• Energy Research

AbstractOne of the major climate‐forced global changes has been white to blue to green; losses of sea ice extent in time and space around Arctic and West Antarctic seas has increased open water and the duration (though not magnitude) of phytoplankton blooms. Blueing of the poles has increases potential for heat absorption for positive feedback but conversely the longer phytoplankton blooms have increased carbon export to storage and sequestration by shelf benthos. However, ice shelf collapses and glacier retreat can calve more icebergs, and the increased open water allows icebergs more opportunities to scour the seabed, reducing zoobenthic blue carbon capture and storage. Here the size and variability in benthic blue carbon in mega and macrobenthos was assessed in time and space at Ryder and Marguerite bays of the West Antarctic Peninsula (WAP). In particular the influence of the duration of primary productivity and ice scour are investigated from the shallows to typical shelf depths of 500 m. Ice scour frequency dominated influence on benthic blue carbon at 5 m, to comparable with phytoplankton duration by 25 m depth. At 500 m only phytoplankton duration was significant and influential. WAP zoobenthos was calculated to generate ~107, 4.5 × 106 and 1.6 × 106 tonnes per year (between 2002 and 2015) in terms of production, immobilization and sequestration of carbon respectively. Thus about 1% of annual primary productivity has sequestration potential at the end of the trophic cascade. Polar zoobenthic blue carbon capture and storage responses to sea ice losses, the largest negative feedback on climate change, has been underestimated despite some offsetting of gain by increased ice scouring with more open water. Equivalent survey of Arctic and sub‐Antarctic shelves, for which new projects have started, should reveal the true extent of this feedback and how much its variability contributes to uncertainty in climate models.

As marine-ice around Antarctica retracts, a vast ‘blue carbon’ sink, in the form of living biomass, is emerging. Properly protected and promoted Antarctic blue carbon will form the world’s largest ...

AbstractThe two most urgent and interlinked environmental challenges humanity faces are climate change and biodiversity loss. We are entering a pivotal decade for both the international biodiversity and climate change agendas with the sharpening of ambitious strategies and targets by the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Within their respective Conventions, the biodiversity and climate interlinked challenges have largely been addressed separately. There is evidence that conservation actions that halt, slow or reverse biodiversity loss can simultaneously slow anthropogenic mediated climate change significantly. This review highlights conservation actions which have the largest potential for mitigation of climate change. We note that conservation actions have mainly synergistic benefits and few antagonistic trade‐offs with climate change mitigation. Specifically, we identify direct co‐benefits in 14 out of the 21 action targets of the draft post‐2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity, notwithstanding the many indirect links that can also support both biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. These relationships are context and scale‐dependent; therefore, we showcase examples of local biodiversity conservation actions that can be incentivized, guided and prioritized by global objectives and targets. The close interlinkages between biodiversity, climate change mitigation, other nature's contributions to people and good quality of life are seldom as integrated as they should be in management and policy. This review aims to re‐emphasize the vital relationships between biodiversity conservation actions and climate change mitigation in a timely manner, in support to major Conferences of Parties that are about to negotiate strategic frameworks and international goals for the decades to come.

The flow of carbon from atmosphere to sediment fauna and sediments reduces atmospheric CO2, which in turn reduces warming. Here, during the Changing Arctic Ocean Seafloor programme, we use comparable methods to those used in the Antarctic (vertical, calibrated camera drops and trawl-collected specimens) to calculate the standing stock of zoobenthic carbon throughout the Barents Sea. The highest numbers of morphotypes, functional groups and individuals were found in the northernmost sites (80–81.3° N, 29–30° E). Ordination (non-metric multidimensional scaling) suggested a cline of faunal transition from south to north. The functional group dominance differed across all six sites, despite all being apparently similar muds. Of the environmental variables we measured, only water current speed could significantly explain any of our spatial carbon differences. We found no obvious relationship with sea ice loss and thus no evidence of Arctic blue carbon–climate feedback. Blue carbon in the Barents Sea can be comparable with the highest levels in Antarctic shelf sediments.This article is part of the theme issue ‘The changing Arctic Ocean: consequences for biological communities, biogeochemical processes and ecosystem functioning'.

