Go ahead FT... attempt to pressure the IOC into contorting it's mission into being an environmental change agent beholden to the likes of the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc.

Our Take, With Doug Sheridan

The FT Editorial Board writes, the organisers of the Paris Olympics, like their predecessors, aim to host a crowd-pleasing athletic spectacle and run a secure, globally unifying event, even at a time of French national disunity.

Amid rising global temps and in the city where the 2015 climate agreement was forged, the organisers have set a goal of emitting less GHGs, serving more plant-based food, using less single-use plastic and deploying more temporary venues. Faster, higher, stronger, yes, but also leaner, greener—and hotter.

The goal of leaving a lasting legacy has also been part of Olympic planning for years. As the aftermath of Athens in 2004 and Rio de Janeiro in 2016 showed, efforts to avoid building Olympic white elephants are not always successful. But London 2012 provided a good example of regeneration and the repurposing of venues, and Los Angeles’ Memorial Coliseum, already used for the 1932 and 1984 Games, will have a third outing in 2028.

Environmentalists are rightly wary of “greenwashing.” A report by climate-focused non-profit groups Carbon Market Watch and éclaircies described efforts to green the Games as “a decent attempt.” But it called for tighter monitoring of progress, greater transparency, more responsible sponsorship and even a downscaling of the whole concept to reduce the amount of carbon burnt by incoming spectators.

The Paris organisers deserve credit for aiming as high as the athletes. They want to halve the GHG emissions of the Games that took place in London and Rio. They have also planned for 95% of the venues to be temporary or to use existing assets, built and natural—water pollution permitting.

It is an existential imperative for the Olympics to do better. Climate change is already having an impact, whether from the heat that now threatens most summer Games, or the dwindling snow cover that jeopardises winter Olympics. Demonstrable efficiency is also key to attracting potential hosts put off by the risk of Montreal-style cost overruns.

Innovations have enlivened and improved Olympic competition. An inventive, cost-effective and sustainable approach to staging the Games is equally vital to their future.

Our Take 1: An "existential imparative" that the Olympics green themselves, huh? That the FT Board thinks the International Olympic Committee – IOC has any material role to play in the fight against climate change simply underscores how out of touch our media elites. Whatever.

Our Take 2: Go ahead FT... attempt to pressure the IOC into contorting it's mission into being an environmental change agent beholden to the likes of the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc. The climate brigade has attempted to ruin everything else in its path, why not the preeminent global sporting event that brings nations together once every four years in the spirit of excellence in competition?