The Ski Area Citizens Coalition monitors the environmental impacts of Colorado’s ski areas. They recently issued their report card, and both the Sentinel and the Denver Post reported that Powderhorn was at the top of the list, in terms of environmental friendliness. But when I went to the Coalition’s website, Powerderhorn earned an overall rating of “C” with only a few “A’s.”
They got an “A” in maintaining their existing footprint, preserving undeveloped lands from development, protecting endangered species, and preserving environmentally sensitive areas.
They got a “C” in things like protecting wetlands, water quality, and water conservation. More “C” ratings for conserving energy by not making snow, using renewable energy, energy efficiency, and transportation. And even more “C” ratings for environmental policies and advocacy, waste stream management, purchasing, environmental reporting and accountability, and community sustainability.
Some of the “C” ratings came because Powderhorn has not installed low flow faucets and waterless urinals. Given the financial history of the resort, this isn’t a huge surprise, nor is it a difficult thing to fix.
They lost points for not using biodiesel fuel in their diesel engines and for failing to generate clean energy on site. Further room for improvement exists for employing energy efficient retrofits, installing energy efficient lighting, and replacing old snowmaking guns with newer, more energy efficient ones. They could improve their score if they provided incentives to workers and skiers to carpool to the resort.
It was a mixed bag when it came to environmental policies. They got all available points for not opposing local environmental efforts, but zero points for actively supporting local environmental efforts. They got 5 out of 5 possible points for signing on to climate change legislation in 2005, but who knows if new ownership would stay that course? They got zero points for adhering to green building policies.
They got positive scores for increasing the amount of their waste that is recycled, but were dunned for not using recycled materials in construction projects or composting food wastes. Zero points, out of a possible 3 were awarded for serving food on “non-disposable” products. They did a little better on office products and energy efficient snowmobiles. They got zero points for tracking its water usage, publicizing its environmental report, having a 3rd party environmental audit, or supporting a local philanthropic organization.
When it comes to the environment, Powderhorn is good, but not great. The good news is that becoming great appears to be easily achievable should the resort decide it is a priority.
Finally, when you go out to play this winter, think about what you are wearing. (See the linked article about fleece.)
Homework
Denver Post Article About Ski Resorts
Ski Area Report Card
Powderhorn Report Card
Click Here to Ask Powderhorn to improve
Is Your Fleece Killing the Ocean
They got an “A” in maintaining their existing footprint, preserving undeveloped lands from development, protecting endangered species, and preserving environmentally sensitive areas.
They got a “C” in things like protecting wetlands, water quality, and water conservation. More “C” ratings for conserving energy by not making snow, using renewable energy, energy efficiency, and transportation. And even more “C” ratings for environmental policies and advocacy, waste stream management, purchasing, environmental reporting and accountability, and community sustainability.
Some of the “C” ratings came because Powderhorn has not installed low flow faucets and waterless urinals. Given the financial history of the resort, this isn’t a huge surprise, nor is it a difficult thing to fix.
They lost points for not using biodiesel fuel in their diesel engines and for failing to generate clean energy on site. Further room for improvement exists for employing energy efficient retrofits, installing energy efficient lighting, and replacing old snowmaking guns with newer, more energy efficient ones. They could improve their score if they provided incentives to workers and skiers to carpool to the resort.
It was a mixed bag when it came to environmental policies. They got all available points for not opposing local environmental efforts, but zero points for actively supporting local environmental efforts. They got 5 out of 5 possible points for signing on to climate change legislation in 2005, but who knows if new ownership would stay that course? They got zero points for adhering to green building policies.
They got positive scores for increasing the amount of their waste that is recycled, but were dunned for not using recycled materials in construction projects or composting food wastes. Zero points, out of a possible 3 were awarded for serving food on “non-disposable” products. They did a little better on office products and energy efficient snowmobiles. They got zero points for tracking its water usage, publicizing its environmental report, having a 3rd party environmental audit, or supporting a local philanthropic organization.
When it comes to the environment, Powderhorn is good, but not great. The good news is that becoming great appears to be easily achievable should the resort decide it is a priority.
Finally, when you go out to play this winter, think about what you are wearing. (See the linked article about fleece.)
Homework
Denver Post Article About Ski Resorts
Ski Area Report Card
Powderhorn Report Card
Click Here to Ask Powderhorn to improve
Is Your Fleece Killing the Ocean
RSS Feed