Part 3: Bleak forecast for ski industry

Warmer temps may put resorts in deep freeze

Jim Erickson, Rocky Mountain News

Saturday, March 19, 2005

CHANGE IN THE AIR: THIRD IN AN OCCASIONAL SERIES ABOUT HIGH-ALTITUDE RESEARCH IN COLORADO

ASPEN - Colorado's $2 billion ski industry could be dead by 2050 unless radical steps are taken to address global warming and save the state's prized champagne powder.

This is not a line from the latest Hollywood disaster flick about the impending climate apocalypse. And it's not the Chicken Little ravings of some kook on late-night talk radio.

This gloomy pronouncement comes from an executive at the Aspen Skiing Co., operators of a four-mountain ski mecca in one of the world's best-known and poshest destination resorts.

"Things look bleak," said Auden Schendler, the company's director of environmental affairs.

The most likely scenario for Colorado's 25 ski resorts, unless global emissions of heat-trapping "greenhouse" gases are reined in: "Gone in 2050 . . . Maybe - good case scenario - gone by 2100," he said.

Schendler's pessimism is based on numerous climate-change studies that predict declining mountain snowpacks in coming decades as the West warms.

"Most analyses project a decline, if not total demise, of downhill skiing by the mid or latter part of the 21st century," proclaims the federally funded Rocky Mountain/Great Basin Regional Climate-Change Assessment, a 240-page study produced by more than 125 researchers.

But uncertainty about the amount of warming, the reliability of computerized climate models used in such studies - and especially about how precipitation patterns will change in the Colorado Rockies - leaves plenty of room for speculation.

In the Colorado ski industry, opinions about the likely impacts of climate change run the gamut, and some observers reject Schendler's views as overly negative and unjustified.

Even so, few in the industry dismiss the climate-change issue completely.

Warming on radar screen

"Climate change is a potential risk in our industry. It's on all our radar screens," said Bill Jensen, senior vice president and chief operating officer for Vail Resorts.

"But I'm not as pessimistic as Auden," he said. "I think we'll be able to adapt."

Jensen envisions scenarios in which Colorado ski resorts could benefit from a few degrees of warming.

Schendler's boss at Aspen, President and Chief Executive Officer Patrick O'Donnell, called climate change "the most pressing issue facing the ski industry today."

But O'Donnell said he remains optimistic that global greenhouse emissions will be curtailed and the warming problem controlled.

And Aspen Skiing Co. is moving ahead with plans for a $400 million revamping of the Base Village at Snowmass, which suggests the resort's owners remain upbeat about the future of Colorado skiing.

Scientists acknowledge the limits of the computer models used to project future climate at the regional level. But despite the unknowns, certain changes seem unavoidable if warming continues, they say.

In the Rocky Mountain/Great Basin Regional Climate-Change Assessment, scientists concluded that some outdoor recreational activities, such as fishing and golf, could benefit because warmer temperatures would extend the summer season and make winters milder.

But downhill skiing would likely suffer, according to the study, released with little fanfare in February two years ago and published by the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

Likely major effects on the Colorado ski industry would include a shorter ski season and increased reliance on artificial snowmaking. The season would be squeezed at both ends, fall and spring, and attempts to make up for a natural-snow deficit with man-made snow could backfire due to warmer temperatures.

Models: variable, warmer

The two computerized climate models used in the regional assessment, known informally as the Hadley and Canadian models, project a 4.5- to 14.4-degree warming in the Rocky Mountains and Great Basin by 2100.

But most of the latest models suggest the West will warm between 3.6 and 10.8 degrees by 2100 as levels of heat-trapping gases continue to rise, according to Daniel Cayan, director of the climate research division at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif.

Even 4 degrees of warming in the Colorado mountains could have a "huge impact" on the ski industry, said Aspen's O'Donnell. The company attracts 1.3 million visitors each winter to its four mountains: Snowmass, Aspen Mountain, Aspen Highlands and Buttermilk.

The most damaging blow might be struck in the fall, when Colorado ski areas spray tons of artificial snow in a race to build the base layers needed to ensure a November opening.

Aspen starts blowing artificial snow in mid-October, using "every available hour" to lay down that base, O'Donnell said. Early-season conditions are critical, in part, because many out-of-staters make their winter vacation reservations based on late-November snow reports in the West.

"If somebody condensed my snowmaking period by a week or two, we'd have a real problem," O'Donnell said.

Warmer fall temperatures would hurt in several ways.

First, if mountain precipitation changes from rain to snow later in the season, there will be less natural snow on the ground.

Second, warmer temperatures could reduce the period when artificial snow can be made.

Third, making snow when temperatures approach the freezing point is costly, inefficient and produces inferior snow.

"What snowmaking allows us to do is to get open earlier, consistently, than we ever did before in the old days just relying totally on Mother Nature," O'Donnell said.

"It brings more cash flow in and gets more people interested," he said. "But if you haven't got the temperature, you can't make the snow."

Cutting the profit margin

In a good year, Aspen operates for about 140 days. It takes about 100 days to pay the resort's expenses, so all the profits come during the last 30 to 40 days - in March and part of April, O'Donnell said.

If climate warming starts compressing the Colorado ski season on both ends, he said, "It's going to be an economic disaster."

Last year, the four Aspen mountains spent $600,000 on snowmaking, including $388,000 for electricity and $115,530 for water. High-pressure spray guns made about 650 acre-feet of artificial snow, enough to cover one square mile to a depth of a foot.

The snowmaking campaign consumed 162.4 million gallons of water. That's enough water to supply the needs of nearly 1,000 Denver Water customers for a year. And it's more than three times the amount of water Aspen Skiing Co. used last year in its lodges, restaurants and hotels.

