National Oceanography Centre                            ANT0005

Written evidence submitted by the National Oceanography Centre

Inquiry into The UK and the Antarctic Environment

Environmental Audit Sub-Committee on Polar Research

About us

1. The National Oceanography Centre (NOC) is an independent research organisation, with charitable status, which provides national capability to enable large scale ocean science. We undertake and facilitate world-class agenda-setting scientific research and technology development to understand the ocean and use this knowledge to advocate for international and UK public policy, business and societal outcomes that advance future human prosperity and wellbeing.  

2. NOC operates the Royal Research Ships James Cook and RRS Discovery and develops technology for coastal and deep ocean research. Together with our partners, NOC provides long-term marine science national capability including: sustained ocean observations, mapping and surveying, data management, scientific research, international coordination and independent advice.   

Introduction

3. NOC welcomes the opportunity to provide written evidence to the Polar Research Sub-Committee’s Inquiry into the UK and the Antarctic Environment and would be delighted to meet with members of the Sub-Committee to discuss in greater detail our keen interest in understanding the marine environment of the Antarctic, its relation to weather and climate, how that may change in the coming years and decades and the potential consequences of the melting of the Antarctic Ice Sheet to sea level rise.

4. Our scientists are part of a number of different collaborative research projects funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC/UKRI) facilitating knowledge creation to support policy development in the Antarctic. Examples include:

• BIOPOLE: Biogeochemical processes and ecosystem function in changing polar systems and their global impacts.[1]
• DEFIANT: Drivers and Effects of Fluctuations in sea Ice in the ANTarctic.[2]
• DeCAdeS: Drivers of Oceanic Change in the Amundsen Sea.[3]

5. NOC’s engineers and technologists, who run NERC/UKRI’s Marine Autonomous and Robotics Systems[4] (MARS) fleet, also play an important role in advancing our knowledge of the Antarctic environment in collaboration with projects such as PycnoGen: Generation of the ocean’s permanent pycnocline in the ice-covered Southern Ocean.”[5]
6. Ocean Regulation of Climate by Heat and Carbon Sequestration and Transports (ORCHESTRA)[6] and its follow-up project ENCORE[7] is another NERC/UKRI funded project where NOC contributed to substantial advances in our understanding of the Antarctic environment by improving “our ability to measure, understand and predict the exchange, storage and export of heat and carbon by the Southern Ocean.”[8]

NOC’s Summary Position

Our primary recommendations to UK Government are as follows:

Longer-term, more ambitious and larger scale funding for Antarctic science

7. The key ocean science challenges concern basin-decadal scale change and variability in physical, biogeochemical and ecological Essential Ocean Variables. Planning and evaluating the effectiveness of ocean management actions needs to be done hand in hand with sound science and data from a continuous presence of sustained ocean observations in line with the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS)[9] 2030 Strategy.

8. The Southern Ocean, which surrounds Antarctica, connects the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Ocean basins. It is only in the Southern and North Atlantic Ocean that overturning circulation occurs. Overturning circulation is the global system of currents which not only transports heat, but also sequesters carbon into the deep sea and replenishes the deep sea with oxygen rich waters from the surface. 

9. In Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, GOOS tends to be funded by short-term projects rather than on an ongoing basis which would be more appropriate for a global data infrastructure system to which many nations continue. The Southern Ocean Observing System (SOOS) suffers the same lack of sustainability of funding as other crucial parts of GOOS.  A priority area, where the UK could exercise leadership, would be to develop innovative, sustainable business models to support global ocean observations with continuous funding. Southern Ocean observing infrastructure needs to be considered in this wider global context and not in isolation.

Prioritise investment in ocean technology and future marine research infrastructure

10. Marine science and its research infrastructure, including autonomous marine systems, remote sensing and modelling capability, are critical to improving our understanding of the Antarctic environment and its significance to planetary health and resilience. Technology developments in these areas will benefit sectors beyond marine science and help advance such fields as cleaner maritime transport and carbon capture and storage, where the UK is poised to play a global leadership role.

