Going, Going...
Will climate change decide whether our grandchildren will belong to a skiing nation? By: Mark Mallet
When I was a teenager in the 1980s, my ski
buddies and I used to do whatever it took to stay warm during
Quebec's brutal Laurentian winters. We regularly tucked napkins
under our goggles to keep the wind and frostbite from burning
the skin on our cheeks. We hammered our numb hands against
our thighs from the moment we got on the chairlift until the
moment we got off. We thought up bizarre concoctions to slip
into our ski socks in order to prevent frostbite from getting too
firm a grasp on our toes (my favourite was cayenne pepper and
baby powder--the former to stimulate circulation, the latter to
prevent excess sweating). And at lunchtime we pried each other's
frozen boots off and welcomed others' toes into our armpits while
we all waited for the pain of the thaw to dissipate to the point
where we could unclench our jaws enough to speak.
Admittedly, we took a certain amount of pride in surviving
cold snaps that could sometimes last from December till March.
But underneath the proud exterior, I, for one, was praying for
warmth. Unfortunately, it looks as though my prayers may soon
be answered.
In December 2003, the International Olympic Committee and
the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) came together in Italy
to co-host a conference on Sport and the Environment. One of
the papers presented, "Climate Change and Winter Sports:
Environmental and Economic Threats," painted a less-than-rosy
picture for the future of the ski industry.
The report examined a number of studies detailing the
impact of climate change on the winter
tourism industries of North America,
Australia, New Zealand and Europe.
According to the report's authors, "All these
studies show severe implications for the
winter tourism industry if climate change
were to occur. While some regions may be
able to maintain their winter tourism with
suitable, but expensive, adaptation
strategies (e.g. artificial snowmaking),
others would lose their winter tourism
industry due to a diminishing snowpack."
While global climate change is still
technically a "theory," the report based its
findings on the generally accepted climatic
predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC), a body that is
co-sponsored by UNEP and the World
Meteorological Organization. According
to the IPCC, worldwide temperatures are
predicted to increase by 1.4 to 5.8* Celsius
by 2100. While 1.4* may not seem like
much of a jump, it's sobering to note
that warming is predicted to be more
significant on land, in the northern
hemisphere and during winter. In other
words, ski country.
What this global rise in temperatures
means for ski resorts is a possible decrease
in snowfall, a consequent shortening of the
ski season, possible landslides in alpine
areas due to melting permafrost, and the
recession and eventual disappearance of
alpine glaciers.
Believe it or not, even the frigid Canadian
winter is threatened. In a recent University
of Waterloo study of five ski areas in the
Lakelands district of Southern Ontario, researchers found that,
"Under climate change scenarios and current snowmaking
technology, the average ski season [at the five ski areas] was
projected to be reduced by 8-30% in the 2020s, 16-52% in the
2050s and 30-66% in the 2080s. Concurrent with the ski season
losses, the estimated amount of snowmaking required doubled
at most locations by the 2050s. With improved snowmaking
technology and additional snowmaking, ski season losses could
be reduced to 3-17% in the 2020s, 10-32% in the 2050s and
22-49% in the 2080s."
With such dire predictions starting to circulate through the
ski community, I thought I'd find out what some of Canada's ski
areas are doing to prepare themselves.
My first call was to Sunshine Village, the Banff-area resort whose
claim to fame is its 100% natural snow. After introducing myself
to John Ross, sales and marketing director, I popped the question:
"What is Sunshine Village doing to meet the challenges of global
warming?"
There was a long silence. Then laughter. Finally, "Generally, it's
not been a problem for us. The warming would probably help us
more than anything because the American visitors all think it's
too cold up here." Ross went on to point out that Sunshine Village
usually closes for the season long before its snow disappears,
and that many of the guests could no doubt do without prolonged
stretches of -40*. Admittedly, global warming may seem like a bit
of a joke to anyone who's spent a ski season in the Rockies.
But there are other Canadian resorts that don't experience the
same kind of Arctic temperatures that Alberta has every winter.
Grouse Mountain, for example, located right beside Vancouver
on the edge of the Pacific Ocean, already suffers from its fair
share of rain. If any resort in Western Canada is concerned about
rising temperatures, Grouse seemed like a likely candidate.