The optimum temperature for making artificial snow is 15 degrees, Schendler said. As the temperature rises, more compressed air and water must be forced up to the spray guns, increasing electricity costs and water consumption while producing heavier, lower-quality snow.

Snowmaking can continue up to 28 or 29 degrees, O'Donnell said. But the Aspen Skiing Co. avoids doing it, when possible, because it's so expensive. If climate change pushes fall temperatures near the upper limit of snowmaking, costs would skyrocket, he said.

Snowmaking more expensive

And then there's the question of water availability. Ski areas can't assume they will be able to get all the water they would need to expand snowmaking operations.

At Snowmass, for example, water use has been the subject of bitter conflicts - including several lawsuits - dating to 1978. Water used for snowmaking at Snowmass comes from Snowmass Creek, a tributary of the Roaring Fork River, which flows into the Colorado River.

A court ruling already limits the amount of water the ski area can pump from the creek, and it forces Snowmass to quit making snow each winter on Dec. 31.

Colorado's current population of 4.6 million is expected to swell to 7.2 million by 2030, a 55.5 percent increase. In the coming decades, competition for Colorado's water will intensify and water costs are likely to rise.

So water could cost more at a time when ski areas will need more of it for snowmaking. The seemingly inevitable result: increased operating costs.

"Let's be realistic about it. Those extra operating costs, in some form or another - at least a portion of it - are going to get passed on to the consumer," O'Donnell said. "You could end up pricing yourself out of business."

An Aspen four-mountain daily lift ticket costs $74. Vail charges $77.

Colorado typically leads the nation in annual skier visits, with an average of 11.5 million skiers per year, according to Colorado Ski Country USA, a nonprofit trade organization representing 24 of the state's 25 ski resorts.

But the annual number of Colorado skier visits has grown less than 1 percent since the 1993-94 season. It hit a high of 11,979,719 visits in 1997-98 and a low of 10,892,263 visits the following year.

The high cost of lift tickets may be partly responsible for that slow growth, and climate warming could add to the problem, said ecologist Frederic Wagner of Utah State University, co-coordinator of the Rocky Mountain/Great Basin regional climate assessment.

"If skiing is now at the expense level where it's shutting off moderate-income people - and I don't know that that is the case; this is a hypothetical - then they're going to get fewer and fewer people coming out to ski," Wagner said.

Downhill skiing contributes $2 billion to $2.5 billion to the Colorado economy annually, according to Colorado Ski Country USA.

"I can't say that this is absolute certainty, nor put a probability figure on it, but I think it's a distinct possibility that we're going to lose the snowpacks in the West and with that the ski industry," Wagner said.

Wetter may not be better

Most of the latest climate models show little or no change in annual precipitation for the West in the coming century, Cayan said.

The latest version of the Community Climate Systems Model from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, for example, calls for a "slight annual increase" in precipitation over the Colorado Rockies by 2100, said Gerald Meehl, a senior scientist at the lab.

But no one knows for sure what will happen.

And even if it does get wetter here, warmer temperatures would likely reduce the length of the ski season because much of the extra mountain precipitation would fall as rain in autumn and spring.

The snow line would rise and the lowest-elevation Western resorts would be hurt first.

"The survival probability of lower-elevation resorts would still be low," despite an annual precipitation increase, according to the regional assessment.

But Vail's Jensen said Washington state's loss could be Colorado's gain.

The high elevations of many Colorado ski resorts could act as a temporary buffer against the damaging effects of climate warming, he said.

Think of warming temperatures as a rising sea that will inundate the lowest-elevation resorts first. If that's how it plays out, then ski areas in Europe, New England, the Pacific Northwest, the Midwest and even California's Sierra Nevada will be under water long before the high-altitude Colorado resorts.

As conditions deteriorate at lower elevations, skiers may seek higher ground in Colorado, Jensen said. During the next several decades, the Colorado ski industry could benefit, he said.

"What do you think the chances of us having snow in 40 years are, compared to Snoqualmie Summit, outside of Seattle, or ski areas that are outside of Boston that are at 1,200 feet?" Jensen said.

The Summit at Snoqualmie, a ski resort 52 miles east of Seattle in the Cascades, has elevations ranging from 2,610 feet to 5,420 feet above sea level. The resort has been closed most of the 2004-05 season because of lack of snow, and it received 8.5 inches of rain in a four-day period in January.

The base elevation of Vail ski resort is at 8,120 feet and the summit is at 11,570 feet.

"The base elevations of the Colorado resorts give us an advantage - certainly in the near term, if you define the near term as the next 50 years," Jensen said.

Warming controls destiny

In fact, a temperature increase of 4 degrees could result in higher snowfall totals during the coldest winter months at Vail and other Colorado resorts, said Jensen, who has worked in the industry for 31 years. Vail receives an average of 346 inches of snow per year.

Average low temperatures on Vail Mountain in December, January and February were 6.6 degrees, 6 degrees, 7.5 degrees, respectively, between 1973 and 2003.

When the temperature dips below 10 degrees or so at Vail, storms don't deliver much snow, Jensen said. If it warmed 4 degrees during those months, mid-winter skiing conditions could improve, he said.

"I would probably argue from a ski resort's perspective - a selfish ski resort's perspective - that it actually would lead to more snow in Colorado, because many times we're too cold to have it snow any significant amounts," he said.

But in the long run, significant warming would have "tremendously negative" effects on the industry, Aspen's O'Donnell said.

The solution is to cut global emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that climate scientists say are warming the Earth.

"But it's out of our control," O'Donnell said. "The worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases is controlling our destiny."

ericksonj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5129