Report: Winter economy in peril due to climate change

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 7:34 p.m.

    This article is making an emotional appeal to stop climate change in order to preserve ski jobs. The question then becomes: How many jobs would be lost be curtailing our oil and coal production in an effort to cut down C02 emissions? Some would argue that global warming is the real problem but then why the emotional appeal about ski resort jobs? Why not more articles on the many locals who have lost jobs in the Vernal area as this administration fights against gas drilling?

    If we really wanted to slow global warming, shutting down our ski resorts would mean less people driving cars, less people flying, and less C02 emissions altogether. It could also convert much of out beautiful, pristine, mountains that currently have large scars on them from both ski lifts and runs, into a more natural and pristine state. The ski industry is not the most ecologically friendly and shouldn't get a free pass from environmentalists.

    Additionally, last winter was the most heavenly winter I have ever experienced in Utah. The lack of water is concerning, but I will take the warm weather. Always something to complain about but better to enjoy the good things...

  • SummitHigh Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 4:18 p.m.

    My, how short our memories are. After one poor winter, did we totally forget the massive amounts of snow that fell multiple seasons of the last decade?

    We can measure and quantify the results of the past decade, whereas for our future projections, it is extrapolation. Since when did extrapolation become a safe bet in scientific research?

    We have recorded CO2 levels for the past decade, we have recorded our temperature, and we have recorded winter snowfall. Why would increased CO2 for the past decade translate to more snowpack, while for the decades to come it necessarily means less? How does this all add up? We just don't know enough about this tremoundously massive and complex climate of ours to accurately predict future trends, be it 5 days or 5 thousand.

    If, for the past decade, increased levels of atmospheric CO2 and the reported anthropogenic climate change has meant multiple years of 700+ inches of snow at Alta, how can the Utah winter sports industry NOT shout with joy, "Sign me up!"???

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 3:25 p.m.

    @Still Blue

    Why doesn't a Republican actually give us a real live list of things to cut out of the budget. Why do we only get "cut deductions and loopholes" without actually describing one. Why do all we hear is CUT, CUT, CUT without anyone explaining what they want cut? The constant ranting of you guys decrying government waste with no plan or concrete examples is growing tiresome.

  • Still Blue after all these years Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 1:48 p.m.

    Where does DNews get this garbage? This is pure nonsense. Print something factual - such as if the US does not get is spending under control, we face bankruptcy which will have a far greater effect on Park City's economy than any silly climate control fiction.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Dec. 7, 2012 1:28 p.m.

    We've seen it all before. Conservatives will believe anything they hear from "their" trusted sources even if it contradicts the position from a few years prior.

    In 2006 republicans were agreeing about climate change. In 2007 the election was on and they suddenly all became against the idea of anthropological climate change as millions of oil and coal dollars were funneled into senator's coffers.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 12:41 p.m.

    @D Van Duker
    "In 2010, a British study measured CO2 levels; objectively comparing atmospheric CO2 levels back to the 1880s. The study was to identify when mankind exceeded the earths CO2 saturation level to pinpoint when mankind started causing global-warming. The data was conclusive and unexpected; CO2 levels have been at a constant all the way back to pre-industrialization."

    That's completely false. There has been a steady clear increase over time.

    "To deny climate change is a death sentence for a climate scientist, even if there is data that would refute their theories. "

    That's just stupid. Accuracy is the best asset in terms of getting more research funding and having proof that climate change isn't occurring would guarantee access to funding, if from nothing else, from oil companies, and you could easily make millions on a book deal promoted by conservative talk radio. That is... if there were proof that climate change isn't occurring.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Dec. 7, 2012 12:23 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" if what you say is true, the produce the studies that actually connect CO2 and climate change that actually meet the 95% confidence interval. The best I have heard of is around a 92% confidence interval, which still is not good enough for scientific standards for publication. Ask yourself why did they have to lower the standards for Climage Change?

    Also, how do you know that the earth is too warm? We had the Midievil Warm period where temperatures were warmer than today, maybe that is the correct temperature of the earth. There have been times when the earth was warmer than it is now, and you want to use man's influence to prevent the earth from reaching its optimal temperature. Why do you want to tamper with nature so much? If the rate bothers you, naturally we have seen global temps change by 4 degrees in less than 50 years. So tell us, what is occuring outside of imaginary alarmism by big government liberals that indicates that the warming is bad or caused by man?

  • LDS Tree-Hugger Farmington, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 12:08 p.m.

    Orem, UT

    So you have found a group of like-minded people on a website that supports how you think? And you want me, who doesn't think like you, to be convinced that climate change is worth completely altering my life and give my hard earned money to the government so they can squander it away on 'green' energy knowing full well that nothing I do will alter the climate?


    It's guys like you that make me embarassed when I tell people I'm from Repulican Red - Utah.

    Even more so if I ever discover you happen to also be LDS.

    FYI - My LDS Stake Center in 100% GREEN.
    Would you be just as upset to know you aren't "thinking" like the Brethern?
    Are you just as upset that your hard earned tithing is being "squander it away on 'green' energy" knowing full well that you might be wrong all along?

    Just asking for you to keep an openmind to the possiblity YOU might the one who is wrong, and may be duped by AM radio college-drop-outs.

    That's all.

  • JP Chandler, AZ
    Dec. 7, 2012 11:56 a.m.

    Actually Jason, seven years ago I thought very much the same as you, and even used the same arguments. I thought I had all the answers on climate change and thought the whole thing was a big hoax. In order to prove it, I started doing my own research. I looked at the source of every article I read, and looked at the sources they referenced. What I found was that what I thought I knew was quite easy to disprove.

    I didn't ask you to believe "a bunch of like-minded individuals." I asked you to look into the arguments against what you think you know, and see if you can prove those arguments wrong. I like Skeptical Science because they provide links to all their sources so you can do your own fact checking.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Dec. 7, 2012 11:47 a.m.

    For all arguing that some scientific principle or factoid means that climate change is not real or that humans have no hand in the changes we see, I have a question.

    Do you really think that those in the science community are unaware of this? That you (and cadre of similarly minded non-scientists) know what the scientists do not?

    If so, then please inform them.

    If not, then the only answer is a conspiracy of vast proportions. Which leads to another question.

    When was the last time thousands of people across language, cultural, political and national borders all secretly agreed to hush things up and maintain their silence for decades?

    See? That is the problem. Conspiracies don’t work. They fall apart. This one is not falling apart, it is gathering steam.

    For those who say that the conspiracy is motivated by money, please look at the combined net worth of the frequently cited players (Gore, Soros, etc.) and compare it with Exxon, Shell, or BP.

    Finally, when businesses start to plan (and spend money) based on their own studies, we should sit up and take notice.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 11:21 a.m.

    Here we go - AGAIN.

    I can so easily pick out the AM hate radio listeners just by reading their "Climate Change is a Hoax" comments. Parroted vertabim from their college-drop-out radio talk show hosts.

    Rush Limbaugh also tells you sheeple tobacco doesn't cause cancer, and is even GOOD for you - despite what 99% of the Scientists have said for decades.

    Why the lack of integrity? At least be consistant in your parroting.

  • D Van Duker Syracuse, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 10:18 a.m.

    The theory is that use of fossil-fuels increases atmospheric green-house gases, mainly CO2. Increasing CO2 levels form an insulating blanket; trapping heat that would otherwise dissipate to outer-space. The KEY to the theory is human causation.

    In 2010, a British study measured CO2 levels; objectively comparing atmospheric CO2 levels back to the 1880s. The study was to identify when mankind exceeded the earths CO2 saturation level to pinpoint when mankind started causing global-warming. The data was conclusive and unexpected; CO2 levels have been at a constant all the way back to pre-industrialization. Inexplicably, the earths natural mechanisms are FULLY compensating for mankinds increased use of fossil-fuels.

    The greenhouse gas theory should have fallen apart when CO2 levels were found to be constant. A man-made thermal-blanket theory cannot be reconciled to observations. The media and politician CANNOT give up on the idea that mankind is the key to averting a climate disaster. Laws can be passed to build windmills and tax oil; but, politicians cannot outlaw solar-flares or legislate against natural warming and cooling cycles. Sadly political-science evolved from the science of politics to the politics of science.

  • jasonlivy Orem, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 9:48 a.m.


    So you have found a group of like-minded people on a website that supports how you think? And you want me, who doesn't think like you, to be convinced that climate change is worth completely altering my life and give my hard earned money to the government so they can squander it away on 'green' energy knowing full well that nothing I do will alter the climate?

    Do you think we're all that stupid?

    I get a sense that you are a bit arrogant...that you have figured it all out. You're obviously smarter than the rest of us. You've been on wikipedia and read about 'climate change'. You've been on other websites and read the research. You're educated and the rest of us are not. Fine.

    Have you even considered this for what it is? To deny climate change is a death sentence for a climate scientist, even if there is data that would refute their theories. There is too much deceit and politics in regards to climate change for me to alter my life the way you would like me to. Sorry...

  • terra nova Park City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 9:48 a.m.

    It is unfortunate that comments on this board devolve into "he said, she said" arguments about the truth of global warming. It is like listening to theologians argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is the unknowing arguing the unknowable.

    What I know is simple: If you make a mess, pick it up. If you open a gate, close it. If your dog poops in the park, bag it so someone else doesn't step in it. It is good manners. It is a form of kindness. It is thoughtful. Reducing the messes we make is a way of being good stewards in our short sojourn here on earth. If you have a way to pollute less, please employ it. You may think it does not matter. But small things add up.

    We all benefit from cleaner air, water and earth. Be kinder and more mindful. Do small things to help and the big things will tend to take care of themselves.

  • justamacguy Manti, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 9:42 a.m.

    The author should look at some Utah facts. Yes, last year was a drought, and this year is not looking the best right now. But, for several years prior to this one our ski resorts have had their latest closing dates ever. Some still having skiing on the 4th of July. Give me the facts DS news, not what ifs.

  • Sensible Scientist Rexburg, ID
    Dec. 7, 2012 9:18 a.m.

