British Antarctic Survey                            ARC0028

Written Evidence submitted by the British Antarctic Survey

We are grateful for the opportunity to contribute written evidence to the Polar Research Sub-Committee’s Inquiry into the UK and the Arctic Environment which was launched on 21 February 2023.

This evidence is submitted on behalf of the British Antarctic Survey (BAS). It has been compiled from input of a broad cross-section of BAS scientists. Our evidence directly addresses Questions 1 and 3 of the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference: The UK’s contribution to the Arctic through scientific research. We can provide additional detail, should that be useful, on any specific areas.

Dr Anna Jones, BAS Director of Science

Section A: Introduction to the British Antarctic Survey

The British Antarctic Survey is the UK’s primary research centre for polar research and is part of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). BAS provides the UK’s national polar capability by operating research stations, aircraft, and the RRS Sir David Attenborough, supporting science at both poles and securing the UK’s presence in Antarctic affairs. On behalf of NERC, we operate the UK Arctic Research Station in Svalbard, for the whole UK research community.

Our science activities span the depths of the oceans to the inner edge of space, and include world-leading expertise on glaciers, sea ice, ecosystems, climate, ocean and atmospheric science. We carry out research both in the Antarctic and the Arctic. Our Arctic research is funded in large part by competitively-won funding from external sources, including NERC and the European Union.

Section B: Direct answers to Inquiry questions

1.The Arctic environment

1.1 What are the consequences for the UK of the observed climatic and environmental changes in the Arctic?

Reasons for Arctic warming: The Arctic is warming at a rate roughly four times faster than the global average. This is mainly due to the decline in Arctic sea ice and the associated feedback, related to sea-ice albedo. Sea ice is highly reflective of the sun’s radiation. As sea ice melts, the reflective surface is replaced by a non-reflective ocean surface. This dark surface absorbs, rather than reflects heat, which leads to even more warming.

Sea level rise from melt of the Greenland ice sheet: The Arctic is home to the Greenland ice sheet, the second largest mass of ice on Earth, which holds enough water to raise global sea levels by approximately seven metres if it melted completely. Arctic warming is expected to melt the Greenland ice sheet at unprecedented rates in the coming decades and some consider that it is already in irreversible decline (tipping point). This will contribute significantly to global sea level rise, affecting UK coastal cities, infrastructure, and coast lines.

Links to UK weather and climate: As one of the closest non-Arctic states, the UK will be impacted by Arctic change.  The UK is dominated by weather from the North Atlantic and the Arctic, and thus changes in weather patterns, as well as the increased frequency of extreme events, may have their roots in Arctic change. As well as increasing global sea levels, the input of fresh water into the ocean as the Greenland ice sheet melts will likely change ocean salinity, and negatively influence the formation of deep-oceanic water masses. This matters for the UK because this deep water formation is one of the drivers of the Gulf Stream which is a key influence on UK climate. 

Permafrost thaw releases carbon dioxide: A longer-term effect of Arctic warming is thawing of permafrost. The organic carbon in Arctic permafrost is estimated to weigh 1.4-1.6 trillion tonnes. With permafrost thaw, this organic carbon will be decomposed by soil microbes and released to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide (CO2). If all of this organic carbon is converted to CO2 by microbes, and without any sinks for the gas (e.g., increased plant growth), it could approximately triple the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which would have a significant effect on UK climate. 

Fisheries: Changes in Arctic biodiversity are anticipated as a result of environmental changes in the Arctic (e.g. increased light levels into the ocean, loss of sea ice as a habitat). These changes are likely to impact options for UK fisheries.

1.2 What are the observable realities of ice decline for biodiversity, air quality, sea level changes, permafrost melt and levels of methane?

For introduction - Sea ice loss timescales and the Paris Agreement: Climate models that best capture the observed evolution of Arctic sea ice suggest that the Arctic Ocean will be essentially sea ice-free during summer months before 2050.  There is considerable uncertainty in the exact date because of naturally occurring variations in climate, with some models suggesting it is likely to occur, at least once, in the 2030s.  This means that the first sea ice-free year may be within the period of Parliament after the next general election. Reduction in greenhouse gases (GHG) in line with the Paris Agreement (restriction to 1.5°C warming) will likely reduce the frequency of ice-free years and the length of the ice-free season.  There is also evidence that the decline in sea ice extent during the winter months will also be reduced under a Paris Agreement GHG scenario.

