| How will you respond to the threat of climate change |
| I will cease my self-centred winter sports activities immediately |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| I will do my bit by taking one or more less trips per season than hitherto |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| I'm not sure I believe the Jeremiahs, so I'll carry on as normal and hope for the best |
|
35% |
[ 20 ] |
| If the snow is on its way out, I'm going to book extra trips to enjoy it while I can |
|
60% |
[ 34 ] |
|
| Voted : 57 |
| Total Votes : 56 |
|
|
|
 Poster: A snowHead
|
Jonpim, just to add to DGO's list, there's also the energy to get us up to resort level, plus getting everything we use/consume up to resort level, same for the people who run all the services and everything they need, all the building materials for them and us, etc, etc. Although the energy dissipated in flying/driving to the mountains is probably still the biggest component, these other factors make skiing/boarding more energy intensive than most types of holiday, I reckon. Certainly more than my other type of activity holdiay, namely cycle touring. Admittedly that uses up lots of black, viscous fuel, but in that case it's called Guinness and the only greenhouse emissions it causes are of methane. 
Anyway, if the government wants us to chuck out 60% less greenhouse gases, Snowheads could make a decent start by giving up skiing. Whether or not we'd be happy with that is what I was trying to guage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| Anyway, if the government wants us to chuck out 60% less greenhouse gases, Snowheads could make a decent start by giving up skiing. Whether or not we'd be happy with that is what I was trying to guage |
.laundryman, I'm pretty sure you are actually just being a bit mischvous. But if this were a serious proposal, I think it pretty inefficient.
1. What would all these people be doing instead if they weren't skiing? Certainly not nothing. Planes would still take off, but the destination would be sunshine rather than snow.
2. Just altering a few weeks is small change compared to the rest of the year.
If we all stopped using the car for those quick short trips to the video shop, the pub, taking kids to see nearby friends, taking kids to school, the lift to the station that should have much more impact: the environment would be saved and we would be fitter.
3. And what of the communities who service the skiers: shops, lifts, hotels, bars, skischool, piste-bashers?
No, of we want to make a difference: garage the car and get back your licence fee. Turn off the heating and put on an extra jumper. Have a communal bath with your neighbours once a week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Jonpim, I am being a bit mischievous, but also a bit serious.
| Quote: |
| What would all these people be doing instead if they weren't skiing? Certainly not nothing. Planes would still take off, but the destination would be sunshine rather than snow. |
Most paid-up environmentalists are very serious about reducing air traffic. Aviation fuel is currently untaxed, and there are calls for it to be taxed at the same level as petrol. I think that would ground many snowheads and probably reduce the activity of most. Jetting off to the sun, which is much further away in winter than the Alps at least, would not be an option.
| Quote: |
| Just altering a few weeks is small change compared to the rest of the year. If we all stopped using the car for those quick short trips to the video shop, the pub, taking kids to see nearby friends, taking kids to school, the lift to the station that should have much more impact: the environment would be saved and we would be fitter. |
The reason that environmentalists are so worked up about air traffic is that planes push out so much CO2. A family of 4 taking a return trip from Gatwick to Geneva (I would guess the shortest UK-Alps flight) in a 737 will be responsible for about 880 kg of the stuff. An average family car has to be driven about 3000km to achieve the same effect -- that's an awful lot to do if the above family stayed at home for the week (equivalent to nearly 100,000 miles per year). Add 50% to these figures if you're travelling from Glasgow to the Alps, and multiply by 10 if you're flying to Denver in a 767! I've neglected the emissions on transfers, that caused by hauling all the gubbins I mentioned in my last post up the mountain, running the lifts and the extra heating because it's colder there than here in the evening/night. I'm all for the savings that you mention: we'll have to do those as well if we want to cut carbon emissions by 60%!
| Quote: |
| And what of the communities who service the skiers: shops, lifts, hotels, bars, skischool, piste-bashers? |
60% cuts in CO2 emissions (in the absence of breakthroughs in alternative technologies) will cause massive economic damage way beyond ski communities. It's no coincidence that the world has seen unprecedented economic growth in parallel with the advent of cheap travel (by car or plane). And that's where I'm being just a bit mischievous. In threads that have been active while you've been 'away', I've said that this kind of (not very certain) cure to the threat of climate change is worse than the disease. We'd be better off adapting to the effects of climate change, while investing heavily in research into alternative energy sources, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
laundryman:
"We'd be better off adapting to the effects of climate change"
You speak my language! Way back when snowheads was young and WTFH was just a cub, I and PG used to have lovely little banters about this very subject. My stance was just as your quote. But with an extra plea.
The extra plea was/is about poverty. I think poverty (see Ethiopia) is a far worse threat than climate change. I wonder if the big powers are now trying to duck the poverty problem by saying climate change is more important, and if they don't sort out the climate problem poverty will get worse. Hogwash! That's just an excuse to do nothing, and allow wealthy countries to continue raping poor countries of their natural wealth while selling them arms to maintain the corrupt governments who are happy to let them (us) do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Well I think we have enough snowheads now to occupy a ski train or two so how about that, or even a carriage at a time 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonpim, couldn't agree more! When I hear 1st world politicians - I mention no names - bleat about 3rd world poverty, while doing nothing to right unfair terms of trade (especially domestic agricultural subsidies and non-tariff barriers), the TV is at risk from house bricks (that would save a bit of energy!) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So is PG or laundryman the 1 who is giving up winter activities immediately? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Not according to the 'Hitch Hickers Guide to the Galaxy'!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He should be number 42
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Alan Craggs wrote: |
| So is PG or laundryman the 1 who is giving up winter activities immediately? |
Not me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
PG has made the ultimate sacrifice and moved close enough to the snow that he doesn't need to fly, in fact with a bit of effort he could cycle up to the slopes!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Hopkinson, He would be fit then!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