Sustainably fund scientific ocean observation programmes

11. Long-term observation programmes, led or contributed to by the UK, have made a major contribution to the international scientific community’s understanding of the Antarctic and its impacts on our changing climate. The recent UK Sustained Scientific Ocean Observation Priorities consultation report[10] recommends that the UK continues its investment in six major programmes, including three that leverage Antarctic science capabilities or infrastructure: One Argo,[11] the Global Ocean Ship Based Hydrography Programme (GO-SHIP),[12] and the Global Sea Level Observing System (GLOSS).[13] However, each has been held back or cut back by funding models, where even “long-term” science funding is allocated to new topics every five years. The UK’s unique three-decade annual Southern Ocean GO-SHIP time series (Drake Passage[14]), for example, has missed years of measurements due to limited ship time. Dropping or reducing the frequency of these long time series risks losing essential information about the ocean’s response to climate change, information which cannot be recovered in the future. 

Better engage with British Overseas Territories to support Antarctic research with autonomous underwater vehicles

12. Emerging technologies, such as autonomous underwater vehicles, could be deployed from Overseas Territories in the Antarctic and South Atlantic. Launch and recovery sites for marine autonomy could be built in these locations, which aligns well with the Future Marine Research Infrastructure[15] programme.

Maximise the scientific contributions of the HMS Protector

13. NOC recommends consultation with ocean science and technology experts to expand the array of the HMS Protector’s onboard sensor arrays and establish procedures for data collection, archiving and use. Once agreed, data gathering and recovery operations would need to be appropriately funded to enable open access and maximise scientific value. The HMS Protector could also be used more consistently to support the logistical and supply needs of Antarctic research bases.

Issues raised in the terms of reference

The Antarctic environment

What are the most significant climate and environmental changes taking place in the Antarctic? What might they mean for the UK, for example in terms of sea level rise and our weather? How well prepared is the UK Government for these impacts? 

14. From an oceanographic perspective, the three most significant changes taking place in the Antarctic and the Southern Ocean are 1) recent decline in Antarctic sea ice extent, 2) melting of ice sheets, ice shelves, and glaciers on the Antarctic continent, resulting in substantial freshwater release into the ocean, and 3) changes to circulation patterns in the Southern Ocean – particularly for Antarctic Bottom Water, a key contributor to the global meridional overturning circulation – and the subsequent global impacts on heat and carbon uptake by the ocean.
15. Globally, the Southern Ocean accounts for a large proportion of the global heat and carbon drawdown into the ocean interior to date,[16] but the fate of the future role of the Southern Ocean as a heat and carbon sink is very uncertain. One potentially crucial uncertainty is how the Antarctic Circumpolar Current’s structure is going to respond to increasing temperatures, melting ice and possibly shifting/strengthening winds over the coming decades. This response will both (1) shape the depth and configuration of the ocean’s main pycnocline (the dividing surface – laying at 1000-1500 m depth over much of the ocean – between the relatively heat- and anthropogenic carbon-rich, well-ventilated global ocean’s upper layer, and the much more slowly-renewed deeper waters), and (2) influence the formation rate and properties of the mode and intermediate waters being fed into that upper layer.

16. Melting of the Antarctic ice sheets will determine global sea level rise over the next decades and centuries. The question is not if, but how much they will contribute. Without adaptation measures, a sea level rise of 1 m would have severe consequences, causing hundreds of millions of people to experience flooding, threatening the survival of low-island nations, and costing an estimated 15 trillion USD in lost or damaged assets. These figures would grow exponentially for multi-metres sea level rise, along with the necessity to displace populations from their homes.

17. Depending on the amount of ice sheet melting, our strategies to adapt to sea level rise on a global scale will be different. We can imagine two scenarios. Estimates of global sea level rise without a reduction in carbon emissions and due to ice sheets melting range from 0.5 m in 2100 (1.3 m in 2200) to 1.8 m in 2100 (7.5 m by 2200) depending on the scenario.[17] The difference between the two scenarios is not the emission of greenhouse gases by anthropogenic activities, but rather the possibility of rapid collapse and runaway retreat of these ice sheets, with sectors of West and East Antarctica representing the largest potential contributors to multi-meter sea level rise. Even if we were able to reduce carbon emissions and limit global warming to 2°C following the Paris Agreement, the possibility of a rapid melting and retreat of the Antarctic Ice Sheet is still present, even if aggressive carbon emission cuts were implemented.

18. Better understanding of the key processes that cause melting and destabilisation of glaciers around Antarctica is necessary to predict which scenario is more likely, to allow coastal populations (including the UK) to adapt. As warm ocean waters provide most of the heat that is melting Antarctica, glaciers that are exposed to the ocean are at higher risk. Among these glaciers we find Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers in West Antarctica, and Vanderford, Totten and Denman Glaciers in East Antarctica – all of which are showing signs of retreat and mass loss. The future of these few glaciers will largely determine which sea level rise scenario will become our future.

What is the extent of plastic and microplastic pollution in the Antarctic? What could the UK Government do to reduce it? 

19. The Antarctic is one of the most isolated regions on the planet with very limited access for human activities. Antarctica and the Southern Ocean south of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) are under increasing threat from the consequences of anthropogenic activities[18] including plastic pollution.[19] Initial observations show the presence of plastic litter in the Antarctic surface water from coastal areas off the Antarctic Peninsula and Weddel Sea,[20] Ross Sea and Scotia sediments,[21] and ice from the Eastern Antarctic Peninsula[22] all of which indicates that these contaminants reach even very remote ecosystems. Microfibers were also found in the Antarctic krill and salps, in the digestive tract of Antarctic benthic invertebrates,[23] and the scat of penguins.[24] These findings show that the sub-millimetre plastic particles (microplastics) are ingested by marine biota, some of which are commercially important species (e.g., krill). 

20. Knowledge of the abundance, distribution, and characteristics of the microplastics in different compartments of Antarctica (air, sea-ice, ocean surface and water column, deep-sea sediments) is scarce. 

21. There is a need to explore spatio-temporal changes in magnitude and characteristics of microplastic loads and fluxes in the context of physical and biogeochemical factors, such as water-masses properties and movement, atmospheric deposition patterns, bloom dynamics and downward particle flux. There is also a need to improve understanding of the journey through which, and ultimate fate of, the plastics that reach the Antarcic region. This is crucial for our understanding of the risks these contaminants pose to the unique Antarctic ecosystem.  

22. To reduce plastic and microplastic pollution in the Antarctic, the UK government needs to discourage the production and consumption of plastics, incentivise rapid shifts to a circular economy and exercise leadership on the global stage in developing a binding agreement on plastic pollution following the UN Environment Assembly’s March 2022 resolution[25] (UNEP/EA.5/Res.14) to begin work on a global plastics treaty.

What effect is climate change having on biodiversity in Antarctica? To what extent does the UK’s Blue Belt Programme address the protection of biodiversity in the Antarctic and the Overseas Territories in the South Atlantic? 

23. The effect of climate change on biodiversity in Antarctica is a significant area of research, requiring ongoing monitoring and documentation via such programmes as the US Palmer Long-Term Ecological Research study area,[26] a partner of the UK’s Rothera Time Series (RaTS).[27] Through long-term research and time-series observations[28], we know that changes to the Antarctic environment have cascade effects through the entire food chain, such as polar species (e.g. the Emperor and Adelie penguins) that require ice to reproduce.

24. As described in Question 1, ongoing Southern Ocean circulation changes influence the availability of light and nutrients via changes in the mixing regime and upper ocean warming. These changes have important implications for biogeochemistry and consequently for marine life around coastal Antarctica.[29]  

25. In the West Antarctic Peninsula, opposing changes in primary production, which are increasing in some areas and decreasing at other locations, have already been observed with a reduction in Antarctic sea ice cover. This has already resulted in changes in the Antarctic food web, with large dominant diatoms being replaced by small phytoplankton (e.g. cryptophytes).[30] This change in dominant phytoplankton population has significant implications for the next trophic level, as large dominant zooplankton (such as krill) are incapable of physically feeding on small phytoplankton.

26. Consequently, this change in the primary producers, together with changes in water temperature and sea ice reduction (affecting krill recruitment) causes changes in the zooplankton population from the characteristic krill to gelatinous salps.[31] The replacement of krill by salps affects the next trophic level, like penguins, fish, and seals, as their main food source is changed or reduced.

27. Changes in ocean circulation and warming may also lead to increased primary production in the Southern Ocean as a whole, leading to a significant drop in the export of nutrients out of the region (as they would get consumed in situ). These nutrients sustain most of the rest of the global ocean's primary production. It has been forecasted that this could drive a decline in fisheries yields by more than 20% globally and nearly 60% in the North Atlantic by 2300.[32]

28. The UK’s Blue Belt Programme represents an important step forward for marine conservation in the Overseas Territories in the Antarctic and South Atlantic. However, this only extends as far as their Exclusive Economic Zones, which is a small fraction of the total Southern Ocean. Ocean circulation patterns surrounding Antarctica will enable strong connections between the Blue Belt protected areas and the open Southern Ocean. Consequently, these areas can be affected significantly by changes occurring outside the protected range, such as changes in large scale ocean circulation and nutrient supply. Special care and attention to these sites therefore extends to the wider Southern Ocean.

What impact is tourism having on the Antarctic?

29. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) recently published an Issues Brief on the Impacts of Tourism in Antarctica[33] which highlights the positive and negative impacts of Antarctic tourism. It recommends effective and proactive management of tourism, “with decisions based on science and informed by best practice.” NOC shares this view and agrees that “all proposed visitor sites and tourist activities should be evaluated using the precautionary principle.”

UK Science in Antarctica

How well placed is the UK to deliver the scientific priorities identified by national and international research communities? 

30. The UK is an established global leader in advancing Antarctic science, a necessarily international endeavour, governed by the Antarctic Treaty System. In addition to the RRS Sir David Attenborough and the UK’s Antarctic research stations run by the British Antarctic Survey, the UK has two other scientific research vessels, the RSS James Cook and the RSS Discovery, which are managed by NOC and play a key role in supporting Antarctic science. They are both able to travel up to the ice edge and go on regular missions to both polar regions.

31. The National Marine Equipment Pool (NMEP), hosted at the NOC, delivers technology support to enable world-class research. The NMEP’s marine autonomy assets in particularly are a key enabler of UK Antarctic science, with NOC’s Marine Autonomous Robotic Systems (MARS) team supporting a number of the Antarctic science projects noted in the introduction above as well as many others.

32. A key focus of MARS is the development and operation of advanced under ice capable autonomy, with enhanced navigation capabilities to enable observations for a full seasonal cycle. Autonomous marine science technology allows for expanded measurements of essential ocean variables beyond what is possible with a research vessel alone. As an example, last year an Autosub Long Range (ALR, better known as Boaty McBoatface) returned from a mission under the Dotson Ice Shelf.[34]

33. These emerging technologies are also being deployed in two upcoming Antarctic research projects – DeCAdeS and Pycogen – which will see an ALR and number of ocean gliders deployed under the ice of the Amundsen and Weddell seas for a full year.

34. It should be noted, however, that autonomous vehicles should not be seen as a full replacement for ships, and it would be of great detriment to UK science if the total number of research ships were not maintained at present levels in coming years. As autonomous sensor technology develops the data it collects must be verified against in-situ measurements taken by ships to ground truth the data and build trust in marine autonomy datasets.