Impact of sea ice loss on biodiversity: The Arctic marine ecosystem has developed over millennia to thrive in an ocean covered by sea ice.  The total removal of sea ice within a summer will have a catastrophic impact on this fragile ecosystem over all trophic levels within the ecosystem. This means that all biodiversity in the Arctic could be affected, from the iconic polar bear to the smallest of living creatures.

Sea level rise from melt of the Greenland ice sheet: see above
 

Impact of glacial retreat on permafrost thaw and plant communities: Glacial retreat will accelerate the melting of permafrost formerly protected beneath glaciers and increase the area of land available for plant growth. However, plant communities on barren, formerly glaciated land, take decades to develop so this is a long-term response.

Impact of soil warming on greenhouse gases (CO2 and methane): The warming of soil in the Arctic will increase the release of CO2 to the atmosphere. However, in some soil types, warming has been shown to increase the absorption of methane by microbes, offsetting some of the warming effect of CO2 released to the atmosphere.

3. The UK’s contribution to the Arctic through scientific research

3.1 What are the benefits for the UK of support for Arctic research activity?

The UK benefits from Arctic research both directly, in terms of what we learn about the impact of Arctic ecosystem and climate change on the UK, and also in terms of influence and “soft power”, for example through leadership roles in international research programmes and from our position as one of the top four countries in terms of scientific outputs about the Arctic.

Direct benefits to the UK of Arctic environmental research: The rapid and unprecedented environmental change in the Arctic will impact the UK. Melting land ice will contribute to sea level rise, risking low-lying UK coastal communities and increasing coastal erosion in the UK. Changing ocean and sea-ice properties in the Arctic will likely adversely impact UK weather patterns. Accelerated climate change will likely have negative effects on marine and terrestrial ecosystems in the Arctic and sub-Arctic, which are important natural resources for the UK and international partners, e.g. through fisheries.  It is crucial to support Arctic research now in order to understand Arctic polar processes and continue to monitor change, to underpin the legislation changes needed to minimise the impact on the UK.

Direct benefits to the UK from space weather research in the Arctic: UKRI/NERC has invested £6.2M capital and ~£5M in strategic research and user support to exploit the multi-national EISCAT radar facility in the Arctic over the next four years. The UKRI delegate to the EISCAT Scientific Association is Dr Mervyn Freeman at the British Antarctic Survey, who can provide more details. The facility comprises two radars on Svalbard and the new £60M EISCAT-3D radar facility in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, which is recognised within the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). (https://roadmap2021.esfri.eu/projects-and-landmarks/browse-the-catalogue/eiscat_3d/). The facility is used for fundamental and strategic research into the impacts of space weather on the space environment, on satellite services, and on critical national infrastructures, as recognised in the UK National Risk Register and in support of the UK Space Weather Preparedness Strategy. The Arctic region is a gateway for space weather impacts.

Example of “soft power”: The UK was a key player in the international flagship programme MOSAiC (Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate). MOSAiC is to date the largest scientific expedition to the Arctic ,during which an ice breaker drifted with the ice for the entire year 2019-20, enabling multi-disciplinary studies of the ocean-sea ice atmosphere system. The UK contributed significantly to MOSAiC. BEIS provided funding of £0.5 million for UK researchers to join the vessel, and seven UK research projects were supported by £1.8 million of NERC funding.

