How Green the Games/ne green the Games.pdf · The Sydney 2000 Olympics have produced a mix of wins and losses on the environment front. While the wins are impressive, the losses show

GREENPEACE’S ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPICS

Australia Pacificwww.greenpeace.org.au

Sydney Office4/39 Liverpool Street Sydney NSWGPO Box 3307 Sydney NSW 2001Tel: 61 (0)2 9261 4666Freecall 1800 815 151Fax: 61 (0)2 9261 4588

InternationalKeizersgracht 176, 1016 DW Amsterdam, The NetherlandsTel: 31 20 523 62 22 Fax: 31 20 523 62 00www.greenpeace.org

GIVE THEPLANET ASPORTINGCHANCE

A production of Greenpeace International & Greenpeace Australia Pacific

Researched, Written and Edited by: Blair Palese, Corin Millais, Rupert Posner, Fiona Koza, Elisabeth Mealey, Warren McLaren,Darryl Luscombe, Matt Ruchel, Mark Oakwood, Tanja Dam, Gabriella Wuelser, SybrandLandman, Danielle Stewart, Jo Shepherd and Linda Apps.

Special Thanks To:Karla Bell for the original campaign ideaMaria Atkinson, Bovis Lend LeasePeter Ottesen, SOCOGCamilla Edwards,OCAAndrzej Listowski, OCARussell Peel, Foster’s BrewingNicholas Cox, EarthcareBrent Hoare, Greenchill Ladas Taylor, Greenchill Paul Blacklock, Calorgas Kevin Sansome, ElgasBirte Carstensen, Danfoss CompressorsJacqui Courtney and staff at SEDARod Simpson, Allen Jack & Cottier

A number of architects, developers, suppliers and contractors also gave freely of their time, including:Declan Brennan, Bryce Christian, Andrew Dunn, Craig Gilbert, Steve King, Stuart Morris,Richard Polkinghorn, Jeff Profke, David Shaw, Greg Taylor, Colin Wyllie and many other valu-able contributors too numerous to mention.

September 2000

ISBN: 1 876221 08 9

Cover photos: © Anthony Edgar.Designed by Pulse Design, Sydney, Australia

G R E E N P E A C E ’ S E N V I R O N M E N T A L A S S E S S M E N T O F T H E S Y D N E Y 2 0 0 0 O LY M P I C S

How green the Games?


Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................1

Introduction ..............................................................................................................7

Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................8

Chapter 1. Toxic contamination & the Olympic Games..................................11

Chapter 2. Energy use at the Olympic Games..................................................21

Chapter 3. Refrigeration & airconditioning at the Olympic Games ..........31

Chapter 4. Alternatives to PVC at the Olympic Games ..............................39

Chapter 5. Timber use at the Olympic Games ................................................47

Chapter 6. Water use at the Olympic Games ..................................................55

Chapter 7. Transport at the Olympic Games ..................................................61

Glossary ............................................................................................................67

The Sydney 2000 Olympics have produced a mixof wins and losses on the environment front. Whilethe wins are impressive, the losses show thatSydney could have done more to give the planet asporting chance.

Greenpeace is determined to ensure that thepursuit of environmental solutions does not endwith the Sydney Olympic Games. We will continueto push for environmental solutions andtechnologies to be taken off-site and put into useinternationally.

The following is a summary of Greenpeace’sevaluation of the seven key areas that featuredprominently in Sydney’s Environmental Guidelinesand how Sydney performed against them. Ourreport also provides the context of what world’s bestpractice for each issue area is and how Sydney’seffort stacks up against that.

Finally, and most importantly, there have beenmany lessons learned by Sydney’s Green Gameseffort that should not be lost. These lessons are notonly an important part of the on-going process ofmoving toward sustainable development, butshould be used by future Olympic cities to avoidthe pitfalls experienced by Sydney for a betteroverall environmental performance.

LESSONS LEARNED

LESSON 1:Make specific environmental commitments as partof your development plans well before design plansare finalised and construction begins. Make thesecommitments public.

LESSON 2:Environmental Guidelines must be clear andspecific benchmarks that are non-negotiable,measurable and backed up by law. Thesebenchmarks must be included in all of the tendersoffered for Olympic development and made public.

LESSON 3:Olympic organisers and developers must berequired to collect and report information on allenvironmental aspects of their project and makethis information publicly available.

LESSON 4:Independent auditing of all environmentalinformation is essential to ensure credibility.

LESSON 5:No matter how Olympic construction is managed –with one project manager or as independentprojects and contracts – Olympic organisers mustensure that the best and most cost-effectiveenvironmental systems and materials are usedproject-wide.

1 |

Executive summary

LESSON 6:Great enthusiasm for and expertise inenvironmental building and event managementexists at all levels internationally. Seek out andengage those innovative and creative experts andcompanies interested in the environmental successof your event.

LESSON 7:High-level and consistent consultation with thecommunity, environmental and social groups isessential and must be part of the project from thebeginning. A clear process for conflict should beestablished as part of the city’s EnvironmentalGuidelines.

LESSON 8:Education about environmental initiativesundertaken and the benefits gained is essential atall levels, from the public to athletes, sponsors, themedia and the commercial sector.

GREENPEACE EVALUATION OFSEVEN KEY ISSUE AREAS:

TOXIC CONTAMINATIONSydney's wider Homebush Bay area was the site ofwholesale dumping of domestic, industrial andcommercial wastes from the 1930s until the 1980s.Nine million cubic metres of waste were dumpedin the area, filling more than 160 hectares of thenatural wetlands in the area. Some of this wasmade up of extremely hazardous industrial wasteand has had a significant impact on the widerenvironment and receiving waters due to itstoxicity, persistence and/or bio-accumulativenature.

