 Poster: A snowHead
|
Over the last 3 years the French Northern Alps have been around 2.3C warmer than the 1980 temperature. For some reason the Alps are warming faster than the France as a whole and faster than other mountain ranges. Why? Overdevelopment maybe?
At +3C mid mountain resorts (pistes from 1500 meters) will have trouble operating, at +4C higher altitude domains (pistes above 1800m) will have trouble operating, with or without artificial snow.
The 1980 trendline shows 3C being passed at about 2070 and 4C sometime in the early 21st century.
The post 2010 trendline shows 3C being passed in the 2030s. 4C being passed around 2055. Note the trend is below the last 3 season's temperatures. It doesn't anticipate the last 3 seasons until 2030.
French planners are now assuming at +4C temperature rise on average for France by 2100.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| clarky999 wrote: |
| Gored wrote: |
India has an abundance of coal. Yeah, they get a lot of sun so could do a lot with solar. Such a large population though. The requirement for energy will probably far outweigh any green solutions for a poor country. |
India especially have to balance their energy needs with other needs though. They have big water supply issues, with something like 60% of their water (I forget the exact number) coming from Himalayan glacial melt. Those glaciers are fragmenting and shrinking just like glaciers elsewhere - India can’t afford drastic climate change. |
Some years ago I did some work in India for an international beverage manufacturer. We were looking at a project to convert the factory’s steam boilers from coal to rice husks. When the local coal mine heard about it they dropped the coal price so the project was no longer viable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Climate change has parallels with music. The really good winters came to an end in the 1980s. Since then it’s been a bit a crap 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@Peter S, Can’t agree there. The 90s and 00s delivered a fantastic era of music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Yes there were a few decent winters 1996 and 2001even 9/10. Just not as many as the preceding decades.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Just a few observations from Sainte Foy 1550m as of today 21st March after this warm but wet winter. These observations are based by memory of coming here regularly and frequently through the winters over the last 20yrs
Abundance of snow above 2000m , still quite good depths between 1800 and 2000m , below 1800m I’d suggest the spring is about 2 weeks ahead of itself . I am aware that we have had a favourable winter here compared to some other areas of the North West French Alps .
More Poignantly it appears that after being here for a week or more in Dec , Jan and Feb that the coldest temperatures I will endure this season will be this weekend , madness !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Rob Mackley, we enjoyed our week in Ste Foy just leading up to Christmas. The first three days were heavenly, blue skies, sunshine and cold. Then it was cold and cloudy. In Ste Foy again this week and the weather is changing from day to day, I didn’t like the sound of the rain in the night. Rather heavy snow lower down, but a lot of the issues are my eyes and my rather elderly legs. I think it is all changing a bit at the weekend as we leave and should be ok for my various bits of family when they go to Tignes Easter weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| jirac18 wrote: |
| https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68768598 |
Maybe I should file suit for breach of my human right to have a ski holiday and expect great snow below 1600m.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And the response to all this from Shell is to threaten to shift their share registration from the UK to the US, because it's 'under-appreciated' by LSE investors. This from a company that made $28 billion in profits last year by polluting the planet and not having to pay for any remediation. And which is whingeing that it's had to pay $2 billion in corporation tax in the UK+EU for the first time in five years.
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much  on Wed 10-04-24 14:04; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
It's all quite worrying. I'm glad the Swiss govt lost the case above because the scale of action that is required is beyond the ability of individuals to put into effect. I can drive to and from the Alps at 60mph but that doesn't change the fact that I'm constantly being overtaken by Chelsea tractors with skis on the roof doing 100. Eventually you think 'why am I bothering' and end up doing 80. I think this encapsulates the problem we face as individuals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@pavlf, this is the conclusion from the Oslo study into emissions related to speed of travel
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920919314002
8. Conclusion
Authorities increasingly consider lowering speed limits in the hope of improving air quality, as road transport is an important contributor to air pollutants such as NOX and PM2.5. In this paper, we studied the environmental speed limit policy in Oslo, which the city has implemented to various degrees since 2004. The reduction of the maximum speed limit from 80 km/h to 60 km/h reduces travel speed by 5.8 km/h. However, we found no evidence that the policy improves air quality. We also calculated a net social loss from the policy. We conclude that policymakers need to find other measures to improve local air quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Thanks, but isn't that city travel and air quality, not travel and c02 ('we find no evidence of reduced air pollution as measured next to the treated roads' seems to be a giveaway here as is mention of evidence on 'the effect of lower speed limits on local air pollution' - local air pollution is rather different to greenhouse gas emissions no? - it's like the difference between weather and climate).
If I drive at 80mph my car does around 55mpg, if I drive at a steady 60 it does 80mpg. This incontrovertibly demonstrates that driving more slowly is less damaging for the climate than driving faster, unless there's an argument that burning more fuel at high speeds releases less c02 than burning less fuel at low speeds!. I can't really defend driving 2k miles though, at any speed. And I just did that. Nevertheless, if anyone thinks driving a Landrover discovery at 110mph is no more damaging than driving a Fiat 500 at 50 I'd wonder about their grasp upon reality
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
But anyway, the car example was just intended as an analogy of the situation we are all confronting - whether we accept it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@pavlf,
To take things to the extreme, if I ride my motorbike at 20mph I'm in first gear, 2nd at best. If I ride at 30mph I can just about be in 3rd but probably 2nd. If I'm doing 60, I could still be in 1st but realistically I'll be in 5th or more comfortably in 4th. If I'm pootling (or bimbling) at 80 then I'm in 6th, no doubt about it.
If I ride without any mechanical sympathy I wear all the components out quicker.
So tell me how are lower speeds better for the environment?
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that we have to be careful how we use numbers because as my "O" level teacher used to say, statistics can be made to say just about anything we want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is taking things to the extreme. I'm not saying a car is more efficient at 2mph in 1st gear. But, aside from mechanical issues relating to engine efficiency and gearing there is an exponential effect that arrives at around 50mph related to the displacement of air that makes it increasingly less efficient for cars to exceed 55-60mph (can't remember exactly off the top of my head, but you can google for the precise figures and some scientific explanation).
Also, as the article jirc18 posted suggests, and as Paul Donald's fantastic book, Traffication, makes abundantly clear, and as you also suggest, fuel usage is not the only contributor to 'pollution', nor to global warming (tire particulates seem particularly damaging). I'm not going to dispute that.
But, there's no arguing with the fact that my car recently drove 300 miles at a steady 60mph (with two short stops) and did 80mpg. I was in 6th gear obvs, and didn't drive without 'mechanical sympathy'. In a similar scenario I also recently drove at 80mph and did 55mpg. On this occasion I also drove with 'mechanical sympathy' (although I imagine at 80mph there's a more strain on the car's components in general, but this is just what I imagine). I used less fuel driving at 60mph. Using less fuel to cover the same distance means my vehicle discharged fewer damaging exhaust gasses. I can't comment on the rest of the damage the car did - simply by having been manufactured before anything else - but fuel usage is the most immediate thing I can reduce by my own behaviour.
But, the fact is, I was trying to draw a simple analogy linked to skiing about the situation we all face. I can decide to take unilateral action to attempt to slow down AGW, but when I see everyone around me doing nothing at all after a while I fall back in line with everyone else. The analogy was drawn between taking individual action and driving my private car on a shared road with other private car owners. As individuals therefore it's very unlikely any of us will succeed in making the kinds of changes that need to be made. I'm sure I don't need to explain my point any further.
It still stands that I use substantially less fuel driving at 60 in an economical car than I would driving at 100 in a large Range Rover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
If it all kicks off between Iran and Israel then 60mph v 80mph will be the least of our worries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I’ve long said ‘the time of the individual is over’, with industry pumping out emissions, forests getting chopped down, and all the other environmental disasters happening on a daily basis whether one person drives more economically is completely underestimating the scale of the problems faced and how the impacts will affect our modern society/civilisation.
Sure someone will be along to say ‘but, but, what are you doing?’ again, that completely and intentionally underestimates the challenges faced. This is now a question of drastic action coming from law implemented by governments on a global scale. Not arguing about how much meat someone does or doesn’t eat or arguing the relative minutiae of how fast to drive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Yes! That was my point. I'm afraid though, that even drastic action by governments has to be prefaced by arguments about energy consumption (food production, transport etc etc).
I noticed it was a record breaking 27.8 C in Chamonix yesterday. And now the see saw is taking us back to winter again. The swings in temperature this year have been quite dramatic. That sand layer probably isn't going to help with the snow's longevity into the late spring and summer is it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pavlf wrote: |
Yes! That was my point. I'm afraid though, that even drastic action by governments has to be prefaced by arguments about energy consumption (food production, transport etc etc).
I noticed it was a record breaking 27.8 C in Chamonix yesterday. And now the see saw is taking us back to winter again. The swings in temperature this year have been quite dramatic. That sand layer probably isn't going to help with the snow's longevity into the late spring and summer is it. |
Absolutely, my point wasnt aimed at you - the actions of the individual are always the target for people who choose not to understand the impact climate change is having and will continue to have, it’s simply a distraction technique.
