Climate change remains one of humanity’s most pressing existential threats. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns that failing to curb global warming could result in massive economic losses ($100⁢-⁢200 trillion by 2100) and the displacement of hundreds of millions of people (IPCC, 2018; Stern, 2007; Rockström et al., 2009). Negative emissions technologies (NETs) are increasingly recognized as essential to limit warming below 2^∘C (Pacala and Socolow, 2004). Among NETs, Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW) can sequester significant quantities of atmospheric CO₂ by accelerating the natural chemical breakdown of silicate rocks, such as basalt (Schuiling and Krijgsman, 2006). The principal barrier to ERW is the immense energy and logistics required to mine, crush, and transport billions of tonnes of rock. Recent proposals have resurrected the idea of peaceful nuclear explosions to do this “heavy lifting.” Historically studied under programs like Project Plowshare (plo, 1961), nuclear blasts can fracture large volumes of geological material.

Nuclear explosions are a well-researched topic, but the largest nuclear explosion ever detonated, the Tsar Bomba, only had a yield of 50 megatons of TNT (Mt)(Narayanan,). To enable ERW on the required scale using a nuclear explosion, a yield in the gigaton range would be required. This is untested and would require much testing and verification before detonation.

To calculate an effective yield for the nuclear explosion, we will have to make a few assumptions:

1. 1.

   Every year, approximately 36 gigatons of carbon dioxide are emitted into the atmosphere.

2. 2.

   We want to sequester 30 years worth of carbon dioxide emissions.

3. 3.

   Through ERW, 1 ton of basalt can sequester 0.28 tons of carbon dioxide(Beerling et al., 2020).

4. 4.

   The crushing work index of basalt is 22(Ram Chandar et al., 2016).

5. 5.

   In a seafloor buried nuclear explosion, there will be approximately 90% efficiency in pulverizing the basalt.

From these assumptions, we can calculate that 1.08 trillion tons of carbon dioxide should be sequestered, 3.86 trillion tons of basalt are needed, the crushing energy needed is 3.05∗1020j, and a nuclear explosion yield of 81 Gt is required. This is orders of magnitude larger than the largest nuclear explosion ever detonated, so this is not to be taken lightly.

Detonating a 81 Gt nuclear device could cause a global catastrophe if done improperly. Simply burying a nuclear device in a basalt deposit would cause this catastrophe. However, deep water is incredibly shock absorbant. By buring the nuclear device kilometers underground under kilometers of water, we can be certain that the explosion will first pulverize the rock then be contained by the water.

We propose burying this device beneath the Kerguelen Plateau in the Southern Ocean, 3-5 km into the basalt-rich seafloor and 6-8 km below the water’s surface. Under these parameters, there is approximately 800 atm of pressure to absorb the energy. Additionally, nearby currents like the Antarctic Circumpolar Current can distribute the particles for accelerated carbon sequestration.

Additionally, the nuclear device should be designed to minimize its long-term radiation effects. To do this, a standard fission-fusion hydrogen bomb design is sufficient. The basalt should absorb and trap in the majority of the radiation to the local area.

This is a radical idea and requires serious discussion around its deployment. This section makes these assumptions about the nuclear device:

1. 1.

   This explosion can be detonated without global catastrophe.

2. 2.

   This explosion can sequester 30 years worth of carbon dioxide emissions.

3. 3.

   This explosion can be detonated within 10 years.

4. 4.

   This nuclear device is too large to deploy militarily.

Additionally, we are assuming that climate change will progress according to current estimates. The estimates range from 1.5∘−4.5∘C.

With these assumptions, we can compare this plan to current climate change predictions in regards to safety, ecosystem preservation, political feasibility, and financial viability.

In conclusion, this study introduces the innovative approach of utilizing buried nuclear explosions within remote basaltic seabeds to pulverize basalt for Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW). By specifying the necessary parameters, we demonstrate the potential for effective carbon sequestration while minimizing adverse side effects. Conducting the explosion underwater ensures the safe containment of debris, radiation, and energy, facilitating rapid basalt weathering essential for significant climate impact. Achieving meaningful climate mitigation requires scaling this method to gigaton-level explosions, underscoring its large-scale applicability. Although the concept is radical, our analysis suggests that, when considering factors such as safety, ecosystem preservation, political feasibility, and financial viability, this strategy represents a promising and potentially the most effective solution for addressing climate change in the near future.