Summary

Two Swiss radio journalists did not photograph climate change in the Alps – they recorded it. Sarah Heinzmann and Noah Bio collected soundscapes of melting glaciers to create an emotional understanding of the climate crisis. Their audio piece debuted at the Bern podcast festival Sonor and demonstrates: the sound of breaking glaciers conveys urgency differently than before-and-after images. The recordings were made under extreme conditions in the Monte Rosa region and Valais – with surprising discoveries, such as the unexplained rumbling from a glacier crevasse.

People

Topics

  • Climate change and glacier melt
  • Sound documentation and soundscape
  • Emotional access to the environmental crisis

Clarus Lead

Climate change is normally measured in megatons of CO₂ and temperature graphs. Two Swiss radio journalists choose a different path: they make glacier melt audible. Their sound documentation shows that a single rumble from a glacier crevasse sometimes moves people more than thousands of statistics. The audio piece premiered at the Bern Sonor Podcast Festival and documents a year of intensive fieldwork in the Swiss Alps – under extreme logistical conditions.

Detailed Summary

Sarah Heinzmann and Noah Bio both work at Bern radio station Rabe and started their project as an extension of a classical reporting series on climate change in the Canton of Bern. The decisive moment came when Bio attended a course with sound artist Ludwig Berger – a specialist in soundscapes of glaciers and moors. The two realized: sounds can make the invisible visible.

The fieldwork took place in summer 2025 and took them to several high mountain regions: the Monte Rosa region in Valais, the Misochs area in Graubünden, and the Jungfraujoch. The logistical challenges were substantial. Specialized hydrophones for water recordings, microphones for low frequencies, and dozens of batteries had to be hauled over thousands of meters of elevation. Many hours of recorded material were technically unusable – disruptive background noise, poor sound quality, hikers unexpectedly speaking in recordings.

One moment remained unforgettable: in a glacier crevasse, they heard a deep, resonant rumbling that seemed to come from nowhere. At first, they suspected a helicopter, but the sound came from below. To this day, they cannot say with certainty what caused this phenomenon – possibly water flowing through rock crevices with the glacier body acting as a resonating chamber.

In terms of content, the journalists argue that soundscapes offer a different sensory access than visualizations. Everyone knows the frightening before-and-after photos of the Aletsch Glacier. But few have ever experienced the sounding landscape of a melting glacier – the cracking of ice, the dripping of water, the groaning of rock. These sounds are not new, but their intensity and frequency in 2025 marks the difference: everything happens earlier and more massively than before.

Key Points

  • Soundscape instead of statistics: Sound documentation conveys climate change more emotionally than data or photos.
  • Fieldwork under extreme conditions: High mountain recordings required specialized equipment, extreme weights, and much improvisation.
  • Glacier melt is accelerating: Sounds that previously belonged to summer now occur earlier and more intensely – an indicator of rapid changes.

Critical Questions

  1. Evidence & Representativeness: Can individual soundscapes from a few glaciers truly depict Switzerland's widespread climate change, or is there a risk of overrepresenting spectacular individual cases?

  2. Emotional vs. Factual: To what extent does emotional resonance through sound actually replace scientific literacy – could the focus on aesthetics even distract from involuntary agency?

  3. Microphone Effects: How do microphone technology, frequency ranges, and post-processing influence the perception of these sounds? Do listeners hear what is actually happening or a filtered interpretation?

  4. Target Audience and Reach: Who listens to this audio piece – already climate-conscious people or skeptics? Is there data on audience reactions and whether the format actually changes willingness to act?

  5. Causality of the Rumbling: The unexplained deep rumbling in the glacier crevasse is not resolved – how does this uncertainty affect the credibility of the documentation?

  6. Representativeness of Locations: Why were Monte Rosa, Misochs, and Jungfraujoch specifically chosen? Did this follow scientific criteria or rather accessibility and familiarity?

Source Directory

Primary Source: Regionaljournal Bärer-Freiburg-Wallis – SRF Audio

Participating Institutions:

  • Rabe Radio (Bern)
  • Sonor Podcast Festival (Bern)
  • SRF

Verification Status: ✓ 27.02.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-check: 27.02.2026