this discussion report explained what the Foundation felt VANOC needed to do in order to actually be able to meet their goal of being the greenest Olympic Games.
"Climate change is a defining issue of our time, and the Winter Olympics are an opportunity to show leadership by reaching and inspiring billions of fans and spectators with solutions to global warming," says Paul Lingl of the David Suzuki Foundation. "Despite some missed opportunities, the steps taken by the 2010 Olympics demonstrate that climate solutions are doable, affordable and can have a lasting legacy."
On February 3rd (1 week before the games were to begin) the Foundation graded the overall efforts and results of VANOC's attempt to make the 2010 Games the "most sustainable games yet". The result = a bronze. Which in my opinion - is pretty sad if this was the attempt to be the greenest games and it got a bronze... dare I even want to know what the previous Games would've gotten...
The evaluation was broken down into 10 categories. Categories that the Foundation "felt were together a good measure of overall performance with respect to climate action and leadership".
- GOALS - clear goals were set towards energy efficiency and renewable energy... however no goals were set related to a sustainable transportation legacy, nor very clear on how they would "move towards carbon-neutral games".
- TRANSPARENCY - VANOC provided information of it's climate-related initiatives, and published in total 5 sustainability reports (more than any other organizing committee). VANOC communicated often with local environmental groups that provided feedback on sustainability issues. However, there was a poor information provided on their overall transportation program, and a breakdown of their overall budget for sustainability issues.
- MEASURING CLIMATE CHANGE -VANOC provided reasonable estimates for all emissions that would be emitted from the Games, and made an extraordinary effort to reduce them over seven years which had never been done for any other games. However, they didn't account in fugitive emissions from refrigeration, or those from suppliers and contractors.
- VENUES - 8/9 of the new venues were certified under the LEED building rating system. VANOC gets an A for Venues. Once the games are over, the community will be left with innovative, energy-efficient buildings that will reduce greenhouse gases and and save money for years into the future.
- ENERGY USE - VANOC delivered on it's committment to use clean, renewable energy sources through use of micro-hydro, fuel cells, solar heating and ground source heat pumps, seawater, and many other green sources. They successfully reduced greenhouse gas emissions from generator use by 90% compared to the Turin 2006 Winter Games.
- TRANSPORTATION - PROS: VANOC did develop sustainable transportation guidelines that include initiatives such as ride sharing, route optimization, and a no-idling policy for their operations. The new Canada Line to the airport will benefit greatly for tourists and locals in the future. Also, many of the streets that were closed during the games were open still to pedestrians and cyclists giving an incentive for people to choose not to drive, and of course the 30% reduction in vehicle traffic goal during the games. CONS: Instead of expanding the existing rail lines, the Sea to Sky highway was widened at a cost of $600 million. This is going to encourage more traffic once the games are over, and result in more greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. The buses used to transport spectators were diesel buses. Even though 30% was a measurable goal, residents will go right back to using their personal vehicles rather than using public transportation.
- OVERALL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS - it was estimated that the Games would reduce overall emissions by 15%, however VANOC didn't publicly announce any emission reduction targets, therefore it is hard to evaluate their success, and it's possible they may have reduction opportunities that were missed.
- OFFSETTING REMAINING EMISSIONS -VANOC had committed to offset 118,000 tonnes of their emissions, which is substantial but it stills represents under half of overall Games-related emissions.
- MOBILIZING SPONSERS AND OTHERS -VANOC reached out to sponsors and encouraged their feedback on sustainability issues. In 2009, VANOC held the World Conference on Sport and the Environment bringing together athletes, sponsors, and organizations to discuss climate change and other environmental concerns on sporting events.
- PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT - the Olympics were a major opportunity to inspire and educate the world on climate change issues, but VANOC failed to take advantage of it's high profile and reach out to the people on these issues. They did a lot of work behind the scenes to make the games as green as possible but didn't promote enough for others to do their part.
No comments:
Post a Comment