Carbon Conundrum: Part 4

Economy and Reality

Can you grow and shrink at the same time? Some say “sustainable growth” is an oxymoron. Others believe it’s possible, if we make a significant shift towards renewable, carbon-light energy sources including wind, solar, geothermal and hydropower.

Part of the carbon crux is that, in most cases, economic growth is equated with more CO2 emissions. And economic growth is what many valley residents would like to see, so the working class can make a decent, sustainable living without riding the seasonal tourism roller coaster, and the bubble-and-burst cycle of development and corresponding real estate sales.
At the same time, only certain types of economic growth are palatable to this community. For example, a mine operating in Crested Butte’s municipal watershed might produce some economic growth and tax revenue, but it’s not popular with most of the population at the north end of the valley.
Growing the tourism industry is a top priority for many businesses, but also CO2-emissions rich, because of what it takes for tourists just to get here. We’re not just a hop, skip and a jump away from anywhere with a substantial population base. We want to grow, without growing our carbon footprint. Is that possible?
Ahh, yes, conundrums everywhere we look. In this segment of the Carbon Conundrum, we investigate the economic factors associated with human-induced climate change, and dig a little deeper to unearth our carbon reality. And in Part 5, we’ll take a stab at solutions, and see if there’s a way to live in the mountains without leaving a Sasquatch-sized carbon footprint.
Tourism. It sounds so benign, and inviting. People come, but then they go, and many months of the year locals own the roost. All that coming and going eats up a lot of fuel and emits significant tonnage of CO2. The full brunt of tourism and its carbon footprint weren’t fully accounted for in the 2005 Upper Gunnison River Watershed CO2 Emissions Inventory, because the “to and from” travel factor is very challenging to account for.
Maya Silver, Office for Resource Efficiency Community energy coordinator, explained, “The CO2 emissions from tourists driving around the Valley are captured in the Inventory from CDOT [Colorado Department of Transportation] data. The emissions from their lodging, food consumption and recreation are largely captured under CO2 emissions from commercial buildings and the ski resort. The major omission in tourism emissions is the flight or drive to and from the Valley, which I’m sure would be a significant figure.”
Silver continues, “At a certain point, you have to draw the line at what will feature into the painting of our valley’s carbon reality. Otherwise, you will spend all your time deliberating what should and shouldn’t be included, where and how you can obtain the data needed and how you should process and present the data.”
And even then, CO2 emissions are a moving target. “Of course, if you’re really concerned about an accurate picture of carbon emissions, you’ll have to re-inventory frequently to monitor progress or regress,” Silver says. “The point is that it’s crucial to have a baseline to work from, but it’s ineffectual to devote excessive attention, time and resources to the creation of the baseline because then you will end up under-serving your goals for addressing it. Eventually, we hope to have a more streamlined system and better technology for efficiently inventorying and re-inventorying—or even monitoring in real time—our region’s CO2.”

Stunted Growth?
Reaching the 20/20 benchmark based on the existing 2005 UGRW inventory is daunting enough. In addition to the funding factor, it remains in part a question of economic growth, and what the footprint of that future growth will be. As Western State College business professor Roger Hudson wrote in his analysis of the local 20/20 goal, “In the Gunnison Community, with few strategic buttons and levers remaining, there may be a strong temptation to slow population and economic growth, especially since this sentiment appears to resonate with some in the community already. Recent examples include resistance to the Snodgrass expansion and the latest molybdenum incarnation, the Lucky Jack Mine. The motives of those resisting these projects are not always clear, and there are multiple reasons to oppose these projects, but both efforts have the consequence of reducing population and economic growth.”
Hudson asks, “Is the Gunnison Community’s historically slow population and economic growth bad luck or intentional, or is it the unintended consequence of a series of decisions where growth was of small concern? Will the recent economic disasters, followed by what appears to be a collapse of the kokanee salmon population in Blue Mesa Reservoir that will have a very noticeable affect on the local economy, tend to make population and economic growth more salient in future decisions?”

Tourism Dependent
The on-the-ground economic impacts of climate change—forecasted as hotter and drier climate in the Rockies—have myriad implications for tourism. Consider these possibilities associated with a warmer future. Chris Menges, High Country Citizens’ Alliance climate and clean energy director, cited some examples.
“As many are well aware, our tourism dependent economy is closely related to natural resource health. While we’re already seeing on-the-ground impacts of climate change, it is near certain that these impacts will become more varied and severe in the future unless we get heat-trapping emissions under control. Human-caused climate change is likely to have an effect on local tourism by altering some of the natural attributes that draw tourists to the Gunnison Valley. For example, the forecasted decrease in the prevalence of wildflowers could conceivably lead to a decline in a portion of summer tourism. Likewise, since climate change poses threats to our aspen forests by making them more susceptible to diseases and factors that cause Sudden Aspen Decline, it is possible that we could lose more of our aspen forests. Since it’s clear that local aspen forests are a big draw for autumn tourists and ‘leaf peepers,’ it is possible that a decrease in ‘aspen leaf season’ could equate to a reduction in tourism during that time of year.”
Likewise, the ski industry could suffer, according to Menges. “Colorado’s ski and snowboard industry generates an estimated $1.92  billion (2007 dollars) annually and is greatly imperiled by climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise dramatically and intensify the acceleration of shorter winters and higher ‘snow lines’ in Colorado. Some models forecast a 30-day shortening of the snow season, which could challenge Colorado ski areas including CBMR. Spring break is an important time of year for ski areas and their communities to generate revenue. Eventual losses in snow cover at the resort during that time of year could potentially correspond to big losses in the skier days that are currently attributed to the spring break crowd. A significant loss in skier days at CBMR during a normally popular time of year could negatively impact it and associated local industries.”

A short list of climate change’s far-reaching economic impacts
—In recent days it rained up to 10,000 feet in Utah’s Wasatch range—unheard of in January. Winter rain doesn’t exactly inspire skiers and riders to flock to resorts, or plan vacations. This will impact the day skier and destination guests.
—Less snowfall and earlier runoff impacts stream flows, which are relied upon by fishing and boating operations. Again, there’s the potential for shorter guiding seasons and a diminished experience due to decreased stream flows, in addition to stressed fish populations.
—Less precipitation overall raises wildfire danger. Tourists don’t like to visit places that are on fire.
—Wildflowers: Crested Butte is the premier wildflower destination in Colorado. Climate change could reduce wildflower populations and alter their flowering time. That might discourage some visitors from visiting, or make it tough to pinpoint when the “peak” will be.

After four weeks spent facing off with climate change, we’ll finally start looking at solutions in part five of the Carbon Conundrum series.