Does the Winter Olympics just need a rotating roster of hosts?

[Nacre]

5 hours ago, yoshi said:

Is that really a big problem? I can't imagine there's many ski resorts that don't have others nearby to host other stuff. That national scale idea is interesting but wouldn't it just make (what would be) the Olympics even more unwieldy and lead to a problem with them instead?

The problem isn't the ski areas themselves, but the infrastructure needed to support the games. 

In example my home city of Seattle cannot host the winter games irrespective of funding and political will because the road to the potential alpine skiing resort (Crystal Mountain) is not wide enough and enlarging it would be political suicide for local politicians because it's in a protected forest.

There are lots of ski areas that could manage the winter games if it were only a question of catering to the athletes. It's the huge requirements for officials, media and fans that make the modern games difficult and cuts the list of potential hosts down dramatically.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Nacre

[krow]

if this thread ends up killing off my board cross i swear to god

[Sir Rols]

 

7 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Climate warming:  the future of the Olympic and Paralympic Games

In the face of a warming climate and impacting snow venues in particular, the International Olympic Committee has postponed the 2030 host selection to give the Future Host Commission more time to research the landscape more of future hosting.

It has also flagged a series of significant measures under consideration to entry requirements, structure and process by which future Olympic/Paralympic Winter Games Hosts are awarded.

The Commission, building on Olympic Agenda 2020 and 2020+5, outlined a number of proposals and potential challenges around hosting the Olympic Winter Games, which could have an impact on future elections, including:

• The preliminary results of leading academic research, showing a potential reduction in the number of climate-reliable hosts 
• Ongoing discussions by the Winter Sports Federations around adjustments that have already started to be made to their event calendars and potential new competition formats
• The idea of rotating the Olympic Winter Games within a pool of hosts
• To ensure climate reliability, a proposal that hosts would need to show average minimum temperatures of below zero degrees for snow competition venues at the time of the Games over a 10-year period.
• discussion about a double award for 2030 and 2034, to create stability for winter sports and the Olympic Winter Games.

Future Host Commission studying landscape of winter sport with a view to the Olympic Winter Games 2030 and beyond - Olympics.com

This has been discussed extensively in this thread… why do we need another one?

[AustralianFan]

Climate warming:  the future of the Olympic and Paralympic Games

In the face of a warming climate and impacting snow venues in particular, the International Olympic Committee has postponed the 2030 host selection to give the Future Host Commission more time to research the landscape more of future hosting.

It has also flagged a series of significant measures under consideration to entry requirements, structure and process by which future Olympic/Paralympic Winter Games Hosts are awarded.

The Commission, building on Olympic Agenda 2020 and 2020+5, outlined a number of proposals and potential challenges around hosting the Olympic Winter Games, which could have an impact on future elections, including:

• The preliminary results of leading academic research, showing a potential reduction in the number of climate-reliable hosts 
• Ongoing discussions by the Winter Sports Federations around adjustments that have already started to be made to their event calendars and potential new competition formats
• The idea of rotating the Olympic Winter Games within a pool of hosts
• To ensure climate reliability, a proposal that hosts would need to show average minimum temperatures of below zero degrees for snow competition venues at the time of the Games over a 10-year period.
• discussion about a double award for 2030 and 2034, to create stability for winter sports and the Olympic Winter Games.

Future Host Commission studying landscape of winter sport with a view to the Olympic Winter Games 2030 and beyond - Olympics.com

[AustralianFan]

NBC News

Dr Daniel Scott, Director of Climate Change Programs, University of Waterloo:

• ”under a high emissions scenario where you would lose almost two thirds of the climate reliable hosts
• athlete safety:   “Even when you have reliable temperatures to make the snow, your daily temperatures when the competitions are happening are well above freezing, you get those conditions which are really becoming dangerous for the athletes in all the different snow sports in different ways”
• ”the pipeline for elite athletes has shrunk substantially and so they have some serious concerns about the future of their sport,  not just where the Winter Olympics can take place”

NBC reporter:

• artificial snow: “nearly 100% of the snow (@ Beijing 2022) was man-made”
• water infrastructure:  “where does that water come from? If you’re talking about the American west that’s no small conversation to be had”
• past Olympic hosts: “almost two thirds of the past 21 Winter Olympics hosts experienced an average increase of about 10 degrees fahrenheit over the last century in those 21 cities”

 

[FYI]

As of right now, Sapporo's concern isn't the climate (their snow is real & plentiful, unlike a couple of previous hosts). It's the growing opposition of the people there that don't want it (due to cost overruns, & not to mention the Tokyo 2020ne scandal). If Sapporo's (& not to mention Vancouver's) support numbers were high from the very beginning, 2030 would've been handed to them on a silver platter. So it's quite disingenuous of the IOC to say that the 2030 decision is being delayed *because of climate concerns*. Yes, climate concern is real & needs to be looked at, as far as the Winter Olympics are concerned, but currently it's the opposition to the (winter) Games that's the INITIAL problem, & all the IOC it seems to be interested in doing, is deflecting & sticking their heads in the sand to that particular major issue.

