You are here

UPDATE | Yellowstone National Park Tourism Generates Billions Of Pounds Of CO2 Emissions

Share
Yellowstone National Park's unique and pristine environment each year lures millions of tourists who are responsible for generating roughly 2.3 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions, according to a new study/Rebecca Latson file

Yellowstone National Park's unique and pristine environment each year lures millions of tourists who are responsible for generating nearly 2.3 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions, according to a new study/Rebecca Latson file

Editor's note: This updates with additional comment from Emily J. Wilkens, a co-author of the study.

Tourism to Yellowstone National Park, which attracts millions of visitors a year searching for spectacular scenery, geothermal wonders, and a pristine environment, is responsible for generating nearly 2.3 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions each year, a new study says. 

It's a staggering output of a greenhouse gas that is a major contributor to climate change, one that the study's authors hope will prompt the tourism industry to develop "strategies to reduce emissions and hasten the achievement of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reduction targets."

The authors, Emily J. Wilkins of the U.S. Geological Survey, Jordan Smith from the Institute of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism at Utah State University, and Dani T. Dagan from Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson University, focused on Yellowstone because of its global prominence. 

What they found was that of that annual CO2 output, the bulk is created by visitors heading to and leaving the park [roughly 90 percent]. Inside the park, transit is responsible for about 5 percent of the total, with lodgings accounting for 4 percent, and other park operations generating about 1 percent of the total, stated the study, which appeared on PLOS Climate last week.

Air travel to Yellowstone was the largest generator of CO2 emissions, according to the study/PLOS Climate

Air travel by visitors heading to Yellowstone National Park is the largest generator of CO2 emissions, according to the study/PLOS Climate

"Nature-based tourism provides numerous personal and social benefits to tourists; it also plays an essential role in the economies of many municipalities, counties, states, and even countries. This is certainly true in the western United States, where many state governments actively promote outdoor recreation and tourism at national parks and other public lands to out-of-state and out-of-country markets," the authors wrote. "However, focusing primarily on the social and economic benefits of tourism obfuscates the many environmental costs of tourism. Principal amongst these effects are CO2 emissions, for which tourism contributes 8 percent globally."

The study calculated that "[V]isitors who fly [to reach Yellowstone] only made up about 35 percent of all visitors, but produced 72 percent of the emissions related to transit to and from the park."

Inside the park, recreation vehicles generated the highest CO2 output per person, they found, at 70.07 kilograms [154.5 popunds], "while tour buses had the lowest CO2 emissions per visitor (15.46 kg) [34 pounds]. Only 6 percent of visitors travel by RV within the park, yet these visitors produce 17.2 percent of all emissions related to transit within the park."

Tourism to Yellowstone National Park generates more than 2.2 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions annually/PLOS Climate

The problem is only expected to get worse in the coming years, the authors added.

"By 2035, tourism-related emissions are expected to grow by 161 percent from 2005 levels, largely due to a projected growth in air travel and longer transit distances," they wrote. "Although the overall efficiency of transit has increased over time (i.e., increasing km/L of vehicles), CO2 emissions per tourist are still rising in many places because tourists are travelling greater distances. Due to the rising demand for tourism and increased CO2 emissions per tourist, it is critical that strategies are adopted to help slow the rise in tourism-related emissions.

Reducing that output of the greenhouse gas will require a multi-pronged approach, they said, including a reduction in transit needed to reach Yellowstone. "[T]his includes a greater proportion of local or regional visitors, fewer visitors flying, and increased fuel efficiency of vehicles," the authors wrote.

"We weren't trying to suggest that the total amount of tourism or the number of park visitors needs to change," Wilkens said Friday. "We weren't trying to suggest that people shouldn't visit national parks. There's a lot of research that suggests that nature-based tourism has benefits, including increased environmentally minded behaviors at home. And so there's all these benefits from visiting parks. ... We were trying to suggest that there were other changes that can reduce emissions related to tourism. For instance, being a little bit more cognizant of increased fuel efficiencies, or visitors taking more public transit, if it's available, or driving rather than flying, or visiting destinations that are a little bit closer to home rather than going on huge trips halfway across the country or world in some cases."

The size of Yellowstone — 2.2 million acres — does help reduce the park's CO2 output, which is generated by traffic as well as lodgings, museums, visitor centers, and other facilities operated by the National Park Service and concessioners, the study pointed out.

"Within the United States, the total value of vegetative carbon sequestration on National Park Service lands is $707 million annually (assuming a social cost of carbon price of $40.45 per metric ton of carbon), but there is a projected drop in future sequestration due to climate change and the increasing prevalence of forest fires," the study pointed out. "Previous research found Yellowstone NP had the second highest carbon sequestration of NPS units and is a net carbon sink, with -1.5 megatons of CO2 annually. However, even with a substantial increase in terrestrial sequestration (i.e., land use change), terrestrial carbon sequestration alone could not offset current global emissions. Therefore, understanding and reducing total CO2 emissions remains critical."

The study, the authors noted, was intended to spur a larger discussion around the role of tourism in generating greenhouse gases and how the outputs can be reduced.

"The work is intended to reinvigorate discussion on both the major role tourism plays in shaping the climate and the many ways tourism’s effect can be mitigated through strategic interventions, such as marketing strategies that change the composition of visitors or regulations that improve the fuel efficiency of vehicles," they said.

Comments

How much could we save on emissions if this geological position was removed from our operational budget?

What a waste of money pursuing a clearly political viewpoint

And with ever increasing efficiency in vehicles- and a limited entry system in place- how on earth will emissions go up?

What a waste of money putting politics first and our parks last.  Again


Been to fishermans bridge in the lake district?, Have you used the museum there or the store?  Did you see or smell the septic plant that operates the faciliies there?  

Probaly not....

I mention this because Yellowstone is a geothermal resource that could power our entire nation.  And it could be done in the backcountry on a road closed to the public that would never be seen by tourists.  It would be a very small chunk out of a huge wilderness area.  

Its the most remote region in the lower 48 with unlimited potential and it just sits there.  Perhaps these geologists should be finding out where best to put such a thermal plant


What utter nonsense. 1)People go on vacation.  If they don't go to Yellowstone, they are going to go somewhere else that is likely to have a similar footprint.  2) The amount of Carbon they attribute to Yellowstone is a minute portion of all carbon emitted.  If it went to zero the impact would be just that.  3) The actual extent of the impact of carbon emmissions is far from a "known".   The fact that most predictions based on AGW have proven to be wrong would suggest the statement " It's a staggering output of a greenhouse gas that is a major contributor to climate change" is flat out wrong. 


Are you referring to the climate scientists at the state universities that peformed the study? How does that have anything to do with a "geological position" at Yellowstone?


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.