Application of Hollow Glass Microspheres in the Arctic Ocean Would Likely Lead to a Deceleration of Arctic Sea Ice Loss” ‐ A Critique of the Paper by Webster and Warren (2022)

Abstract Avoiding the worst effects of global warming requires a multipronged approach including decarbonizing as quickly as possible, adaptation, greenhouse gas removal, and climate intervention. Additional research is needed to ensure that climate intervention strategies will be safe, effective, and environmentally acceptable. The importance of the Arctic in influencing global climate has led investigators to propose various climate intervention strategies specific to the Arctic (Strawa et al., 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2020.08.010 ). One approach, proposed by Field et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ), is to distribute reflective hollow glass microspheres (HGM) on strategic areas of Arctic sea ice at strategic times to reduce ice melt, thereby slowing the Arctic ice‐albedo feedback and interrupting further acceleration of ice melt. While research into this technique is still in its early stages, results show this approach can effectively slow melt of Arctic sea ice (Field et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ; Johnson et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002883 ). On the other hand, a recent paper by Webster and Warren (2022, https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2022EF002815 ) claims that this technique would warm the Arctic and speed up ice loss. Webster and Warren (2022), https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002815 largely ignore the promising results of field experiments conducted using hollow glass microspheres on pond ice (Field et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ; Johnson et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002883 ) and instead present an analysis that hinges upon a very high absorptance value for HGM. In this commentary, we present new measurements of HGM and show that, when measurement uncertainty is accounted for, their model shows that deploying HGM as proposed by AIP can cool the Arctic and prolong Arctic sea ice.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Earth s Future
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ef004749
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.90
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Application of Hollow Glass Microspheres in the Arctic Ocean Would Likely Lead to a Deceleration of Arctic Sea Ice Loss” ‐ A Critique of the Paper by Webster and Warren (2022)

Leslie Field, S. Zornetzer, Subarna Bhattacharyya, D. Johnson et al.
3 citations
Earth s Future
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
3.90
article

Application of Hollow Glass Microspheres in the Arctic Ocean Would Likely Lead to a Deceleration of Arctic Sea Ice Loss” ‐ A Critique of the Paper by Webster and Warren (2022)

Leslie Field, S. Zornetzer, Subarna Bhattacharyya, D. Johnson, S. Olinger, A. W. Strawa, D. Ivanova
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Avoiding the worst effects of global warming requires a multipronged approach including decarbonizing as quickly as possible, adaptation, greenhouse gas removal, and climate intervention. Additional research is needed to ensure that climate intervention strategies will be safe, effective, and environmentally acceptable. The importance of the Arctic in influencing global climate has led investigators to propose various climate intervention strategies specific to the Arctic (Strawa et al., 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2020.08.010 ). One approach, proposed by Field et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ), is to distribute reflective hollow glass microspheres (HGM) on strategic areas of Arctic sea ice at strategic times to reduce ice melt, thereby slowing the Arctic ice‐albedo feedback and interrupting further acceleration of ice melt. While research into this technique is still in its early stages, results show this approach can effectively slow melt of Arctic sea ice (Field et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ; Johnson et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002883 ). On the other hand, a recent paper by Webster and Warren (2022, https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2022EF002815 ) claims that this technique would warm the Arctic and speed up ice loss. Webster and Warren (2022), https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002815 largely ignore the promising results of field experiments conducted using hollow glass microspheres on pond ice (Field et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000820 ; Johnson et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef002883 ) and instead present an analysis that hinges upon a very high absorptance value for HGM. In this commentary, we present new measurements of HGM and show that, when measurement uncertainty is accounted for, their model shows that deploying HGM as proposed by AIP can cool the Arctic and prolong Arctic sea ice.

Earth s FutureVol. 13(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
3.90
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.