the
complete disappearance of the summer Arctic sea ice by the year 2030.1
This is extremely detrimental to those countries and regions that are at the
verge of being submerged under water. The submergence of certain regions of the
word 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 and
implement any methods that could possibly cease or slow down the melting, the
outcome could be irreversible. At the moment, the global sea level is rising at an average
of 3.2 millimeters per year, and is expected to increase between 0.2 and 2
meters by 2100. Both the melting of the Arctic and Greenland Ice Sheets pose
the most detrimental risk of further rising sea levels. The reason this melting
is so impactful is because the total area of Greenland and the Arctic combined
is 2.6 million cubic kilometers.2
The melting of the ice sheets would not only result in a drastic increase in
rising sea levels, but it would raise sea levels through Thermal Expansion by
increasing the volume of water. What this signifies is that with the accumulation
of more water in the ocean in the warmer climate, there will be more heat
absorption by the ocean. The Arctic plays one of the most important roles in the
global climate system, and – its climate has great influence. Its decline can
alter global ocean circulation patterns. Seawater travels through the Atlantic
Ocean as part of the Global Ocean Conveyor, the circulation pattern that
controls the movement of seawater through the world’s oceans.  These
patterns are vital because the different climate regions are extremely
dependent on them. The Global Ocean Conveyor is able to circulate due to
differences in water density, which are generated by differences in
temperature. There is a temperature difference between the warmer equator and
the colder Arctic drive weather patterns on Earth during the fall and winter
seasons, and it is practically the cornerstone of the Earth’s climate.
 Warm water that resides near the equator moves at the surface of the
ocean into high latitudes, where it decreases in temperature. As its
temperature decreases, it becomes heavier and sinks to the depths of the ocean.
The Arctic melting, which is occurring faster than studies show, causes sea at
high latitudes less dense, in result, the amount of cold water sinking decreases
and will not be able to circulate through the ocean, thus the melting is
delaying this process, affecting weather patterns as well. Alas, the
temperature difference has lessened. This difference is significant because as
it decreases, the number of extreme snowfalls, storms, droughts, and heat waves
will dramatically and detrimentally proliferate.3
 What I am proposing in my project are two possible
refreezing methods which could possibly reverse the impact of Climate
Change/Global Warming. Though, one of the solutions was rejected by the UN due
to its possible repercussions of further melting the ice sheets, or a global
drought. Therefore, my focus is on the possible refreezing solution of
constructing and placing 10 million wind-powered pumps which would cover 10% of
the Arctic region.4
Currently, this idea is theoretical, yet feasible.5
In order to create a possibility of putting this into action, I would like to
create and implement scientific policy and international regulatory policy
frameworks. The scientific policy framework would highlight the implementation
of the refreezing of the Artic region. The regulatory policy would guide the
preservation, maintenance and improvements as needed, of the process and its
results, such as the Kyoto Protocol (Adaptation to Climate) and the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Both policy efforts would
entail the coming together of the international community of nations to commit
to 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 a
drastic decrease of the Arctic ice caps to the extent of witnessing 60% of the
region’s disappearance. The Arctic’s climate system is one of Earth’s most
important, if not, the most important. The presence of the Arctic climate
system stabilizes and balances ocean circulation patterns, as well as being
depended on by the different climate regions around the world. Therefore, as it
diminishes more, the Earth’s climate system becomes more unstable, resulting in
an increase of extreme snowfalls, droughts, storms, and heat waves. The most
detrimental outcome of the melting are rising sea levels. My proposition is to
refreeze the Arctic by two possible methods:1.    
Injecting
aerosol particles into the atmosphere.2.    
Redirecting
the water beneath the ice and dispersing it onto the surface of the ice.             The injection of particles in the
atmosphere would consist of a few wind-powered jet engines, but unfortunately,
the UN rejected this idea due to its possible repercussions of further melting
the ice sheets, or creating a global drought.6
The second method though is somewhat feasible, yet at the moment, it is
theoretical. It would comprise of 10 million wind-powered turbine pumps that
would 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 cost
approximately $500B. Since the Arctic is melting faster than studies show, we
could see the complete disappearance of the Arctic summer sea ice by the year
2030. Simply completely eliminating CO2 emission is not sufficient this prevent
this outcome.       
The pumps would be built with a wind-turbine.   
The basic elements of the pump would include: a large buoy, a wind
turbine 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 onto
large areas of the ice. This device would have to be manufactured and delivered
to the Arctic region, and repositioned annually. The challenges of this being
applied to the rasping environment of the Arctic are intimidating. Gusts may
accelerate wind speeds, which could reduce the efficiency of the pump by
interfering the delivery system. It will also be difficult to prevent the water
in the tank from freezing. Moreover, it would need half of the current
worldwide container ship capacity.  Now,
the other question is how long will this process take? Well, an estimate based
on research would be roughly 10 years, but fortunately, the construction of
these 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. The
U.S. already produces 80 million tons a year, and the world 1.6 billion tons.7
The project is predicted to take 10 years to completely put into action, and
since it is desired that coverage of 10% of the Arctic region with these pumps
would be sufficient, 1 million pumps would be required to be constructed and
shipped per year. One downside of the construction of these devices is that
every ton of steel produced would create 1.8 tons of CO2; therefore, the
construction of 10 million pumps per year with 10 tons of steel each would
release 0.18 Giga tons of CO2 annually. Though, the worldwide yearly production
results in 36 Giga tons released.8
Now, the question is who will contribute, collaborate, and
participate? Initially, there was 11 that were thought of: the Arctic States,
the Non-Arctic States, the UN, the Green Climate Fund, Greenpeace
International, NASA, MIT, the Global Environment Facility, the World Bank, the
World Climate Research Program, BP, and ExxonMobil. If others decide to join
this, they will be permitted as long as they abide by the process.  All in all, Climate Change/Global
Warming is humanity’s biggest threat, and our future depends on what our home
will be like in years to come and the Arctic is the key. Regulatory   
 In the following, there will be laws and regulations listed that
necessitate the decrease of petroleum-powered vehicles, the improvement and
adjustments of waste management, and the implementation of renewable energy
sources.    
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 will
include them. This policy must be implemented if this project(s) were to
succeed because it is vital that we create methods by which the results and the
outcome of the project can be maintained and progressed.  Thicker ice in the Arctic during the summer there would
change current weather patterns. As a matter of fact, it would counteract
present, worsening conditions. Half of the sea ice has an annual thickness of
1.5m, and adding one meter will create a substantial difference. The increasing
air temperature in the Arctic region would also be counteracted (a possible 1
degree Celsius increase).9 On the other hand, Julienne Stroeve, a senior scientist at
the National Snow and Ice Data Center10
refutes the success of this project because she stated that, “Global warming in response to rising CO2
concentrations would continue despite efforts to grow ice in the Arctic,”
she said. “Thus, the excess heat at lower latitudes would still be
transported towards the Arctic via atmospheric and oceanic circulation and this
would counter efforts to grow ice in the Arctic.”11 Recently, on 7/31/17, The Washington Post posted an article
based on two new studies conducted by Nature Climate Change which states
that there is possibly only a 5% chance of avoiding ‘dangerous’ warming.
Christina Figueres, the former head of the United Nations’ Framework Convention
on Climate Change collaborated with a group of climate scientists and policy to
emphasize that there are only three years left to further decrease carbon
emissions before it is too late for the elimination of carbon emission to make
any difference. Furthermore, the research of the first study12
concluded that the median warming is likely to be 3.2 degrees Celsius, and that
there is only a 5% chance that it can be decreased to below 1.5 degrees Celsius
by reducing carbon emissions.13
  The second study analyzes the commitment that the world has
already given, expressing the possibility of having already committed to 1.5
degrees Celsius.. Glen Peters, a climate policy expert at the Center for
International Climate Research stated that he thinks that there is a small
chance of holding warming to 2 degrees Celsius unless we create “negative
emissions” technologies that withdraw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere later
in the century.14
“Less than 2 degrees of warming is unlikely if we don’t try,” said Peters. “I’m
one that says that 2 degrees is not likely anyway — but if we try, at least
it’s an option that we can get to 2 degrees.” Since this project is very expensive, I took the initiative
of 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, South
Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, the United States, and the E.U.),  and the
total military spending of 30 countries which are known to have very powerful
militaries so that there is a clear understanding of how much of this
investment would affect the global economy.15·      
Arctic
States total GDP: 22.8287 Trillion USD ·      
G20
Member Nations Total GDP: 77.7381 Trillion USD ·      
Military
Spending (30 nations): 1500.4 Billion USD (1.5004 Trillion USD)16