3.2 What more could the UK do to improve or increase its contribution to Arctic science?

Some specific suggestions include:

• An increase in cross/multi-disciplinary research to tackle the complex environmental change underway in the Arctic, and multiple-stressors acting on Arctic ecosystems.
• More co-production of research with local and Indigenous groups in the Arctic would improve the relevance of the research carried out (using the Canada-Inuit Nunangat-United Kingdom Arctic Research Programme 2021 – 2025, CINUK, as a model).
• Greater use of autonomous technology to improve the spatial and temporal resolution of observations and sustained monitoring.
• Further integration of model and observational data, and engagement with AI to build digital twin environments for understanding fundamental environmental processes and for designing more effective/efficient observing systems.
• Increased support of long-term observations that provide a baseline of how the environmental system is changing.
• Specific funding schemes to support Arctic science, including enhancing support for the UK’s Arctic research station on Svalbard.
• Support increased collaboration with Arctic Circle countries (Canada, Norway, Greenland, etc) to increase access to the Arctic for UK researchers, including access to other Arctic research stations.

We also suggest improved mechanisms to support international science programmes: Arctic science is difficult, expensive, and logistically challenging.  One nation alone does not have the capability to address major Arctic challenges; an international approach is mandatory.  However, most Arctic science is funded at a national level which makes it exceedingly difficult to develop integrated programmes of research with Arctic scientists from other countries (the double-jeopardy issue). To encourage international scientific cooperation and research, funding is required for bilateral or more partnerships, for example, the successful UK-Germany Changing Arctic Ocean programme, or EU framework partnerships in which several nations work together to address identified Arctic challenges. UK Arctic would greatly benefit from international partnerships.

3.3 How do the findings of scientific research into the Arctic’s climate and environment inform the UK’s Arctic policy?

The FCDO has recently launched its refreshed Arctic strategy and has appointed a new member specifically for Arctic matters. This will improve the pathway for scientific information into Arctic policy.

3.5 How can future Arctic research in UK institutions be supported so as to maintain and enhance the UK’s leadership in Arctic science? 

The UK is in a strong position to lead in policy-relevant Arctic research, however, this relies on adequate funding and a longer term funding strategy. Further strategic funding of existing UK assets would benefit Arctic research greatly through:

• Further cutting-edge infrastructure, scientific equipment, and data management/interpretation tools.
• Support for world-leading researchers, with training and support for the next generation of scientists.
• Enhanced engineering science, especially in autonomous underwater robotics and airborne drones.
• Support for international partnerships for major research programmes.
• Momentum and motivation for co-producing research with local Arctic communities and Indigenous Peoples Organisations (e.g., CINUK).
• Sustained monitoring of key climate variables that are essential to support climate and weather services but also to provide empirical evidence to understand and better predict climate change over different time scales. 
• A clear UK strategy for sustained and co-ordinated funding for Arctic observations (short-, medium-, and long-term).
• Targeted funding for cross-disciplinary Arctic research that involves collaboration between different research fields e.g. environmental science (climate, sea ice) and resource management (e.g. transportation, risk assessment).

3.6 What factors govern the commissioning of Arctic research programmes in UK scientific institutions, and to what extent are the outputs of such programmes used in contributions to multilateral scientific assessments such as the IPCC?

Within NERC funding opportunities, the science community can propose research programme ideas in the Arctic (mechanisms include Highlight Topic Ideas that, if selected, can be funded up to £5m). Success depends on quality of science. Availability of logistical support is also critical, such as for example, the UK’s polar research vessel, RRS Sir David Attenborough, and the NERC/BAS instrumented atmospheric science aircraft. Partnerships with other nations can also provide shared access to facilities.

A recent example of a successful Arctic Highlight Topic is UKRI/NERC’s award of £6.2M capital and £4M strategic research funding to exploit the multi-national EISCAT_3D radar facility in the Arctic (see above). In addition, a major project to understand the response of climate change on Greenland glaciers will begin in 2024.

Published outputs and data from such programmes provide important contributions to multilateral scientific assessments, such as the IPCC.

3.7 What research activities concerning the climate and environment ought to be eligible for UK support through the NERC?

All research activities should be eligible if they fall within NERC’s remit. However, it is also important to recognise that questions concerning climate and environment are global in scope so support should be available for research that has an impact across the planet,  not restricted to UK concerns only.

3.8 Has the UK’s departure from the EU had an impact on UK research in the Arctic? Has there been any impact on agreements on international cooperation, joint research projects and access to funding streams such as Horizon Europe?  

