December 14, 2024 • 13 mins
A UK-based startup is working on carrying out a bold plan to fix the decline of sea ice in the Arctic.
Real Ice's ultimate plan is to re-freeze the Arctic by thickening ice to slow down the damage caused by climate change.
Co-founder Simon Woods says this is their third winter of research - and it's promising so far.
"We're chasing a moving target here - but at current levels, 1.2 meters of ice should survive the summer, and that's what we want."
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudgin
from News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
So it is no secret that the level of sea
ice and the Arctic has been declining for decades. Well,
a bunch of UK scientists they are undertaking a trial
with a very bold plan. They are trying to refreeze
the Arctic. The project has been undertaken by company real Ice.
They're currently in Cambridge Bay in Nunavut to prove that
(00:33):
they can restore and grow Arctic ice. Real Ice co
founder Simon Woods joins me. Now, good morning, Simon, Hi,
thank you so much for being with us. Talk me
through how this works. How are you refreezing the Arctic
in Cambridge Bay.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Well, we're only doing research to gather data on the
feasibility of restoring Arctic sea ice at scale. We are
running small scale tests. This is our third winter. We're
based up at the Canadian High Arctic Research Station, which
is an excellent facility in Cambridge Bay. None of it
that the Canadian government built. And what we do, in
(01:12):
simplest terms, is we pump water from below the ice
to above the ice in the winter when it's cold,
in order to thicken the ice from the top. But importantly,
what we're doing is we are flooding the snow layer
that sits on top of the ice, and that snow
layer actually acts as a retardant to ice growth because
it insulates the ice, and so when we flood it,
(01:35):
we create slush, which then hardens in twice and that
increases the conductivity of the whole ice stack and encourages
ice to grow from below, which is where it naturally grows.
So in last year's winter testing, we grew about thirty
centimeters above, which is are pumping, but importantly we grew
another twenty thirty centimeters below, and that's that's where we
(01:56):
get the real benefit of this approach.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Are these the results that you were expecting? Simony? Are
you happy with how the testing's going so far?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
Yeah? I mean it was very small scale last year.
It was about a football pitch size. This year it's
a little bit bigger. We're doing a square kilometer of
cover and in various various parts. So the team, the
early winter team is just finishing today. They were actually
pumping when the ice was only thirty centimeters thick the naturalize,
(02:28):
so we were having dipping of the ice and so on,
because the whole thing's floating. So and then we're going
back in January, and we're going back in February. But
the results have been encouraging. Lots more data to gather,
but yeah, encouraging so far.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
How is how are you undertaking this? Is this all
been done by the team? Is it?
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Is?
Speaker 2 (02:45):
It very much a manual process at the moment.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
It is because it's research, But we're also we're looking
we're looking to develop a prototype of an underwater drone
that will do the pumping. And this is our There
are two parts to the science and technology. The science
which is the manual stuff we're doing right now, and
we're partnered with a bunch of academic institutions including Center
(03:10):
of the Climate Repair at Cambridge University and Stephen Desh
and Cecilia Bits, who did the original research into these approaches,
University of Washington and Arizona State University. So with our
collaboration academic collaboration partners, we're doing the kind of science
through the manual testing and then the prototyping of this
underwater drone will which will drill through the ice, measuring
(03:32):
as it goes and if it finds appropriate thickness or thinness,
then it will do the pumping itself. And the idea
is at massive scale, you'd have a lot of these
communicating with each other and they would follow the ice
as it grows at the beginning of the season, and
then follow the ice as it retreats at the end
of the season.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Okay, it's really interesting. So there's sort of two parts
to it. There's the research to work out whether it's
actually going to work, and then how you could actually
do it, actually put it into practice. What is that
range of ice thickness that you are looking for that's ideal.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
So what we're looking to do is create multi year ice.
And at current temperatures, and the Arctic is warming four
times faster than anywhere else. I mean, it's already three
degrees above pre industrial levels in the Arctic, so we're
chasing a moving target here, but at current levels, one
point two meters of ice should survive the summer, and
(04:27):
that's what we want. The Arctic is an incredibly efficient
reflector of radiation which causes heat, So during the summer
it reflects an enormous amount of ninety percent of the
radiation That comes down to the planet is reflected and
hits the Arctic is reflected back by the white surface.
But if it's open ocean, ninety percent of that radiation
(04:48):
is absorbed by the ocean and it heats the ocean.
