Leaderboard

Ok, a vast subject that interests me and I don't think I found an open topic even though it seems important to me. I didn't really know what title to put so I put "How to make the Olympic Games more resilient to climate change?", it seemed to me to be the most factual title to summarize the thinking and the debate that can open in this topic, without falling into the caricature of the NOlympics movements. I think that everyone here believes in the reality of climate change; and the fact that this subject comes up more and more in the threads dedicated to the games ("What do you mean, no air conditioning?" for Paris, "The Brisbane River floods" for... Brisbane, etc etc) means that there is a real subject to discuss perhaps in a more centralized way than scattered across different topics. In fact, the idea of launching this topic comes from the fact that in France, we have a think-tank called "The Shift Project" bringing together engineers and scientists who work on climate issues and publish many reports on, basically, how to adapt to climate change so that our societies and our ways of production, of life, become more resilient. And this think-tank released a report yesterday on the carbon footprint of football and rugby. So I haven't seen their detailed report yet. But last summer they did an interim report on stadiums, which I'm putting here (spoiler alert: it's in French): https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/240319-Decarbonons-les-Stades-Rapport-intermediaire-Shift-Project.pdf To my knowledge they haven't done a report on the Olympic Games for the moment; and I would of course be interested to see if other institutes around the world are conducting the same kind of research. That said, the interim report on stadiums still seems relevant to me for the Olympic Games, since organizing an Olympics without a stadium seems inconceivable (hello Brisbane) For example, we learn that the carbon footprint for a match (or any other sporting event) in a stadium is due, unsurprisingly, to 60-65% (depending on the size of the stadium) to the transport of spectators, but with a huge difference depending on the origin of the spectator: - the carbon footprint of the local spectator will represent only 4kg of CO2 - but the carbon footprint of the foreign spectator can range from 90kg of CO2 (for example, an English person who would go to France for the Olympics, and who would not need to take the plane, the car and/or the train would be enough) to 2500kg of CO2 (the American who has to take the plane) Right away, this will raise a lot of questions for LA 2028, because as much as the Olympic Games in Europe raise fewer questions thanks to our great rail network and our high population density; as for the United States, when you plan to organize things in Oklahoma or even New York for cricket... The other interesting point (in fact there are a LOT of interesting things in this report but I'm not going to list them because my message is much too long) is that the carbon footprint linked to food and drinks (so the refreshment bar) still represents 15-17% of the carbon footprint of a match; I didn't expect so much, and these are things where the organizers of sporting events can take concrete action. For example, in Paris, the desire to put a plant-based offer in the refreshment bars (which, by the way, was disgusting and unworthy of France) was intended in particular to respond to this problem (since you probably know, but meat production represents a significant part of our CO2 emissions) So in the end: - How can we ensure that the Olympic Games reduce their carbon footprint? It is increasingly difficult to organize things of this magnitude without asking this question and it will inevitably lead at some point to questioning the very model of the Olympic Games. Should the number of sports be reduced? Is the growing model of "multi-city" Games (like Milano-Cortina) relevant in the face of climate issues? Because just as a Berlin-Hamburg project in Germany makes sense with the German rail network, an Indian national bid project with Ahmedabad and other cities would perhaps save them a few billion, but at the cost of an explosion in the carbon footprint (because the Indian rail network...) - How can we ensure the resilience of the Olympic Games and host cities in the face of climate change? Has LA planned backup plans in case the fires we have recently experienced happen again? Does Brisbane have a plan to adapt to the risk of flooding of the Brisbane River? Should the IOC require for the next Games allocations (2036, 2040) real guarantees and binding climate requirements for host cities (with for example an imperative to finance resilience projects according to the risks linked to each city; one could imagine that for example Brisbane in the contract which binds them with the IOC is obliged to invest 1 billion in water retention lakes to limit possible damage linked to floods) - Will it be possible to organize Winter Games in 2042?

After the Grammys, their French equivalent, the Victoires de la Musique. Paris 2024 ceremonies won the concert of the year award. With a live performance of Parade, of course. https://www.france.tv/france-2/les-victoires-de-la-musique-varietes/6955021-victor-le-masne-insuffle-un-air-de-nostalgie-des-jo.html

If they must hold the closing ceremony in a place that's not hosting anything else, they should combine it with the final of Sanremo. You want a party, try an Italian party!

and also this exhibition center where it would be possible to install a large ice rink (hockey 1) and two small ice rinks (hockey 2 and curling). https://www.gl-lyonevents.com/en/eurexpo-lyon Lyon was certaily the best host city for these games but it was not candidate!

For tourism, there are already data for 2024 in Paris and its region. There were 1.7 million international tourists during Olympics, compared to 1.5 million in 2023. +21% from USA, +65% from China, +94% from Japan, +110% from Brazil. https://parisjetaime.com/eng/media/article/preliminary-report-olympic-games-a1755 And don't forget that the opening ceremony was a 4-hour ad for visiting Paris broadcasted in all the countries of the world, let's see how much people have been convinced to do a trip in the coming years. You've also talked about broadcasting and content creation. One thing that everybody seems to enjoy a lot recently without acknowledging its impact is AI. It's VERY energy-consuming and it doesn't seem to be a subject at all. After each Games, OBS brags about its increased production of content and its advanced technologies, but it has an increasing cost: NKH had a 8K theatre in the broadcasting center and Intel even had a booth promoting 8K broadcasting but nobody asked themselves if it was relevant. If you want to see more, here's a video (in French) visiting the International Broadcast Center (and france⋅tv's control room).

That’s a pretty nice idea. Well worth considering. But again, human selfishness and politics. Can you imagine the reaction of the current ogre in the White House, fresh from reinstating plastic straws because paper straws are “woke”, if he was told the LA games required mandatory climate requirements and offset investments?

The fact that you have it before the French Alps 2030 (well, it's a matter of a few days) makes it all the more embarrassing.

Cazalys AFL club is a big sporting Social Club one of the biggest in Queensland. They could/should use this site over Barlow Park. Your T20 cricket idea has some merit as the lighting is up to good standard too if needed. But a long way from Brisbane especially if only 6-10 teams are involved. Going on the image. I like they have used the carpark and possibly the grandstand for solar panels. The grandstand is an old Gabba one. It was shipped 1700 km to Cairns by about 20 semis and put together again on site. With the current floods in North Queensland i hope these two venues escaped any damage

The Queensland Government and the Brisbane 2032 Organising Commitee (BOC) are well aware of the periodic risks of inundation from Brisbane River floods at different times of the year. Yes severe flooding of certain areas in and around the Brisbane River has occurred durung the wet season which is in Februrary. For example, historically, the time of year for Brisbane’s biggest floods were: 1893 Brisbane Flood: Februrary, 1974 Brisbane Flood: January, 2011 Brisbane Flood : Februrary, 2022 Brisbane Flood: Februrary. However, the 2032 Games are being held in Brisbane’s driest period of the year which is May until October. The dates of the Brisbane Games are 23 July-8 August (Olympics) and 24 August-5 September (Paralympics). Be assured that such risk assessment and contingency planning is intrinsic in Host City planning and BOC will be no exception, given climate change and Queensland’s long history and experience in flood management and planning. Back in 2021, the meteorological data on p.52 of the IOC’s Feasibility Study - Brisbane 2032 - IOC Future Host Commission, showed that Brisbane’s average number of days with rain is only 3.3 in July and 3.8 in August & September. The final placement of Brisbane’s 2032 venues will shortly be known when we hear what recommendations from GIICA’s 100-Day Review (of all venues and infrastructure) that the Queensland Government will take action on. This could of course directly affect where exactly venues will be located. Historical Brisbane flood areas are available through this link: Historical Flooding in Brisbane.

Agreed, these are not solutions. They’re just reactions to practical necessity. Shifting hosting time slots itself will do nothing to combat emissions, just move emissions to a different month. And, yeah, energy production is THE major hurdle. In France you are lucky, and can take some pride, in your far more decarbonised energy industry. Here in Oz, it’s a hot potato that has poisoned politics for decades now. The increasingly rabid Right HATE anything renewable, while the Left is firmly anti-nuclear because, well, nukes are bad. In the meantime, we just continue our addiction to coal-fired electricity. Personally, I’d be open to nuclear energy here, but we probably should have started that shift twenty or thirty years ago - it’s not something we can adopt overnight.

The first interesting discourse and debate on this thread for months.

No, YOU turned it into a numbers game and made a disparaging remark comparing them to the front row of the stadium. I’m not the only one who described that response as sneering. Instead of playing the numbers game, why don’t you address the topic and explain how the needs of the stadium would, ahem, Trump the need for green space in a city not exactly bursting with it?