2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver, B.C. And Compromises Over the Environment

There aren't many who would argue that Vancouver, British Columbia is one of the most pristine natural places on the planet amid a thriving metropolis. When the International Olympic Committee announced that the 2010 Winter Olympics would be held there in 2003, it had to go through every mind living in the region how the world's greatest sports event could be taken on the home turf without disturbing at least part of the area's valued ecosystem. It had to linger in the mind, even with immediate promised plans to work around it all without disturbing the vitals of nature.

That thought always seems to linger in the minds of indigenous people rather than all else who let the excitement of prestige override virtually everything else. And with all the time an Olympics host city has to get ready for the event, finding the technology and ability to work around fragile nature should be more than possible.

Not that the International Olympic Committee doesn't do what they can to make each Olympics as environmentally friendly as possible. For the first time, though, accusations are sprouting from environmentalists that the 2010 Winter Olympics will be the most destructive environmentally since the Olympics started going green. When you hear things like that, trying to fathom how the IOC could have a deliberate sense of mind to let such a thing happen is automatically incomprehensible, even if they are a corporate entity.

When the IOC decided to go officially green back during the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics in 2002, most people accepted it as a huge, flying leap forward. Considering the monumental building of infrastructures to host an Olympics in each city in all decades prior, the chances are that environmentally-sensitive cities of Olympics past were harmed without anybody noticing a thing.

Of course, through all those times, indigenous people in each host country protested without much media coverage. And when both the Winter and Summer Olympics decided to go officially green in 2002, indigenous people spoke a little louder that the compromises in reducing carbon emissions wasn't enough to thwart serious economic damage. Yet the natives of those prior countries seem in small number in comparison to the indigenous force that protects Vancouver, B.C's natural environments akin to an elite security force protecting a multi-million dollar diamond.

All you needed to see was the small indie documentary "Five Ring Circus" to witness the profound backlash indigenous people can create when one of the most profound natural environments in the world gets bothered. This little movie with a smaller audience from 2007 showed the intense protests from the Vancouverite Native-Americans over the construction of the new Sea to Sky Highway up on Hwy. 99 in Vancouver's mountains to help make transportation for Olympic athletes and tourists easier.

And the Native-Americans weren't the only ones who protested the building of this expanded highway at the peak of Eagleridge Bluffs or over other environmental concerns. More than a few non-native people joined the fray to go after what they thought was unreasonable expansion, threats to endangered species, an out-of-control budget and unnecessary displacement of the homeless.

_____

How does the IOC and Vancouver Organizing Committee deal with these issues, even when much of it gets ignored by the mainstream press and relegated to fringe environmental media? The good news is that the IOC and VANOC have already proven they have an epic conscience despite the IOC's epic, monolithic status. During the opening ceremony on February 12, many Native-American and indigenous people were featured prominently and allowed to perform generously in the early part of the show.

These were the few who apparently didn't have issues with the environmental impact, or perhaps just deciding to take the middle ground of acceptance in lieu of international goodwill. The rest are still out there and protesting not only the destruction of natural environments to accommodate the Olympics, but also the deals made with corporations to build their own properties on the existing areas after the Olympics end. Every one of these and earlier-mentioned issues have caused protesters to get violent in the streets of Vancouver as these words go to print.

Even before this happened, environmental organizations working with VANOC to plan environmental procedures for the event acknowledged that not holding an Olympics at all is the only option toward keeping Vancouver or any Olympic host city pristine. There was also an acknowledgement of what the Olympics will cause--namely 330,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions along with the natural destruction with profound ripple effects.

But what the IOC and VANOC will be doing is plenty enough to give an attempted green stamp to the Games. They'll be reducing power consumption, recycling venues and still cutting gashouse emissions to some degree that would otherwise be worse doing nothing at all. When you take into account that compromises have been offered on both sides, the real search is on for where the true line of compromise is that makes sense for both sides and that's satisfactory to the world.

Finding the line of compromise...

It can't come down to the environmentalists v. the Olympic idealists when the view of both has become a compromise on its own to those impartial. It's a given that the majority of all, including those impartial, view the Olympics as a necessity for peace in the time we're living in. Plenty evidence exists that even the most extreme environmentalists think the same thing. Not having an Olympics at all for the sake of environmental protection would take a massive chunk out of the same reservoir of joy we get when succeeding to preserve stunning natural environments.

The compromise line unsurprisingly falls on the head powers of both sides that need to work closer together so the excitement of corporate encroachment for the sake of staging a fun and epic Games doesn't take precedence over glaring environmental concerns that get ignored. Since most Olympic cities have seven years to get ready for the event, an intense dialogue over concessions shouldn't need any more time.

This is a line that needs to stay right where it is, despite its challenges and imperfections. The worst scenario is the possible slide to the philosophy of staging ever-bigger Olympics to top the last one and no one worrying about how it gets done when staged in those fragile natural environments around the globe. We all remember them from past decades and they may be used again if not all new ones still sitting mostly pristine.

Vancouver may never be completely the same again environmentally. Nevertheless, they'll survive after the Winter Olympics and will still look the same to the basic tourist. If the compromises could have been done exponentially better, at least Vancouver is a starting point. It's a chance to get it right on both sides for Sochi, Russia in 2014 and all future cities awaiting the prospect of perfection in corporate Olympic sport and natural preservation unity.

References & Resources:

http://www.thefiveringcircus.com/

http://vancouver2010insider.ca/node/11

http://www.vancouver.com/2010/