The New South Wales (NSW) Government'sdecision to bid for the 2000 Summer OlympicGames meant that the motivation, and moreimportantly, funding commitments were mobilisedto clean-up and manage a site which probablywould otherwise have languished as acontaminated legacy of industrial dumping. As aformer dumping ground, the redevelopment of thesite represented an opportunity to develop Gamesinfrastructure without clearing previouslyuntouched remnant vegetation or contributingfurther to Sydney's suburban sprawl. It was alsoclose to public transport from the city.

While there are many issues about how effectivelythe site has been cleaned up, it is highlyimprobable that the investigation into, separationand landfilling of waste on-site would haveoccurred to the extent it has without the Olympicsto justify the cost and effort. For the short-term atleast, the site has been made safer than it was priorto using it for Sydney’s Olympic Games.

Just 2.5 kilometres off the site, Homebush Bay andthe Rhodes Peninsula is one of the five worst dioxinhotspots in the world due to chemical production

by companies such as Union Carbide and Orica fordecades. One of the greatest failings of the NSWGovernment is its failure to live up to a promise toclean up this area – half a million tonnes of dioxincontaminated waste – before the Games.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• A new, non-incineration remediation technology,

which uses heat to separate waste from soil andchemical treatment to break down the waste, isbeing trialed to treat 400 tonnes of dioxin-contaminated waste found on the Olympic site.Greenpeace lobbied strongly for this to be used atSydney’s Olympic site because no toxic emissionsare released during the treatment process.

FAILURES AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• Despite government promises, there has been no

clean-up for Homebush Bay and the RhodesPeninsula just off-site. Half a million tonnes ofuntreated dioxin-contaminated waste remain inthe muds of Homebush Bay and on land just 2.5kilometres off the Olympic site.

• The OCA chose to landfill most of the waste on-site rather than to segregate and treat it. Instead,it was collected into a number of large landfillmounds that were capped and installed withdrains to allow liquid run-off to go to a treatmentplant on-site.

• This system must be managed and maintainedindefinitely to ensure leachate does not escapeand pollute the environment. Greenpeace hasbeen asking the NSW Government for a long-term, post-Games management plan for the sitebut this plan has yet to be provided.

• There is still no publicly accessible validationdocumentation on the bulk of the remediationwork.

ENERGYWith climate change fast becoming one of theworld’s biggest challenges, the need for solutions toour reliance on fossil fuels for energy is dire. At theSydney Olympics, renewable energy has virtuallysubstituted conventional fossil fuels to meet thehuge energy demands of a modern OlympicGames showing that it can be done and that it iscost effective.

With over 90 per cent of Australia’s energygenerated by coal-fired power stations,1 the switchto clean, renewable energy at the Olympics is animportant success. Remarkably, the grid-connectedsolar photovoltaics installed at the Olympic Parkcontribute nearly half of all New South Wales’ grid-connected PV power. The use of rooftop solarpower for electricity and water heating at theOlympic Athletes’ Village is proof that an averagehome can be directly powered by the sun's energy.

The widespread use of green power at Olympicvenues during the Games demonstrates thatelectricity use for homes, offices and other buildingscan be powered by 100 per cent renewable energy

2 | Greenpeace’s environmental assessment of the Sydney 2000 Olympics

Executive summary

sources. The array of energy efficient design toolsand technologies on the site shows that typicalenergy consumption can be cut by up to 50 percent.

Collectively, energy efficient design, renewableenergy generation from sources such as solar andthe use of green power for Sydney’s OlympicGames is one of the best environmental legaciesachieved.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• All competition venues will use 100 per cent

Green Power for the duration of the Games.• Nearly half of all New South Wales grid-

connected solar photovoltaics are installed atOlympic Park.

• 665 houses in the Athletes’ Village have grid-connected solar (PV) panels and solar hot watersystems making it the largest solar-poweredsuburbs in the world by number of homes at thetime of the Games. The Village’s energy load is50 per cent less than conventional dwellings,saving 7000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year.

• 1,176 solar PV panels on the SuperDome roofprovide 10 per cent of its daily energy.

• 19 grid-connected solar-powered lighting towerswill provide lighting for Olympic Boulevard.

• Australia’s largest centralised solar domestic hotwater system will provide hot water for theneighbouring Homebush Bay Novotel/Ibis hotels.The 400 square metre system will provide 60 percent of the hotels’ hot water needs, an energyreduction of 15 per cent.

• 800 solar panels will power water pumps in theMillennium Parkland.

• A natural gas co-generation plant in StadiumAustralia will reduce mains electricity demand by10 per cent when an event is on.

• Waste heat recovered from the Hockey Centre’sairconditioning heats domestic hot water for thevenue.

• Efficiency measures such as passive naturalventilation save 20 per cent of energy demand inthe Showgrounds.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• Plans for an on-site Solar Thermal Electricity

plant at Olympic Park were dropped.• Photovoltaic energy and solar hot water

generation were not taken up at all venues.• A lack of commitment to purchasing Green

Power long-term for all Olympic venues.

REFRIGERATION ANDAIRCONDITIONINGAustralia is the country with the fastest growing rateof skin cancer in the world and is struggling to evenbegin to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. It isdisappointing that the country lags behind Europein the move towards environmentally saferefrigeration and airconditioning chemicals.Sydney’s failure to meet its own EnvironmentalGuidelines in airconditioning and refrigeration

(RAC) in Olympic venues is the biggest and mostsystematic environmental failure of its OlympicGames.

