Snowmaking that removes CO2 from air is no longer science fiction: pilot projects at a handful of ski resorts are testing ways to marry snowmaking systems with carbon‑capture technologies to both preserve winter seasons and actively reduce atmospheric carbon. Early experiments combine direct air capture (DAC) approaches, mineralization techniques, and traditional snowguns to create slopes that can help sequester CO2 while delivering the snow athletes expect. This article looks inside those pilots, outlines costs and climate gains, and considers what carbon‑capture snowmaking could mean for the future of winter tourism.
How carbon-capture snowmaking works
At its simplest, carbon‑capture snowmaking integrates two components: an air‑capture or CO2‑rich input stream, and a system that converts water and mineral components into solid or stable carbonates within snow. There are two broad technical routes in current pilots:
- Integrated DAC + snow production: Small modular DAC units pull CO2 from ambient air. Captured CO2 is then reacted with alkaline solutions or minerals to precipitate stable carbonates. Those mineral slurries or treated water are fed to snowguns, so the produced snow contains solidified carbonates that remain locked in the snowpack.
- Alkaline mineralization in snowmaking water: Instead of storing gaseous CO2, some pilots dissolve alkaline materials (e.g., crushed silicate minerals or lime) into the snowmaking water. When CO2 naturally dissolves into that water or gas is bubbled through, carbonates form and get captured as part of the snow’s mineral fraction.
Both methods aim to move carbon into a stable, solid form that will either mineralize in the snowpack or be carried into soils and sediments as meltwater, reducing atmospheric CO2 over long timescales.
Pilots on the ground: what resorts are testing
Several small pilots—located in alpine regions of Europe and in the Rocky Mountains—are exploring different configurations. Common themes emerge across projects:
- Scale is deliberately modest: units are often sized to treat a fraction of a resort’s snowmaking water to measure impacts before scaling.
- Energy sources matter: pilots pair DAC with renewable electricity to reduce lifecycle emissions, since DAC and water treatment are energy‑intensive.
- Monitoring is rigorous: CO2 removed, energy used per ton captured, and downstream ecological impacts on meltwater chemistry are tracked closely.
These pilots are not uniform—some emphasize marketing and carbon‑neutral branding while others prioritize rigorous permanent sequestration metrics geared toward carbon markets.
Costs, benefits, and climate gains
Estimating the real climate benefit requires a full lifecycle analysis. The main cost drivers and payoff factors include:
- Capital and operating expenditures: DAC modules and water treatment systems add significant upfront costs compared to conventional snowmaking equipment. Ongoing electricity and maintenance are also substantial.
- Energy mix: If the system runs on fossil‑heavy electricity, net CO2 removal can be small or even negative; pairing with renewables increases net removal per dollar.
- Sequestration permanence: Mineralized carbonates locked into snow and soils can be long‑lived, but the exact permanence depends on local hydrology and chemistry.
- Co-benefits: Extending reliable snow cover, protecting local winter economies, and providing verifiable carbon credits that can offset other emissions.
Early pilot reports suggest carbon removal costs remain high—orders of magnitude above many mainstream carbon prices—largely because DAC and mineral processing are energy‑intensive and deployed at small scale. However, resorts may justify expenses through a combination of premium ticketing, eco‑tourism branding, corporate sponsorships, and emerging revenue from verified carbon removals sold to buyers seeking durable offsets.
Approximate climate gains
When designed and powered with renewables, a pilot can remove measurable CO2 per season, but the total tonnage is modest relative to regional emissions. The strategic value lies in proving technical feasibility and reducing unit costs through learning and scale. If widely adopted and linked with low‑carbon power, carbon‑capture snowmaking could become a component of resorts’ broader decarbonization plans rather than the sole solution.
Environmental, regulatory, and community considerations
Deploying carbon‑capture snowmaking poses environmental questions that pilots are addressing:
- Meltwater chemistry: Mineralized snow changes runoff composition; monitoring ensures water quality remains safe for downstream ecosystems and human use.
- Resource use: Additional water and energy demand must be balanced against local availability and conservation goals.
- Regulation and verification: Clear rules for counting removals—what counts as “permanent” sequestration—are still evolving, impacting whether credits can be sold.
- Community buy‑in: Local residents and environmental groups need transparency about risks, benefits, and monitoring results.
Successful pilots emphasize stakeholder engagement, publish independent monitoring data, and pair pilots with investments in renewables and water stewardship to avoid shifting burdens onto local communities or ecosystems.
What this could mean for the future of winter tourism
If technical hurdles, costs, and regulatory frameworks align, carbon‑capture snowmaking could become a niche but influential tool for resorts. Potential future scenarios include:
- High‑end resorts offering “carbon‑negative” ski packages that include verified CO2 removals produced on‑site.
- Consortia of resorts pooling investment to build centralized DAC/mineralization plants that serve multiple ski areas and lower per‑ton costs.
- Integration into regional climate strategies, where resorts contribute to local carbon budgets while investing in renewables and conservation.
Conversely, if costs remain high and verification lags, carbon‑capture snowmaking may stay limited to demonstration projects and marketing pilots rather than large‑scale deployment.
Key takeaways for resort managers and skiers
- Carbon‑capture snowmaking is promising but experimental—expect incremental progress and cautious scaling.
- Energy sourcing and rigorous monitoring are essential: renewables + independent data make the climate case credible.
- Community engagement, transparent science, and clear regulatory pathways will determine whether pilots become mainstream.
For skiers and mountain communities, the concept represents an inventive intersection of tourism, technology, and climate action: it doesn’t replace the need to cut emissions elsewhere, but it offers a potential pathway for resorts to contribute directly to permanent CO2 removal while keeping slopes open.
As pilots mature, the ski industry will need to weigh the tradeoffs—costs, energy, and environmental impacts—against the social and economic value of preserving winter recreation in a warming world.
Conclusion: Carbon‑capture snowmaking is an intriguing, early‑stage tool that could help ski resorts both protect snowy seasons and contribute to atmospheric CO2 removal—if energy, water, and verification challenges are solved. Explore pilot results, demand transparent data, and support solutions that pair removal with strong emissions reductions elsewhere.
Call to action: Want to follow the latest pilots and learn how resorts are measuring carbon removal? Subscribe to our newsletter for in‑depth pilot reports and expert briefings.
