In early February, the new Outdoor Business Climate Partnership faced its first test, and its response made some people cranky.
The president of the International Ski Federation had made remarks to a Swiss newspaper that seemed dismissive of the threat of climate change. "To everyone who approached me shivering, I said 'Welcome to global warming!'" said Gian-Franco Kasper, the head of the FIS since 1998, referring to the cold at the PyeongChang Olympics last year. "There are always some winters that are cold and others warm."
Kasper was showered with denunciations, but the trio of industry heavyweights who the previous week had announced their partnership to seek climate change solutions remained publicly mum.
"We didn't feel that we needed to come out and have a social media attack on him," says Chris Steinkamp, who represents the Park City-based Snowsports Industries America, or SIA. "That's not our role."
Instead, says Steinkamp, his organization, SIA, had "high-level discussions" with the appropriate people in what he calls a "more thoughtful and measured approach."
"We are not just attracted by shiny objects," says Geraldine Link, director of public policy for the National Ski Areas Association. "The foundation for our partnership is working with respect when we're trying to affect climate change, and some of the messaging we saw—using profanities and calling the leader of the FIS a dinosaur and a denier, calling people names and using labels—that's not what we're all about."
At least in its early phase, this partnership is all about working with lawmakers in Washington D.C. and their staff, making the case for climate change as a business opportunity as well as an existential threat. The emphasis is finding bipartisan common ground. Putting a price on carbon emissions to accelerate innovation is one among several goals. Conversation is the key thing.
Heading to Washington
Members of the three business trade groups—NSAA, Snowsports Industries America, and the Outdoor Industry Association—that comprise the Outdoor Business Climate Partnership descended on Washington D.C. for a lobbying blitz May 21 and 22. Orchestrating the effort will be the much larger Ceres Policy Network, a Boston-based non-profit that has more than 50 members, including major companies such as Microsoft, Ben & Jerry's, and Kaiser Permanente.
In its 2019 Policy Outlook, Ceres identified carbon pricing as among its top five priorities.
"In 2018, we saw a carbon-pricing bill introduced by a bipartisan group of House lawmakers, and another introduced by House Republicans—the first Republican carbon-pricing legislation since 2010," the report says. "We will work to advance the conversation with lawmakers in both parties, and in both chambers, providing business support for meaningful progress."
Ceres also wants to see incentives for electric-vehicle infrastructure restored, appropriations for climate and clean energy research continued, and climate change mitigation integrated into new and existing infrastructure policy.
A particular focus in Washington is the bipartisan House Climate Solutions Caucus. Like Noah's Ark, it requires membership in pairs: a Republican for every Democrat. In the last election, it lost 20 Republicans and hence 20 Democrats. The total membership in the caucus slimmed from 90 members to 50, according to Roll Call.
In going to Washington D.C., the new climate partnership can claim to represent a hunk of the US$837 billion outdoor recreation industry. Largest among the three trade organizations is the Boulder-based Outdoor Industry Association. It proclaims itself as the voice of the outdoor recreation industry, both locally and in Washington D.C. Members include more than 1,200 manufacturers, retailers, distributors, suppliers, and others from across the country.
Andrew Pappas, manager of state and local policy for OIA, says the message he'll make in Washington, D.C. is that climate change is a business issue, not just an environmental issue.
"Our businesses do rely upon the certainty of environmental quality, and there needs to be a bipartisan solution to climate change," says Pappas.
One blueprint for achieving bipartisan climate change action in Washington, says Pappas, is the reauthorization of the Land and Water Fund as part of a public lands package. Funding remains missing, although a bill with bipartisan support proposes to make funding permanent.
Bridging the gaps
Even the reauthorization for multiple years "definitely did not happen overnight," says Pappas. "I think it's the same thing with climate. It won't be overnight. We need to bridge gaps and find common ground, and hopefully this partnership can find those common grounds and bring business voices to (achieve) solutions."
That sounds hopelessly naïve. Climate change has become a partisan issue. Republicans have only occasionally bucked Donald Trump, and Trump has called global warming a Chinese hoax and done everything in his power to bring back the failing coal industry and to stall other efforts to decarbonize the economy. Given this backdrop, can this new coalition really hope to make headway in Washington?
SIA's Steinkamp sees a different reality than the overt partisan divide. The reality of human-caused climate change is accepted by people on both sides of the political aisle, he says. What remains absent is consensus about the immediate need for a broad response at the federal level.
