Efforts to minimize the environmental impact of large-scale sporting events were ?conspicuously? absent? until Lillehammer played host to the 1994 Olympic Games in Norway, the United Nations Environment Program says. Responding to concerns raised by local environmental groups, Lillehammer?s organizers came up with a number strategies, including a unique system to retrieve and recycle the bullets used in the shooting events.
For their efforts, they received the U.N.E.P. Global 500 Award for setting a new environmental standard.
That standard has steadily evolved ever since, and today must balance social and economic impacts as well, according to David Stubbs, the head of sustainability for the London Organizing Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Since London?s bid committee was formed nine years ago, this broader view of sustainability has been central to the planning for the 2012 summer games, he said. I spoke with Mr. Stubbs last week at his office within view of the Olympic Park in London. Following are excerpts, edited for brevity and clarity.
Q.
Where do you think you have broken new ground when it comes to greening the games?
A.
We?ve been responsible for developing the first global standard for sustainable event management, ISO 20121. It recognizes the unique nature of events where you have spikes of activity, which is different from managing a steady-state company. It also takes a broader approach to sustainability, recognizing that social and economic aspects of events tie in with the environmental ones. We wanted to look at a balanced approach across all these things.
We are also being monitored by an independent assurance body, the Commission for a Sustainable London 2012, which is the first time the games have had a body like this. They report to the Olympic board, which is the ultimate governance body for the games. They?ve issued numerous reports on our progress against our targets over the last four or five years, and at times they have been critical of us.
Then there?s the ?food vision? program. Previously, no one has challenged the catering sector to look at sustainable sourcing standards for large events, especially on this scale. We estimate 14 million meals will be served over the course of the games and all of the contracted caterers, including sponsors like Coca Cola and McDonald?s, have adopted the food vision principles. That includes things like fair trade, M.S.C.-certified (Marine Stewardship Council-certified) fish and Farm Assured Red Tractor [a program that assures the safety of food production, from the farm to its packaging].
We also set up the London Legacy Development Corporation three years ago. Their remit is to look beyond the games to ensure the long-term future of the site, which will become the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park. There is a very detailed long-term plan for the site, the venues, the parklands and for future development, including housing.
The legacy company will do the transition work of getting the park ready for the public and breaking down the barrier between the new park and the old part of the city. No previous games have had a legacy body formed well in advance of the events.
Q.
Why did you choose this site, and what did it take to get it ready?
A.
When we started nine years ago, we recognized it was not just a question of hosting the Olympic Games; we also saw it as a massive opportunity to transform a large part of East London, an area that has been an industrial waste ground for centuries.
For example, on the Velodrome site, when they started work on that four years ago, there was a tremendous hole, about 30 feet deep, and at the bottom of the hole you could see the cobblestones of a Victorian street. All above that was rubbish, a century or more of waste and that had to be sorted out. The entire site was badly contaminated with things like lead, arsenic and tar, so one of the biggest pieces of work was the big cleanup, as we called it. We set up giant soil processing machines on site for washing, sieving, shaking something like 800,000 tons of contaminated soil.
We also had to take down the overhead power lines and underground them, clean up the rivers, reprofile the riverbanks, and demolish all the old derelict buildings on site. All that work was a vital part of making the site what it is today while fitting our longer-term vision. And about 90 percent of all the contracts awarded were to British firms, with 70 percent of these small to medium businesses.
Q.
Which aspect of the games will have the largest environmental impact?
A.
Our carbon footprinting work showed us that the embodied carbon in the construction materials was likely the biggest piece, not travel or waste. So we only built permanent structures that were part of the long-term plan, and temporary ones for everything else like the shooting range, venues for equestrian events, water polo, hockey, basketball.
For the temporary structures, by working closely with the designers, we identified what we could get that was already available and parts that could be reused or recycled. That massively reduces the footprint because you are using existing materials with a proper reuse strategy.
Even for the permanent structures, we tried to reuse existing material as much as possible. For the steel used around the top of the Olympic Stadium, we used gas main pipes that were surplus to a project from up north. They had already been manufactured and were available, so this saved time, saved budget and it saved carbon by avoiding making new material.
Q.
How close will you get to a carbon-neutral event?
A.
We?ve never said ?carbon neutral?; instead we?ve said ?low carbon? because obviously you can?t eliminate or mitigate all the emissions. Based on our carbon footprinting exercise, which we did as part of our planning process, we determined which aspects would have the biggest impact and focused on avoidance.
Carbon is a useful proxy because if you are saving carbon, you are also typically saving money and reducing waste. But it?s not a sustainability metric on its own because we considered other factors as I?ve already mentioned, like social and economic ones. Over all, we?re convinced that the net benefit of the games and transforming the site will be vastly superior to any negative environmental impacts.
Q.
Some of the London 2012 corporate sponsors, like Dow and BP, have had significant problems in their environmental records. How would you respond to critics who have said this undermines your sustainability message?
A.
Well look, you can?t put on the games without major commercial sponsors these days. But we made our sustainability criteria very clear, and all the partners that have come on board have had to demonstrate that they would meet them. I think a number of them have signed on to fast track changes in their own business practices.
Take the car fleet. We are using B.M.W. vehicles, and a vast number of these meet Euro 6 emission standards two years ahead of the legislation. Heineken has changed to PET [recyclable plastic] bottles for the first time in the U.K. Coca Cola has invested in a plastics recycling plant in Lincolnshire. So many of these partners are looking at the games as an opportunity to transform their own processes.
Many of our partners come from challenging sectors, and somewhere in the world they will have issues, but we are not here to change whole companies or whole industries. It?s not our charter. At the same time, all those companies would be the first to admit they can improve in sustainability terms.
Q.
Have you had to make any compromises to the athletic venues to meet your sustainability goals?
A.
Sebastian Coe [the president of the organizing committee] will always say ?the athletes come first,? so obviously the sport is the central part of the project. Plus the International Olympic Committee and the Paralympics Committee have to approve all the designs and specifications for the venues.
But a good example is the Velodrome. The timber for the track is sustainability-sourced. The design of the building is very carbon-efficient, like the lightweight roof with cable net structure. We avoided using thousand tons of steel just by a design change in the roof. You?ve got other design features like rainwater harvesting, natural ventilation and lighting. So you?ve got a venue that works from a sustainability point of view but is also a world-class sporting venue, according to all the international sporting bodies involved.
Q.
Will spectators know they are watching games in the latest green venues?
A.
For people watching the events from around the world, they probably won?t notice any difference in the venues. They won?t say, ?Oh, that looks a little bit funny, or a bit homespun and a bit ropey around the edges ? these must be the Ecogames.? It will be the same world-class games as any others. I hope, though through the commentary, they will know there?s been a lot more thought put into it than usual.
Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=5f4ca98ca2c231b7c1868039058d8a87
aziz ansari aziz ansari katherine jenkins peyton manning broncos mexico city earthquake stand your ground law dancing with the stars season 14
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন