Pollution Could Buy an Extra Decade of Arctic Sea Ice

Air pollution could help preserve ice but that stilll doesn’t make it good

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Arctic sea ice continues to dwindle at an exceptional pace. Summer sea ice has declined at a rate of 13 percent per decade, and the rate has sped up in the last 10 years.

The main driver for Arctic sea ice’s disappearing act is the rising ocean and air temperatures driven by human greenhouse gas emissions. But that isn’t the only factor affecting Arctic sea ice. Air pollution also plays a role and can actually slow down warming.

In the tug of war, aerosols don’t necessarily counter the impacts of climate change on sea ice (or the planet as a whole for that matter). But new research shows that air pollution could buy the planet a decade of ice in the Arctic.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“It shows it’s a complex picture,” Nathan Gillett, a research scientist at Environment Canada, said. “Aerosols have quite a substantial impact on Arctic climate.”

Gillett co-authored the new research in pre-publication with Geophysical Research Letters. The findings show that aerosols have blunted 60 percent of the warming in the Arctic through the 20th century, a notable statistic given that the Arctic has still warmed at twice the rate as the rest of the planet.

This summer saw the fourth-lowest extent on record (and this winter also saw the lowest winter maximum on record). With temperatures projected to keep rising, it’s only a matter of time before the Arctic experiences an ice-free summer.

Credit: NASA

Going forward, aerosols—small particles that make up air pollution and reflect sunlight back into space—could continue to keep the northern reaches of the planet somewhat cool. Using a middle of the road carbon emissions scenario (which is a little optimistic given currently pledges) as well as rising aerosols, Gillett and his team show that the Arctic is likely to see an ice-free summer around 2057.

When his team ran the same scenario but capped air pollution at 2000 levels, ice-free summers in the Arctic started more than a decade earlier in 2045.

"The base driver of sea ice melt ultimately is anthropogenic greenhouse gases,” Walt Meier, an Arctic expert at NASA, said. “That ultimately causes enough warming to lose sea ice in summer in the Arctic. Aerosols are a secondary effect so they can reinforce carbon dioxide-influenced warming or slow it down.”

Sea ice extent in the region is crucial for a number of reasons. It provides habitat for polar bears and other animals that call the Arctic home. It also protects coasts from erosion, particularly in winter, and some research shows it could even affect weather in areas further south.

However, using air pollution as a means to buy time for Arctic sea ice is a devil’s bargain and could come with significant downsides.

“It (the study) doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have that clean air legislation. Plenty of other studies have shown there are many large benefits to clean air legislation and reducing aerosols,” Gillett said.

In the U.S. alone, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that clean air legislation will prevent more than 230,000 early deaths and provide $2 trillion in economic benefits by 2020.

Other research has considered the even more fiendish bargain of intentionally pumping enough aerosols into the stratosphere to keep the whole planet cool. The process, referred to as geoengineering or the even more ominous-sounding solar radiation management, has been rejected by most mainstream scientists and policymakers as too risky to pursue at this point, though.

Ultimately, the best solution is probably the most obvious: cut carbon emissions sooner than later.

This article is reproduced with permission from Climate Central. The article was first published on October 22, 2015.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe