 Poster: A snowHead
|
| uktrailmonster wrote: |
| David Goldsmith, How do you feel about the environmental impact of indoor snow slopes? |
I feel moderately relaxed about it. Users pay to use them, partly down to the energy costs of running them. Energy can (and should) be priced to reflect the cost of sucking out of the atmosphere any CO2 which is generated to make the electricity. If snowdomes aren't paying the environmental price of their existence, then this needs looking at.
One alternative to banning heli-skiing would be to charge it the cost of restoring the atmosphere, plus a notional tax to deal with the noise pollution that davidof mentions. That would make it more expensive and elitist than it presently is (and don't we welcome the fact that heli-skiing is such an accessible treat?).
We generally need to move towards economic models based on ensuring that this planet is sustainable, by keeping fossil fuels in an inert place as much as possible through taxation paying for environmental restoration. 'The Costs of Economic Growth', which EJ Mishan wrote about nearly 40 years ago, should be the focus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
I feel moderately relaxed about it. Users pay to use them, partly down to the energy costs of running them. Energy can (and should) be priced to reflect the cost of sucking out of the atmosphere any CO2 which is generated to make the electricity. If snowdomes aren't paying the environmental price of their existence, then this needs looking at.
One alternative to banning heli-skiing would be to charge it the cost of restoring the atmosphere, plus a notional tax to deal with the noise pollution that davidof mentions. That would make it more expensive and elitist than it presently is (and don't we welcome the fact that heli-skiing is such an accessible treat?).
We generally need to move towards economic models based on ensuring that this planet is sustainable, by keeping fossil fuels in an inert place as much as possible through taxation paying for environmental restoration. 'The Costs of Economic Growth', which EJ Mishan wrote about nearly 40 years ago, should be the focus. |
The devil's in the detail, but generally I agree with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ....... If snowdomes aren't paying the environmental price of their existence, then this needs looking at....... |
Oh no, not carbon credits again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
David Goldsmith, it would take rather a lot of energy to suck the "excess" CO2 out of the atmosphere. Had you thought of that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
We generally need to move towards economic models based on ensuring that this planet is sustainable, by keeping fossil fuels in an inert place as much as possible through taxation paying for environmental restoration. 'The Costs of Economic Growth', which EJ Mishan wrote about nearly 40 years ago, should be the focus. |
I don't have any problem with that aim. But it's hard to pick specifically on heli-skiing and demand that it should be banned while you are quite happy to go skiing in snowdomes or modern mechanised ski resorts. As far as heli-skiing being a local nuisance, that's really up to those locals to decide for themselves what to do about it. I think all you can say about heli-skiing is that it appears to be an unnecessary indulgence. But then so is modern Alpine skiing. I don't really see how you can divide the two and treat one as being acceptable and the other as a step too far (in terms of environmental significance)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uktrailmonster,
| Quote: |
I think all you can say about heli-skiing is that it appears to be an unnecessary indulgence. But then so is modern Alpine skiing. I don't really see how you can divide the two and treat one as being acceptable and the other as a step too far (in terms of environmental significance)
|
That's been my problem throughout this debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Hurtle,
I second you on that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Me Three .. and why I'm afraid why I find such arguments to be shallow and emotive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| uktrailmonster wrote: |
| David Goldsmith, How do you feel about the environmental impact of indoor snow slopes? |
I feel moderately relaxed about it. Users pay to use them, partly down to the energy costs of running them. Energy can (and should) be priced to reflect the cost of sucking out of the atmosphere any CO2 which is generated to make the electricity. If snowdomes aren't paying the environmental price of their existence, then this needs looking at.
|
Oh dear! Could not let this pass by me.
I have no objections to paying for tangible stuff, but I do object to being taxed or paying for stuff that is blatantly a scam to get more money out of me.
Charging or taxing on "CO2 emissions" is as such.
There is NO evidence that raised C02 levels increase temperature. There is only evidence that raised temperatures increase CO2.
Tax me on stuff, but don't use the "Carbon footprint" rubbish as an excuse.
tux
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
tuxpoo, yup. See my link above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Me too. Where do you, or more likely some HMG appointed tree hugger, draw the line? EG, Indoor ski slopes are OK. Does that include the one in Dubai?
As for paying for environmental damage to be repaired... we are all paying the taxes but Gordon doesn't seem to be spending any of it on environmental repairs.
Then again, doing so would be like paying extra to use the urine free lane at the local swimming pool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
!