Greenpeace believes Australia missed an importantopportunity to use the Environmental Guidelinesto push its airconditioning and refrigerationindustry towards clean alternatives such asammonia and hydrocarbons. Fortunately, ourengagement with Olympic sponsor companies suchas Coca-Cola, Fosters Brewing and Samsung haveproved more successful and will be a major legacyof Sydney’s Environmental Guidelines.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• After a global Greenpeace protest campaign

Coca-Cola announced that it would stoppurchasing HFC equipment for all newrefrigeration equipment by the Athens 2004Games. If delivered, this will create significantchange in the global refrigeration industry andpositively impact on the commercial availabilityof Greenfreeze equipment internationally.

• After intense lobbying from Greenpeace,Samsung agreed to provide 324 large,environmentally safe Greenfreeze refrigerators foruse at the Olympic site.

• Foster’s Brewing Group agreed to alter itsrefrigeration policy to ban the purchase ofgreenhouse-polluting HFCs and ozone-destroyingHCFC refrigeration equipment.

• Greenfreeze refrigerators have been used in halfof the Olympic hotel and in small numbers inthe SuperDome.

FAILURES AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• Not a single Olympic venue, either permanent or

temporary, requiring airconditioning meetsSydney’s Environmental Guidelines. Greenhousegases HFCs and ozone-depleting HCFCs areused throughout.

• The vast majority of refrigeration equipment usedby Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Samsung andFoster’s Brewing at the Olympic site do notcomply with the Environmental Guidelines.

• Car manufacturer, GM Holden, will providemore than 3000 cars that are likely to haveairconditioning using the greenhouse gasHFC134A.

PVCOlympic building construction is proof positive thatPVC can at least be minimised or avoided. Themanufacture, use and disposal of PVC (polyvinylchloride) produces hazardous chemicals includingdioxin, which has been linked to birth defects,cancer and hormone disruption.

PVC use was reduced at the Sydney Olympicsparticularly in water and waste pipes used on mostOlympic venues. Vinyl flooring was reduced as wasa great deal of PVC-sheathed cabling. AnAustralian-made PVC-free cable was developedespecially for use at the Athletes’ Village and other

3 |


venues and is now available to the Australianmarket. Unfortunately, many sites chose not to usethe local product and chose PVC for power andlight cables. Virtually no effort was made to usePVC-free telecommunications cabling.

The widespread use of PVC-free alternatives inOlympic venues clearly shows that withcommitment, PVC can be replaced in buildingconstruction.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• It is estimated that PVC was avoided for

infrastructure (sewer, stormwater and watermains).

• The Athletes’ Village reduced PVC usage byweight against standard industry practice byapproximately 70 per cent. More than onemillion metres of PVC-free cabling were usedthere.

• Australian-made PVC-free power and light cable,Envirolex, was developed to meet Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines and used extensivelyin the Athletes’ Village and other Olympicvenues.

• At least 200,000 metres of Polyethylene (PE) pipewere used as a PVC alternative.

• No PVC was said to have been used forhydraulics at the SuperDome.

• At least 19,000 metres of PVC piping weredisplaced at the Showgrounds site.

• No in-ground PVC piping was used at theNovotel/Ibis hotels.

• 40,000 metres of PVC-free cabling were suppliedto Stadium Australia and 60,000 metres toSOCOG offices.

• Major 132kV power lines were re-routedunderground using 8,400 metres of PVC-freecabling.

• Over 5000 square metres of biodegradablelinoleum was laid instead of vinyl flooring at theMedia Centre and in the Olympic hotels.

• No PVC seating was used in stadium venues withover 390,000 kilograms of Polypropylene seatingused instead.

• Over 2000 square metres of polyolefin sailmaterials were supplied for tensile roofingstructures.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• PVC-free power and lighting cabling was not

used at many Olympic sites or venues.• Little effort was made to find PVC-free

telecommunications cabling.• Little effort was made to find PVC-free

alternatives for huge numbers of temporarymarquees used during the Games.

TIMBERRegrettably, Sydney’s Olympics did not moveAustralia closer to adopting independent timbercertification as a measure of local forestry bestpractice – an ongoing environmental problemnationally. Greenpeace had hoped Sydney’s

Environmental Guidelines might help move themarket at the beginning of the campaign in1992/93. Credit goes to Mirvac Lend Lease VillageConsortium (MLLVC) for what is believed to bethe first commercial use of imported ForestStewardship Council-certified (FSC) timbers inAustralia used in small amounts in the Athletes’Village.

Due to the failure to establish an effective locallycertified sustainable timber system in time for theOlympics, emphasis was directed at sourcing nativeforest timbers with at least a chain-of-custody andrecycled and plantation timber. Extensive use wasmade of recycled and plantation timbers, especiallyin the application of engineered plantation timbersfor joists, bearers and custom trusses.

The native forest timber issue remains contentious.While no evidence was found of timbers sourcedfrom rainforests it does appear that timber from oldgrowth forests and forests nominated for inclusionin World Heritage Areas were used at Sydney’sOlympic site. While this is a tragedy, the quantityseems to have been small. On the whole, althoughinformation was difficult to obtain in someinstances, responsible timber practices seem tohave been adopted by most Olympic venuedevelopers.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• Australia’s first imported FSC-certified timber was

used for veneers and handrails at the Athletes’Village.

• ‘Feature’ grade timber was used in the Athletes’Village using 80 per cent of the log instead of‘Select’ grade, which uses only 20 per cent.

• Construction workers union placed a ban on theuse of imported rainforest timber.

• 288,000 metres of engineered plantation timberjoists and beams were used in the Athletes’Village.

• Chain-of-custody native timber was used at theEquestrian Centre, Shooting Centre and TennisCentre.

• Plantation timber was used extensively in mostOlympic venues.

• 1000 tonnes of plantation timber glue laminateswere used in the Showground’s Multi-use Arena.

• Recycled timber was used at the ShowgroundsCarlton Clydesdale pavilion, Ferry Wharf,Olympic hotels, International Shooting Centreand Archery Centre.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• No timber was sourced from independently

certified, sustainably managed forests (eg FSC)within Australia.

