 Poster: A snowHead
|
Is the US 'sustainable slopes policy' effective? This article casts serious doubt both on effectiveness and the reasons behind the initiative.....
| Quote: |
The analysis strongly suggests that resorts participating in that program - especially publicly traded ones - have poorer environmental records than ski areas that haven't signed on.
Moreover, the report says the four-year-old program is ineffective because it has no mandatory policies and no sanctions for non-compliance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
well what do you expect from Americans ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I would be interested to see a comparison with efforts this side of the Pond... resorts can hardly complain at the threat to skiing from climate change if the ski industry itself doesn't show the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Most ski resorts in the Alps - at least those controlled by ancient communities with farming roots - have been reasonably cautious in the way they affect their landscapes and local ecology but few interests involved in Alpine skiing are in a position to take a 'holier than thou' attitude.
So much of the pollution in skiing is about how we get there - the vehicles and fuel we use. In that sense, local initiatives by ski resorts to reduce their impact are really welcome but don't really address the core issue, which is what's melting the glaciers and raising the snow line.
What really annoys me is people saying they've done something for the environment when, in fact, it's just a mirage and a PR shout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
kuwait_ian, to be fair wood burning stoves are almost enviromentaly neutral, they only release co2 that they took up in their life, coal/oil or gas are all more damaging. Also alpine regions have a far easier time generating hydroelectric power than areas of flat countryside. Likewise older villages tend to use additive free snow cannons which whilst not as effective as those that add chemicals to their water does mean that the slopes stay green in summer and not turn to mud.
As for being car free old resorts such as Zermatt, Wengen and Murren have allways been car free, unfortunately that tends to mean that there will be many car parks nearby, in fact many people complain about car free resorts because they have to transfer luggage from their car to the resort.
In the short term the vast majority of skiers are far more interested in getting up the mountain as quickly as possible and far less concerned about any impact they have on the local area, after all they don't live there and are likely to be somewhere else the following year 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D G Orf, point taken about wood burning but lots of wood burners in individual chalets will throw out much more CO2 than a huge, well insulated, multi-storey block contributes, however its electric central heating is fueled. Large thermal power stations are almost as efficient as they can be. Nuclear doesn't add CO2 during it's operational phase (although overall the energy involved in building them and then decommissioning them badly skews the balance). Hydroelectricity is wonderful stuff - pity really that most of the viable sites in Europe have already been developed.
I'm interested in your point about snow cannon additives damaging the vegetation. Never been to the slopes in summer. Is this a serious problem ? If so I'm surprised there is not more of a fuss about it.
Totally agree with your last para, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kuwait_ian, re the snow cannon, unfortunately some of the addatives which can be added to the water to raise the temperature at which snow can be made have the effect of defoliating the slopes leaving large areas of mud where once there would have been grass, not a big problem for dedicated ski areas, but in those areas where the slopes are used for summer pasture it is just not practicle, don't forget that the snow will turn to run off in spring wnich gets into the drinking water supply. Of course those defoliated areas would also be prone to more rapid errosion
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
D G Orf, Wow - shades of Agent Orange. Nasty.
How do we know which resorts are using the additives ? I imagine they'd want to keep it under their hats. I'd certainly boycott a resort if I knew it was using the stuff. From Google, the Sierra Nevada resorts and Les Arcs claim to be additive free. At a guess most of the Swiss and Austrian resorts also won't use it because their slopes are mountain pastureland in summer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kuwait_ian, I have no idea, I only know about the problems as I have friends who have farms in the alps and they told me, they also used to teach skiing so they saw things from both points of view
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