The UK has been a key contributor to Arctic EU projects and UK scientists also initiated, led, coordinated and won EU funding for major Arctic projects in the past.  BAS scientists have held leadership positions in a number of significant EU projects and have received significant funding. Given the uncertainty of whether the UK can or cannot participate, BAS scientists have been hesitant to commit to preparing further proposals (and where recently successful, have had to give up leadership of their project).

A key impact has been on opportunities for funding transdisciplinary Arctic research, which the EU funded. Understanding changes within the Arctic and predicting and anticipating their impacts is a formidable task. A more holistic understanding of the impact of Arctic change requires the coordinated efforts of a broad range of expertise, disciplines and sectors (e.g. social scientists, physicist, economists and indigenous people).  Presently these transdisciplinary projects are funded almost exclusively through EU calls, rather than via UK research councils.

The UK has an influential role in the European Polar Board (EPB, EuropeanPolarBoard.org), an organisation of 29 European polar institutions (including NERC) as a collective voice for European research in polar research. The EPB provides independent policy advice at national and international levels. In addition, the EPB has been involved in the EU-Polarnet consortium, in which BAS scientists played a major part to plan future polar science and influence the EU to fund Arctic science. BAS has greatly benefitted from EU Arctic funding through this route in the past but opportunities may now be restricted after Brexit.

3.9 What impact has Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had on Arctic scientific cooperation? Has the conflict had an impact on UK research capacity in the Arctic?

Below are some testimonies from individual BAS researchers:

“Russia accounts for more than half of all Arctic territory so the cessation of international collaborations in the Russian Arctic has had a huge impact on Arctic research as a whole. As someone who has undertaken several field seasons in Arctic Russia, has scientific equipment deployed in Russia, and was previously involved with various UK-Russian collaborations, it has evidently had a direct impact on my scientific research. While it has been possible to switch some work to other parts of the Arctic – I have a PhD student who has changed from studying forest fires in Siberia to North America – there are many aspects of Arctic research that are unique to the Russian Arctic and can only be undertaken there. Prior to the invasion, significant strides had been made in enhancing collaboration between Russian and UK scientists. Examples include the ‘soft diplomacy’ of the British Council Institutional Links funding and the European INTERACT project, which facilitated access to scientific stations in Arctic Russia.”

“Collaboration with Russian partner scientists within MOSAiC is currently on hold, limiting the advance of some scientific investigations. MOSAiC is to date the largest scientific expedition to the Arctic during which an ice breaker was drifting with the ice for the entire year 2019-20 enabling multi-disciplinary studies of the ocean-sea ice atmosphere system. The UK contributed significantly to MOSAiC. BEIS provided funding £0.5 million for UK researchers to join the vessel, and 7 UK projects were granted £1.8 million of Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) funding.”

“Within the EISCAT Scientific Association, it has made the UK and Arctic countries sensitive to collaboration with other countries with which we may have concerns regarding national security.”

“Whilst it has been difficult to have co-funded projects between the UK and Russia (other than the Arctic Office bursaries), there have been more collaborations with Russian colleagues through EU projects. At present we have had Russian institutes who had to be removed from presently-funded EU project.  This project also had links and funding for Russian indigenous Arctic peoples, this too had to be removed.  We were warned by these indigenous people not to contact them as they were concerned that their e-mail may be checked and this would have a detrimental impact on their lives.”

3.10 What impact has the effective suspension of the Arctic Council had on environmental science and environmental protection?

The Arctic Council working groups have been halted, which has a negative impact on environmental science and protection, as well as the coordination of Arctic observations (for example “Sustaining Arctic Observing Networks” SAON) and other such Arctic Council programmes.

3.11 What role is there for the UK to assist in Arctic scientific co-operation while the Arctic Council is in abeyance?

As an observer within the Arctic Council the UK does not have the mandate, but there would be an opportunity to support Norway (the next Arctic Council chair) to re-establish the working groups of the Arctic Council. In some instances, additional funds to help the working groups might be useful.

April 2023