Millions of people across the world have been glued to their television screens this summer, following the successes and shortfalls of athletes at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games. The Summer Olympic Games began in 1896 and has become one of the most renowned sporting competitions in the world. Trying to make an international event of this size green is a difficult feat. This year, an estimated 10,500 athletes and 15 million supporters will have visited Paris for the Games. The provision of transport, accommodation, and meals for all of these individuals is bound to have a detrimental impact on the environment. However, the Paris 2024 Organising Committee made efforts to rise to the challenge and “reduce [the] environmental and climate impact” of the Paris 2024 Games, to make this year’s Games the greenest yet.
Buildings and Accommodation
Perhaps the most notable environmental ambition outlined by the Paris Committee was to avoid building new competition venues for the Games. The Aquatics Centre was the only new permanent competition venue constructed. Most events were held in existing sports venues that had been renovated for the Games, or in “temporary infrastructures” with “eco-design criteria” (such as the use of low-carbon building materials) that could be “redeployed, reused or recycled” post-Games to minimise environmental impact. This marked a significant deviation from tradition, as multiple new venues are typically built for upcoming Games, such as the six new permanent venues that were built for the 2012 London Games. The Paris Committee also made an effort to provide greener accommodation for athletes. After the Games, the Athletes’ Village will be repurposed into a neighbourhood consisting of 2,500 homes and other additional features such as shops, offices, and parks. The Village also boasts a number of sustainable design features, including the return of the “cardboard beds” designed for the 2020 Tokyo Games.
Energy
Another goal of the Paris Committee was to use greener energy sources to power the Games. Rather than relying on diesel generators, they worked to connect competition venues to the public electricity network, which could be powered by renewable sources. All venues connected to this network were provided with 100% renewable energy produced by six wind farms and two solar farms located in France. The Paris Committee also invested in new renewable energy technology. For instance, solar panels were constructed on the new-build Aquatics Centre to provide renewable solar energy that accounted for 20% of the venue’s electricity needs.
The energy demand was also consciously reduced through particular design features. For example, the Aquatics Centre was designed with a concave rooftop and large-scale wooden features to reduce the need for energy, as the volume of air that needed to be heated was reduced by 30%. Also, old and new competition venues alike were fitted with LED lighting technology, to reduce the energy consumption from lighting by 80%. The Paris Committee initially intended to avoid the use of air conditioning at the Athletes’ Village, in an effort to further reduce energy consumption and associated carbon emissions, opting instead to rely on a more environmentally-friendly geothermal cooling system. However, due to significant backlash from athletes, the Committee agreed to allow competitors to bring their own air-conditioning units if they were self-funded.
Transport
Most international athletes and spectators flew by plane to France for the Games, significantly contributing to the carbon footprint of the event. Whilst taking an alternative, more environmentally-friendly mode of transport was impractical for individuals travelling from some locations, in other cases this was down to personal preference for the convenience of the fast, cheap flights on offer. This highlights how change is also needed at an individual level if the environmental impact of the Games is to be minimised. Once in Paris, the Paris Committee encouraged individuals to use the city’s public transport network. This network includes buses, trams, and the metro, with an additional 400km of bike lanes also being added for the Games. To reduce the emissions from athletes’ travel, 85% were given accommodation “within a 30-minute travel radius of their competition venues”.
Meal Provision
It has been estimated that over 600,000 meals were served each day at the Athletes’ Village. To reduce the harmful impact of catering en-masse, the Paris Committee implemented a series of strategies. Firstly, the amount of plant-based food provided was doubled relative to previous Games. This aimed to reduce the carbon emissions linked to food production, as by doubling plant-based food, carbon dioxide emissions were halved. However, this change was subject to criticism from the athletes, who argued that the plant-based meals were not adequately meeting their protein needs. This led to the Committee straying from its goal and ordering in more eggs and meat. If plant-based options are to be relied upon at future Games, their protein content may need to be assessed to ensure that athletes are adequately fuelled. Secondly, there was a push for predominantly locally-produced food, using “80% French origin products, 25% within 250km of the venues”, to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions from food transportation. Thirdly, the Paris Committee set out to limit food waste and recycle any uneaten food, whilst also halving the quantity of single-use plastic packaging relative to previous Games.
Carbon Offsetting
The Paris Committee set itself the goal of halving the carbon footprint of the Games relative to the average footprint of the 2012 London Games and 2016 Rio Games. Whilst a number of changes were made in an attempt to reduce the carbon emitted, carbon offsetting was also prioritised to account for emissions that were not avoided. A variety of offsetting projects are being funded by the Olympics at an international scale. Within France itself, the Committee has opted to fund four forestry projects: “a new forest project (1,340 ha in total) on the Pierrelaye-Bessancourt plain in the Ile-de-France region, and three projects to restock degraded forests, in Montmorency (15 km from the Stade de France), in the Vosges and in the Aisne”. However, it can be argued that offsetting should not be used to excuse carbon emissions, and that emission reduction should remain the priority.
Despite the efforts of the Paris Committee to make the Games greener, it is obvious that not all of the strategies put in place were successful and some argue that further changes could have been made. For instance, the surfing venue in Tahiti was subjected to significant coral reef destruction so that a “completely optional tower” could be constructed for the Games. After locals spoke out against the reef destruction, the Committee opted for a “leaner, smaller tower”. Some have argued that despite the improvements made, the Summer Olympic Games continue to cause significant harm to the environment, and therefore any implication that the Games have become environmentally-friendly is greenwashing. Environmental damage is inexorably linked to international sporting events, with 85% of carbon emissions coming from travel, as athletes, coaches, and visitors fly from far and wide to attend the Games. This raises the question, even if the Paris Olympics were greener, can an international sporting event such as the Olympics ever be adequately green?