Climate Choices in the Northeast by UCS

[dmc]

I'll agree with that last bit 100%.
Difficulty for us is that nature doesn't give a fig for us or anything else. Whatever it takes to get to equilibrium. In whatever state.

And we as a people aparently don't give a fig for nature too.. When we let this polical BS get in the way of cleaning up our planet.

 

[catskills]

When I read this Washington Post article I thought of this thread. Enjoy

When Life Knocks You in the Nose

It lets us know that sometimes it takes a whack upside the head -- or in the nose -- to remind us who we are and what we're not; to remember that some things in life are simply not our call; that notwithstanding our smarts and means, we don't have the last word.

 

[awf170]

Can I post a picture of the Karl Rove and Dick Cheney instructing their minions on why Al Gore is wrong in order to protect their own interests now?

It's only fair... :???:

Sure. I never said I had a problem with Al Gore, I just thought this thread needed some fat pictures of him. I like Al Gore.

 

[MadPadraic]

The situation is kinda sad... lots of ski resorts suffering. Many of them have recently been voicing concerns that human caused global warming is killing them.

Yet I don't see too many resorts doing anything about it. More than ever, they seem to be putting in faster quads that burn more energy, heated gondolas, ridiculously fancy hotels and base lodges, ski lifts that take people from the town to the base (instead of making them walk), upgrading their villages and towns with more creature comforts, restaurants, bars, etc.. etc.. sure seems like all of this causes even more polution - a bit hypocritical me thinks.

Sure there are some exceptions, like the wind powered resorts out west, but the vast majority of resorts hasn't taken the initiative to set higher standards for energy efficiency for themselves so why shouldn't their customers drive their H2s? How about setting an example people. Instead of blowing 10 million dollars on fancy hotels and faster lifts, spend it on clean energy, efficiency and all that - while preserving the old school, vintage skiing experience.

Of course this rant/suggestion is completely emotional and not at all rational - I haven't done the financial analysis and many resorts might be forced to upgrade their lifts and facilities just to stay in business so....

A number of resorts are doing things--wind power, biodiesil (sugarbush), etc. Its improtant to understand that in the East, Snowmaking consumes more energy than all other resort operations (usually all other resort operations combined). So all those things you mentioned..e.g. heated gondolas contribute, but the best thing ski resorts can do is upgrade their snow making equipment to reduce energy usage. After that, I'm willing to bet that putting all those cars on the road for 3-5 hour drives contributes much more to global warming than the energy used by the hotels and lifts. If only taking a train to the mountain was an option!

 

[jack97]

..... I just thought this thread needed some fat pictures of him. I like Al Gore.

Dunno, I think someone should post skinny pictures of a politician so that this will also be represented.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

10 year temperature prediction.....perhaps snowbirds won't have to travel to Florida anymore.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2007-08-09-climate-model_N.htm

 

[Greg]

Yet I don't see too many resorts doing anything about it. More than ever, they seem to be putting in faster quads that burn more energy, heated gondolas, ridiculously fancy hotels and base lodges, ski lifts that take people from the town to the base (instead of making them walk), upgrading their villages and towns with more creature comforts, restaurants, bars, etc.. etc.. sure seems like all of this causes even more polution - a bit hypocritical me thinks.

Anyone who is ultra-environmentalist yet supports the lift-serviced ski industry via the purchase of a pass or lift ticket is totally hypocritical. Destroying large swaths of some of our most pristine mountains with ski trails and consuming tons of energy on snowmaking and lifts is far from environmentally friendly. Can't have it both ways.

 

[riverc0il]

Anyone who is ultra-environmentalist yet supports the lift-serviced ski industry via the purchase of a pass or lift ticket is totally hypocritical. Destroying large swaths of some of our most pristine mountains with ski trails and consuming tons of energy on snowmaking and lifts is far from environmentally friendly. Can't have it both ways.

Driving to the ski area has a larger environmental impact than a single skiers net contribution to ski area operations assuming full operation on a weekend via purchase of a lift ticket, so even driving a few hours to earn turns would be just as bad. I do not believe being environmentally conscious and being a skier are mutually exclusive but it certainly does beg some questions about how we pursue the activity.

National Forests exist for many reasons and one of those stated reasons is pursuit of recreation. Other reasons include forestry which can be maintained via a long term and sustainable program. Cutting trees can be done in environmentally friendly ways and many environmentalists are starting to argue that forest management must assume cleaning up the forests to avoid fires.

Many hard core environmentalists attest to the fact that there is a thin line between loving nature vs. "loving it to death." Engaging in outdoor pursuits brings people closer to the land and natural world and often inspires people to treat the world better. Where does an environmentally oriented person draw the line between enjoying what they love versus enjoying it too much? Since no human being can exist within our society without leaving some sort of environmentally negative foot print, we all must decide where to draw our own lines. It comes down to how environmentalistic you want to be short of homesteading off the grid without using any non-human powdered transportation.

Mad River Glen is engaging in a program to be "carbon neutral" this year. Not only doing carbon off sets for ski area operations but also to account for skiers driving to and from the mountain. Now we can engage in a fairly long discourse about the viability of what carbon off sets are all about, but steps are being taken to decrease the foot print. Some ski areas are engaging in renewable energy sources as well. Trees may be mowed down but NELSAP shows it wouldn't take long for the forest to reclaim the trails. Trails grow berries which the black bears certainly like. And ski areas investing in snow making are also engaging in land management practices to reduce run off issues.

Are ski areas ecological oasis? Hardly. But I do not think skiing and being environmentally conscious irreconcilable. Skiing is hardly the most environmentally friendly sport around. Transportation alone accounts for a huge amount of the related emissions involved with the activity. That is something we all have to reconcile with ourselves if we desire to pursue the sport.