[Sir Rols]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

As of right now, Sapporo's concern isn't the climate (their snow is real & plentiful, unlike a couple of previous hosts). It's the growing opposition of the people there that don't want it (due to cost overruns, & not to mention the Tokyo 2020ne scandal). If Sapporo's (& not to mention Vancouver's) support numbers were high from the very beginning, 2030 would've been handed to them on a silver platter. So it's quite disingenuous of the IOC to say that the 2030 decision is being delayed *because of climate concerns*. Yes, climate concern is real & needs to be looked at, as far as the Winter Olympics are concerned, but currently it's the opposition to the (winter) Games that's the INITIAL problem, & all the IOC it seems to be interested in doing, is deflecting & sticking their heads in the sand to that particular major issue.

Of course climate change is the fig leaf. Vancouver isn’t being readied for the Last Rights because of climate change, it’s because the Provincial and National governments refuse the guarantee funding. Sapporo hasn’t collapsed paused because of climate change, it’s because public support has plummeted and outright opposition has surged. SLC isn’t coy on 2030 because of climate change (you’d expect them to prefer the earlier date if it was), it’s because 2028 puts strains on their sponsorship programs. The 2030 decision wasn’t postponed because of climate change - it’s simply the IOC has no-one they can move forward with yet at this late stage. Mentioning climate change is jus a cover for that.

Climate change does need to be addressed, but it’s not a huge factor for 2030 yet. Bach and the OC are fast running out of excuses to avoid the more serious issues that make the WOGs so toxic. First “too many losers”, next “because… climate change “. What next? “It’s too close to Paris 2024 to focus”?

[AustralianFan]

Lack of snow postpones FIS Nordic Combined World Cup in Klingenthal - ITG

“The Vogtland Arena had been due to stage a men's large hill and 10 kilometres race tomorrow and on Sunday (January 15), following on from qualification today.”

“A lack of snow has led to its postponement.”

 

 

 

 

[Sir Rols]

Yes, and Garmisch was postponed last week. Europe has had a mild, snow scarce winter so far this year.

Meanwhile, in the new few days: Weather maps show wall of snow to blanket UK in days as -11C Arctic freeze engulfs nation

One mild start to a European winter is no more proof that it’s ski resorts are now officially redundant than one blizzard proves that global warming is a myth.

Most sensible people would agree that climate change is serious and challenging and needs planning for. But you require larger data points - say, if there’s a rising trend in the number of FIS events being cancelled over several years - to estimate what the  long term consequences for alpine sports and particular established circuit venues are going to be.

 

[AustralianFan]

Having a look here at Olympic Winter Games Hosts and the use of artificial snow and in some cases other ‘additives’ mixed in the snow at competition venues:

 

Sapporo 2080

• If global greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced, only one of the 21 previous locales for the Winter Games—Sapporo, Japan—would have the requisite temperature and precipitation to stage the games by 2080.

Milano Cortina 2026

• In 2026, the Winter Games will return to Cortina d’Ampezzo and Milan in Italy after 70 years.
• When Cortina d’Ampezzo welcomed the Olympics in 1956, heavy snow fell on the first day.
• But an analysis from nonprofit research group Climate Central found that since the Olympics, the average temperature for Milan in February has warmed by 5.9 degrees in the intervening time.

Beijing 2022

• 100% of snow used at competition venues was artificial

PyeongChang 2018

• 98% of snow used at competition venues was artificial
• China is estimated to pay more than $60 million for the snow machines used at the Olympics
• Wind and solar energy were used to power these snow generators, according to the IOC.
• But to generate enough snow, the country estimates it needed more than 49 million gallons of water.

Sochi 2014 

• 80% of snow used at competition venues was artificial
• Sochi saw temperatures as high as 16ºC

Vancouver 2010

• Pesticide was added to fake snow used at the 2010 Vancouver Games to allow the water to freeze at high temperatures
• Snow ‘hardeners’ like salt and fertilisers may also be used to improve the quality on cross-country skiing trails.
• Temperatures have stayed above freezing, making artificial snow-making impossible
• Snow was moved from the top of Cypress Mountain to its lower levels, where the snowboarding competitions will take place

Torino 2006

• Torino Olympics saved by Israeli snow-making technology

Salt Lake City 2002

• The Salt Lake area has had unseasonably warm winters for five straight years.
• Alder said three of the warmest Januarys on record have come in the last five years
• Will Snow Show for the 2002 Winter Olympics?

