The North Pole was here
NY Times reporter Andrew Revkin visits the not–so–frozen Arctic.
Andrew Revkin is a reporter for the New York Times newspaper, covering the environment since 1995. Revkin has traveled to the Arctic three times, and he was the first New York Times reporter to file stories and images from the North Pole. He has won several national journalism awards for his coverage of climate change, including the inaugural National Academies Communication Award for print journalism presented by the National Academy of Sciences. He has had articles published in The New Yorker, Audubon, Conde Nast Traveler, and Science Digest.
When he is not writing news stories, Revkin enjoys writing songs and performing with an acoustic–roots band, Uncle Wade. He lives in New York’s Hudson River Valley with his wife and their two children. Revkin spoke to Earth & Sky’s Jorge Salazar from his residence in February of 2006 about his experiences in writing a new book, The North Pole Was Here: Puzzles and Perils at the Top of the World, a first–hand report of the science, history, and rapid changes happening in the Arctic.
Salazar: Thank you for speaking with me today, Mr. Revkin. So, what drew you to travel and report from the North Pole?
Revkin: Well, growing up, I’ve always loved nature and wild places, and in particular the ocean. And, frankly, I’d never really loved the Arctic. If you had given me a choice as a kid, I would have read Swiss Family Robinson before I would have read Nanook of the North. But as a journalist, I basically go where the news is. And I’ve been covering climate change and the increasing human influence on climate that scientists have found, for 20 years. And lately, it’s quite clear, that for several decades, the most profound changes have been in the Arctic. So basically, my job description requires me to go where the change is, because change equals news. And that’s what pulled me north.
Now getting there took literally years to plan. I first heard about this project where scientists were trying to collect information regularly in a place where nothing is regular, at the top of the world, back in 2000. I wrote about it a little bit in 2001, and I was hoping to go on this annual trek that they make, where they fly out over the ocean, the Arctic ocean, land on the sea ice, deploy instruments, pick up ones that were left a year earlier, and go back. But it took three years for this to actually happen. And when I go somewhere for the New York Times that requires a lot of work, and effort, and time, and money, I figure that I’d better come back with the goods and not just write some news paper stories. So in this case, I took my camera, I took TV quality video cameras, I had a big sack of stuff, and I wanted to capture this story in as many ways as I could.
And I decided that once I’d been back, I’d written all these stories, I did some web presentations, some little videos on the web, and that kind of thing, and I still felt that the one audience that I hadn’t connected with yet was young people. And the more I cover climate change over the years, the more I realize that it really is their story. The things that I’m writing about now are all bearing on the climate that will be their climate, and not so much bearing on our own current situation. That was another thing that pushed me forward to write something fresh for young people on the changes at the top of the world.
Salazar: You mention connecting with young readers, and I can relate that when I was younger I felt more connected to the outdoors. What kinds of connections to nature have you had?
Revkin: Well, I grew up in Rhode Island, and sometimes we would drive down to Florida to see my grandparents. So, my two main outdoor experiences were on the seacoast in Rhode Island and in the woods a little bit, and down in Florida, where I would go skin diving. Right from the age of ten or so, I just loved the ocean and was enthralled with what we used to see regularly in those days, the documentaries by Jacques Cousteau. That’s the kind of stuff I grew up on. I just loved the sea.
And I remember one moment, skin diving in the surf off the beach in eastern Florida, and just kind of daydreaming. I loved to just sort of daydream and watch the water flow around me. And I looked down at the sandy bottom, and there was my shadow. And then there was this shadow parallel to mine that was as long as mine. And I thought, “that’s weird.” And I looked over, and there was this barracuda, eye–to–eye with me, parallel to me, sort of in the surf, and it was as long as I was, and that got my attention. That’s sort of the heart of what’s always pulled me towards nature, these unexpected moments, and the wildness of things. The wildness of things, and seeing that fish then flick off into nowhere.
And back in Rhode Island, seeing scallops. I grew up with scallops in a dish, but I never saw them in their clapping shells, dancing through the sea grass, until I put my head under water. And that’s the kind of thing that really pulled me to write about all of these things.
Salazar: Did you feel any connections to nature at the North Pole?