When he goes to Washington, he will emphasize that major action now will avert the worst damage of the future. Think spending $1 today to avoid spending $10 in a few decades.
"You have a lot of people, conservatives, who are not coming out against climate change," says Steinkamp, who headed Protect Our Winters for 10 years. "I do think they believe that climate change is real, but they need to be given compelling arguments to address it. And I think the compelling argument is the economic case."
For ski areas, though, the climate case is a business case.
"The ski industry in Colorado, if we don't take action now, we'll lose 80 per cent of our ski season by 2090," says Steinkamp.
In the long run, low-elevation ski areas clearly will be in trouble. Whistler already gets lots of rain during winter at the base area. Rain will creep up the mountain. Some resorts in California may not make it.
Rocky Mountain resorts, being higher and more inland, will likely have snow well through the 21st century. But the warming climate has arguably already shortened ski season and will continue to do so even more. Plus, January rain will become more common. (See story from 2016.)
As well, climate havoc in world economics may erode the affluence that that allows people to take vacations in Colorado.
Seeing opportunities, not gloom
This gloominess, though, will not be the entrée of the businesses descending upon congressional offices. "If you talk about resorts being out of business that's a pretty tough statement to make, so you had better be careful," says Steinkamp.
Rather, the talk will be primarily of silver linings: opportunity for economic growth in ways that reduce climatic and hence economic peril. If a price on carbon ranks high on the agenda, the partnership isn't married to a specific policy. But the goal is to decarbonize the economy by 2050, says Steinkamp.
The climate partnership began coming together in discussions last autumn. Part of the impetus, says NSAA's Link, was the Trump administration's rollback of energy and safety requirements, including the weakening of the fuel efficiency standards.
A new category of economic data from the U.S. government that measures the economic bulk of the recreation industry adds muscle to the argument, Link says. "It gives us a lot of power on the national stage."
In her view, the new partnership can deliver synergies in reducing carbon footprints of the individual members. For example, can aggregated power-purchase agreements provide renewable electricity supplies, much as what Vail Resorts was able to do with its purchase of generation from a wind farm in eastern Nebraska?
In making efforts to reduce their own carbon footprints, says Link, the members will be able to add credibility to lobbying efforts. "We are optimistic that we can at least begin a dialogue and build support."
The last significant climate change legislation in Congress was in 2009. Called the Waxman-Markey bill, after its primary sponsors, Rep. Henry Waxman, of California, and then-Rep. (and now Sen.) Ed Markey, of Massachusetts, it would have instituted a cap-and-trade system, forcing innovation by effectively limiting emissions.
Congressional members from farm and coal states sank the legislation. Wyoming remains the nation's largest producer of coal. As of 2017, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, it was responsible for 41 per cent of production, followed by West Virginia at 12 per cent.
Will this delegation try to entertain a conversation with one of Wyoming's congressional delegation, perhaps Sen. John Barrasso?
"Absolutely," Steinkamp answered when posed the rhetorical question. "There are a lot of conversations going on about climate change behind closed doors."
Providing cover
What the climate partnership must do, whether it's Barrasso or other members of Congress, is provide "the rationale and cover to speak out on it," says Steinkamp. "This isn't a red-and-blue state thing any more. It just can't be. John Barrasso is a rational human being who has to understand that climate change is real."
Even more, added Steinkamp, Barrasso has seen coal tumble from its once royal status.
Coal production nationally in 2018 fell to the lowest level in 39 years, the Energy Information Administration reported.
"Warning bells are ringing across Wyoming's Powder River Basin that the largest producing coal region of the country is in big trouble," reports Heather Richardson of the Casper-Star Tribune in April.
"Wyoming made its peace with the idea that coal's best years were likely behind her, but that a more modest future for Wyoming coal, with manageable losses over time, was also likely," Richardson added. "That may not be the case."
The Outdoor Business Climate Partnership agenda is still being invented. If there's agreement on the need for carbon pricing, it's not the singular goal. A carbon tax in France yielded the yellow-vest protests. Government must foster alternatives, such as cleaner cars. "That's where the Trump administration regulatory rollbacks make no sense," says NSAA's Link.
But the most important thing is joining of singular voices into one.
"Getting the trade groups behind climate change is something we have been talking about for a long time," says Steinkamp, "and it's finally happening."