 

Day-time Temperatures of past Olympic Hosts

• February daytime temperatures of Olympic Winter Games host cities have been increasing steadily from an average of 0.4°C in the 1920s-50s, to 3.1°C during the 60s-90s and 6.3°C in the 21st century

[ulu]

The lack of snow in Beijing (Zhangjiakou) had more to do with being too dry than too warm.

[FYI]

It is interesting, because Beijing 2022 was actually freezing, with very gusty conditions, at many of the mountain venues. When it's too cold, it also can't snow.

PyeongChang 2018 was also quite frigid. Sochi 2014 was balmy (talk about choosing a site where winter is moderate at best), & Vancouver 2010 wasn't that much chillier, either.

[Sir Rols]

Also to point out Milan isn’t Cortina… not even particularly close. It’s not a snow venue (and didn’t feature in the games 70 years ago).

[Sir Rols]

If we’re delving into history, another interesting one to compare is Innsbruck.

In 1964, it was notorious as a pretty snowless games:

In the weeks leading up to the Games, temperatures often rose above zero degrees Celsius due to the foehn, a hot, dry wind. There was no major snowfall for seven weeks, and the rain melted snow and ice at sports venues. This was the first time in around a century that the snowfall had been so low in Tyrol.^[2][12] Two weeks before the start of the Games, thousands of Austrian soldiers were mobilized to transport by truck 40,000m3 of snow from the Brenner Pass, close to the Italian border, and spread it by hand on the ski slopes. 20,000m3 of snow was built up and 20,000 blocks of ice were transported to the bobsleigh and toboggan run. - Wikipedia

1964 was also the last to start in January.

1976 had no such issues. Go figure…

Edited January 15, 2023 by Sir Rols

[AustralianFan]

1 hour ago, ulu said:

The lack of snow in Beijing (Zhangjiakou) had more to do with being too dry than too warm.

Absolutely right.

February is dry and a very low precipitation month, whereas July/August is the highest for precipitation (rain).

 

[Sir Rols]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Sochi 2014 was balmy (talk about choosing a site where winter is moderate at best),

Yeah, the Russkis chose the most temperate region of their country - but that was sorta their aim - they wanted a year-round resort area, surf and ski. Great for the Oligarchs to have year-round dachas.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Sir Rols

[FYI]

11 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

If we’re delving into history, another interesting one to compare is Innsbruck.

In 1964, it was notorious as a pretty snowless games:

1976 had no such issues. Go figure…

And this is why some out there aren't too convinced about climate change/global warming. Examples like this are what they say makes it all "cyclical". Like more examples of "once in a century floods, fires, droughts or storms". What was the excuse 100 years ago for record heat or cold, etc. when the pollution on the planet was much less, & so therefore couldn't be blamed on that then. There may be some truth to that, or not, or maybe it's somewhere in between, & maybe something like climate change can't be accurately measured or predicted when we only have about 150 years or so of consistent, global weather record-keeping. 

11 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Yeah, the Russkis chose the most temperate region of their country - but that was sorta their aim - they wanted a year-round resort area, surf and ski. Great for the Oligarchs to have year-round dachas.

Yeah, but what I meant was the onerous was on the IOC, since they're the ones who ultimately picked a sub-tropical region for a Winter Olympics. When they could've gone for a much more *wintery* locale, at least at the time, with Salzburg instead. 

[Sir Rols]

4 minutes ago, FYI said:

Yeah, but what I meant was the onerous was on the IOC, since they're the ones who ultimately picked a sub-tropical region for a Winter Olympics. When they could've gone for a much more *wintery* locale, at least at the time, with Salzburg instead. 

Well, they weren’t picking for the future, though. At the time it was a fairly well received choice. And technically, it was a pretty slickly run games. It’s only in hindsite that doping, politics and costs tarnished it so badly.

10 minutes ago, FYI said:

And this is why some out there aren't too convinced about climate change/global warming. Examples like this are what they say makes it all "cyclical". Like more examples of "once in a century floods, fires, droughts or storms". What was the excuse 100 years ago for record heat or cold, etc. when the pollution on the planet was much less, & so therefore couldn't be blamed on that then. There may be some truth to that, or not, or maybe it's somewhere in between, & maybe something like climate change can't be accurately measured or predicted when we only have about 150 years or so of consistent, global weather record-keeping. 

Yeah. While the data sets are pretty conclusive that mean global temperatures have been warming in industrial times, forecasting particular weather trends for specific regions is still a fraught and inconclusive endeavour. The best consensus the climate scientists and meteorologists can give is that weather events will become more extreme and volatile - we’ll see more “once in a hundred years” events.

Which is exactly why I’m unconvinced that the 2020s is the best time for the IOC to want to start locking in locations for he 2080s. It seems to me the most flawed of a number of options they could be taking to prepare for climate change. They’d be far better served adopting more flexibility to deal with it, than to try to lock in a rigid rotation in a changing and unpredictable world climate.

