In an interview on Environmental Change

Let’s go on to Terra Incognita by Sara Wheeler.

I’ve had one real serious visit to Antarctica and on a second occasion I flew over it. It is the most staggering landscape and it’s actually emotional seeing the scale of the icebergs, the depth of the ice-sheet, the incredible weather. There are lots of books about Antarctica, but Sara Wheeler has pulled it all together more effectively than many others, and I think if you read just one book about this extraordinary continent it should be this one.

She spends a lot of time with scientists (it’s mainly scientists who hang out down there) but she manages to keep just the right amount of distance from the people she’s staying with – to be amused by them, to be occasionally appalled by them, to be impressed by their diligence and endeavours. And she very gently gets into the issue of what they’re actually doing – and, of course, one of the biggest themes of what they’re doing is change. How is the ice changing? How is the Antarctic wildlife changing?

She quotes one of the scientists, who is very diligently and carefully gathering little bits of data, and describes these little bits of data as clues to the bigger puzzle. I think that’s a great way to sum up how a lot of science works: it’s all incremental, it’s people methodically and carefully trying to find out whatever they can, and putting it together. We sort of assume, if we listen to environmental campaigners, that the whole thing is settled, the questions are all answered, that we know what is going on. And, actually, it’s far more complicated, it’s far more nuanced than that. It’s also very hazardous, finding out this kind of stuff. The impression I always got from my polar trips is how dangerous a lot of this research is. And therefore how impressive it is, to gather these clues to help form that bigger puzzle, which helps us all understand what is going on.

So what view would you walk away with, from the book, in terms of understanding climate change?

I don’t think it creates a view about climate change – what the books does is it reinforces something very valuable, about the diligence of science. Climate science has got a very bad name at the moment, with all of the scandals – and there have been some terrible mistakes. But I’ve always been biased in favour of science carried out in the field, where people are actually gathering their own hard-won information. And if there’s one impression that I come away with from this book, it’s that dedication to getting at the truth. It’s not a major theme of the book, but if you read it, I think you might come away with more respect for science at a time when it’s never faced such a trial.

She covers all the explorers as well? Scott, Amundsen, Mawson, Shackleton?

You get all the best stories, that’s what so wonderful about it. She loves all the best anecdotes – the greatest heroism. There’s a lot on Shackleton, and she was obviously very impressed by him, because, although the mission he’s most famous for was a complete failure, the heroism with which he led his men to safety is extraordinary. She’s a huge admirer of Cherry-Garrard, and Mawson – how these men coped with minimal equipment, absolutely the skimpiest or non-existent maps, and clothing that we would regard as totally inadequate. I’d always enjoyed the heroism of polar travel, but what she conveys fantastically is the combination of that with the modern heroism of science. They’re obviously better equipped, they’re insulated sometimes from the cold – I certainly was – and differently motivated. But people are still going through the unbelievable danger of this place. There’s not much chance of rescue if things go wrong, and the weather is unbelievable. And she brings all of that out – the heroism, both ancient and modern.

And do you get a sense of the weird life on these polar stations?

She’s very good at conveying how it’s almost like being on another planet: these isolated communities, how life works, what the internal politics are, how people get on or don’t get on. She shows the extraordinary chauvinism of the British base – which thankfully now is a thing of the past. But when she visited, she was not made very welcome as the only woman, or one of the very few women. She brings out how the Italians live and love food and are much jollier…you’ve got some wonderful examples of how the different nations operate. But the uniting theme is that they’re all engaged in diligently trying to understand the place and how it’s changing.

And what is changing?

The main thing that people are watching for is what happens to the ice. No one is suggesting that the ice is all going to go in a matter of days. But what really matters is understanding the mechanisms by which it might change. There’s a big focus, in particular, on one part of Antarctica: the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. If that were to melt entirely, that would raise the global sea level by five to six metres. No one is saying that is going to happen, even over the next decade. But even if a bit of it melted, and you got a half-metre rise in the coming century, on top of sea-level rises from other factors, that would spell the end of a number of island nations, and be very threatening to a lot of coastal cities. So there’s this critical importance to understanding what is going on in the margins of Antarctica.

So, in practice, what are these scientists doing?

A combination of drilling: absolutely heroic operations to drill through the ice cores, which give you a record from the bubbles of past climate and show how this current climate might change. They’re going out on snowmobiles, they’re trekking, they’re using light aircraft, helicopters. And even if they’ve got satellites up, they’re also out on the ground, to try to calibrate the satellites. There’s nothing like on-the-ground measurement to tell you what’s happening. And all of this over huge areas – this is a continent twice the size of Australia. To get around requires incredible planning.