The Antarctic ice sheet holds enough frozen water to redraw the world’s coastlines, and one outlet in particular has become a symbol of that threat. Thwaites Glacier, often dubbed the “Doomsday Glacier,” is destabilizing in ways that could eventually unleash several feet of global sea level rise, putting megacities and low lying nations at risk. Against that backdrop, a proposal to build a roughly 50 mile barrier in front of the ice has emerged as one of the most audacious climate interventions on the table.
The idea is simple to describe and extraordinarily hard to execute: stretch a 62-mile-long flexible wall across the seafloor to keep warm water from gnawing at the glacier’s underbelly. I want to examine whether that kind of geoengineering Hail Mary can genuinely buy time for coastal communities, or whether it risks becoming an expensive distraction from cutting the emissions that are driving the melt in the first place.
Why Thwaites became the “Doomsday Glacier”
Thwaites Glacier sits in western Antarctica, where relatively warm ocean currents are already attacking the ice from below and loosening its grip on the bedrock. Researchers tracking relatively warm water flowing beneath the floating ice tongue have warned that this undercutting could trigger a retreat that is difficult to stop once it begins. In a separate assessment, scientist Dow noted that a fully melted Thwaites could raise sea levels 60 centimeters, a figure that does not include knock on effects if neighboring glaciers also destabilize.
That 60 centimeter rise would be enough to supercharge storm surges and permanently inundate parts of cities from Miami to Mumbai, even before considering the wider Antarctic system that Thwaites helps buttress. The glacier is often described as a cork in a bottle, because its collapse could open a pathway for other ice in Antarctica to flow more quickly into the ocean. As the ice front has fractured and retreated, an international team has been installing sensor networks on and around Thwaites Glacier to better understand how fast warm water is eroding it from below, but the broad conclusion is already clear: the glacier is melting faster than many early models anticipated, and the world is running out of time to keep its contribution to sea level in check.
The $50 billion seabed curtain vision
Into that urgency has stepped a group of Geoengineers and glaciologists who argue that if emissions cuts are not happening fast enough, humanity may need to physically shield the ice. Several Scientists have floated a plan to build a 62-mile-long curtain anchored to the seabed in front of the glacier, a flexible barrier that would hang roughly 100 meters high in the water column. The goal is to block the warmest layers of ocean water from reaching the grounding line, where the ice sheet transitions from resting on rock to floating, and where much of the current damage is occurring.
The price tag attached to this Hail Mary is staggering. Backers describe it as a 62-mile-long structure that could cost around $50 billion to design, build, and install in the hostile waters off Antarctica. A separate analysis of the concept framed it as a $50 billion mission to protect Antarctica and the Doomsday Glacier, led by Professor John Moore and a team of collaborators who argue that the cost, while enormous, is small compared with the trillions of dollars in damage that several feet of sea level rise would inflict on coastal infrastructure worldwide.
From thought experiment to engineering blueprint
What began as a theoretical sketch is slowly being translated into engineering drawings. A group of Geoengineers has set up the Seabed Curtain project, describing it as a bold, large-scale effort to delay devastating sea level rise by blocking warm water that currently travels through channels in the continental shelf toward the glacier. The concept envisions modular curtain segments, each tethered to the ocean floor and buoyed at the top, that together would form a continuous barrier in front of the most vulnerable parts of the ice front.
Glaciologist and Glaciologist and geo-engineer John Moore has become one of the most visible champions of this approach, describing a 100km long, 100m high curtain that could be tested first in smaller settings. Moore and colleagues have already trialed aspects of the design in a river environment to see how a flexible barrier behaves in strong currents, and they argue that the same basic physics can be scaled up offshore. In parallel, other Scientists have modeled anchored seabed curtains in computer simulations, suggesting that strategically placed barriers could reduce the flow of warm water into key cavities beneath the ice and slow the rate of thinning.
Scientific doubts and ethical red flags
For all the ingenuity behind the curtain concept, many glaciologists and climate researchers are deeply skeptical that it can deliver what its advocates promise. Some Opponents of the proposal, including experienced Antarctic scientists, warn that such outlandish interventions risk diverting attention and money from the “real task” of cutting greenhouse gas emissions. They argue that even if a curtain could slow Thwaites, it would not address the broader warming of the oceans and atmosphere that is also destabilizing ice elsewhere and driving heat waves, droughts, and other climate impacts.
There are also concerns about unintended consequences in the ocean itself. Redirecting warm water that currently flows under the glacier could alter circulation patterns, affect marine ecosystems, or simply push the heat toward other vulnerable ice shelves. Climate policy expert Wagner and others have cautioned that by relying too much on strategies like geoengineering, societies may fail to act aggressively enough to curb emissions, effectively betting the planet’s future on unproven technologies. That moral hazard looms especially large when the proposed fix carries a $50 billion price tag and would be deployed in one of the most remote and fragile environments on Earth.
Can a 50-mile wall really save coastal cities?
Even among those intrigued by the idea of a seabed curtain, there is a recognition that it would at best buy time rather than permanently “saving” the glacier. One analysis of the curtain plan notes that the idea is to gradually reduce the amount of warm water reaching the grounding line, which could delay the most rapid phase of retreat and avoid up to a meter of sea level rise if everything worked as intended. The same group of Geoengineers stresses that the curtain would not freeze the system in place forever, but could stretch out the timeline of change so that coastal communities have more decades to adapt.
Yet the engineering challenges are formidable. The waters in front of Thwaites are choked with icebergs, battered by storms, and difficult to access for even the most capable research vessels. One report notes that this is not the first time Moore has suggested a blocking solution, and that His earlier work tested versions of this technology inside tanks rather than at full ocean scale. Translating those experiments into a functioning, storm proof, iceberg resistant barrier in front of Thwaites Glacier would require a level of polar construction and maintenance that no country has attempted before. As I weigh the evidence, I see the curtain less as a silver bullet and more as a provocative reminder of how far humanity may be willing to go to avoid the consequences of unchecked warming, even as the most reliable protection for coasts still lies in cutting emissions fast enough that we never have to find out whether a 50 mile wall can hold back the sea.
More from Morning Overview