So that's what we're trying to mitigate initially and then
potentially start to reverse with this if this was scaled.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Did I am i creaketin saying, I believe I think
I read that by twenty thirty we could have iceless
summers in the act twenty thirties.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Yeah, sometimes in that decade, which is terrifying, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Well, it's not far away, is it.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
No, No, it's not. It's a race against time. I agree.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Okay, all right, so let's talk about Yeah, what why
is it important that we do this? We should we
should really touch on that as well. Why is it
important that you know that you work towards increasingly the
ice and the Arctic.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Well, it has the potential to be a problem that
we can help with, and the Arctic acts as a
as a as a cool a cooling mechanism for the
whole planet. So it's it's a key system. It's one
of the tipping points that we lose the Arctic sea ice.
It's it's one of the tipping points that leads to
all sorts of downstream effects, you know, perma frost thawing
(05:52):
and more wildfires and so on. So so working on
this system seems like it could have a positive impact.
And and I don't know about you, but I assume
that other people were working on it until I got
involved in this and then discovered that really there are
very few people working on this problem. And so it
(06:13):
seemed like something that you know, we as a small
team could have a positive impact on without having enormous resources.
And so, you know, we have a lot of enthusiasm
and are willing to get very cold and you know,
we're qualified.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
How big and undertaking is it to though, because the
actor isn't a small area, I mean, in order for
it to heaven impact. What kind of area are you
talking about, you know, trying to refreeze.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
Yeah, So, so the way we think about it is
that so the ice currently is four million squarecilometers at
its lowest point during the summer, and it's ten to
eleven million square kilometers at the maximum point. So we
we need to operate on about a million square kilometers
if it was a full scale deployment, we think in
(07:04):
order tommitate to stop increase melt, but also to start
clawing back some of that multi year ice to return
things till they were back in the nineteen eighties, which
would be before we started losing ice at at a
rapid rate.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
So would you have to work around the clock or
would you still be looking at you know, all year,
or would you still be looking at working within winter period?
Speaker 3 (07:28):
So you yeah, so you know, in order to make
this energy efficient, you only pump when the temperature is
low enough, so minus ten and below celsius, and so
you'd only operate in the winter, and you'd and you'd
operate mostly on the shoulder seasons as the ice is
growing and as the ice is retreating. So it has
to be a mobile system. That's why we like the
underwater drones idea. It's and it moves as the ice
(07:50):
grows and it grows out and retreats. So that we
think that's about half a million drones at full scale,
But you know that's a that's a ways into the future.
Before we start thinking about that, we need to get
the core science done and the technology prototypes built out first.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Is it possible?
Speaker 3 (08:07):
We think so if you've got wouldn't be doing the research?
Speaker 2 (08:12):
No, no, no, no, I just I think because as
you say, once you start talking about the scale of it,
it is, it is, you know, amazing, it's a huge
amount of space. If if you've got it up and
running as a permanent project, have you been to sort
of make doing estimates of how much this would cost?
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Yeah, so the Sense of Climate Repair does a good
job of describing this. So the research costs millions, The
deployment is billions, and that's what we've estimated. It's the
single digit billions a year, but the impact is in
the trillions. So those are large numbers. But complete ecosystem
collapse in the Arctic, which is you know, in our
(08:52):
future if we do nothing, and by the way, doing
nothing is an action in the Arctic. If we do nothing,
it will melt and there will be catastrophic ecosystem collapse.
And so so you know doing something is going to
cost money. Yes, but the alternative is very, very costly,
and do.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
You have any idea how the project could be funded?
Speaker 3 (09:13):
So it will require at scale, it will require government
support and multinationals, you know, So it's supernationals Arctic Circle.
The governments that are concerned in the Arctic need to
get involved, the UN it's those type of institutions. It's
a project similar to similar to the Amazon restoration. It's
(09:38):
that kind of scale.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
Simon, I'm sure that something else that you're sort of
focusing on while you're going through this research project is
just the human presence and the equipment and things in
the Arctic and the impact that that could have, especially
if you're talking about having these underwater drones, you know,
is there any danger to the marine environment.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
So we're measuring impact and that's a big part of
what we do. So we have to when we say
feasibility of restoring arctics ic at scale mean including impact analysis,
and we want to measure, you know, and that everything
has an impact. I just said, you know, doing nothing
has an impact. So we need to measure and find
out what those impacts are and then decide are they acceptable.
(10:20):
But our intention is to make this and you know,
the underwater drones, for instance, will make very little noise.