• Timber was sourced for veneers from clear-felled,200-year-old forests in Tasmania.

• Timber was sourced from forests nominated forinclusion in a Tasmanian World Heritage Area.

• No timber was obtained from small-scale‘portable’ selective logging operations.


Executive summary

• Recycled timber and engineered plantationtimbers were over-specified in some cases overother more environmental options.

WATER CONSERVATIONWith environmental threats to clean, drinkablewater growing, there is a great need to conserve ourwater resources. Solid efforts were made tointroduce sustainable water management systems atSydney’s Olympic Park. Key features such as thedesign of the Park to maximise collection of stormwater and minimise on-site demand for water wereimportant in creating a more ecologically sensitivesite. The collection and recycling of waste water foron-site treatment and the provision of separatepotable and non-potable supplies to reducedemand on Sydney’s mains water supply were goodachievements.

However reliance on traditional technologies forwaste water collection and treatment meant thatmore sustainable options were overlooked. As aminimum, the water management system atOlympic Park could have included separate greyand black water collection systems, an anaerobicdigester and a combined heat and power station forbetter environmental results.

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• A Water Reclamation and Management Scheme

(WRAMS) was implemented across the Olympicsite recycling about 50 per cent of water used and100 per cent of non-potable water (around 850litres per year).

• A dual water system that separates drinking waterand recycled ‘waste’ water for landscape use andtoilet flushing was installed.

• All storm water is collected on site.• Two megalitres of sewage is treated on-site every

day.• Water saving devices and techniques at the

Athletes’ Village will cut water use by 30 percent.

• Dual flush toilets and low flow water-savingdevices are installed at most Olympic Parkvenues.

• Drought-resistant plants are favoured on mostsites to reduce the need for watering.

• A central computer controls irrigation forautomatic night time use and non-use during rainperiods.

• Roof harvested water cuts the Showgrounds’mains water needs by 50 per cent.

• A pool filtration system at the Aquatic Centrereduces the need for top-up water.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• Grey water and black water collection systems

were not used. These would have fed ananaerobic digester. This would have producedgreen electricity from biogas and formed anutrient rich fertiliser.

• Chlorine disinfection was used for waste watertreatment instead of ozone or UV radiation as

originally proposed.• Membrane technologies were not fully explored

as alternatives to chemical water treatments.

TRANSPORTA large contributor to greenhouse gas emissions isour increasing reliance on fossil fuel-burningvehicles. One of the most significant successes ofSydney’s Environmental Guidelines was the highdegree of public transport used for the movementof people. No provision has been made forspectators to drive their cars to the core site ofOlympic Park at Homebush Bay. Strong incentivesto use public transport for other sites weredeveloped by building the cost of public transit intoevent ticketing. The use of electric, particularlysolar-powered, vehicles at Olympic Park is also tobe commended.

The disappointment is in the inability of the localautomotive industry to seize the opportunity toshowcase new cleaner technologies in personaltransportation, such as low emission fuel or hybridfuel cars. While spectators are moved around byless polluting modes of transport, Olympic VIPswill be transported by low-efficiency, petrol burningHolden vehicles that produce more greenhousegases than their original designs did in 1948.2

SELECTED ACHIEVEMENTS• 21 of the 25 Olympic sporting events occur

within the Olympic Park or the Sydney HarbourZone, reducing overall transport demand.

• Virtually all spectators attending events will usepublic transport.

• The price of Olympic Games tickets includespublic transport costs.

• No public car parking will be available atOlympic Park.

• The Olympic rail loop can move 50,000passengers per hour with trains leaving OlympicPark station every two minutes.

• Both Sydney International and Domestic Airportshave new rail stations and links to the city’s railnetwork.

• 3800 buses will carry spectators directly to andfrom venues as direct services or as rail-busshuttles.

• Ferry services will move officials and athletesbetween major venues via Sydney Harbour.

• A network of cycleways feed into Olympic Parkvenues.

• 500 solar and electrical buggies will transportofficials, athletes and staff around the Olympicsite.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES• None of the 3000+ VIP car fleet provided by

Olympic sponsor Holden will be fuelled byalternative fuels such as liquid petroleum gas asoriginally promised.

• A hybrid fuel/electric concept car developed byHolden is not available for road use in time forthe Games.

5 |


• Only 24 of the 3800 bus fleet will operate usingcompressed natural gas (CNG). The rest will usemore polluting petrol and diesel.

• Only limited secure bicycle lock-up facilities havebeen provided at Olympic Park.

ENDNOTES1. http://www.seda.nsw.gov.au/renewable.asp2. Geoff Strong, "Blame it on the Australian dream" The Age

July 14 2000


Executive summary

In 1992, Greenpeace took advantage of Sydney'sopen and anonymous contest for the best Olympic2000 Athletes’ Village design to show that, withcommitment, a city could showcase environmentalsolutions.

Forward-thinking architects were consulted, ideasand environmental best practices gathered and aGreenpeace design plan submitted. Our plan foran Athletes’ Village was car-less, powered by thesun, used land carefully, included only non-toxicand eco-friendly materials, conserved and reusedresources, and acted as a platform for cutting-edgegreen technologies.

Greenpeace focused on a number of key areas:solar energy, energy conservation and design,public transport, best-practice toxic wasteremediation, PVC-free building materials, wastereduction and non-toxic disposal, waterconservation and re-use, protection of endangeredareas and species, and responsible use of timberand building materials.

More than 100 bidders, mostly architectural firmsand development companies, entered plans intothe Athletes’ Village design contest. When thewinners were announced, Greenpeace's design wasamong the five winners. We remained involved inthe development of the final plan. Not long after,Olympic bid organisers decided that they liked theconcept of a green Village so much that theyextended it to the rest of the Olympic site.

