Among the nearly 40 scientists who spent eight weeks at sea on a significant Antarctic expedition, which concluded on Thursday, roughly one-quarter were American.
However, their vital work was largely backed by private foundations; none of their primary research received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the federal government’s leading supporter of non-medical scientific endeavors.
The vessel they sailed on is owned by South Korea. Under former President Trump, the National Science Foundation had, in the previous year, decommissioned the United States’ sole icebreaker dedicated to studying the frozen continent.
“I feel profoundly disappointed,” expressed David Holland, a polar scientist from New York University who participated in the expedition. The mission specifically targeted Antarctica’s most threatening glacier. “I’m accustomed to challenges when working in Antarctica, but this level of disappointment with the NSF is a different matter entirely.”
This situation marks a significant shift from just a few years prior, when the NSF collaborated with Britain to support scientists on numerous voyages to the Thwaites Glacier. This unstable ice mass, comparable in size to Florida, acts as a crucial barrier for the immense West Antarctic ice sheet. Scientists are gravely concerned that its collapse could trigger a massive influx of ice into the ocean, potentially adding an extra 15 feet to global sea-level rise over the coming centuries.
Despite the urgency, researchers still need a more comprehensive understanding of how the glacier is melting and fragmenting before they can accurately predict the exact amount of additional water coastal cities should brace for, and precisely when.
Last year, the National Science Foundation, operating under Mr. Trump’s administration, reduced funding for grants across all scientific disciplines. This was part of a broader campaign by his administration aimed at curtailing what it termed wasteful and “woke” spending. Grants for geosciences, which encompass Antarctic research, saw a 25% decrease in 2025 compared to the average of the preceding decade.
David Holland, a polar scientist at New York University, celebrating as two of his autonomous robot profilers were deployed into the sea. Credit: Chang W. Lee/The New York Times
For many polar scientists, the greater setbacks were the decommissioning of the U.S. icebreaker, the Nathaniel B. Palmer, and the subsequent abandonment of plans for its replacement. This leaves American researchers without a dedicated Antarctic vessel for the first time in half a century.
“Historically, the U.S. led the way,” stated Julie M. Palais, a former director of the National Science Foundation’s Antarctic glaciology program. “We invited researchers from other countries to participate in our field programs, leveraging our logistical capabilities. Now, the tables have turned; it’s our turn to seek assistance from other nations, not merely as reciprocity, but in hopes of navigating this challenging period for American science.”
In a statement issued to The Times, Mike England, an NSF spokesperson, affirmed the agency’s “commitment to maintaining America’s active and influential presence through a world-leading science program in Antarctica.”
Mr. England noted that the agency has continued to invest in crucial upgrades for America’s three aging research stations in Antarctica. He added that the NSF is funding several projects related to Thwaites, although these primarily involve analyzing existing data rather than gathering new measurements directly from the glacier. Furthermore, he mentioned that the agency is utilizing two alternative vessels, the Sikuliaq and the Roger Revelle, to accommodate scientists who had initially planned to work aboard the Palmer this season.
However, the Sikuliaq is smaller than the Palmer and has limited endurance at sea without resupplying. The Revelle, on the other hand, is not an icebreaker, which restricts its operational range around Antarctica. Mr. England refrained from detailing the agency’s future plans for supporting oceanic expeditions.
As part of a nine-year initiative to explore Antarctica’s future in a changing climate, the Korea Polar Research Institute welcomed 38 scientists and engineers from across the globe to the Thwaites Glacier aboard its icebreaker, the Araon, this season.
According to Won Sang Lee, the expedition’s chief scientist, this year’s journey to Thwaites—the second of four planned voyages—cost the institute between $1.5 million and $2 million. The institute covered the researchers’ shipboard expenses, such as food and fuel, but not their equipment or salaries, necessitating external funding.
Dr. Holland of New York University sought $2 million from the National Science Foundation for a series of Thwaites projects. He aimed to install a fiber-optic cable to obtain the first detailed temperature readings of the warm ocean water actively melting the glacier from below. His application was denied, however, leading him to secure a grant from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, established by the Intel co-founder and his wife.
Chris Pierce, a glaciologist at Montana State University, and his three colleagues received funding from NASA and the G. Unger Vetlesen Foundation, a supporter of Earth science research, to survey Thwaites’s fractured interior using a helicopter-mounted radar system.
A three-person team from the University of California, Davis, funded by the Korea Polar Research Institute, successfully deployed a robot into the waters adjacent to Pine Island Glacier, another rapidly deteriorating glacier near Thwaites.
Jamin Greenbaum, a polar geophysicist, presented a daring proposal to the National Science Foundation for this expedition: to measure inside the narrow canyons nestled between Thwaites’s fractured ice blocks.
These rifts are typically impassable for ships due to thick sea ice. However, Dr. Greenbaum and his colleagues had devised a floating platform that he believed could be deployed by helicopter. If successful, this innovative approach would enable data collection in previously inaccessible waters beneath the glacier, offering crucial new insights into how warm ocean currents are eroding the ice from below.
The National Science Foundation rejected his proposal. While the grant reviewers acknowledged his idea as “transformative,” they ultimately deemed it “too high risk,” Dr. Greenbaum recounted.
Undaunted, he began piecing together funding from alternative sources, including the Explorers Club and his own institution, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego. He even covered research expenses on his personal credit card, preparing to utilize equipment generously donated by other scientists.
Ultimately, just weeks before the Araon was set to depart for Antarctica in December, a substantial $500,000 grant arrived from the Fund for Science and Technology, a philanthropic organization supported by the estate of Microsoft co-founder Paul G. Allen. With this funding secured, Dr. Greenbaum and his team could finally settle their outstanding bills and commence their vital work.
Dr. Greenbaum points out a persistent flaw in the National Science Foundation’s approach, one that predates the Trump administration’s budget cuts: it tends to play it safe.
He half-jokingly suggested that the agency often funds projects that have already been proven, showing a reluctance to back high-risk, multi-season endeavors, which are often essential for new technological advancements in research.
Dr. Palais, the former program director at the National Science Foundation, concurred, noting that stagnant budgets combined with rising costs have led to “fewer opportunities for sustained, high-risk, high-reward field programs.”
Mr. England, the NSF spokesman, stated, “All NSF-supported projects, including international partnerships, undergo rigorous, merit-based peer review to ensure scientific excellence and responsible stewardship of public resources.”
Some U.S. scientists believe the country’s vast pool of talent will keep it relevant in polar research, even as China rapidly expands its Antarctic and Arctic ambitions and infrastructure. China launched its fifth Antarctic research base in 2024 and plans a sixth by next year. This year, a Chinese team is attempting to drill through nearly 10,000 feet of an Antarctic glacier to explore a buried lake.
“Our collective of researchers, our technologies, our scientific drive, are enormous,” remarked Eric Rignot, a professor of Earth system science at the University of California, Irvine. “But currently, we are all sidelined, which is both unacceptable and counterproductive.”
The escalating threat of rising sea levels demands a significantly greater investment in Antarctic research, argued Richard Alley, a professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University.
“Many of us have been constrained to plan for what is achievable with limited resources,” Dr. Alley lamented, “rather than focusing on developing the research strategies that are truly necessary.”