Skiing and Carbon Footprint.... ?
42 posts
20 users
13k+ views
Eug
February 18, 2009
Member since 03/3/2005 🔗
142 posts
A friend of mine wants to minimize her carbon footprint by not skiing.

Ok, question to the smarter ones in this board. How does skiing increases your carbon footprint?

Is it the driving to Liberty or Whitetail?

Do you increase your carbon footprint by using the facilities at the resort, chairlift, snow making, etc?

I guess if none of us went skiing, there will less carbon emissions, less diesel and electrical power used, more trees, etc...

I don't know. I think it is a little bit of a stretch but I will love to hear more points/counter points on this issue.
kwillg6
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/18/2005 🔗
2,030 posts
That's a really lame excuse to not enjoy something that's a wonderful experience. What does she do instead? Unless its sitting in the dark on her a$$ it's going to leave some carbon reminents. I imagine that she thinking of the secondary issues which lend carbon by-products such as electric used in snow-making and running lifts. But then again, there's nordic which in it's purest form is very earth friendly. Just my 2 cents worth.
FreshPow
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/2/2008 🔗
174 posts
Oh boy. I'm a self-proclaimed moderate on most issues, but that's ridiculous.

Sure, maybe the drive, or jet travel. But what's the option, sit in the dark or limit recreation to a literal walk in the park?

The only additional insight might be anecdotal from a ski buddy who works for The Sierra Club. I once asked about their position regarding ski area land use, etc., especially out West in leased National Forest lands.

He indicated they tend to remain quiet, as it's believed it provides useful public access to nature/Wilderness, and by default grows support on their other initiatives. ...however, expansion often brings another response.
fishnski
February 18, 2009
Member since 03/27/2005 🔗
3,530 posts
I'd like to leave my foot print on her....... crazy
DCSki Sponsor: Canaan Valley Resort
GGNagy
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/5/2006 🔗
450 posts
hold her breath.
GGNagy
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/5/2006 🔗
450 posts
hold her breath.
Leo
February 18, 2009
Member since 11/15/2005 🔗
278 posts
She can buy (phantom) carbon offsets from (ripoff) websites if it makes her sleep better at night.

Or plant a tree for every run she makes.
jimmy
February 18, 2009
Member since 03/5/2004 🔗
2,650 posts
Eug i know your question was for the smarter ones on this board but i'll reply anyway.

She's right, she should quit skiing immediately. Maybe she could start a website and other like minded peoples would pay her money not to ski.
JohnL
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/6/2000 🔗
3,516 posts
Dying is the most effective way to minimize your carbon footprint.
David
February 18, 2009
Member since 06/28/2004 🔗
2,444 posts
Originally Posted By: JohnL
Dying is the most effective way to minimize your carbon footprint.


Unless you WALK around every day and plant 50-100 trees. That would actually make your carbon footprint negative...
kwillg6
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/18/2005 🔗
2,030 posts
Yee Ha! I needed this thread for some comic relief laugh
Eug
February 18, 2009
Member since 03/3/2005 🔗
142 posts
Lots of good thoughts.

Should I wax my skis? I don't wax my skis (let's save this for another thread...) but if I did, does waxing increase my skiing carbon footprint?

I am guessing that if did wax my skis, I will be increasing my skiing carbon footprint because of all of the collateral damage/byproducts/waste involved in the production and use of ski wax. Correct?
David
February 18, 2009
Member since 06/28/2004 🔗
2,444 posts
I nicely waxed ski would slide much smoother, therefore decreasing the effort you put into moving it. With decreased effort comes a decreased amount of respirations. Decreased respirations would lead to a higher atmospheric O2 concentration and lower atmospheric CO2 concentration.....

All of this assuming you are using the correct temp wax smile smile
RodSmith
February 18, 2009
Member since 10/22/2004 🔗
318 posts
Snowmaking uses a LOT of electricity. I think your friend is right. The strong reactions to this idea indicates denial and suppressed guilt are involved.
rbrtlav
February 18, 2009
Member since 12/2/2008 🔗
504 posts
Many of the resorts in the area have put alot of time and money into creating efficient snowmaking systems. The more efficient they are, the less money it costs them long term.