At that point, Greenpeace was asked to helpSydney develop a specific set of EnvironmentalGuidelines for the Olympic Games. We workedwith alternative power and waste experts, greenbuilding designers, academics and our own team ofinternational environmental campaigners to comeup with the most progressive standards. We helpeddraft what became Sydney’s official EnvironmentalGuidelines for the Summer Olympic Games.

In September 1993, Greenpeace joined the SydneyOlympic bid committee in Monaco, Monte Carloto promote the "Green Games" idea as a uniqueselling point of the city's bid to the InternationalOlympic Committee (IOC) and to other biddingnations as a possible positive legacy of any OlympicGames.

EYES ON THE GREEN PRIZEAfter Sydney won the bid for the 2000 Olympics,Greenpeace began a seven-year campaign to ensurethat the city lived up to the environmental promisesit made before it won. Greenpeace closelymonitored all aspects of the development andconstruction of the Olympic site, playing animportant "green watchdog" role.

Greenpeace successfully lobbied the New SouthWales (NSW) Government to have theEnvironmental Guidelines passed into law as part

7 |

Introduction

of the budget package for the Olympics. Weworked with companies tendering to design, buildand supply the Olympic site, protesting when theOlympic organisers fell short of theirenvironmental commitments.

While Greenpeace has worked closely with theSydney Organising Committee for the OlympicGames (SOCOG), the Olympic Co-ordinationAuthority (OCA) and other Olympic and cityofficials responsible for the Games, we remainindependent. We have praised Sydney’s effortswhen they have led to some of the most progressiveenvironmental work internationally and protestedwhen efforts have fallen short of promises orpossibilities.

For Greenpeace, the Sydney Olympic Games haveprovided a platform to implement effective,mainstream environmental solutions. Since 1992when we first came up with the idea for a GreenGames, much has been achieved. Yet much morecould have been done to see Sydney’s originalgreen vision became reality.

GREENPEACE’S EVALUATION REPORTWith this report, Greenpeace has undertaken adetailed evaluation of how Sydney performed inseven key areas that featured prominently in theEnvironmental Guidelines: energy, transport,water, toxic remediation, timber, PVC and airconditioning/refrigeration. The report also outlinesworld’s best practise for environmental solutions inthese areas in an attempt to put some context toSydney’s performance.

The Greenpeace evaluation primarily covers theOlympic Park where the majority of events, venues,activities and buildings are found. The report alsolooks at some non-Park venues where there aresignificant issues or links such as public transportthat cannot be separated out.

The Olympic Park covers the Stadium, ArcheryCentre, SuperDome, Tennis Centre, AquaticCentre and the Sydney Showground (used forhosting Sydney’s annual Royal Easter Show) whichincludes the Sports Hall, Exhibition Complex andthe Multi-use Arena. Other Olympic Park venuescovered here are the Athletes’ Village, MediaVillage, multi-storey SuperDome car park, Railloop and station, Novotel and Ibis hotels,17technical equipment rooms (portable buildings),15computer equipment rooms (portable buildings),33 buildings at the Technical Operations Centreand the Main Press Centre.

The OCA and SOCOG were asked to assist in thecollection of data for this report. The informationthey provided after lengthy negotiation was largelyqualitative and fell very short on specific detail. Inmany cases information on whole areas of interestwas unavailable. This is an obvious shortcoming onthe part of Olympic organisers charged with

ensuring the Environmental Guidelines wereadhered to.

In many cases, Greenpeace was forced to searchvenue by venue for much of the informationprovided here relying on individual contractors andsuppliers. Inevitably there will be data thatescaped close scrutiny but every effort has beenmade to verify the information we obtained.Greenpeace believes a more open environmentalreporting process was needed in order to evaluateSydney’s successes and failures, to learn about theobstacles to success and allow for learning forfuture Olympic Games.

A glossary of terms is included at the end of thereport.

The report presents eight important lessons thatGreenpeace believes will help other Olympic citiesto match and improve upon Sydney’senvironmental achievements and to avoid some ofthe mistakes Sydney organisers made.As we move into the new millennium, it is clearthat governments and companies at all levels needto start delivering environmental solutions into themainstream. Sydney has shown that solutions toenvironmental problems exist and can, withcommitment from government and industry,become part of everyday life.

The challenge now is for the world to assessSydney’s performance and aim to break itsenvironmental records at every turn.

Sydney’s Green Games – The lessons learnedGreenpeace became involved in attempting togreen Sydney’s Olympic Games because we saw anopportunity to forward the environmental agendaand to show the world that environmental solutionsare possible.

While we have been critical of Sydney when it fellshort of its original environmental goals, animportant part of greening the Olympic Games isthe need for the lessons learned here to be passedon to future Olympic host cities. We believe theIOC has an important role to play in helpingOlympic host cities and bid cities to avoid thepitfalls Sydney faced and to exceed Sydney’senvironmental standards.

LESSONS LEARNEDThe list of lessons learned below is key to ensuringthat Sydney’s environmental successes are just thebeginning of an ongoing international process.

LESSON 1:Make specific environmental commitments aspart of your development plans well beforedesign plans are finalised and constructionbegins. Make these commitments public.


Introduction

This was one of the major achievements of the2000 Olympic Games and it’s what has set Sydneyapart from other Olympic host cities. In the pursuitof an "edge" over other Olympic bid contenders,the Sydney Bid Company took up Greenpeace’splan for a Green Games early and promised tomake Sydney’s Games the "greenest ever". Sydneysubmitted a set of Environmental Guidelines,which Greenpeace and other environmentalorganisations helped draft, as part of its official bidto the IOC and made these Guidelines public.After winning the bid, the New South WalesGovernment included these Guidelines in thebudget legislation for the Games. While non-binding, this made the Guidelines an official partof Sydney’s Olympics effort. Although Sydney fellshort on a number of its Environmental Guidelinecommitments, much of the credit for what hasbeen achieved can be linked to the city’s earlyinclusion of environmental protection in all of itsOlympics preparations long before winning the bidfor the 2000 Olympic Games.