Revkin: When I got to the sea ice at the North Pole, the profound thing that you realize, when you’re there, is the sterility of it. It’s just lifeless. There’s no birds, there’s nothing, except this endless icescape. And then, after we had been there for almost three days, I was staring at this open patch of water, two–mile deep water. It’s just so bizarre to be standing on ice on water that deep. And then this little head popped up. And there was this grey ice seal, just staring at me for the briefest moment, and then disappearing. That was it. That was my interaction with Arctic biology.
But with that, comes the recognition of two things. One is that, this is not a place that is welcome to people. Because every time that you see a seal, you think of what eats seals, which are polar bears. And they do get out to the middle of the Arctic Ocean. All the scientists there had shotguns near their tents as a precaution. I kind of liked the idea that there’s places on Earth where we’re still not able to establish a normal presence. Humans will never, even if the ice all melts away, it’s not like we can just hang out at the North Pole. And I like that.
Salazar: The science that was going on at the North Pole, what was that like?
Revkin: Well, the two things that I’ve learned about science over the years are that it’s always a work in progress, and always will be. And climate science is the biggest one, because it’s complicated, and it’s more than one science. It’s Earth science, oceanography, biology, all mixed together. And, when you’re out in the field with scientists, you see that each effort, some of which take a huge amount of work, like planning this thing at the North Pole is just an amazing project, each effort requires experimentation and failure. Failure is normal in science. And getting things wrong is normal. But the great thing about science is that that all builds a picture that is a picture of understanding.
As you watch science progress over the years, you see the strength of a tested theory. And that’s what’s come clear with climate change over the years. Every little bit and pieces builds a picture that’s still a work in progress, it still has some uncertainties, but tells us quite clearly that humans have taken a hold of the thermostat of the planet, and there are consequences to that. And then you get to the whole question of what to do about it, but that’s the next question.
Salazar: What are you trying to convey in The North Pole Was Here?
Revkin: My goals for the book are two. One is to paint a portrait of the strength of science. The things that it tells us about climate change, even with the uncertainties, which will be there for a long time to come, give us plenty of information that we can act on. Even with uncertainty. Every day we act in the face of uncertainty. We own houses and we buy fire insurance, not because we know it’s going to burn down, but because we want to avoid the economic catastrophe if it does. And with this book, I’m basically saying that we have a clear picture now that we’re transforming the planet in ways that are profound. We might have a blue pole at one end of the Earth in summers later this century, for the first time in a very, very long time. And that’s a big deal, to think that humans have contributed to a change in the planet that will be visible from far in space. And, if only that thought can really resonate with the whole family, with kids, and parents, and maybe even a few elected officials, it’s written in pretty straightforward English, that will be an accomplishment, I think.
And the other thing about the book that I think is important is that it gives a sense of taking us out of our day–to–day timeframe. Things that happen on longer timescales are important. Sometimes they happen in a way that’s kind of invisible on a day–to–day basis. The book is sort of step back, it’s a way to step back and reflect on how our whole notion of the Arctic as a frozen, untouchable place that’s going away. It’s not a conventional news story, but it’s something that I think is worth people absorbing.
I want to be sure that you got that sound clip. The sounds of the ice, most people aren’t aware, even that the North Pole is really just a sheet of ice on a two–mile deep ocean, and there’s something about standing there and hearing it all cracking underneath you, and hoofing, and huffing, and chugging, is pretty amazing stuff.
Salazar: Dumb question, but why did you call it, The North Pole Was Here?
Revkin: It’s not a dumb question at all. It actually relates to the sounds. When I was up there for three days on the ice with these scientists, early on, they had put up this barber pole, your classic sort of cartoon caricature of the North Pole, a red–striped pole, and they stuck a sign next to it saying, “North pole is here.” After a couple of days, they realized that, because of the drift of this ice, we’re all floating on basically a raft of ice that’s the size of America, but it’s moving, that they scribbled out the “is” and put the word “was.” To me, that conveyed the dynamics and drama of this science. But at the same time, it’s much more profoundly conveying that the Arctic of our history and legend, and imagination is going away. It’s truly going history at this point. The North Pole was here. At least the pole that we always knew.