We are now passed the point of preventing climate change, we are now at the point of deciding how bad it will be. Either we continue to along the path of pretending to limit our emissions, or we actually meaningfully limit our emissions. There is no grey area, only one of the two options will limit the worst impacts of climate change and it’s not carry on pretending like everything is fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Unfortunately, you are completely right. It's here, it's happening. I've read that we should know by August whether or not the shocking positive temperature anomaly in the ocean is simply an anomaly or is in fact an indicator of a profound shift that the models were unable to predict. It looked like the temps were trending down for a while last month, but then they shot up again so at the moment I guess the money is on a profound shift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@pavlf, in my research group we have been looking at the sea surface temp graphs. The current figures are very very worrying. Atypically high and on a trajectory upwards.
https://www.axios.com/2023/05/01/ocean-temperature-spike-climate
Whilst we are arguing about the sum of minor individual actions (which should still be done nonetheless) Big Business is not doing enough at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Yes, big business, but it's also probably a systemic failure. I'm quite pessimistic about the possibility of anything meaningful happening. We've known about all this for at least 30 years. Nothing happened when there was still time. We'll be struggling with mitigation for a while, then when it gets difficult people will start clamouring for action. At the moment those of us clamouring for action go to jail (in the UK anyway).
Here's a 2024 anomaly graph.
https://x.com/EliotJacobson/status/1778826234472054819
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
"If snow falls at a closed resort and no one is around to measure it, does it contribute to the annual snowfall?"
Glacier 3000 in Switzerland has recorded 1.5m of snowfall in the past 72hrs. In an October - May season their average annual snowfall is 6.3m.
That's a huge percentage of the average annual to come down in one event - almost 24%.
What happens at the resorts which have already closed?
Do they stop recording snowfall because the lifts aren't running?
There's no denying the climate is changing and we're constantly told that there's less snowfall per season compared with previous decades.
But with snow often arriving later but often falling later than previous decades is it an apples v apples comparison or apples v oranges comparison?
Genuinely interested in your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@Mike Pow, …in a way your ‘Glacier 3000 has recorded 1.5’ answers the question. Yes there is annual monitoring both manual and automatic outside the ski season and outside the activities of resort personnel. The Swiss Meteo service prides itself on the integrity of its datasets. The methods are outlined here:
https://www.slf.ch/en/avalanche-bulletin-and-snow-situation/snow-maps/
And the data are shown daily throughout the year. We have a big automated weather station on Plaine Morte (3000m) behind our shack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@pavlf, sadly true re criminal proceedings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| valais2 wrote: |
@Mike Pow, …in a way your ‘Glacier 3000 has recorded 1.5’ answers the question. Yes there is annual monitoring both manual and automatic outside the ski season and outside the activities of resort personnel. The Swiss Meteo service prides itself on the integrity of its datasets. The methods are outlined here:
https://www.slf.ch/en/avalanche-bulletin-and-snow-situation/snow-maps/
And the data are shown daily throughout the year. We have a big automated weather station on Plaine Morte (3000m) behind our shack. |
Thanks
Is that consistent across Europe to your knowledge?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Precipitation must have been above average in parts of the Alps this year. Most places above 1800-2000m had loads of snow, much more than normal. I was in Italy a few weeks ago and I can't remember seeing that much snow at altitude for a long long time - if ever! There was a marked difference over the border in Switzerland though, still a lot of snow, but not as much (Cervinia/Zermatt). Same in France (La Thuile/Les Rosiere). But for a lot of places lower down, the bumper snowfall higher up fell as rain. It's been a bad season for a lot of low lying places in the Haute Savoie for instance. This is in line with climate change predictions though. Climate change doesn't mean no more snow, it seems likely to mean more snow, but much higher up. Until the planet stops warming, much higher up will get higher and higher. Later snow doesn't have as much time to consolidate though, so melts faster, plus whilst lots is falling at altitude it's not enough to offset the terrifying rapidity of glacial retreat.
It is remarkable looking at the snow cover of a lot of places that are closed now and to compare them with how they looked in February when loads of people were going skiing. They would've been much better off going now. It's all a bit of a gamble these days isn't it.
@valais2, the UK government are looking to deport one climate protester at the moment! He's already been in jail for 16 months - the longest anyone has ever been sent to jail for protesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Peter S, Yep mid Atlantic sea temps this winter gone was I think the main problem in the alps the warm sectors pulled up from the SW we’re so much warmer than usual .
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
| we're constantly told that there's less snowfall per season compared with previous decades. |
I think the issue is not the amount of snow high up (e.g. above 2200m), but low down (e.g. below 1600m). Others can
add the stats, but it's evident that the future for low-lying resorts is not good.
Why would anyone book a 'ski-in ski-out' property in Morzine or Les Gets when you know that the chances of that happening
are very low? Resorts with glaciers are actually in a pretty good position to benefit from climate change in the short-run (say
up to 30 years hence) as skiers migrate from low to high.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why would anyone in Morzine or Les Gets advertise (and price accordingly) ski in/ski out when they clearly know that chance of that happening are really low ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