LESSON 2:Environmental Guidelines must be clear andspecific benchmarks that are non-negotiable,measurable and backed up by law. Thesebenchmarks must be included in all of thetenders offered for Olympic development andmade public.

In hindsight, Sydney’s Environmental Guidelineswere too general to ensure that specificenvironmental commitments could be achievedand measured. Time- and budget-pressed Olympicorganisers, suppliers and developers were able toskirt around the Guidelines when meeting themrequired time to search for environmentallyfriendly materials and technologies. Had therebeen specific and measurable standards in areassuch as renewable energy use and soil toxicitylevels, such evasion would have been impossible.Equally, without laws to back them up, theGuidelines were just that – guidelines rather thanregulations. Companies and developers arenotorious for meeting only the minimalenvironmental standard if they can avoid legalsanction. Greenpeace believes Sydney would haveachieved greater environmental success if there hadbeen legal requirements on organisers anddevelopers to meet certain standards.

LESSON 3:Olympic organisers and developers must berequired to collect and report information on allenvironmental aspects of their project and makethis information publicly available.

In carrying out its eight months of research for thisreport, Greenpeace found that Sydney Olympicorganisers had no defined process for gathering,verifying and recording environmental informationthroughout the development of Olympic venues.Organisers did not require those who won Olympic

tenders to show that they were meeting specificenvironmental criteria. Interestingly, wheredevelopers wanted to show off their greencredentials, they managed to find their records andmake them available. In other instances, we weretold that records had been placed in deep storageand were unavailable.

Companies around the world are realising theyneed back-to-source supply chain information toensure their environmental credibility. Greenpeacestrongly recommends that future Olympic citiesestablish a clear system for gathering and managingenvironmental information at all levels of theproject as part of their Environmental Guidelines.Without this information, it is impossible tomeasure the environmental impacts of the projectoverall and to learn from the experience.

LESSON 4:Independent auditing of all environmentalinformation is essential to ensure credibility.

As Sydney did not keep detailed records of how itperformed against the Environmental Guidelinesnor require an accredited, independent auditor toverify this information, it is impossible to properlygauge the city’s Olympic environmentalachievements and shortcomings.

The OCA employed the Earth Council toundertake a series of 'Environmental Reviews' butthese lacked in-depth research and credible dataand were more of a PR exercise than an official andindependent audit. Likewise, the IOC failed tocarry out anything other than a superficialassessment of Sydney's Green Games. Anindependent audit of environmental informationwould have given Sydney unequivocal credit for itssuccesses and put real pressure on the city todeliver on its commitments.

Future Olympic cities would benefit greatly fromemploying credible independent auditors from thestart of venue development to ensure successes andfailures are accurately monitored throughout theproject.

LESSON 5:No matter how Olympic construction is managed– with one project manager or as independentprojects and contracts – Olympic organisers mustensure that the best and most cost-effectiveenvironmental systems and materials are usedproject-wide.

Because Sydney’s Olympic venues were built bycompeting companies, builders were constantly "re-inventing the wheel" in their efforts to source best-practise environmental technologies and materials.The Stadium and SuperDome, for example, bothsought PVC alternatives for drain pipes, cablingand flooring but as they were competingcompanies, they often found separate suppliers with

9 |


varying degrees of successful alternatives and atdifferent prices. For the best environmental results,Olympic organisers have a responsibility to ensurethe best materials and systems are used throughoutthe site even if competing companies are involved.

LESSON 6:Great enthusiasm for and expertise inenvironmental building and event managementexists at all levels internationally. Seek out andengage those innovative and creative experts andcompanies interested in the environmentalsuccess of your event.

During research for this report, architects, projectcoordinators, suppliers and events managers told usthey were thrilled to have been involved inSydney’s green Games effort. Many told us theywanted to discuss the many complex issuesinvolved in their participation with Olympicorganisers and others involved but were rarely giventhe opportunity. Others told us they longed to domore environmental projects but that they came upvery rarely.

There is a wealth of expertise and interest inenvironmentally sustainable projects that need tobe tapped. Governments, corporate and residentialbuilding clients need to set challengingenvironmental standards that can keep our expertsdeveloping the environmental solutions we needfor the future.

LESSON 7:High-level and consistent consultation with thecommunity, environmental and social groups isessential and must be part of the project from thebeginning. A clear process for conflict should beestablished as part of the city’s EnvironmentalGuidelines.

A lot of the public cynicism about Sydney’s so-called Green Games stems from the fact that asystem was not established early on to maintainregular consultation with the many stakeholdersimpacted by Olympic construction.

The selection of Bondi Beach for the beachvolleyball stadium was a classic case of communityoutrage going unheard. Residents of the HomebushBay area were left uninformed for years about thetoxic waste found at the Olympic site and were notwarned when the waste was moved into landfills onsite. The OCA’s failure to use any environmentallysafe airconditioning in Olympic venues was notmade known to Greenpeace until after decisionshad been made and equipment purchased.

Confidence in the consultation process would havebeen greater if it had been more consistent,involved senior Olympic officials and had a conflictresolution process established from the start toensure failures did not occur without exploring allpossible solutions with all stakeholders.

LESSON 8:Education about environmental initiativesundertaken and the benefits gained is essential atall levels, from the public to athletes, sponsors,the media and the commercial sector.

