The 2010 Winter Olympic Games will begin tomorrow, on February 12th in Vancouver and they are already considered as ones of the “greenest ever organised”.

These days many journalists’ are asking the same questions: are the 2010 Olympics the greenest games ever? “Vancouver Olympics: The greenest Games ever?” (Yahoo), “Vancouver 2010: The greenest Olympics?” (Mother Nature Network), “Green Olympic Games - Myth or Reality?” (environmentalism.suite101.com). But what can we compare Vancouver 2010 to, to get a clear answer to that interrogation?

By screening the web, I realise the answer is contrasting: “Vancouver Olympics are going for the green” (Yahoo), “Vancouver Winter Games, Not surprisingly, to be Quite Green” (greenr.ca), “the 2010 Games will be pretty green” (Ms Coady, Vanoc’s vice-president for sustainability), “Vancouver 2010 Promises Greenest Olympic Games Ever” (Inhabitat.com).

Indeed Vancouver has some pretty impressive green credentials to put forward.

The LEED building criteria were used to reduce venue footprints and to create facilities that have minimal impact on nature, and that use water and energy efficiently. The priority has been given to the refurbishment of existing facilities rather than building new sites. Basically Vancouverites did not get super-structures such as a ‘Birds Nest’ stadium or a ‘Water Cube’ swimming pool. The emphasis has been put on responsible construction and nearly every building has a purpose and a meaning that will outlast the two weeks- long Games.

Vancouver’s Olympic organizing committee (VANOC) partnered with Offsetters Green Technology Inc., to offset the direct emissions generated from the Games by investing in clean energy projects. The estimate direct emissions are of 110,000 tonnes including all aspects of staging the Games, including transportation, energy consumption, venue construction and the torch relay.

Regarding sponsorship corporate sustainability program has been introduced, the “Vancouver 2010 Sustainability Stars program”, that highlights the leading innovations in sustainability made by Games sponsors, partners and organizers. So far, over 60 “sustainability stars” have been awarded. Coca Cola was awarded a star for its “Waste Diversion Program” that will ensure that 95% of waste generated during the Games will be diverted from landfills.

Public transport will be free and unlimited for ticket holders on the day of their event.

And it may seem anecdotal, but all the medals to be awarded to the successful athletes, are made from recycled materials from used electronics , allowing 6.8 metric tons of circuit board to be diverted from landfills.

But the answer to the question “Vancouver Olympics: The greenest Games ever?” is far more simple.

In 1932, Lake Placid hosted the third Winter Olympics. Due to the financial crisis only 17 countries attended, represented by some 250 athletes, half of them were coming from Canada and the United States, and only 21 were women athletes. The Games required the construction of one new stadium, all the events being organised outdoor or in existing facilities. Lake Placid Games is just an example of how green were the first Games back in the late 19th and early 20th century.

In 2010, 80 countries will participate to the Games. Vancouver is set to host 5,500 Olympic Games athletes and team officials, 1,350 Paralympics Games athletes and team officials and 10,000 media representatives from all over the world. 1.6 million tickets were made available. 3 billion viewers are expected to watch the Games on screen. Two villages have been built to host them. Olympics infrastructures also include a new subway line and $600m upgrade of the “Sea to Sky highway”. These Games will leave a massive environmental footprint despite all the efforts of organisers to lower it. No need to be an environmentalist to figure out which one of Vancouver or Lake Placid Games have the lower environmental footprint. Vancouver Games are probably going to be the greenest games ever organised, during the past 15 years.

Carbon neutrality is the BHAG (“Big Hairy Audacious Goal”) of Vancouver that does seem unachievable due to the size of such an event and the inherent limits to carbon offsetting. On the other hand the impact of their social inclusion programs was a bit diminished when IOC (international Olympics Committee) was nominated for a Public Eyes Award (organised by Greenpeace) for having awarded the 2010 Games to Vancouver, “causing the displacement of a large part of the indigenous population around the venue, the Games being held on Indian lands whose title was never ceded”.

2012 London Summer Games are coming soon, and they are already putting forward “never seen before” green credentials. But what I like about London strategy is that it is not focused only on environment. Organisers have also embedded social sustainability in their strategy, highlighting the social benefits that the Games could have on the east of the capital.

The “Greenest Games ever” is a recurring theme and a PR leitmotiv.

In substance Vancouver 2010 organisers claim that the Games will have no impact on the area where they are organised. They will leave the place as it was found. Whereas London BHAG is to make London a better place than before the Games and that’s a much hairier goal…