Scientists Propose Giant Underwater Curtain to Save ‘Doomsday Glacier’

Scientists have devised an ambitious strategy to prevent the melting of major Antarctic glaciers, aiming to avert potential catastrophic flooding along the US East Coast. Their proposal suggests installing a vast underwater barrier to thicken artificial glaciers with seawater or cool the bedrock beneath them, blocking warm waters from reaching the Thwaites Glacier, also known as the “Doomsday Glacier.”

The Thwaites Glacier, which has been melting rapidly due to climate change, poses a severe risk to global sea levels, with the potential to raise them by up to 10 feet. This rise could lead to flooding in major coastal cities like New York, Charleston, Atlantic City, and Miami.

In a recent report led by the Climate Systems Engineering Initiative at the University of Chicago, scientists described the proposal as a “major initiative.” Co-author Douglas MacAyeal, a professor of geophysical sciences, emphasized the importance of starting research now to avoid last-minute decisions in the face of rising waters.

One approach in the report involves pumping seawater onto the glacier’s surface, where it would freeze due to the frigid air, thereby thickening the glacier. However, this concept has its challenges, as the salt in seawater could compromise the glacier’s stability, and considerable energy would be needed for such large-scale pumping.

UK-based startup Real Ice has been exploring the idea of seawater pumping since 2019, with initial field tests in Canada yielding promising results. However, implementing the technology on a larger scale would cost approximately $6 billion annually and demand significant energy.

Scientists are also considering other geoengineering methods to reduce glacier melt. Some experts view these ideas as “radical,” warning that geoengineering might prove extremely challenging and could distract from the essential goal of reducing carbon emissions. Climate economist Gernot Wagner from the Columbia Climate School remarked that while such strategies might help, they are not substitutes for climate action, likening them to “painkillers” rather than cures for climate change.