One of Sydney’s most unfortunate failures was itslack of an environmental public educationplatform for the 2000 Olympic Games. Late in1999 a plan emerged from SOCOG for anEnvironmental Pavilion which would haveincluded financial support and participation fromOlympic organisers, environmental groups,government agencies and sponsor companies. Atthe last minute, the project was cancelled anddespite seven years of effort, Sydney’s Green Gamesproject will be largely unheralded in September2000. In addition to public education, thecommercial successes of Sydney’s environmentalefforts should also have been analysed andpromoted to encourage other developers andcompanies to take them up. Olympic host cities should ensure that acommitment to and funding for education at alllevels is included from the beginning of theproject.


Introduction

INTRODUCTIONThe production, trade in, use and release of manysynthetic chemicals are widely recognised as globalthreats to human health and the environment. Yetthe world's chemical industries continue toproduce and release thousands of chemicalcompounds into the environment every year, inmost cases with little or no testing or understandingof the impacts on people and the environment. Ofthese chemical compounds, Greenpeace hasprioritised the elimination of persistent organicpollutants or POPs.

POPs are generally extremely toxic in smallamounts and because they travel long distances viaair currents, they endanger people and wildlife.POPs are also carried in the atmosphere towardspolar environments where they condense and aredeposited. This mechanism is believed to accountfor the surprisingly high concentrations of POPs inarctic environments and in the indigenous peopleswho live there.

The other defining and worrying characteristic ofPOPs is that they cannot be broken down easily bynatural processes. In some cases when breakdowndoes occur, it creates chemicals that are even morehazardous than the original substances. Dioxin, aby-product from combustion processes involvingchlorine, is one of the most poisonous POPs knownto science.

The United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP) has recognised the need to adopt aworldwide legally binding treaty to eliminate POPsby the year 2001 at the latest. Twelveorganochlorine POPs, including dioxins have beenprioritised.

The Greenpeace international toxics campaignseeks an end to the manufacture, use and disposalof hazardous, synthetic substances, particularlypersistent organic pollutants. Greenpeace activistsraise public awareness about the dangers ofindustrial pollution and encourage governmentsand industries to convert to clean modes ofproduction.

Greenpeace believes the best way to deal with toxicand hazardous waste is not to produce it in the firstplace. The problem is that in many parts of theworld, including Sydney, toxic legacies have beenleft by previous generations.

Sydney’s controversial decision to use a formerwaste dump site to locate its Olympic venues raisesa serious issue facing many cities around the world– how to treat and make safe toxic waste areascreated years ago which pose serious environmentaland human health threats.

This chapter outlines the positive and negativeaspects and challenges faced during of the clean-upof the Sydney Olympic site and beyond. This

11 |

1 | Toxic contaminationand theOlympic Games

evaluation refers to the area within the siteboundaries. However, no comprehensiveassessments would be complete without referenceto the wider Homebush Bay area, which areincluded here.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES STATE:"Degradation of natural resources by pollution

reduces the capacity to protect human health.Toxic waste can pollute ground water, rivers andoceans. Waste gases from factories and cars cancreate a mixture of toxic chemicals in city air.Uncontrolled power station emissions can causeacid rain and agricultural chemicals can polluteair, soil and water in rural areas."

They continue:"The protection of human health requires highstandards of air, water and soil quality. Whenimplemented, such standards provide protectionfrom excessive exposure to heavy metals, noxiousgases, toxic chemicals and bacteria. World HealthOrganisation guidelines are commonly used bynational governments when establishing their ownenvironmental health criteria and may also be usedas a yardstick against which to assess performanceof governments. Pollution is widespread throughoutthe world.

“Cities in particular have pollution problems andmany are now addressing them. Typicalinnovations to improve air, water and soil qualityinclude:

• regional air quality strategies such as openburning controls and pollution preventionregulations to minimise industrial emissions;

• improvement of drinking water quality standardsto limit people’s exposure to toxic chemicals andreduce risk of disease;

• improved management of urban run-off,supported by planning that minimises use ofpaved surfaces and reduces storm water run-off towaterways;

• effective remediation of former industrial sites.

“Olympic host cities should commit themselvesto... comprehensive contamination testing offormer industrial sites being redeveloped for theOlympic Games with remediation and riskreduction programs as appropriate.”

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY'S GREENOLYMPIC EFFORT

TOXIC REMEDIATION OUTCOMESSydney's wider Homebush Bay area was the site ofwholesale dumping of domestic, industrial andcommercial wastes from the 1930s until the 1980s.Nine million cubic metres of waste were dumpedin the area, gradually filling more than 160hectares of the natural wetlands of Homebush andWentworth Bays.

Some of this was made up of extremely hazardousindustrial waste and has had a significant impact onthe wider environment and receiving waters due toits toxicity, persistence and/or bio-accumulativenature.

The New South Wales (NSW) Government'sdecision to bid for the 2000 Summer OlympicGames meant that the motivation, and moreimportantly, funding commitments were mobilisedto clean-up and manage a site which probably wouldhave otherwise languished as a contaminated legacyof industrial dumping. While there are many issuesabout how effectively the site has been cleaned up, itis highly improbable that the investigation into,separation and landfilling of waste on-site wouldhave occurred to the extent it has without theOlympics to justify the cost and effort.

Sydney’s choice of site was underpinned by thecity’s Olympic Environmental Guidelines in anumber of ways. As a former dumping ground, theredevelopment of the site represented anopportunity to develop Games infrastructurewithout clearing previously untouched remnantvegetation or contributing further to Sydney'ssuburban sprawl. The site also has the advantage ofbeing close to the demographic centre of Sydney,facilitating mass transit to and from the site.

The clean-up of the site has been an opportunity totrial mass clean-up strategies on a scale notpreviously attempted in Australia. Some of theclean-up strategies adopted by Games organisersand the NSW Government have been far fromperfect, however they have made the site, at least inthe short term, safer than it was.

