• Home
  • About
    • Our People
    • Mission and Funding
    • 990 Filings
    • Governance and Disclosure Statements
  • Our Work
    • Publications
    • Newsletters
    • Equity Resources
  • Blog
  • Jobs
    • Internships
    • AEC Fellowship
    • Careers
  • Pro Bono Fund
    • Pro Bono Fund
    • Donate
    • MassCEC Empower Grant
Applied Economics Clinic
  • Home
  • About
    • Our People
    • Mission and Funding
    • 990 Filings
    • Governance and Disclosure Statements
  • Our Work
    • Publications
    • Newsletters
    • Equity Resources
  • Blog
  • Jobs
    • Internships
    • AEC Fellowship
    • Careers
  • Pro Bono Fund
    • Pro Bono Fund
    • Donate
    • MassCEC Empower Grant

Sustainability at the 2024 Paris Olympics

The fanfare and attention to the Olympic Games, while exciting, can often overshadow the negative environmental impacts of the tournament. The Olympics are one of the most highly anticipated sporting events in the world. In the two weeks of competition during the 2024 Summer Paris Games, there were an average of 30.6 million viewers across 7,000 total hours of coverage—an 82 percent increase from the Tokyo Summer Olympics in 2021. The organizers of the 2024 Paris Olympics set out to create a more environmentally sustainable Olympics without compromising the nature of the competition.

According to a 2021 analysis from the University of Lausanne, New York University, and the University of Bern, while organizers have claimed that the Games have become more sustainable, the actual environmental impacts have become more harmful. The Tokyo Olympics emitted an estimated total of 2.73 million tons of CO₂, and these Games were held without fans due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In comparison, the 2016 Rio Olympics emitted a total of 4.5 million tons of CO₂, with about 55 percent of emissions coming from spectators.

The organizers of the 2024 Paris Olympics strove to break this pattern of emissions. The Paris 2024 Board of Directors set a goal in the beginning of their planning process to emit no more than one-half of the planet-warming emissions of the London 2012 and Rio 2016 Olympics. This would place their maximum emissions at 1.58 million metric tons of CO₂e. At the time of writing no reports on emissions resulting from the 2024 Paris Olympics has been released.

Emissions were organized into three primary categories: construction, transportation, and operations. To address emissions from construction, recycled venues were used to host different events and, in cases where something new needed to be built, renewable or low-carbon materials were used. Transportation was more difficult to manage as the Olympic Committee had no control over how people moved around the city. Therefore, the main strategy employed was encouraging people, athletes included, to use public transportation. Olympic teams from the Netherlands, Britain, Belgium, and Switzerland all used public transportation to arrive in Paris. Finally, to lessen the environmental impacts of the operations of the Games, the Board of Directors planned to get energy not only from the French power grid, which is powered primarily by nuclear energy, but also from solar panels floating along the Seine and on Olympic buildings. Additional energy-saving measures were taken including placing trees and cooling misters around the city, improving building insulation, building light-colored surfaces, and installing geo-thermal water-cooling systems.

Despite these efforts, a lack of transparency over sustainable strategies such as procuring 100 percent renewable energy has increased skepticism. Jules Boykoff, a professor at Pacific University, publicly questioned how sustainable the Games truly were. As of writing, no official reports have been published that evaluate the sustainability of the Paris Olympics. The IOC has created a standard of reporting on environmental impacts after an Olympic Games has concluded, but this is rarely done. While the evaluation of the 2024 Paris Olympics has yet to be released, the planning for the 2026 Winter Olympics has already begun. Organizers have issued statements that they are hoping to adopt a “realistic, concrete, and progressive approach” to sustainability, but no detailed plans have been provided.

Lila McNamee

Research Assistant


This is a part of the AEC Blog series.

tags: Lila McNamee
Friday 10.25.24
Posted by Liz Stanton
 

Justice40 and the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool

World Resources Institute. 2022. Cumulative Burden of Disadvantaged Communities. Available at: https://www.wri.org/technical-perspectives/6-takeaways-ceq-climate-and-economic-justice-screening-tool

In January of 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14008 establishing the Justice40 Initiative. The goal of this program is to allocate 40 percent of benefits from certain federal investments to disadvantaged, marginalized communities that have been overburdened by the climate crisis. One example of this investment can be seen in the $2 billion earmarked from Inflation Reduction Act funds to support new community-driven projects.

To determine which communities will receive funding, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) developed the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, which produces community-scale metrics related to climate change, energy, health, legacy pollution, and workforce development.

A critical data point missing from the CEJST is race and ethnicity. Black and Latino communities have been disproportionately impacted by climate change for years. According to one study, Black and Latino communities respectively face 56 percent and 63 percent more pollution than is released due to their consumption. This compares to white communities, which experience 17 percent less pollution than they cause through consumption.

This decision has been questioned because race is often considered a key determining factor of who lives with the consequences of environmental harm. Emory University School of Law Professor Dorothy A. Brown has voiced a dissenting view of the CEJST, saying, “In 2022, if you want to help Black people, you’re going to get sued. So either you’re with the effort to help Black people or you’re not. But you can’t be timid about it.”

The data on race and ethnicity were deliberately kept out of CEJST due to legal concerns stemming from the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Affirmative Action. This omission will make it more difficult to ensure areas most affected by climate change are protected. However, multiple solutions have been proposed. In 2022, the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council provided a list of suggested improvements including adding indicators of structural racism (i.e. redlining, and segregation, etc.) to the CEJST and consulting with Native American and tribal groups to determine how Justice40 can best serve their people.. Further, one study by professors from multiple universities including the University of Washington, and UC Berkeley, suggests that using location-based approaches can reduce racial/ethnic exposure gaps.

Because the Justice40 Initiative was implemented so recently, there are few studies evaluating its efficacy. However, the Biden-Harris Administration has created an Environmental Justice Scorecard to evaluate the federal government’s progress on tackling environmental inequities. To date, all federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Defense among others, have only been scored on the Phase One scorecard, which assesses the advancement of Justice40, implementation and enforcement of environmental and civil rights laws, and solidification of the goal of environmental justice throughout the federal government. In the coming years it will be crucial that the Justice40 initiative proves that can enact real change and adjust, if needed, to address the roots of environmental justice.

Lila McNamee

Research Assistant


This is a part of the AEC Blog series

tags: Lila McNamee
Wednesday 03.06.24
Posted by Liz Stanton