I called them up to find out how concerned they are.
"So far it hasn't really been something that's been addressed,"
was the response I got from Chris Dagenais, Grouse's
communications manager. "I mean, you're talking about a
controversial subject in which there's some data in one direction
and some data in another." Dagenais recalled a terrible season
three years ago, and then last year they had loads of snow.
"Global warming will definitely be a concern if the data starts
to present itself in a very tangible way, but as yet, without any
indications, it hasn't really been something that's been top of
our agenda."
Interestingly, scientists predict that one of the overall effects
of climate change would be to cause not only warming, but
also increased climate instability--wild swings in one direction
or another--which could help to explain the fluctuations that
Dagenais referred to. (In all fairness to Grouse, the ski area is
taking numerous measures to reduce energy consumption; it's
just that those measures aren't tied to immediate concerns about
climate change.)
Low elevation ski hills in Southern Ontario, on the other hand,
may have more reason to be concerned, given the University of
Waterloo study. At Craigleith Ski Club, general manager Jeff
Courtemanche said he's "very concerned [about climate change],
as any responsible business or person in the community or the
province or the country should be." As a result, Craigleith has
converted to more energy-efficient lighting, they've bought
snowmobiles that pollute less, and when choices exist they try
to use the majority of their electric power during off-peak evening
hours when the power is not only cheaper but is also less likely
to be generated by one of Ontario's five coal-powered plants.
But as Courtemanche pointed out, regardless of whether or not
ski hills are nervous about climate change, it just makes sense to
be as energy-efficient as possible. "Our biggest expense here at
the ski area is electricity," he said. "And at every area their largest
expense will be electricity or fuel. And every area is trying to
improve their bottom line, and you can improve it by reducing the
amount of power you use."
Courtemanche's point was illustrated by the fact that every ski
area I contacted was more than happy to talk about how they
were saving energy--installing the latest snowmaking technology,
retro-fitting buildings, buying more fuel-efficient vehicles, etc.
But only a few of them said they were doing it because they
were nervous about climate change and what it might mean
for the ski industry. Most were just trying to improve their bottom
line and corporate image.
While there is nothing inherently wrong with either of those
motives, I decided to find out if the ski industry as a whole is
doing anything to address climate change on a larger scale.
To that end, I called Colin Chedore, president of the Canadian
Ski Council (CSC). The CSC is an industry organization whose
stated goal is to "increase participation in recreational
snowboarding, alpine and cross-country skiing in Canada."
In order to do that, the CSC focuses on four main areas:
marketing and promotion; communication and co-operation;
research and development; and advocacy.
I asked Chedore what the CSC is doing to meet the challenges
of climate change. "The CSC itself is not involved in that area"
was his initial response, but Chedore went on to explain that the
CSC is actually made up of 14 smaller ski area organizations like
the Ontario Snow Resorts Association and the Canada West Ski
Areas Association, and that it essentially does what its members
tell it to do. And as yet, no one has brought up the spectre of
climate change.
The irony of the situation was not lost on Chedore. Here is an
industry that relies entirely on cold temperatures and snow for
its very survival, and yet the subject of climate change has
never come up. In fact, every year the CSC brings together
40 of Canada's ski industry leaders to discuss issues relevant
to the future of skiing, and, according to Chedore, "never once
has weather been mentioned." He sounded genuinely incredulous
as he said this.
The explanation given for the ski industry's general lack of
unified action is that most resorts are purchasing more effective
snowmaking equipment and are diversifying into year-round
activities such as water slides and golf courses in order to make
their ski operations less vulnerable to poor snow years. Add to
that the fact that climate change is erroneously believed by many
to be something that exists as a tangible problem only in the
distant future (a belief disputed by many climatologists), and
it's not hard to understand why some ski areas see little financial
incentive to combat the problem on a large scale.
In the U.S., however, the industry as a whole has taken a more
proactive approach to climate change. In the summer of 2000,
the National Ski Areas Association (NSAA) created an
"environmental charter" to encourage resorts to decrease their
environmental footprint. One hundred and thirty resorts adopted
the charter right away, and that number has since grown to 175.
In 2003, the NSAA and the Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC) specifically targeted climate change by implementing a
program called "Keep Winter Cool." The campaign, aimed at
raising public awareness of the potential impact of climate change
on winter recreation, has the dual result of encouraging the public
to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions while also giving
the resorts an opportunity to "green" their image. For instance,
some resorts have used the program to brag about their windpowered
lifts, while others talk up their use of solar power or
bio-diesel. The campaign also gives environmental organizations
a chance to draw attention to their own energy-saving programs.
One such organization, Colorado-based skicarpool.com, enables
local skiers to reduce car emissions by sharing rides to and from
the ski hill.
Campaigns like this, while probably at least 50 per cent
"greenwash" (i.e. driven by PR departments and lacking in real
substance), at least recognize that skiers themselves have a large
role to play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The truth is,
one of skiing's largest contributions to climate change is not from
the resorts themselves, but from the hundreds of thousands of
vehicles (big vehicles) driven to and from ski hills every weekend.
For example, driving an average car from Vancouver to Whistler
and back results in 65 kilograms of carbon dioxide entering the
atmosphere. Change that average car into an average SUV
(skier's vehicle of choice) and the total emissions rise to about
90 kilograms. Fill Whistler's parking lots with 3,000 vehicles,
assume a third of them are SUVs (anyone who's ever seen
Whistler's parking lots knows that this figure is grossly
underestimated), and you're looking at 220,000 kilograms of
carbon dioxide. (The numbers for the Calgary-Banff, Toronto-
Collingwood and Montreal-Laurentians routes are worse.)
Unfortunately, while I'm sure there are at least a few dozen
eco-skiers out there who pack five people into a hybrid every
time they head to the hill, it's clear that a far larger proportion
of skiers continue to drive half-empty SUVs. Without concrete
incentives to do otherwise, it's likely that the trend of big skier
vehicles will continue.
So what would it take to convince skiers to do more to reduce
their own greenhouse gas emissions? Financial incentives for
people who carpool or drive more fuel-efficient cars? Preferred
parking for cleaner vehicles or ones with three or more people
in them? Better bus systems to bring people from the cities to
the ski hills? Perhaps the revival of the old ski trains that used
to take skiers from Vancouver to Whistler, Calgary to Banff and
from Toronto to Collingwood?
These are all initiatives that individual resorts could work on by
themselves, but not many are likely to do so unless the initiatives
somehow become the industry norm. But it's where the Canadian
Ski Council could come in. In light of the fact that the predictions
of skiing's demise are coming from respected institutions like the
IOC and the UN, it would be irresponsible for the members of the
CSC not to take them seriously. In fact, the CSC should be playing
a lead role in the fight against global climate change, if for no
other reason than to help ensure skiing's long-term survival.
Given the organization's four existing areas of expertise, playing
such a role would be a perfect fit. The CSC could use its marketing
and promotions expertise to initiate a program similar to the Keep
Winter Cool campaign in the U.S.; it could put its communication
and co-operation skills to use by coming up with an
environmental charter of its own and encouraging Canadian ski
areas to adopt it; and it could play a lead role in lobbying federal
and provincial governments to enact legislation and implement
programs to curb Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. At the
very least, the CSC should be conducting research to determine
how climate change might affect ski areas across the country,
and what they can do to mitigate its effects.
What's clear is that we skiers have a special responsibility
to fight climate change, if for no other reason than to save the
sport that many of us grew up with (although there are obviously
plenty of other good reasons to fight climate change). According
to the Print Measurement Bureau, almost five-million Canadians
either ski or snowboard, and the ski and snowboard industry
as a whole accounts for a sizable percentage of the country's
$50-billion tourism industry. In other words, mobilized under
the banner of the Canadian Ski Council and the organizations
it's comprised of, skiers and snowboarders could become
a very powerful lobby group.
But to do that, we need to start looking beyond the next season,
or even the next 10 seasons. We need to start looking at the
future of skiing 50-100 years down the road--not what the
sport will look like for our children, but what it will look like
for our great-grandchildren. And if we want them to be able
to enjoy what many of us have taken for granted our whole
lives--winter--now is the time to act.