    Yet another "what-if" article with no factual basis for alarm.

    Weather is not climate. Events in 2012 are irrelevant to the climate change discussion.

    Temperatures have been flat since 1998. What warming trend?

  • JP Chandler, AZ
    Dec. 7, 2012 8:58 a.m.

    Your statement that we were worrying about an ice age in the 70's tells me you haven't done your research. Newsweek had a story warning about the possibility of an ice age based on a minority viewpoint. The majority of the climate community (small at the time) had no such opinion.

    @The rest of the crowd
    Take a few minutes and write down why you "know" human-caused climate change is a myth. Then go to the Skeptical Science website (google it) and look up your arguments. They have a great summary as well as deeper analysis including citations of references for all the common arguments. Educate yourself to what the science says, then see if you can prove any of it wrong.

    All of the common arguments (like the 70's ice age one) that you're likely to read in the comments on this story have already been addressed. When you cite them, you're just adding further proof that the denialists don't understand the science.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 8:47 a.m.

    People forget that God controls climate and impacts on the people due to their living good and productive lives with moral values and esteem for other people in all the world.

    With 70 percent of the earth being water, that is a pretty good environment with the solution to pollution is dilution. The oceans are deep and even though it is great to think of the environmental impacts of what we do, it is a money making proposition for people who are in that field.

    We need to think of things like integrity, taking care of our families, sort of like the Ten Commandments type of living. Those things include love, respect and honor of people, God, and governments and laws.

    This world may have 70 percent water but it also has a large percentage of land that isn't even lived on. When God made this world, He knew what he was doing in everything he made from flowers, trees, and plants to animals of every type made for people who are His.

    He loves us and wants us to take care of the world He made for us. We have troubles but living good will help us more.

  • jasonlivy Orem, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 8:33 a.m.

    My biggest problem with so-called 'climate change' being caused by carbon dioxide is that there is no definitive, absolute proof. And not seeing snow on the ground is not proof.

    We are so short-sighted. We don't see snow on the ground and we immediately panic that climate change is upon us and we are all doomed. Climate Change, in all reality, is social engineering and a massive money pit. I would dare say that it is one of the biggest culprits to our national debt. And what do we have to show for it?

    Do we really think that if everyone on the planet stopped driving cars, all the factories shut down, and the human race stopped emitting any carbon dioxide (as we all hold our breath), that snow would magically start falling again?

    The climate change we were worrying about in the '70s wasn't a warming trend, but the next ice age. Just a few short years ago, Utah experienced a couple of the best snow years in their history! My house, in south-eastern Utah, was literally buried. In a desert no less!

    Let's all take a step back and relax....

  • stevo123 slc, ut
    Dec. 7, 2012 8:04 a.m.

    Dumprake, All of the remotes (RAWS) sites I watch are still there. Even some one like you could step out and watch the snow/rain level which is at 8000+feet. The greatest snow on earth is getting thicker and wetter, and we are losing the best water storage we have ...the mid level snow pack.

  • JP Chandler, AZ
    Dec. 7, 2012 7:43 a.m.

    Here we go again: a deluge of armchair scientists who think they know better than those who've dedicated their professional lives to studying the climate. Why do people trust politicians more than they trust science? Yes, Al Gore is a politician and yes he's using climate change for personal gain. Fine, don't listen to Al Gore. Listen to the science.

  • dumprake Washington, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 7:41 a.m.

    Amy, you have been duped, along with anyone else who believes this so-called climate change nonsense. Climate change is a complete fraud. As a weather scientist, and one who tracks the weather, I can tell you this; data has been manipulated from the beginning. All remote weather sites have been removed and taken to the cities where we know temps report artificially high. So it's no wonder we're told 2012 is the hottest year on record. Baloney, it just is not so. And the worst of it is these guys actually believe they can alter the weather. They know that is also a lie, but it's a great way to get tax monies and gain power.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 7:01 a.m.

    Maybe lake Bonneville will come back and we can replace snow skiing with water skiing, fishing etc.

    Our snow seasons have always fluctuated. Some years we get alot and some years we don't. That's why we built resevoirs and canals. We are the second driest state in the union.

  • Norge Coug WEBSTER, MA
    Dec. 7, 2012 4:44 a.m.

    I roll my eyes everytime I see another of the Chicken Little's claiming this is the hottest year ever. Yes we have climate change. Sometimes like in the warm period that lasted from 1000-1400 AD it's warmer and the Vikings were growing grain in Greenland and Englishman were growing wine grapes in significant swaths of Great Britain. Other times it's very cold like in the 18th century when the canals in Amsterdam were frozen all winter, something that rarely happens today. Is it because of Carbon Dioxide? That certainly wasn't the case 800 years ago, and yet the climate fluctuated greatly.

    The article refers to large swaths of the USA having had an extremely hot summer and drought conditions. I live in Norway and we had an extremely wet and even by Norwegian standards a mild summer. Right now the temp. is unseasonably cold and we've been in a cold snap the last week with no end in sight. So I guess we're not experiencing global warming here.

    It's time for the American person in the street to see that the Global Warming Emperors have no clothes.