There'll be green energy powered hydrogen power perhaps and that
and that's you know, the idea is to keep it,
to keep the impact on the Arctic to an absolute minimum.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
So are there any sort of risks with this project
that you're that you're sort of looking at trying to
solve at the moment.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
So right now we're looking at a gathering data on
the efficiency of the approach that we're that's our primary,
our primary goal, you know, in the next the next
couple of years. That's what really focused on.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
What are the conditions like for those currently in the Arctic,
what is it what is it like, what's the day like?
Trying to you know, undertake this research.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
So it's twilight all day, all day for them for
a few hours that it's actually twighlight. During the day,
it's very cold, it's minus twenty something. The winds are
blowing at the moment at sort of ten twelve kilometers
an hour, so that contributes to the cold. There are
snow drifts. There were big snow drifts last night. So
(11:25):
it's pretty brutal. I mean, that's one of the reasons
to operate underwater with a scale solution is because it's
much more benign the environment under the water.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
You mentioned earlier someone that you were taken back that
not a lot of other people are looking at trying
to sort of solve this problem. Is this our last
chance to refreeze to try and save the actic or
are there any other potential options out there?
Speaker 3 (11:52):
There are other options, and there are organizations exploring these,
And I was at a conference in Washington last weekend
an organization called Ocean Visions that are looking at helping
organizations like ours and others that are looking at stress
for aerosol injection and marine cloud brightening and things like
techniques like that to put in place responsible research. So, yeah,
(12:16):
there are other potential techniques and perhaps it'll be a
combination of things. You know, we're not trying to win
a race here, We're just we're trying to contribute to
solving a problem.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
So if all this is successful, the million dollar question,
how quickly could we hit this process up and running
on a big scale.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Ten to fifteen years is realistic?
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Right? Okay? Long term project?
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Oh yeah, absolutely, An engineering feat of this size was
always going to be a long term project. But we
can have it operating at smaller scale initially and demonstrate
that it's safe and that the impacts are acceptable and
it has a measurable benefit. So that can happen much.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
Quicker, Simon Woods, thank you so much for joining us
and talking to us through that. That's great. It was
a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
That was real Ice co founder Simon Woods. If you
want to follow what they're up to or learn a
little bit more about it, realce dot Eco is their
website and their socials.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to news Talks it'd be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudgin
from News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
So it is no secret that the level of sea
ice and the Arctic has been declining for decades. Well,
a bunch of UK scientists they are undertaking a trial
with a very bold plan. They are trying to refreeze
the Arctic. The project has been undertaken by company real Ice.
They're currently in Cambridge Bay in Nunavut to prove that
(00:33):
they can restore and grow Arctic ice. Real Ice co
founder Simon Woods joins me. Now, good morning, Simon, Hi,
thank you so much for being with us. Talk me
through how this works. How are you refreezing the Arctic
in Cambridge Bay.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Well, we're only doing research to gather data on the
feasibility of restoring Arctic sea ice at scale. We are
running small scale tests. This is our third winter. We're
based up at the Canadian High Arctic Research Station, which
is an excellent facility in Cambridge Bay. None of it
that the Canadian government built. And what we do, in
(01:12):
simplest terms, is we pump water from below the ice
to above the ice in the winter when it's cold,
in order to thicken the ice from the top. But importantly,
what we're doing is we are flooding the snow layer
that sits on top of the ice, and that snow
layer actually acts as a retardant to ice growth because
it insulates the ice, and so when we flood it,
(01:35):
we create slush, which then hardens in twice and that
increases the conductivity of the whole ice stack and encourages
ice to grow from below, which is where it naturally grows.
So in last year's winter testing, we grew about thirty
centimeters above, which is are pumping, but importantly we grew
another twenty thirty centimeters below, and that's that's where we
(01:56):
get the real benefit of this approach.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Are these the results that you were expecting? Simony? Are
you happy with how the testing's going so far?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
Yeah? I mean it was very small scale last year.
It was about a football pitch size. This year it's
a little bit bigger. We're doing a square kilometer of
cover and in various various parts. So the team, the
early winter team is just finishing today. They were actually
pumping when the ice was only thirty centimeters thick the naturalize,
(02:28):
so we were having dipping of the ice and so on,
because the whole thing's floating. So and then we're going
back in January, and we're going back in February. But
the results have been encouraging. Lots more data to gather,
but yeah, encouraging so far.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
How is how are you undertaking this? Is this all
been done by the team? Is it?
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Is?