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Top 5:

1.    
United
States: 597.5 Billion USD2.    
China:
145.8 Billion USD3.    
Saudi
Arabia: 81.9 Billion USD 4.    
Russia:
65.6 Billion USD5.    
United
Kingdom: 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 process
are: the Arctic States, Non-Arctic States, the UN, the Green Climate Fund,
Greenpeace International, NASA, MIT, the Global Environment Facility, the World
Bank, the World Climate Research Program, BP, and ExxonMobil. Entities, such as
NASA, MIT, BP, the World Bank, and ExxonMobil can provide the capital and the
technology. If others are interested in joining in the collaboration, they will
be permitted to as long as they abide by the procedures.

1 Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could Giant
Machines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,
www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’s
role in the climate. The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreeze
the Arctic region.

2
The Climate in the Arctic Has Impact
Worldwide.” 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 the
Arctic Has Impact Worldwide.” 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.  

4 Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could Giant
Machines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,
www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’s
role in the climate. The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreeze
the Arctic region.

5 Crew, Bec. “Scientists Have
Announced 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.

 

6
Gayle, Damien. “Could We Refreeze
the Arctic? Scientists Suggest Radical Solution to Global Warming.” Daily
Mail 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 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.

 

8 Desch, Steven J., et al. “Arctic Ice
Management.” 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 Ice
Management.” Earth&Apos;s Future, Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 24 Jan.
2017, onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full.

10
Mantha, Moitreyi. “Can Giant Pumps
Help Refreeze The Arctic?” DOGOnews, Dog News, 6 Mar. 2017,
www.dogonews.com/2017/2/26/can-giant-pumps-help-refreeze-the-arctic.

11
Zdanowicz, Christina. “Could Giant
Machines Refreeze the Arctic?” CNN, Cable News Network, 15 Feb. 2017,
www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/weather/refreezing-arctic-ice-study-trnd/. The Arctic’s
role in the climate. The main focus, and the most feasible option to refreeze
the Arctic region.

12 Raftery, Adrian E., et al. “Less than 2?°C
Warming 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 Percent
Chance of Avoiding ‘Dangerous’ Global Warming, a Study Finds.” The
Washington 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.
   

14
Mauritsen, Thorsten, and Robert
Pincus. “Committed Warming Inferred from Observations.” Nature Climate
Change, Nature Climate Change, 31 July 2017,
www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3357.html. Study of
committed warming by the global community.

15 “List of Countries by Projected GDP.” List
of Countries by Projected GDP 2017 – StatisticsTimes.com, International
Monetary Fund, 23 Apr. 2017,
statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-projected-gdp.php.

16
“List of Countries by Military
Expenditures.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 9 Aug. 2017, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures.