The U.S. Olympic team is one of a handful that will supply air conditioners for their athletes at the Paris Games in a move that undercuts organizers’ plans to cut carbon emissions.

U.S. Olympic and Paralympic CEO Sarah Hirshland said Friday that while the U.S. team appreciates efforts aimed at sustainability, the federation would be supplying AC units for what is typically the largest contingent of athletes at the Summer Games.

“As you can imagine, this is a period of time in which consistency and predictability is critical for Team USA’s performance,” Hirshland said. “In our conversations with athletes, this was a very high priority and something that the athletes felt was a critical component in their performance capability.”

The Washington Post reported earlier this month that Germany, Australia, Italy, Canada and Britain were among the other countries with plans to bring air conditioners to France.

  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    199
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I have a wild idea here. What if, they didn’t build an entire Olympic sports complex with multiple stadiums and other infrastructure every 2 years around the globe? Maybe that would save a bit on carbon emissions. And hey, the billions that would have gone to building that complex? Maybe that could go toward building up renewable energy resources instead.

    But no that’s crazy, it’s the portable air conditioning units for some athlete’s apartments that are the problem. /s

    Though some props to Paris, it sounds like they didn’t have nearly the amount of insane new constructions that some Olympics have had. Sounds like only one major new venue with most venues being used already pre-existing.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2024/02/11/paris-2024-unveils-only-purpose-built-olympics-venue-in-city-five-months-ahead-of-summer-games/72561147007/

    • warm@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yeah, it should only be held in countries that have the required infrastructure in place, but the whole IOC is corrupt from top to bottom.

        • errer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s true for a few cherry picked olympics, but there are many where the facilities are still used to this day. In this article it’s really only Beijing and Brazil that are fair to highlight IMO (Greece is 20 years ago and that country went through a massive economic crisis, and Sarajevo was 40 years ago and went through a civil war).

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just hold it in Greece every time. Those poor fuckers could use some foreign money coming in every few years, they might not have to work 6 days a week then.

      • tankplanker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        Greece is too warm now for summer games, it’s significantly hotter than Paris right now and can hit a sustained over 40c without much problem. Paris isn’t great in the summer but it’s better than Greece. If we want one location to host the games during the summer then I pick Bergen, significantly cooler than Paris.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Just hold it in Greece every time.

        One of the hottest places in Europe, atm.

        By all means, it wouldn’t hurt to build high efficiency stadiums and sports centers the one time in a big “Olympics Zone” that gets used regularly rather than building a big new thing every two years at a random spot in the world. But if you’re looking for maximal efficiency, Greece ain’t your girl. Its cooking at record-breaking 46.4°C temperatures over there, weeks before the games even start.

        Might as well make Qatar the permanent venue for the World Cup.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Greece is the last place it should be held, the country is an absolute mess. It could honestly be split over Western Europe, countries like France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, UK. Places that have stadiums and such already, places that will still use any new infrastructure that is built.

    • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Imo, we should have one, or at most, two Olympic states. They’d be small countries that are more-or-less politically neutral, and instead of sending teams, their purpose would be to host the Summer and/or Winter Olympics. Construction, maintenance and upgrades of the facilities would be paid for by participating countries, as a percentage of their GDP. That way, the hosting country(ies) wouldn’t have to spend billions building the facilities, they get guaranteed tourism every 2~4 years, the facilities get reused, non-hosting countries have a place to measure their penis size, don’t have to spend outrageous sums to build their own facilities (they’re all paying together, after all), don’t have to bulldoze houses or forests, be concerned with water quality, and probably many other bonuses I’m not thinking of.

      Bonus points if the facilities are open year-round for Olympians to train at, so that the athletes are more used to the climate, equipment, tracks, trails, etc.

      The biggest downside is that hosting the Olympics is prestigious itself and generates a lot of tourism revenue (which in this case, would only be going to the “static” host(s)). It’s a chance for the host country to show off their economic strength, culture (like during the opening ceremonies), and more. You’d have to convince countries that they’re better off without the tourism and chance to flaunt their wealth.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        Or we could simply be logical and help fight climate change by not having the Olympics at all

    • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have a wild idea. What if humans prioritise making money now over their children being able to exist tomorrow?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      There was just an article posted around here about future games in Los Angeles …. Where one of the venues is in Oklahoma, unless I got seriously trolled, for exactly this: trying not to build as much new stuff.

      Here in Boston when they were talking about putting in a bid, all the discussion was about upgrading athletic facilities for all the regional colleges, and getting more hotels built to handle more tourism

      • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        It was far more nuanced than that. They also wanted their own lane on 91 so they wouldn’t have to deal with Boston traffic.

        https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2015/06/30/boston-2024-olympic-lanes/

        https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/30/sports/olympics/bostons-revised-24-bid-criticized-as-incomplete.html?_r=0

        • “Mass media encouraging citizens and tourists to use public transportation and carpooling”
        • “Flexible hours at local businesses”
        • “Rerouting long-haul trucking around the city”
        • “Intelligent highway systems technology”
        • “Manually-controlled traffic lights”
        • “New one-way streets in busy areas to create better flow”

        Never been more proud to go tell the IOC to go fuck themselves with a huge cactus.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Those all sound like good things, though. There shouldn’t be an interstate right through downtown. And god knows transportation in Boston is a mess and desperately needs work.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Right, plus in the context of not building new stuff for a temporary need

            • too bad they didn’t know how easy it would be for so many of us to work from home
            • roping off a lane may offend our egalitarianism, but it’s a temporary change
            • even if we had to build new lanes, they would sure as hell get used (especially since there’s never enough capacity on the T)