Patagucci to Aussie wholesale partners: reduce your carbon footprint or no discount for you! They literally said that.

[jt10000]

But them threatening to withhold discounts if they don't do A, B, C, and D in Patagonia's plan to save the planet, just sets off my bullshitometre.

I'd take your complaints about BS and greenwashing more seriously if it seemed you wanted companies to do more, rather than less.

 

[Rich_Ease_3051]

I'd take your complaints about BS and greenwashing more seriously if it seemed you wanted companies to do more, rather than less.

I actually like Patagucci as a consumer company. Their products are great, the staff are friendly, and in Sydney, you can walk into to one of their stores and there's a sewing machine where one of their staff will repair your Patagucci apparel for free.

I don't even really care about the wholesaler situation. Doesn't affect me as gear availability is my main concern more than price.

What grinds my gears is the whole carbon situation as it pertains to our hobby. We are arguably the highest carbon producers out of all outdoor hobbies. And even with indoor hobbies, we might be given the amount of energy used to create and maintain snow in indoor ski resorts.

Between the travel to different countries, which the major ski conglomerates encourage with passes that get cheaper per usage per year when used in many locations in different continents, and the scaremongering that our beloved mountains will melt, we are not really in a position to preach about lowering carbon nor are we the right market to be preached on about lowering carbon.

Heck, The Powers That Be, who decide how to lower our carbon, meet up every year in a location to ski! They could just Zoom meet, but no, they have to fly in with their own private jets to tiny little Davos.

All I'm saying is this fucking hobby, if you participate in it, you are directly or indirectly one of the biggest carbon producers out there compared to all other hobbies. And if you're really serious about this whole carbon situation (I'm not, I don't believe in it), put up: abandon the hobby. Or just shut up.

 

[jt10000]

I don't believe in it

Noted. Noted from your first post.

 

[dbostedo]

And if you're really serious about this whole carbon situation (I'm not, I don't believe in it), put up: abandon the hobby. Or just shut up.

Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why not put effort into still maintaining the sport we love while at the same time improving the carbon footprint situation?

The all or nothing kind of approach kind of sounds like "Why bother making cleaner running cars? Either get rid of cars altogether, or don't worry about their pollution".

 

[Rich_Ease_3051]

The all or nothing kind of approach kind of sounds like "Why bother making cleaner running cars? Either get rid of cars altogether, or don't worry about their pollution".

There are actually people who refuse to buy cars out of principle and just bike or walk or use public transport to get to wherever they want.

Carbon-allergic skiers can take a cue from them.

 

[jt10000]

There are actually people who refuse to buy cars out of principle and just bike or walk or use public transport to get to wherever they want.

Carbon-allergic skiers can take a cue from them.

I can't help but wonder if you hold the same all-or-nothing standard for things you agree with.

 

[Rich_Ease_3051]

I can't help but wonder if you hold the same all-or-nothing standard for things you agree with.

I mean I guess it doesn't matter really at this stage what standards I hold. It's just the annoyance factor. They can greenwash or not but in the end, I can still buy the gear I want and partake in the hobby that I love.

Well up until the time this carbon credit social score system becomes real. For now, it's just all fluff, whether they believe it or not.

But there may come a time when you swipe that chip in your hand and it says you haven't planted enough trees or whatever or have already used up your carbon allocation this year when you went on your honeymoon trip to Fiji. Sorry, no Epic Pass for you!

When this shit becomes real, you will think "hmm, that Rich_Ease_3051 guy, he swallowed the black (carbon) pill a long time ago. He was right".

 

[skiJ]

I think you are are trying to put secret motivations here that don't really exist. Patagonia has a history of doing whatever they can to make positive changes with environmental issues and businesses associated with them in any way. In fact, they have a history of making bad-business choices. i.e. "Who cares if it costs more or we make less money..."

sarcasm (?)
( sarcasm is mostly lost on me... )

it is not my understanding that Patagonia ' has a history of making bad-business decisions' unless your model is cut costs at any opportunity to increase profitability - which with increasing frequency becomes less effective...

Patagonia in-contrast seems to use a more complex analysis -
it is not recent ( - and may no longer be current - ), but my understanding is years ago, when Patagonia went to only Organic Cotton, sales and revenue and profitability outpaced increased costs ( defying the projections of business analysts. )

truly savvy business people like Mr. Chouinard think differently and rarely tolerate fools.
( I have great Respect. )

skiJ

 

[geepers]

if you participate in it, you are directly or indirectly one of the biggest carbon producers out there compared to all other hobbies. And if you're really serious about this whole carbon situation (I'm not, I don't believe in it), put up: abandon the hobby. Or just shut up.

This is the old "we have to go back to living in caves, weave baskets and eat only root veggies" line. This individual responsibility thing best exemplified by the "crying Indian" faux environmental concern campaign the plastics industry ran to forestall effective action on plastic waste.

Individual action is all well and good but totally ineffective when other people don't play along. For any real action we need Govts to step up.

And no we don't have to return to a pre-industrial, agrarian existence. What we do need is for our electricity to be generated by means other than fossil fuels, same with the bulk of our transportation. And so on. All of which is quite do-able as we are an inventive species, but it's not without challenges. Heck, can even reduce livestock methane emissions by getting them to eat seaweed. (Which is good news for carnivores not too affected by the sad eyes.) It's net zero emissions, not zero emissions.

Of all the targets available to you re climate action or as regards overwhelming hypocrisy Patagonia is probably one of the tiniest around. And we wouldn't even need to look outside Australia.

 

[jt10000]

I mean I guess it doesn't matter really at this stage what standards I hold.

It does with regards to whether or not you're being hypocritical. You're calling out a company and other people for being (in your view) that way.