Just makes me suspect it’s not as much about climate change, and more about not wanting to acknowledge the real reasons the Winter Games haven’t been attracting bidders in recent times, and trying to avoid having to make any decisions at all or face an embarrassing lack of “interested parties” in the future. 

    

[Sir Rols]

An interesting opinion piece from ITG canvassing the issues:

Winter woes on World Cup circuits show existential threat to winter sport

[Quaker2001]

19 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Which is exactly why I’m unconvinced that the 2020s is the best time for the IOC to want to start locking in locations for he 2080s. It seems to me the most flawed of a number of options they could be taking to prepare for climate change. They’d be far better served adopting more flexibility to deal with it, than to try to lock in a rigid rotation in a changing and unpredictable world climate.

And what NOC would want a deal like that where they are obligated to deliver the IOC decades down the line?  I think we all saw after what happened with Tokyo that countries and regions won't want to deal with that.

If the IOC really wanted to have a location perpetually ready for an Olympics, let them invest in it and be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep.  But I doubt they'd be interested in that.

The issue that will always be present will be one of facilities.  Winter sports aren't going to stop because of the threat of climate change, even if that does change some of the calculus about where those competitions are held.  Milan-Cortina is already starting to show us a blueprint of an Olympics spread over more of a country.  That's not the ideal solution to hold an Olympics, but it's one the IOC may have to be more willing to accept.  I think at the end of the day, the onus of securing a future for the Winter Olympics is on them to be adaptable.  And less about trying to pretend that worries over climate change are what's holding them back.

[olympikfan]

Any City north of the 55th degree of Latitude. might be a option. Nothing wrong with Alaska. 

[FYI]

23 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Well, they weren’t picking for the future, though. **At the time it was a fairly well received choice.**

I can't really recall that. At least not here on GB's anyway. Many forumers then were all up in arms over the decision, that they couldn't understand it at all.

If anything, it was more of a complete surprise, since Sochi had to practically build everything from scratch (the exact same Sochi that also was cut from the 2002 short-list), vs Salzburg's low-cost & ready-to-go bid, & then PyeongChang viewed as the favorite after narrowly losing to Vancouver for the 2010 winter Games (not to mention Salzburg also losing out to 2010). That the IOC was more impressed with the typical "brand-new, flashy-ness than on substance".

But of course, that was indeed par-for-the-course for the IOC back then. And I still maintain that if they could go back to those 'give us everything you got, including the kitchen sink' bid days, that they would do it in an Olympic-second. And all this "new-norm, climate initiative" rhetoric is nothing but hot air.

[Sir Rols]

12 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

The issue that will always be present will be one of facilities.  Winter sports aren't going to stop because of the threat of climate change, even if that does change some of the calculus about where those competitions are held. 

I was looking at the ITG article, and some of the rhetoric coming out of the Universiade at Lake Placid as to whether winter sports have a future. All a bit alarmist. I’m with you, they aren’t going to stop.

What I can see, though, is it becoming all more expensive to stage (we may well start seeing resorts being established at more northerly latitudes) and consequently more expensive to participate in. Becoming even more elite and exclusive. 

[Quaker2001]

4 hours ago, olympikfan said:

Any City north of the 55th degree of Latitude. might be a option. Nothing wrong with Alaska. 

In the mid-80s, the USOC was pushing for Anchorage to be the next Olympic host after Lake Placid.  The rationale was that it was a good mid-point between Asia and Europe.  That lasted 2 cycles before that plan was abandoned and Salt Lake became the city of choice instead.

As much as climate change might determine the future, Alaska is too remote and sparsely populated to be an Olympics hub.  So yes, for that and other reasons, there are many things wrong with Alaska

[Quaker2001]

5 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

I was looking at the ITG article, and some of the rhetoric coming out of the Universiade at Lake Placid as to whether winter sports have a future. All a bit alarmist. I’m with you, they aren’t going to stop.

What I can see, though, is it becoming all more expensive to stage (we may well start seeing resorts being established at more northerly latitudes) and consequently more expensive to participate in. Becoming even more elite and exclusive. 

Can't argue with that.  In the next 10-20 years, a lot of these federations may have to make some decisions for which venues they can or can't use, but they'll undoubtedly find enough places to hold their events.  I don't want to think about what things look like 50 years down the road, but that's obviously a much larger discussion that goes will beyond winter sport.

That all said, it's a big issue for the Olympics where the goal is to have everything together.  Which may go against the IOC's desire (and need, who are we kidding) to reduce the cost of holding the event.  The sad thing is that there are places, certainly in Europe, that have facilities in place, but likely aren't willing to want to deal with the IOC for obvious reasons.  None of which have to do with climate change