High latitude benthos are globally important in terms of accumulation and storage of ocean carbon, and the feedback this is likely to have on regional warming. Understanding this ecosystem service is important but difficult because of complex taxonomic diversity, history and geography of benthic biomass. Using South Georgia as a model location (where the history and geography of benthic biology is relatively well studied) we investigated whether the composition of functional groups were critical to benthic accumulation, immobilization and burial pathway to sequestration-and also aid their study through simplification of identification. We reclassified [1], [2]) morphotype and carbon mass data to 13 functional groups, for each sample of 32 sites around the South Georgia continental shelf. We investigated the influence on carbon accumulation, immobilization and sequestration estimate by multiple factors including the compositions of functional groups. Functional groups showed high diversity within and between sites, and within and between habitat types. Carbon storage was not linked to a functional group in particular but accumulation and immobilization increased with the number of functional groups present and the presence of hard substrata. Functional groups were also important to carbon burial rate, which increased with the presence of mixed (hard and soft substrata). Functional groups showed high surrogacy for taxonomic composition and were useful for examining contrasting habitat categorization. Functional groups not only aid marine carbon storage investigation by reducing time and the need for team size and speciality, but also important to benthic carbon pathways per se. There is a distinct geography to seabed carbon storage; seabed boulder-fields are hotspots of carbon accumulation and immobilization, whilst the interface between such boulder-fields and sediments are key places for burial and sequestration.

AbstractGlobal warming is causing significant losses of marine ice around the polar regions. In Antarctica, the retreat of tidewater glaciers is opening up novel, low‐energy habitats (fjords) that have the potential to provide a negative feedback loop to climate change. These fjords are being colonized by organisms on and within the sediment and act as a sink for particulate matter. So far, blue carbon potential in Antarctic habitats has mainly been estimated using epifaunal megazoobenthos (although some studies have also considered macrozoobenthos). We investigated two further pathways of carbon storage and potential sequestration by measuring the concentration of carbon of infaunal macrozoobenthos and total organic carbon (TOC) deposited in the sediment. We took samples along a temporal gradient since time of last glacier ice cover (1–1000 years) at three fjords along the West Antarctic Peninsula. We tested the hypothesis that seabed carbon standing stock would be mainly driven by time since last glacier covered. However, results showed this to be much more complex. Infauna were highly variable over this temporal gradient and showed similar total mass of carbon standing stock per m2 as literature estimates of Antarctic epifauna. TOC mass in the sediment, however, was an order of magnitude greater than stocks of infaunal and epifaunal carbon and increased with time since last ice cover. Thus, blue carbon stocks and recent gains around Antarctica are likely much higher than previously estimated as is their negative feedback on climate change.

AbstractDiminishing prospects for environmental preservation under climate change are intensifying efforts to boost capture, storage and sequestration (long-term burial) of carbon. However, as Earth’s biological carbon sinks also shrink, remediation has become a key part of the narrative for terrestrial ecosystems. In contrast, blue carbon on polar continental shelves have stronger pathways to sequestration and have increased with climate-forced marine ice losses—becoming the largest known natural negative feedback on climate change. Here we explore the size and complex dynamics of blue carbon gains with spatiotemporal changes in sea ice (60–100 MtCyear−1), ice shelves (4–40 MtCyear−1 = giant iceberg generation) and glacier retreat (< 1 MtCyear−1). Estimates suggest that, amongst these, reduced duration of seasonal sea ice is most important. Decreasing sea ice extent drives longer (not necessarily larger biomass) smaller cell-sized phytoplankton blooms, increasing growth of many primary consumers and benthic carbon storage—where sequestration chances are maximal. However, sea ice losses also create positive feedbacks in shallow waters through increased iceberg movement and scouring of benthos. Unlike loss of sea ice, which enhances existing sinks, ice shelf losses generate brand new carbon sinks both where giant icebergs were, and in their wake. These also generate small positive feedbacks from scouring, minimised by repeat scouring at biodiversity hotspots. Blue carbon change from glacier retreat has been least well quantified, and although emerging fjords are small areas, they have high storage-sequestration conversion efficiencies, whilst blue carbon in polar waters faces many diverse and complex stressors. The identity of these are known (e.g. fishing, warming, ocean acidification, non-indigenous species and plastic pollution) but not their magnitude of impact. In order to mediate multiple stressors, research should focus on wider verification of blue carbon gains, projecting future change, and the broader environmental and economic benefits to safeguard blue carbon ecosystems through law.