Ski resorts are probably much better in the "Carbon footprint" area than theme parks or other forms of entertainment. Almost every activity that anyone does has an impact on the environment.
fishnski
February 18, 2009
Member since 03/27/2005 🔗
3,530 posts
Originally Posted By: RodSmith
Snowmaking uses a LOT of electricity. I think your friend is right. The strong reactions to this idea indicates denial and suppressed guilt are involved.


That reminds me..I forgot to plug in my electric car!...Go Green! sick
Roger Z
February 18, 2009
Member since 01/16/2004 🔗
2,181 posts
Quote:
Snowmaking uses a LOT of electricity.


Hey, yeah... that's why I prefer ski areas that don't make snow, because it reduces my carbon footprint! I'm not being selfish by looking for smaller hills that no one knows about, I'm being ENVIRONMENTALLY AWARE!!! Wow, now I can be snobby about my my low-frills resorts, this is fantastic! It's like drinking coffee from a gas station and mocking starbuckers! This is awesome!!!

I ski Wolf Creek and Cooper, I'm more environmentally aware than you are you DEER VALLEY VAIL SKIING EARTH KILLERS!!!!!!!! grin
Jimski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/5/2008 🔗
44 posts
I respect the idea of each of us trying to lower our "carbon footprint", but that doesn't necessarily mean that we need to give up all recreation and live like hunter gatherers. Regarding skiing specifically, a few random points:

1. Snow-making is not just a negative (the fossil fuel used to run the machines), because: (a) snow increases the reflectivity of the earth, and (b) heat which would otherwise be absorbed by the soil is expended to melt snow.

2. If a person foregoes skiing and stays at home, there are energy costs in doing so, for example: (a) we turn our home heat temp way down when we leave to go skiing; and (b) we use appliances, TVs, etc. a lot less at a resort condo than we would at home -- since we're out skiing. (Yes, we still have to heat whatever condo we're renting, but it is usually less interior space than our house.)

Notwithstanding the above, the sport of skiing -- like thousands of other modern activities -- does use energy. The goal for the country (and world) should be to minimize energy use when possible and use non-fossil fuel energy to the extent possible. To reduce energy use, small changes can make a difference, for example:

1. In the evening, walk -- don't drive -- the 100 yards from your condo to the lodge restaurant.

2. If you're going to a local ski resort, carpool when you can.

3. If you're flying to a resort, consider using the resort's shuttle rather than renting a car.

4. Pack less (less weight carried by your car or the aircraft means less energy use).

With respect to overall energy used by ski resorts, ultimately it will be up to them to comply with any mandated reductions in greenhouse gases (GHGs). This may be: (a) active compliance -- if they are a covered entity they will have to purchase GHG allowances -- or, (b) passive compliance -- i.e., they will pay higher prices for non-fossil fuel energy. I would think that resorts would be better able to incur these additional expenses if their customers haven't deserted them. To the extent that ski resorts pass on their added costs to skiers, we too will contribute -- from our wallets -- to mitigation of global warming.


Just my $.06....
JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
Carbon Footprint is a joke of a word anyway. Did anyone ever hear of this until the markets went towards selling environmentally friendly crap to hippies and treehugging wannabes? Seriously, your friend needs to take a chill. She can recycle and try to do the best she can to not waste gas etc., but she needs to get a reality check when it comes to skiing. It's not like resorts are popping up everywhere. I think she needs to ride to work on a mule instead of quiting skiing. I tell you what though. If skiing is so unimportant to her that she feels she should just give it up to be more eco-friendly, then good! We don't need the gaper wannabes on the slopes messin with our lift time and running over our gear anyhow. Tell her to spend her free time walking to local beatnik poetry readings and local coffee houses where they play folk music or something. She will have a better time having a feel good convention with the rest of the idealists for a utopian society.
JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
I would also like to mention that skiing makes me look hot for my sexy wife. She loves my thick skier legs and ski bum. If it weren't for skiing I would be in bad physical shape.
If your friend doesn't ski anymore she might as well hang out with the Janine Garaffalos and the Whoopi Goldberg type of women who don't do their hair or makeup and wear baggy sweaters made by Pakistani children and then rock out their Birkenstocks while they play their guitars and beat their bongos to an ancient environmentally enticed tribal dance to worship Gaia.
My preference is women who use too much Aqua-Net hairspray. Smoke like chimneys, drink like fish, cuss like sailors, and ski like they are on fire in their tight hot chilly non-biodegradable Lycra ski-suits. Preferably Electric Pink or Blue in color. Like Traci Lords in the movie Hot Dog.
JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
When I hear of people like this I think of the old chant of November 2008. Misguided singers of the Nation.
Obama, Obama, Obama, Obama.
Jimski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/5/2008 🔗
44 posts
Jamie -- Why are you making personal, insulting attacks toward someone you don't even know? Pretty lame. Why hang on this site if you're so bothered by rational discussion?
fishnski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/27/2005 🔗
3,530 posts
I could have used you last year!..& many years before that...Gets Lonely at times here in Politically correct DCski..Here is the test..How do you feel about the Developement of Mount Porte Crayon in WV..You know about it?
Jimski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/5/2008 🔗
44 posts
Fish -- you think that understanding global warming and taking responsibility for it is simply being "politically correct"?
Leo
February 19, 2009
Member since 11/15/2005 🔗
278 posts
I have to say, I am amazed that a "carbon footprint" (albeit one with a somewhat humorous bent) thread lasted three pages without blowing up....it was a good run, folks.
jimmy
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/5/2004 🔗
2,650 posts
TEH FUNNAY jamie i got tears running down my cheeks, Traci Lords in HOt DOg the movie BWAAAAAHAHAH



Originally Posted By: JamieGrose79
I would also like to mention that skiing makes me look hot for my sexy wife. She loves my thick skier legs and ski bum. If it weren't for skiing I would be in bad physical shape.
If your friend doesn't ski anymore she might as well hang out with the Janine Garaffalos and the Whoopi Goldberg type of women who don't do their hair or makeup and wear baggy sweaters made by Pakistani children and then rock out their Birkenstocks while they play their guitars and beat their bongos to an ancient environmentally enticed tribal dance to worship Gaia.
My preference is women who use too much Aqua-Net hairspray. Smoke like chimneys, drink like fish, cuss like sailors, and ski like they are on fire in their tight hot chilly non-biodegradable Lycra ski-suits. Preferably Electric Pink or Blue in color. Like Traci Lords in the movie Hot Dog.
bousquet19 - DCSki Supporter
February 19, 2009
Member since 02/23/2006 🔗
699 posts
Jimski and Freshpow, thanks for your rational and respectful responses to the question about skiing and its carbon footprint.

All choices involve tradeoffs, e.g., not skiing may mean keeping your thermostat turned up while you do whatever at home. Working out the full environmental impacts of these choices is not yet an exact science, and these impacts extend far beyond the carbon-footprint concerns that are attracting a great deal of attention today. Other categories of impacts -- several of which have been discussed here previously -- include loss of wildlife habitat, water use, solid waste disposal and sewage treatment.

While some ski resorts may pay lip service to "going green" merely because many consumers expect it, there also appears to be a serious move afoot to help reduce the environmental effects that our sport can cause. Jiminy Peak's wind turbine comes to mind, as does Mad River Glen's policy of closing off some areas to off-piste skiing to protect the forest.

I ski, my grandfather started a ski area and the family ran it for more than two decades, I encourage others to ski, and I also try to understand and reduce the environmental effects of my choices.

I hope that the DCSki forums can provide a place for fun, information ... and intelligent discussion of issues related to snowsports.

Woody


Originally Posted By: Jimski
I respect the idea of each of us trying to lower our "carbon footprint", but that doesn't necessarily mean that we need to give up all recreation and live like hunter gatherers. Regarding skiing specifically, a few random points:

1. Snow-making is not just a negative (the fossil fuel used to run the machines), because: (a) snow increases the reflectivity of the earth, and (b) heat which would otherwise be absorbed by the soil is expended to melt snow.

2. If a person foregoes skiing and stays at home, there are energy costs in doing so, for example: (a) we turn our home heat temp way down when we leave to go skiing; and (b) we use appliances, TVs, etc. a lot less at a resort condo than we would at home -- since we're out skiing. (Yes, we still have to heat whatever condo we're renting, but it is usually less interior space than our house.)

Notwithstanding the above, the sport of skiing -- like thousands of other modern activities -- does use energy. The goal for the country (and world) should be to minimize energy use when possible and use non-fossil fuel energy to the extent possible. To reduce energy use, small changes can make a difference, for example:

1. In the evening, walk -- don't drive -- the 100 yards from your condo to the lodge restaurant.

2. If you're going to a local ski resort, carpool when you can.

3. If you're flying to a resort, consider using the resort's shuttle rather than renting a car.

4. Pack less (less weight carried by your car or the aircraft means less energy use).

With respect to overall energy used by ski resorts, ultimately it will be up to them to comply with any mandated reductions in greenhouse gases (GHGs). This may be: (a) active compliance -- if they are a covered entity they will have to purchase GHG allowances -- or, (b) passive compliance -- i.e., they will pay higher prices for non-fossil fuel energy. I would think that resorts would be better able to incur these additional expenses if their customers haven't deserted them. To the extent that ski resorts pass on their added costs to skiers, we too will contribute -- from our wallets -- to mitigation of global warming.


Just my $.06....

JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
Jimski,
Take a chill too. I was just fooling and if anyone takes me seriously when I post like that shame on them. I am trying to make a funny.
fishnski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/27/2005 🔗
3,530 posts
Jimski..I was just having fun with one crazy mother who reminds me of myself when i 1st got to this site...When i threw out the politically correct comment I meant it in general terms not just limited to GW which I don't believe you or anyone really understands..I've learned the importance of respect over many posts & even though I slip back to the past here & there I try to bring it back to the now & future...In this time that we are in right now, I think that the last thing we should be worrying about is GW because we just don't have the recources to combat a problen that...& here is where I respectivley disagree with you...just doesn't excist...or is way above any humans paygrade to deal with....SSSooooo do what you all feel you got to do, just don't knock on my door looking for more of my hard earned & dwindling money supply thanks to our new socialistic Govt!
Eug
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/3/2005 🔗
142 posts
Well, I am pretty sure that my friend has given up on skiing. People make choices and she has made her choice...

Me on the other hand will continue to increase my carbon footprint when I go skiing. As a matter of fact, last Sunday night at Whitetail, I consumed the meat chili and one of those 1/4 lb 'all beef' hot dog. I am fairly certain that some footprint around me increased, that night and the following day.
JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
I am just tired of the enviromentalist people judging others on how they live and their recreational activities. These are usually the same people who talked about George Bush taking all of our rights away as Americans with the Patriot Act. Yet the same people would love nothing more than to tell me that I can't drive my Hummer H1 because of its 12MPG diesel rating. Quite the hypocritical BS. Everyone needs to recycle if they have the set up for it in their town. I started a couple of months ago and I only have 1 bag of trash a week for my family. It is a logical thing to do and people should urge their county to do so. We should all try our best to limit how much of an impact we have on our environment. If you go hunting, take out what you brought in. If you go skiing, enjoy the day and recycle your trash if the resort has recycling. But don't start hating on skiers for ruining the environment and cutting down trees. Alot of the skiers I know are all about the outdoors and keeping it clean so that the future will hold better skiing. I just can't let someone start the trend on knocking on skiing and comparing a carbon footprint to it. Where does it stop? It doesn't unless we make a stand against these eco-thugs. It should all be about being reasonable, and these type of eco-whack jobs give real environmetalists a bad name.
David
February 19, 2009
Member since 06/28/2004 🔗
2,444 posts
Originally Posted By: Eug
As a matter of fact, last Sunday night at Whitetail, I consumed the meat chili and one of those 1/4 lb 'all beef' hot dog. I am fairly certain that some footprint around me increased, that night and the following day.