Speaker 2 (02:45):
It very much a manual process at the moment.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
It is because it's research, But we're also we're looking
we're looking to develop a prototype of an underwater drone
that will do the pumping. And this is our There
are two parts to the science and technology. The science
which is the manual stuff we're doing right now, and
we're partnered with a bunch of academic institutions including Center
(03:10):
of the Climate Repair at Cambridge University and Stephen Desh
and Cecilia Bits, who did the original research into these approaches,
University of Washington and Arizona State University. So with our
collaboration academic collaboration partners, we're doing the kind of science
through the manual testing and then the prototyping of this
underwater drone will which will drill through the ice, measuring
(03:32):
as it goes and if it finds appropriate thickness or thinness,
then it will do the pumping itself. And the idea
is at massive scale, you'd have a lot of these
communicating with each other and they would follow the ice
as it grows at the beginning of the season, and
then follow the ice as it retreats at the end
of the season.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Okay, it's really interesting. So there's sort of two parts
to it. There's the research to work out whether it's
actually going to work, and then how you could actually
do it, actually put it into practice. What is that
range of ice thickness that you are looking for that's ideal.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
So what we're looking to do is create multi year ice.
And at current temperatures, and the Arctic is warming four
times faster than anywhere else. I mean, it's already three
degrees above pre industrial levels in the Arctic, so we're
chasing a moving target here, but at current levels, one
point two meters of ice should survive the summer, and
(04:27):
that's what we want. The Arctic is an incredibly efficient
reflector of radiation which causes heat, So during the summer
it reflects an enormous amount of ninety percent of the
radiation That comes down to the planet is reflected and
hits the Arctic is reflected back by the white surface.
But if it's open ocean, ninety percent of that radiation
(04:48):
is absorbed by the ocean and it heats the ocean.
So that's what we're trying to mitigate initially and then
potentially start to reverse with this if this was scaled.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Did I am i creaketin saying, I believe I think
I read that by twenty thirty we could have iceless
summers in the act twenty thirties.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
Yeah, sometimes in that decade, which is terrifying, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Well, it's not far away, is it.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
No, No, it's not. It's a race against time. I agree.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Okay, all right, so let's talk about Yeah, what why
is it important that we do this? We should we
should really touch on that as well. Why is it
important that you know that you work towards increasingly the
ice and the Arctic.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Well, it has the potential to be a problem that
we can help with, and the Arctic acts as a
as a as a cool a cooling mechanism for the
whole planet. So it's it's a key system. It's one
of the tipping points that we lose the Arctic sea ice.
It's it's one of the tipping points that leads to
all sorts of downstream effects, you know, perma frost thawing
(05:52):
and more wildfires and so on. So so working on
this system seems like it could have a positive impact.
And and I don't know about you, but I assume
that other people were working on it until I got
involved in this and then discovered that really there are
very few people working on this problem. And so it
(06:13):
seemed like something that you know, we as a small
team could have a positive impact on without having enormous resources.
And so, you know, we have a lot of enthusiasm
and are willing to get very cold and you know,
we're qualified.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
How big and undertaking is it to though, because the
actor isn't a small area, I mean, in order for
it to heaven impact. What kind of area are you
talking about, you know, trying to refreeze.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
Yeah, So, so the way we think about it is
that so the ice currently is four million squarecilometers at
its lowest point during the summer, and it's ten to
eleven million square kilometers at the maximum point. So we
we need to operate on about a million square kilometers
if it was a full scale deployment, we think in
(07:04):
order tommitate to stop increase melt, but also to start
clawing back some of that multi year ice to return
things till they were back in the nineteen eighties, which
would be before we started losing ice at at a
rapid rate.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
So would you have to work around the clock or
would you still be looking at you know, all year,
or would you still be looking at working within winter period?
Speaker 3 (07:28):
So you yeah, so you know, in order to make
this energy efficient, you only pump when the temperature is
low enough, so minus ten and below celsius, and so
you'd only operate in the winter, and you'd and you'd
operate mostly on the shoulder seasons as the ice is
growing and as the ice is retreating. So it has
to be a mobile system. That's why we like the
underwater drones idea. It's and it moves as the ice
(07:50):
grows and it grows out and retreats. So that we
think that's about half a million drones at full scale,
But you know that's a that's a ways into the future.
Before we start thinking about that, we need to get
the core science done and the technology prototypes built out first.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Is it possible?
Speaker 3 (08:07):
We think so if you've got wouldn't be doing the research?
Speaker 2 (08:12):
No, no, no, no, I just I think because as
you say, once you start talking about the scale of it,
it is, it is, you know, amazing, it's a huge
amount of space. If if you've got it up and
running as a permanent project, have you been to sort
of make doing estimates of how much this would cost?