35. Additionally, ships are needed to deploy most autonomous technologies, given their current battery life. Autonomy enhances the capability of research ships but cannot yet replace them.

36. Opportunistic deployment of long-range autonomous vehicles from appropriate vessels transiting Antarctic areas of interest, is an area of tremendous potential. The NMEP is currently constrained, however, by a flat-funding model. National Capability (NC) funding from UKRI/NERC is commissioned for a period of 10 years which is a welcome commitment, but inflationary pressures, and in particular the rising cost of fuel, means that in effect this funding supports less science each year. The Atlantic Meridional Transect (AMT) programme is an example of this problem. It is the only UK sustained observational expedition that covers the Atlantic from the UK to the Falkland Islands. Current fuel costs threaten to make this programme cost prohibitive. Benchmarking NC funding to inflation would be one way to mitigate this problem.

37. Unfortunately, most research funding does not come in 10-year time frames. Instead, it is short-term (usually three to five years) and project-led. Antarctic science demands much bigger scale, more ambitious funding to support bigger research teams over longer periods of time.

How well does the UK support research in and about the Antarctic, and what can the UK do to position itself at the forefront of Antarctic science? What role does international collaboration play in understanding the global implications of climate change in Antarctica? How can the UK ensure that opportunities for international collaboration are maximised, and are there key partners with whom the UK should seek to work? 

38. International collaboration, as governed by the Antarctic Treaty System, is integral to advancing the frontiers of Antarctic science. We cannot understand the global implications of climate change in Antarctica alone. Transnational teams of scientists, bilateral agreements and sharing of knowledge and infrastructure is what is needed to advance our knowledgebase at the scale required by the climate and biodiversity crisis.

39. One way the UK collaborates internationally is through the exchange of scientists, research technicians, equipment, and time aboard research vessels. The UK’s National Marine Equipment Pool (NMEP), for example, can send both personnel and equipment such as autonomous underwater vehicles, sensors and container laboratories on board research vessels travelling to the Southern Ocean, thereby augmenting capacity for knowledge creation. The NMEP also has bilateral agreements in place with France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the US to exchange both ship time and equipment.

40. This list could be expanded to include additional countries such as Australia, Brazil, South Africa, and South Korea. A larger, more coordinated pool of countries to share resources, talent, and the logistical burdens of conducting research in Antarctica would be of tremendous benefit to science. The UK is a world leader in the use of marine autonomy for scientific observation under ice, and by working with international research vessels to launch and recover this equipment we maximise its impact.

41. The G7 Future of the Seas and Oceans Initiative (FSOI)[35] aims to strengthen our sustained observing capability by aligning resources and sharing best practice. The G7 FSOI Working Group is considering how to reduce barriers to research infrastructure sharing, and also strengthen sustained ocean observing as a form of research infrastructure, rather than as a positive side effect of patched together research projects as is currently the case.

42. Through NERC’s Future Marine Research Infrastructure activity and motivated by UKRI’s commitment to be net zero by 2040, the UK aims to transform its marine research infrastructure to meet future research needs, by optimising use of observational platforms, models and digital tools to maximise information value for investment, supporting both sustained and experimental observation capability.

What impact has the UK’s investment in science infrastructure, through the RRS Sir David Attenborough and modernised station facilities, had on UK science in the Antarctic? How can the UK ensure that use of the UK’s infrastructure in the Antarctic is maximised, while minimising the environmental impacts of research activities? 

43. The UK’s investment in Antarctic science infrastructure through the RRS Sir David Attenborough and modernised station facilities is welcome. It should also be noted that both the RRS James Cook and RRS Discovery play a key role in supporting science in Antarctica as well as around the Overseas Territories in the South Atlantic through the Blue Belt Programme. As noted in Question 5 the NMEP, through its state-of-the-art equipment and sensing platforms, benefits the UK science community in undertaking Antarctic science.

