With Roger Schiffman November 2009
In his career as a New York Times foreign-affairs columnist and three-time Pulitzer Prize-winner, Golf Digest Contributing Editor Thomas L. Friedman has interviewed hundreds of experts around the world on subjects ranging from Arab-Israeli relations to telecommunications in China and India to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The latest of his five books, Hot, Flat, and Crowded, exhaustively examines how environmental issues will affect the world's population and economy. Friedman also is an avid golfer (5.8 Index) and plays whenever and wherever his turbo-charged schedule allows. We spoke to him at his Bethesda, Md., home, which is equipped with solar panels and a geothermal heating/cooling system.
Q: Golf Digest: In Hot, Flat, and Crowded, your major thesis is that we need a greener America and green capitalism not only to improve and sustain the environment but also to grow our economy. Can the same premise be applied to golf?
A: Tom Friedman: Golf has an ambivalent relationship with the environment. On one hand, it's a great preserver of open spaces. Golf doesn't pave the world -- it helps to green the world. But the downside is, it uses a lot of fertilizer, pesticides and water. And this is in a world where we know that synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are toxic, and water is more and more scarce. Golf could do a lot more. We're finally getting our arms around hybrid cars -- well, what would a hybrid golf course look like? Every course in America should strive to be Prius Country Club. There is no reason, for instance, that a new clubhouse should not aim to be a LEED [Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design] building. If you have solar-powered carts, then why not a solar-powered clubhouse? A golf course should aspire to generate as much energy as it consumes -- golf should be leading the way toward energy net zero. The future is net zero. Take wind turbines. Now that states and the stimulus bill are giving tax credits for wind-driven and solar energy, wind energy makes sense for certain golf courses. Some courses would be great potential wind farms. Courses should also strive to be carbon positive -- by measuring everything, a course could come up with its carbon footprint. Every golf course should have its carbon rating on the scorecard, alongside its Course Rating, Slope, par and yardage.
Q: How could a course manager go about doing that?
A: You can get an assessment from any number of environmental consulting firms. But here's where the USGA could help: Just as it sets the rules and equipment standards, it should be setting environmental standards. It could create a new division, hire its own scientists, create its own metrics, and for a fee -- it could be a money-making operation -- it would conduct an environmental audit for a course on an annual basis and give it a rating. Golf courses and resorts would welcome that seal of approval, and it could start a trend. The USGA has a huge role and responsibility. It would set the standard, for the sake of preserving the game.
Q: But how would these things help the golf industry, which is at best stagnant right now?
A: Suppose you can say: "Hey, our club is energy net zero, carbon positive, and it's environmentally sustainable. The club next door is an environmental wasteland." Well, you're going to get a lot more people, especially young people, who want to join your club. Just as LEED buildings get higher rents today and attract more people, so environmentally responsible courses will have a competitive advantage.
Q: Golf is such a small part of the overall challenge facing Planet Earth. How much impact can golf courses really have environmentally? Are we just kidding ourselves?
A: Every little bit helps. Golf courses have great potential to be what I call "ecosystems for innovation." For example, does your golf club really need to have gas-powered carts when there are solar-powered ones available? Have you done the math? Sebonack Golf Club on Long Island did and found solar would be cheaper. Now, Sebonack by itself isn't going to affect the amount of COČ in the atmosphere, but when someone sees Sebonack's solar carts, and they order a fleet of solar carts, what happens? The price of solar carts comes down. Then maybe the public course that couldn't afford them before can afford them now. The whole game changes. The thing you have to remember is, oil and gas are commodities, and the more we use them the more the price goes up, like any commodity. Solar, wind -- they are technologies, so the more you use them, the more the price goes down.
Q: One obstacle to golf becoming more environmentally responsible is the perception of golfers that their course needs to look like Augusta National, with wall-to-wall, uniform-green fairways and rough. Should we be trying to change that image?
A: We have to change that image. I don't fault Augusta. Every sport needs its temple, its cathedral. But if everyone copies Augusta and makes their course longer, tighter, softer and more carpeted, it will increase golf's environmental footprint. It takes more water and fertilizer and mowers.
Look at what Tom Watson did at Turnberry this year. He was able to do what he did at age 59 because at Turnberry, it's a game played on the ground as well as in the air. That's a game a lot more of us can play. How much fun did we have watching Tom? How many people did that bring into the game? But what he said afterward was: "I couldn't do this at Augusta. You have to bomb that ball there."
As we get older, we want extra roll. I love coming to a course and seeing firm and fast fairways. Royal County Down strikes me as a browner course rather than a greener course. Or Royal Melbourne, a great Alister Mackenzie course -- I'll bet their water bill is very low. And the good players really like a hard and fast track. It's fun. Making courses "green" in the best sense of that word means making them browner, firmer, cheaper to maintain -- and more fun to play.
- Text Size:
- Small Text
- Medium Text
- Large Text