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Yeah, so the Sense of Climate Repair does a good
job of describing this. So the research costs millions, The
deployment is billions, and that's what we've estimated. It's the
single digit billions a year, but the impact is in
the trillions. So those are large numbers. But complete ecosystem
collapse in the Arctic, which is you know, in our
(08:52):
future if we do nothing, and by the way, doing
nothing is an action in the Arctic. If we do nothing,
it will melt and there will be catastrophic ecosystem collapse.
And so so you know doing something is going to
cost money. Yes, but the alternative is very, very costly,
and do.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
You have any idea how the project could be funded?
Speaker 3 (09:13):
So it will require at scale, it will require government
support and multinationals, you know, So it's supernationals Arctic Circle.
The governments that are concerned in the Arctic need to
get involved, the UN it's those type of institutions. It's
a project similar to similar to the Amazon restoration. It's
(09:38):
that kind of scale.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
Simon, I'm sure that something else that you're sort of
focusing on while you're going through this research project is
just the human presence and the equipment and things in
the Arctic and the impact that that could have, especially
if you're talking about having these underwater drones, you know,
is there any danger to the marine environment.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
So we're measuring impact and that's a big part of
what we do. So we have to when we say
feasibility of restoring arctics ic at scale mean including impact analysis,
and we want to measure, you know, and that everything
has an impact. I just said, you know, doing nothing
has an impact. So we need to measure and find
out what those impacts are and then decide are they acceptable.
(10:20):
But our intention is to make this and you know,
the underwater drones, for instance, will make very little noise.
There'll be green energy powered hydrogen power perhaps and that
and that's you know, the idea is to keep it,
to keep the impact on the Arctic to an absolute minimum.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
So are there any sort of risks with this project
that you're that you're sort of looking at trying to
solve at the moment.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
So right now we're looking at a gathering data on
the efficiency of the approach that we're that's our primary,
our primary goal, you know, in the next the next
couple of years. That's what really focused on.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
What are the conditions like for those currently in the Arctic,
what is it what is it like, what's the day like?
Trying to you know, undertake this research.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
So it's twilight all day, all day for them for
a few hours that it's actually twighlight. During the day,
it's very cold, it's minus twenty something. The winds are
blowing at the moment at sort of ten twelve kilometers
an hour, so that contributes to the cold. There are
snow drifts. There were big snow drifts last night. So
(11:25):
it's pretty brutal. I mean, that's one of the reasons
to operate underwater with a scale solution is because it's
much more benign the environment under the water.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
You mentioned earlier someone that you were taken back that
not a lot of other people are looking at trying
to sort of solve this problem. Is this our last
chance to refreeze to try and save the actic or
are there any other potential options out there?
Speaker 3 (11:52):
There are other options, and there are organizations exploring these,
And I was at a conference in Washington last weekend
an organization called Ocean Visions that are looking at helping
organizations like ours and others that are looking at stress
for aerosol injection and marine cloud brightening and things like
techniques like that to put in place responsible research. So, yeah,
(12:16):
there are other potential techniques and perhaps it'll be a
combination of things. You know, we're not trying to win
a race here, We're just we're trying to contribute to
solving a problem.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
So if all this is successful, the million dollar question,
how quickly could we hit this process up and running
on a big scale.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Ten to fifteen years is realistic?
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Right? Okay? Long term project?
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Oh yeah, absolutely, An engineering feat of this size was
always going to be a long term project. But we
can have it operating at smaller scale initially and demonstrate
that it's safe and that the impacts are acceptable and
it has a measurable benefit. So that can happen much.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
Quicker, Simon Woods, thank you so much for joining us
and talking to us through that. That's great. It was
a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
That was real Ice co founder Simon Woods. If you
want to follow what they're up to or learn a
little bit more about it, realce dot Eco is their
website and their socials.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to news Talks it'd be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Monster: BTK
'Monster: BTK', the newest installment in the 'Monster' franchise, reveals the true story of the Wichita, Kansas serial killer who murdered at least 10 people between 1974 and 1991. Known by the moniker, BTK – Bind Torture Kill, his notoriety was bolstered by the taunting letters he sent to police, and the chilling phone calls he made to media outlets. BTK's identity was finally revealed in 2005 to the shock of his family, his community, and the world. He was the serial killer next door. From Tenderfoot TV & iHeartPodcasts, this is 'Monster: BTK'.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.