 

[dmc]

Anyone who is ultra-environmentalist yet supports the lift-serviced ski industry via the purchase of a pass or lift ticket is totally hypocritical. Destroying large swaths of some of our most pristine mountains with ski trails and consuming tons of energy on snowmaking and lifts is far from environmentally friendly. Can't have it both ways.

Right.. I'm a hypocrit for wanted a better environment but wanting to ski... I get it..

 

[koreshot]

Almost any argument anyone is going to make on the global warming and energy/earth conservation issue is going to be hypocritical to some degree. But I think it is a mistake to discount an oppinion or argument because of hypocricy. It is a cop-out that many folks that are not environmentally concious use and it is just an excuse to not to anything about the situation. For all societies, hypocrisy is on the path to change - you first need to see the wrong in your actions to change it. If you stop right then and there because judging yourself is hypocritical or changing one bad habit but not another one is hypocritical, how are you ever going to advance?

What most global warming skeptics don't understand is that most people that do think we are having an impact on the earth's climate aren't saying that we need to end civilization, live in tents, poop in a hole in the ground and wipe our butts with leaves - its all about starting to make actual, measurable but reasonable steps in the right direction. They are not saying "don't drive cars to go skiing" they are saying "drive a Subaru instead of a Yukon", they are not saying "don't heat your homes" they are saying "heat your homes more efficiently by insulating it with the money you saved on gas when you switched from your Yukon to a smaller but still very practical and fun car". They are not saying "Sugarbush, stop spending money on the mountain" they are saying "Sugarbush, stop spending money and energy on things like the Clay Brook Luxury Hotel & Residences - something that adds nothing to our skiing experience."

Here is a great example - literally as I was finishing typing this post my coworker came in and walked around the office floor and turned every single light on. I had turned about 2/3s on when I first got in this morning (and the place was really bright!), yet he feels to urge to go and make everything even brighter. Oh did I mention that we have blinds running the entire length of the floor? Most of them are drawn shut, nice. I am not saying we need to work in darkness, I am just saying we can work in a bright setting instead of ultra-bright setting. I am also saying I would rather work under natural sun light than flourescent crap.

 

[ctenidae]

You guys missed the "ultra" part of Greg's post. I have to agree with him- the fringe (of any group, really) can be quite hypocritical (there's a PETA-esque group that pickets Macy's at Back Bay every so often, and there are always at least a couple of people wearing leather shoes.) i think Greg's comment, and the ensuing replies, highlights a very important issue- where is the line? Where do you strike the balance between living and enjoying life and saving the planet? That humongous SUV you see driving 1 person 4 blocks is surely a waste, but maybe the person who owns it has switched all their lightbulbs to CF, fully insulated and Energy Starred their house, and recycles. Probably not, but maybe.
Find the balance, in your environmentalism and everything else.

 

[Greg]

You guys missed the "ultra" part of Greg's post.

Right. I'm speaking of anyone that is environmentally radical. Certainly nothing wrong with being environmentally aware and if you want to make changes to your lifestyle that you think will help, then I say good on ya. It certainly isn't going to hurt.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Right. I'm speaking of anyone that is environmentally radical. Certainly nothing wrong with being environmentally aware and if you want to make changes to your lifestyle that you think will help, then I say good on ya. It certainly isn't going to hurt.

Everyone should do their share, but unfortunately it doesn’t amount to much difference IMO. The only thing that will truly make a difference is government laws banning or limiting CO2 emissions. Until Green candidates are voted in or politicians will be voted out if they don’t pass green laws I don’t think any meaningful change will happen in this country.

It is global warming, how do you get a major polluter like China to change their policies? It just doesn’t look good to me for future generations. I'm sure people will adapt, but IMO the climate will change for the worse.

 

[dmc]

You guys missed the "ultra" part of Greg's post.

i saw it..
But who decides what is "ultra"? Karl Rove? Greg?

 

[dmc]

there's a PETA-esque group that pickets Macy's at Back Bay every so often, and there are always at least a couple of people wearing leather shoes

Did you actually get on your hands and knees and check to see if they were not fake?

Even so? We kill cows to eat... We use their leather for shoes - functionality....
Minks, et all... We kill those beautiful animals to cloth ugly women - status...

I'm only really down with slaughtering animals that I need to live.. Some fat long island yenta does not need the 100 minks slaughtered to clothe her ugly ass...

But then - I am a hypocrit..

 

[Greg]

i saw it..
But who decides what is "ultra"? Karl Rove? Greg?

I love how you put me in the company of the ultra-conservative, which in reality I am pretty far from. Oops. What's "ultra"-conservative?

 

[dmc]

I love how you put me in the company of the ultra-conservative, which in reality I am pretty far from. Oops. What's "ultra"-conservative?

Exactly... It's absurd..

 

[JimG.]

I'm buying my respirator now...because all the folks just mentioned and everyone here is facing the same fate when the balance tips and Mother Earth shrugs her shoulders. That's when the poison gas is belched from the ocean and we're all wiped out. It won't matter who thought what or which party you belong to.

That's what we should be discussing, how to manage and decrease our effect on the environment. Not politics.

Humans in general (myself included) are pathetic...they would rather argue about who is right or wrong than act or, worse yet, change.

 

[JimG.]

BTW, Al Gore really packed on the pounds. I didn't realize he had gained so much weight.

What, is he on the Elvis diet?

 

[dmc]

That's what we should be discussing, how to manage and decrease our effect on the environment. Not politics.

Unfortunatley the 2 have been inseperable since the US backed out of the Kyoto Treaty and Christine Todd Whitman was fired...