You know it!! Methane is definitely a greenhouse gas!!
JamieGrose79
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/10/2009 🔗
108 posts
Increasing your Chilli Footprint is giving me a Huge Laugh. Very funny!
Jimski
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/5/2008 🔗
44 posts
Originally Posted By: JamieGrose79
Jimski,
Take a chill too. I was just fooling and if anyone takes me seriously when I post like that shame on them. I am trying to make a funny.

Huh? Everything you say is just a joke? OK, got it.
Kris
February 19, 2009
Member since 03/15/2005 🔗
248 posts
I dont know about you guys but in 10,000 years or whatever when some scientist takes a core sample from Timberline Mountain, I think it would be pretty cool to see his face when he says..."They actually Skied back then. There was actualy snow and ice and cars back then. Is that not the craziest thing you have ever heard?" And then he snaps his fingers and the little electronic implant in his brain teleports him back to 2009 in hologram form and he watches us wipe out on OTW and hit the whales on The Drop.

I want to be able to say...Yeah...That was me...
Roger Z
February 19, 2009
Member since 01/16/2004 🔗
2,181 posts
I don't know, Eug, based on the info you've given I'd say your friend has made a pretty irrational choice. If, on the other hand, she's wiped out all sorts of other things- driving to camp, driving to play in the ocean, driving to shop, etc- then maybe it's reasonable if skiing was the "last man standing." But if all she's done is knocked off skiing and hasn't changed anything else in her life, then it sounds more like she took a bad spill under a chair and is embarrassed to go back out on the slopes and is lookin' for an excuse ("yeah, it's mother nature, that's it!").

Anyway, all y'all are earth killers. It's folks like me that're keepin' it real. Yeah. Heck yeah. Where's the whiskey, I ain't done tonight...
RodSmith
February 20, 2009
Member since 10/22/2004 🔗
318 posts
I don't drive to camp, or to play in the ocean, or to shop, and I assume Eug's friend doesn't do any of that either.
Roger Z
February 20, 2009
Member since 01/16/2004 🔗
2,181 posts
Well, maybe she doesn't... but we really don't know one way or another. And if she *was* driving to ski, it's not irrational to think she might drive to do *something* else.
hockeydave
February 21, 2009
Member since 06/30/2004 🔗
772 posts
Quote:
I would also like to mention that skiing makes me look hot for my sexy wife. She loves my thick skier legs and ski bum.


I'm sure this is news to our lovable SkiBum from the infamous Laurel Mountain thread!!! wink
Fleetwood
February 21, 2009
Member since 12/6/2008 🔗
69 posts
I can't say that I agree with everything Jamie G has to say, but he sure keeps it entertaining. Keep it real JG!
smile
GRK
February 21, 2009
Member since 12/19/2007 🔗
404 posts
Originally Posted By: Fleetwood
but he sure keeps it entertaining. Keep it real JG!
smile


Thats for certain...a welcome, colorful addition. Just no one mention the M-Word! laugh .
Clay
February 22, 2009
Member since 04/11/2006 🔗
555 posts
Originally Posted By: JamieGrose79
Carbon Footprint is a joke of a word anyway.


Um...actually its two words... wink
DCSki Sponsor: Canaan Valley Resort

Ski and Tell

Snowcat got your tongue?

Join the conversation by logging in.

Don't have an account? Create one here.

0.15 seconds