Artificial snow may be masking long-term risks in skiing, while Formula One could help drive low-carbon innovation beyond the track.
Artificial snow is helping keep ski resorts open as winters become warmer and less predictable, but its success may also be delaying the deeper changes mountain economies will eventually need to make, according to a King's Business School expert.
Speaking on the Office Hours podcast, Professor Paolo Aversa said snowmaking technology has become so widespread that it is now central infrastructure for much of the ski industry.
In countries such as Italy, between 90 and 95 per cent of ski resorts rely on artificial snowmaking in some form, helping extend seasons and protect tourism-dependent economies. But Professor Aversa warned that the effectiveness of the technology risks creating a false sense of security about the long-term viability of skiing in a warming climate:
"The problem is not that artificial snow doesn't work. The problem is that it works even too well. It creates the belief that technology will always solve the problem. There will eventually be a point of no return where even artificial snow becomes unfeasible because temperatures will not stay low enough for long enough."
Ski tourism contributes around €11-12 billion annually to Italy's economy and supports roughly 200,000 jobs, helping explain why resorts continue investing heavily in snowmaking systems and infrastructure.
But those systems are energy and water intensive. Snow production now accounts for an estimated 30 to 40 per cent of total energy use in Italian ski resorts, while also requiring large volumes of water and costly infrastructure such as reservoirs, pumping systems and automated snow guns.
Professor Aversa said this form of climate adaptation can unintentionally lock regions into increasingly expensive and resource-intensive business models, particularly for lower-altitude resorts that face the fastest warming trends.
As operating costs rise, the impact is also being felt by visitors. Higher ski pass prices and accommodation costs are gradually reshaping who can afford the sport.
Professor Aversa said:
"Skiing was once a classic middle-class activity. Increasingly, it risks becoming something that only wealthier families can afford."
A different climate story in Formula One
While skiing illustrates the risks of technological adaptation delaying deeper change, Professor Aversa argues that another sport may demonstrate a more constructive role for innovation.
In the same episode, he pointed to Formula One as an example of a sport that functions as a high-pressure research and development (R&D) environment, where technologies developed for racing often transfer into wider society.
"Formula One cars are essentially R&D labs on wheels," he said.
He highlighted the development of net-zero synthetic fuels as one example. Unlike electric vehicles, which require entirely new infrastructure and vehicle fleets, synthetic fuels could potentially be used in existing combustion engines without modification.
"The interesting thing about this fuel is that it can be used directly in normal cars without any technological change."
Although still expensive and in early development, such fuels could provide a route to reducing emissions from the millions of combustion vehicles already on the road.
The comparison between skiing and Formula One highlights a broader lesson, he argues: innovation alone is not enough. The key question is whether new technologies help industries genuinely transition to a lower-carbon future or simply prolong existing models.
"In skiing, technology may be delaying the deeper transition that mountain economies will eventually need. In Formula One, innovation may actually help drive wider technological change."
Listen to the full episode of Office Hours to hear Professor Aversa discuss what sport gets right and wrong when confronting climate change, from artificial snow in alpine resorts to the future of net-zero fuels in motorsport.
