Katie Howe introduces our upcoming TalkScience@BL event: “Science in extreme environments: where research meets exploration?”. More information and tickets are available here.

Scientists travel to the tops of mountains, the polar regions and even outer space in order to conduct experiments, make observations and set up instruments. But what have we learned from doing science in extreme environments? Studies of creatures that survive in extreme environments allow scientists to investigate the limits of life. From tube worms that live near hydrothermal vents in the ocean floor¹ to desert ants in the scorching Sahara desert²,  these so-called extremophiles have adapted to thrive in harsh conditions such as extreme heat, salt or acid. Studying these masters of adaptation has a host of human benefits. For example, scientists are now investigating the potential of biological antifreeze molecules found in the internal fluids of Alaskan beetles for use in cryopreservation and agriculture³. In addition, extremophiles can help us understand how life on Earth began and how life might survive beyond the Earth. As well as providing important locations for studies of biodiversity and adaptation, extreme environments are also useful for many other types of scientific enquiry. For example the poles are a useful vantage point for atmospheric and astronomical observations, while experiments in space help us understand gravity and its effect on human health. The effect of microgravity on osteoporosis⁴ has received particular attention. In addition, technologies developed for use on extreme expeditions can have wider commercial applications. Space exploration alone has generated hundreds of technology ‘spin-offs’ including the now widespread memory-foam, which was originally developed by NASA to protect pilots in the event of a crash⁵.

But projects such as these come with a hefty price tag. Opponents argue that this money could be better spent on causes that are more directly relevant to human health or well being. There is also the potential human cost. By their very nature these extreme environments push humans, and their equipment, to their limits. In 2013 the crew of the ice breaker ship Akademik Shokalskiy⁶ became trapped in thick ice while operating a scientific expedition in Antarctica. They were rescued after two weeks - unharmed, but following a dangerous and expensive rescue mission. Others warn of the environmental impacts as previously unspoilt areas are now being colonised by scientific researchers.

Another important issue is that exploring these places could make science a vehicle through which geopolitics is played out. Historically, exploration of extreme environments has been strongly associated with geopolitics - from the Cold War space race to the search for the North West passage - and this still persists today. As one of the Earth's final frontiers, Antarctica could be seen as a place to assert national political interests. Over fifty nations have agreed to the Antarctic Treaty and many of these have field stations at the pole. However many countries (notably those in Africa and the Middle East) still lack access to the region.

Aside from the more direct benefits to human wellbeing, there are many less tangible reasons to explore these environments. Although scientists are often required to justify their work by predicting the potential benefits, is there an argument that we simply need to explore for the sake of curiosity? To quote Donald Rumsfeld; “We don’t know what we don’t know.” When Captain Cook caught the first glimpse of Antarctica in 1775 he was not impressed and dismissed the perilous icy wasteland as being of no use to man. In his journal Cook said of whomever should proceed further than he had done; "I shall not envy him the honour of discovery, but I will be bold to say that the world will not be benefited by it." Fast forward 240 years and Antarctica is now a useful site for a huge range of scientific endeavours⁷. 

Join us on 25^th March to discuss why scientists are driven to explore extreme environments. The debate will be chaired by Alok Jha and speakers include Professor Jane Francis, Dr Michael Bravo and Dr Kevin Fong. Tickets are available here.

Katie Howe

[1] http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3122624

[2] http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/11907048

[3] http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/19403530 

[4] http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4119729 

[5] http://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2005/ch_6.html

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Shokalskiy

[7] http://www.nature.com/news/polar-research-six-priorities-for-antarctic-science-1.15658