How does HMS Protector benefit UK Antarctic science and how can her contribution be maximised? 

44. The HMS Protector benefits UK Antarctic science by undertaking hydrographic surveys and providing logistical and other support to research stations such as the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust and the British Antarctic Survey base at Rothera. The logistical support for research stations is of tremendous value and could be strengthened with greater planning and coordination, as this would maximise the time that the RRS Sir David Attenborough might spend on conducting scientific research rather than undertaking logistics work and servicing stations. American military organisations such as the US Air National Guard and the US Coast Guard support, including the polar-class icebreaker USCGC Polar Star, support US Antarctic research stations in this manner.[36] It is understood, however, that the unpredictability of the HMS Protector’s schedule is a limitation to achieving this.

45. There are also opportunities for collaboration between the HMS Protector and the Marine Autonomous and Robotics Systems[37] (MARS) fleet belonging to the National Marine Equipment Pool[38] (NMEP). Potentially, the HMS Protector could launch and recover deployed MARS assets, for example, and support in sending back data to UK scientists.

46. Other ways in which the HMS Protector could benefit UK Antarctic Science include en route data collection of sea ice, sea state, weather, wave height and essential ocean variables such as surface temperature and salinity data in the Southern Ocean and in the sea ice covered areas surrounding the Antarctic continent. With the rapidly changing marine environment in Antarctica, recording such observations would not only benefit science but also help inform future UK polar vessel designs. While in transit, the HMS Protector could collect data on sea ice concentration. Together with bridge video recording (potentially combined with aerial helicopter surveys), this could validate satellite data.

47. Additional sensors, such as the hull ice-load monitoring systems used by the Royal Norwegian Navy, could also be installed to register sea ice stressors to hull loads to inform Met Office sea ice forecasts.

48. NOC recommends consultation with ocean science and technology experts to expand the array of the HMS Protector’s onboard sensor arrays and establish procedures for data collection, archiving and use.

Antarctic Governance

What further action is needed through the Antarctic Treaty System to protect the Antarctic? What can the UK Government do to drive international action on environmental management alongside competing demands for the use of Antarctic resources?

49. According to the March 2021 US Congressional Research Service report on Antarctica,[39] there are no known extraction activities happening in the Antarctic that are prohibited by the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). It is reasonable to assume, however, that there will be increasing pressure in coming years to revisit the current prohibition against mineral, oil and gas extraction in Antarctica. Similarly, it is likely that there will be increasing interest from major maritime powers in the resource contained in and under its land and waters.

50. As the date approaches when the Antarctic Treaty becomes modifiable should any of the consultative parties request this, the UK should both hold fast on its commitment to the Treaty’s foundational principals of an environmentally protected, peaceful Antarctic while simultaneously accumulating an evidence base of its physical and biological resources.

51. Following the dictum that what cannot be measured cannot be managed, in order for the UK to be effective in supporting environmental protection in Antarctica, there is a need to ensure that it is well mapped and understood both in ocean physical parameters and biological and mineral resources. Such an evidence base would allow the UK to both assess and model, through emerging capabilities such as digital twin technologies, the potential consequences of any intent to exploit these resources, which currently is not allowed under the Antarctic Treaty System. Holistic Antarctic ecosystem risk assessment models of any future potential extraction of resources will require a better evidence base than currently exists, particularly in marine resource areas such as seabed minerals and fisheries.

What impact do current geopolitical tensions have on Antarctica, and the Antarctic Treaty System? What issues are affecting the treaty system and how can the UK use its influence to ensure that the continent remains a place of peace and cooperation?

52. Many of the peaceful scientific technologies used to study the Antarctic have dual military uses. This is particularly true of underwater autonomous robotics systems. As such, the UK needs to be vigilant in ensuring that science taking place in Antarctica is undertaken for purely peaceful purposes, with scientific data obtained made freely available to all.

September 2023