New Ski and Snowboard Gear is in. Shop REI
Are expedition cruises destroying Antarctica? Depending on who you ask, yes. But also, no. The debate is a legitimate one. After all, most massive cruise ships are often unsustainable and environmentally irresponsible. And Antarctica is home to a delicate ecosystem that affects the weather of the entire world. So yeah, it’s a fair question. But like most complicated questions, the answer to whether an Antarctica cruise is a responsible choice isn’t a simple “yes” or “no,” it’s more nuanced than that.
After all, the concerns posed by folks who don’t think Antarctica tourism should be a thing are legitimate. But modern expedition cruises are also doing lots to mitigate those concerns. So what gives? And is there a clear answer? We sailed to Antarctica with National Geographic-Lindblad Expeditions on the National Geographic Explorer to see what we could learn about sustainability on the southernmost continent and what tour operators are doing to protect it. Also, if an Antarctica cruise is a responsible choice.
Cruising to Antarctica
Yup, we sailed 600 nautical miles from Argentina to Antarctica across the notorious Drake passage and then flew back to Chile on Lindblad’s first ever Sail and Fly offering to Antarctica. Totally not mad I didn’t have to sail across the Drake twice, by the way. Average swell height is 3-4 meters but the highest ever measured was 80 feet (!) so yeah, seasickness is a real concern (more on how to mitigate that below). We lucked out and experienced following winds AND seas, plus max 2-meter swells, so not only was this as calm as the Drake gets, but we were across in about 2 days instead of 2.5-3 days. Huzzah!
Why a sail-and-fly cruise? For those prone to seasickness, crossing the Drake once is more than likely plenty. I know lots of folks on board who had no desire to do that again in the other direction. But you also get more time actually in Antarctica instead of sailing back and forth. So you get the best of both worlds: the chance to say you sailed the Drake AND more time ooh-ing and ahh-ing over penguins and whales instead of booking it across rough open water.
Not that staff didn’t make the most of the crossing. During those two days there were briefings, lectures, scientific programing and more, all of which provided plenty to keep us and the other passengers (there were 148 total on the Explorer) occupied and excited while we made our way a continent whose effective surface area nearly doubles in size every winter thanks to how much sea ice freezes around it. We’re talking at a rate of up 2 square miles per minute. Per minute! (Whoa, am I right?)
But if cruising in general isn’t sustainable and Antarctica is so fragile, is doing any of this a good idea? After all, there are a lot of threats when it comes to this sensitive ecosystems, from water and air pollution to spreading bird flu, to transporting invasive species. People are naturally concerned about threats to wildlife and glaciers.
So let’s get into some of those concerns and what small expedition cruises are doing to address them.
IAATO Protections
Fortunately, there are lots of rules and restrictions for companies that operate in and around Antarctica. That’s thanks to IAATO (International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators) and the older Antarctica Treaty which is now honored by 50 countries.
IAATO’s mission is to protect and preserve the region and promote safe and environmentally responsible travel there. Think of it as a sort of United Nations for tour operators to protect the largest wilderness area on earth. Tour companies join as members and thus state their commitment to protecting Antarctica just by being members. They join voluntarily, it’s not required, but it’s a really bad look if a tour company doesn’t and if they choose to travel down there, it often means bad press. So your first course of action when considering an Antarctica cruise is to see if the line you’re booking with is a member.
The IAATO board, the people who make new rules and reprimand those who fail to follow them, is composed of folks from across the industry. That helps ensure that no one company can just do whatever the heck they want if it benefits them.
And a member-based organization like this is necessary, because unlike every other travel destination in the world, Antarctica doesn’t have any permanent residents, nor is the landmass claimed or owned or governed by any other country. So not only does it not have its own laws or societies, it has no one to vouch for it other than IAATO.
IAATO sets rigorous standards for all vessels and tour operators that travel to Antarctica, including outlining what vessels must do before, during, and after a visit, like filing a detailed environmental impact assessment. You can read more about standard and restrictions here, but suffice it to say there is a passionate organization looking out for Antarctica and its landscape and wildlife.
Argument #1: Cruises are Big Polluters
First things first: Absolutely no shade to anyone advocating for Antarctica to be off-limits. I’ve read plenty of articles and arguments about why regular people (i.e. not scientists) shouldn’t be allowed to go to Antarctica and they make a lot of excellent points. After all, cruising is generally not sustainable (but no travel is). In fact, most of the massive cruise lines you’re probably familiar with are terrible polluters and seemingly largely unconcerned with any form of real sustainability, at least in action.
Fortunately, small ship expedition cruises have a much smaller carbon footprint than traditional cruise ships. Yes, it’s still higher than driving somewhere cool in your hybrid, though. Plus, a lot of these small cruise lines are truly leading the way in development of more sustainable fuels and power sources, which we’ve already started seeing in the way of hybrid and electric ships.
But for now, cruise ships traveling to Antarctica must only use lighter-grade marine gas fuels.Most cruise ships use heavy fuel oils, which is highly polluting. Marine gas is still petroleum-based, but it’s loads better.
There are also stricter rules about when, where and how to jettison food waste (many cruise lines just dump giant chunks of leftovers wherever, which can have negative impacts on wildlife) and extreme speed restricted areas to ensure ships move slowly in areas with lots of sensitive wildlife.
Responsible cruise ships will have measures in place to reduce food waste. On the Explorer we were able to make dinner requests early in the day so the kitchen would know how much of each dish to prepare.
Lindblad funds conservation and education, too. They’ve Raised 22 million since 2008, including for the Pristine Seas program, Grosvenor Teacher Fellowship, and NatGeo society grants for researchers (which they talk all about in their annual Impact Report).
