Why should the Arctic Refuge matter to the ski industry?
by Pat O'Donnell
Why should the 19 million acres of wilderness that
make up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the potential oil
beneath it, and its resident herd of caribou, matter at all to the
ski industry?
Sure, the refuge in Alaska is wild and
beautiful, it’s pristine, it’s a crown jewel of
wilderness. We in the ski industry fancy ourselves environmentally
conscious, so we should want to protect it. But that’s
abstract, and it could even be disingenuous. Do we support
protection because we want to paint ourselves green, taking a stand
where we have nothing to lose?
But there is a compelling
reason that the ski industry should care deeply about the Arctic
Refuge, and it isn’t just about caribou, and it’s not
just about wilderness. It’s about energy policy.
Energy policy decisions threaten to bring the ski industry to its
knees. Overwhelming research is showing that climate change is more
than hypothetical, it is happening, and humans — largely by
virtue of our energy choices — are responsible. Last August,
Science magazine declared a consensus on climate change, after
reviewing 928 papers and finding that they all agreed that the
earth was heating up and humans were responsible. Whenever I say
things like this, I get rafts of mail telling me I’m wrong.
My response is that, for now, I’ll side with groups like the
National Academy of Sciences and the vast bulk of climatologists.
By deciding to drill in the Arctic Refuge, we’re
saying we’re unwilling to take any additional steps, no
matter how modest, to reduce our dependence on oil, steps that
would coincidentally address the greenhouse warming problem and
improve national security.
As Amory Lovins put it: "When
you’re addicted to drugs, you’re told to cut off the
supply. But when you’re addicted to oil, you try to find
more."
By drilling in Alaska, are we then saying that
we’re willing to pursue an energy "strategy" that threatens
the ski industry and the future viability of people’s lives,
communities and children, because we don’t want — for
example — to increase automobile fuel efficiency standards by
a few painless miles per gallon?
Well, yes, that is
exactly what we’re saying. With the climate changing and
threatening not just skiing but every industry, the federal
government has not been willing to order cars to go farther on a
gallon of gas. The government is also not willing to make energy
more expensive when it pollutes, nor to encourage with incentives
what we need more of, which is a greater dependence on renewable
energy sources and energy efficiency.
Even though between
1979 and 1986, we saved an Arctic Refuge’s (predicted) annual
output of oil every five months with efficiency standards that
didn’t ruin our economy, we’re getting ready to drill.
We’ll drill in Alaska, even though, as Bill McKibben points
out in Orion Magazine, the most optimistic estimates assume that
the Arctic Refuge can supply the U.S. with only about five months
of oil.
Fortunately, not all of our leaders have their
heads in the sand. Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, D, understands the
impact of energy policy on the state’s economy, and he
opposed drilling in the Arctic Refuge. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo.,
who doesn’t link the future of Colorado’s recreation
industry to decisions made in Alaska, supported drilling and a
policy of unmitigated consumption.
Decisions like
drilling in the Arctic are part of a broad national policy that, if
continued, will make skiing impossible for future generations. So
this isn’t just about the caribou. It’s about how
we’re selling out our children by ruining their chances for
the kind of prosperity we enjoyed. It’s about how we’re
selling out our industry and all the other aspects of the
West’s ski tourism economy — now a $2 billion
money-maker in Colorado alone — because we’re too lazy
or arrogant to make any sacrifice at all, even the relatively
painless ones.
Protecting the Arctic Refuge isn’t
just about the Arctic Refuge; it’s about skiing.
Pat O’Donnell is president and chief operating officer of the Aspen Skiing Company.