Argument #2: Wilderness is Disappearing
Some people are concerned expedition cruises are turning the last true unpeopled wilderness into Disney World with crowds of tourists crawling over every inch of landscape. But that’s pretty far from the truth. The reality is that never once did we share a port or a landing site with a single other ship (though we saw a few from a distance during our sailing). That’s because every ship is required to pre-book their ports. As in, where they want to drop anchor for the afternoon for an off-ship hike or zodiac cruising. Why? To ensure they’ll be the only ship there.
That preserves the feeling of wilderness, but also prevents too many people from leaving a detrimentally cumulative impact on the landscape by all being in the same place at once.
What’s more, ships aren’t allowed to bring more than 100 people on shore at a time, which protects the landscape and animals who could become easily overwhelmed or frightened off by huge crowds of people. So even during landings, it never felt crowded. I’ve been on national park trails that had more people on them!
Ships with over 500 passengers aren’t allowed to offer landings at all. So keep that in mind if you’re booking an Antarctica expedition. Cause frankly, I don’t think you can check off a continent if you didn’t set foot on land. Just sayin’.
Argument #3: Flora & Fauna Need Protected
Then there are concerns about protecting wildlife, especially threatened whales, penguins, and seals that sometimes can’t be found anywhere else on earth. Fortunately, protecting wildlife is of huge importance to IAATO.
Naturally, you’re not allowed to touch or feed wildlife. There were strict rules about how close we could get to any wild animals, including birds, penguins, seals, etc. Trails were mapped out for us by staff in advance and we were instructed not to leave those paths. We certainly weren’t permitted to walk down penguin highways.
Then there were the extreme measures staff went through to prevent transporting invasive species that could harm wildlife or plant life (though I didn’t see a single leaf or blade of grass in over a week). So all of our shoes and gear had to be rigorously cleaned between every landing. That’s because bird flu in particular is highly contagious and easily spread, and yes, penguins can get it. So if you pick up some contaminated bird poop on your shoe, neglect to clean it off, then take it to another penguin colony at the next landing site, you could infect an entirely new population.
In fact, if responsible expedition leaders spot signs of bird flu at a landing site, they won’t land there at all. That and the threat of transporting invasive species via seeds is why as soon as we got on the ship anything we might wear on land was inspected to ensure there were no seeds stuck to it.
You also aren’t allowed to kneel or put your bag on the ground in Antarctica for the same reason. Why? You might lose your balance and fall over and then your whole body would need to be decontaminated. Pass.
Break the rules and tour operators and guides–who are truly passionate about protecting these places–have to report it. When they do, the cruise line can get fined or worse. So they have plenty of reasons to ensure guests comply. I squatted to take a photo once and was sternly reminded that was a no-no.
Argument #4: Protecting Glaciers
Then there’s the landscape itself. Namely the glaciers and icebergs, which, yeah, are generally retreating, much like most glaciers all over the world. But being near them isn’t the main factor causing their melting; it’s everything we all do every day that contributes to global warming: factory farming, driving to work, taking private jets to sporting events.
And Lindblad and many other small, sustainably-minded expeditions are using their proximity to these climate indicators to further education and research. For example, Lindblad participates in the Extreme Ice Survey and maintains cameras on the continent to document the movement of glaciers over time.
Many ships also transport researchers, often at no cost, to conduct climate-related research, animal studies, and more. Guests are instructed to stay far from glaciers, icebergs and sea ice and educated often on what makes them so special, how fast they’re melting (a few inches a year) and how climate change effects them.
Benefits of Cruising to Antarctica
Then there’s the education component onboard. On the National Geographic Explorer, staff scientists gave lectures multiple times a day on penguins, the oceanic food chain, the importance of sea ice, even the threat krill fishing is causing to the entire food chain, followed by a recommendation to ditch supplements with krill. There were as many opportunities to learn as passengers could handle. And a lot of it is information you’d probably never think to research yourself.
And all that education offers travelers a better understanding of not just a region, but what it means to protect it. It’s a way to see how the decisions we make in our daily lives potentially have major impacts on places like this.
Some lines like HX (which is the company we took when sailing to Eastern Greenland) even offer hands-on citizen science projects on board, which mean passengers have the ability to contribute to valuable research (check out a cool citizen science project we did on a tour in Portugal).
Visiting places like Antarctica can absolutely be questionable in terms of sustainability, and expedition cruises have plenty of room to improve, but lines committed to responsible travel offer an experience that elevates one’s sense of reverence, as Sven Lindblad put it. And when you revere something, you want to take care of it.
Plus, seeing wildlife in the wild is a magical experience (don’t forget your zoom lens).
Bottom Line
So what I’m saying is, expedition cruises to Antarctica, when done responsibly, can alter the way we think of and interact with the world and encourage changes that help protect it. Like swapping krill-oil supplements for flax or chia to protect the integrity of the Antarctic food chain or seeing glaciers calve in person and watching videos of that exact glacier retreat over time to help you understand that climate change is real.
So I say book that Antarctica expedition cruise! But make sure the cruise line is an IAATO member. Check to see if they have a sustainability and impact report. Research what they’re doing to educate and give back and what precisely they’re doing to protect the places they visit.
Then travel responsibly before and after your expedition. Take your time and visit more of the countries you start from or end at. It’s a long flight down to Argentina or Chile for most folks. Explore South America while you’re at it (maybe sign up for the next Fjällräven Classic Chile?) and make that expensive and carbon-heavy flight worth it.
Then enjoy Antarctica responsibly. ‘Cause penguins, am I right? Obsessed.
Want to know what to pack for an Antarctica expedition cruise? Check out this post.
Alisha is a freelance outdoor journalist and photographer based in Ogden, UT. She loves backpacking, hiking, mountain biking, kayaking and snowboarding (even though she’s terrible at it). She’s also pretty sure she’s addicted to coffee. alishamcdarris.com