EARLY APPROACHES TO THE TOXIC CLEAN-UPON THE OLYMPIC SITEWhen the Olympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA)started to rehabilitate the site in 1994, extensiveanalyses of the former dump sites were undertaken.These followed previous studies in the late 1980swhen the State Sports Centre precinct wasdeveloped. These studies characterised the extentof the contamination and the level of ground watercontamination and ground water flow direction andvolumes. From these studies, it became apparentthat significant environmental impacts wereoccurring. The NSW Government committed$A137 million to minimising them as part of thesite rehabilitation.

Some early plans envisaged relocating all waste tothe immense disused brick pit at the former StateBrickworks on the Olympic site. The brick pit wasconsidered an attractive option because of theimpermeability of its shale/clay structure and theapparent lack of seawater infiltration into the pit.This idea was quickly dropped when ecologicalsurveys discovered a population of the endangeredgreen and golden bell frog (Litoria aurea) in andaround the ponds at the bottom of the brick pit.


1 | Toxic contamination and the Olympic Games

TABLE T1 – WASTE IN LANDFILL AT SYDNEY’S OLYMPIC SITE

CAP AND CONSOLIDATION STRATEGYGiven the scale of the necessary work, the OCAdecided to consolidate the many and diverse wastesites into fewer large landfills to facilitate leachatemanagement. These landfills, with theirapproximate waste volumes and annual leachateflow rates (where available) are tabled below.

Greenpeace does not endorse landfilling as a wastesolution. The reclamation of the site has onlycontained the material and reduced the impact (atleast in the short term) of extensive andinappropriate dumping into the local environmentwhich occurred for decades before the site waschosen for the Olympics.

Greenpeace believes the best possible approach toclean-up would have been to excavate all ninemillion cubic metres of dumped waste, sort it intovarious recoverable waste streams and follow thiswith treatment and destruction of non-recoverablewastes using closed loop non-incinerationtechnology on-site. Such an approach would havebeen significantly more expensive than themethods chosen by the NSW Government toreclaim the site. But this more comprehensiveeffort may turn out to be the most cost-effective inthe long run. This is especially true when the long-term management and the inevitableenvironmental and systemic problems that arebound to occur with such a landfill approach arefactored into the overall cost.

It is now widely recognised that the most effectiveand economical approach to toxic waste is not toproduce the waste in the first place – that is,eliminate such waste at source. This is onlyapplicable to materials currently being produced. Itdoes not apply to material dumped by previousgenerations. The retroactive approach to theOlympic site clean-up has dictated a less thanperfect clean-up strategy.

As part of its commitment to the Green Olympics,the OCA agreed with Greenpeace not to transportwaste off-site as this would unfairly burden asecond community with the impacts of wastetransport and dumping. In practice, there wasprobably little alternative to dealing with the wasteon-site as other locations were not available to takesuch an amount of waste. In reality, Greenpeacebelieves that cost and time constraints were theoverriding factors influencing the decisions on thetype of remediation chosen for the Olympic site.

Following consolidation of the waste on theOlympic site, the final landfill sites were cappedwith a metre of clay or sealed under asphalt carparks to minimise rainwater infiltration. They werethen landscaped for stability, and monitored forground water movement.

OLYMPIC SITE LANDFILL LEACHATEMANAGEMENTApart from 400 tonnes of highly contaminatedchlorinated material found later on the site,

13 |


Landfill name & type of waste

Haslams Creek South (Kronos Hill)Domestic and industrial wasteHaslams Creek North (P5 Carpark)Power station fly ashArchery Park (former Elcom dump)Power station fly ash and somedemolition wasteHomebush Common (formerly GolfDriving Range) Domestic andindustrial wasteClay Pit LandfillPrimarily demolition wasteNorth NewingtonMix of a variety of waste found onsite including industrial wasteAuburn/HardiesDomestic and asbestos wasteAquatic Centre Car Park CellsIndustrial wasteTOTALS

Waste volume (m3) (estimates includingpre-existing landfill volume)550,000

600,000

130,000

780,000

55,000

1,700,000

907,000/70,000

Unavailable

4,792,000

Leachate volume (megalitresper annum) 1600MWh18.25

9.125

10.95

9.125

2.95

Not yet completed (6/00)estimated in NRAP (p175) as19.13Not yet completed (6/00)estimated in NRAP (p175) as 31.17O (enclosed system)

100.7Sources: NSW Waste Services, Newington Remedial Action Plan, Nov 1997Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Ecology Program, The Big Clean-up, 1999Personal communication with Mike Howe, NSW Waste Services, 2000Personal communication with OCA Environment Section, June 2000

Olympic organisers missed the opportunity forseparation and destruction of waste and the focusmoved heavily towards the management of the'contained waste'.

The consolidate-and-cap approach has attractedstrong criticism from many quarters, with mostobjections based on the fact that the waste has notbeen significantly separated or treated. All thelandfills have leachate recovery drains, sumps andpumps installed. These act at the lowesthydrogeological point in the local ground watersystems. This ensures that most of thecontaminated ground water flows to thesecollection points. This is further monitored by anarray of water depth-sensing piezometers whichverifies the depth profile of the ground water andensures that flows are towards the interceptionsystem.

The collected contaminated leachate from thelandfill sites is either reticulated to the LidcombeLiquid Waste Plant (LWP), a hazardous wastetreatment plan located near the SuperDome, orpumped to evaporation ponds for interim storageuntil rising mains to the LWP can be installed.Volumes are estimated to be at least 100 megalitresper year.

Due to the large volume of water collected fromthe site the landfill leachate is relatively cleancompared with most of the raw industrial liquidwastes they receive from clients throughout theHunter, Sydney and Illawarra industrial axis.

LWP management uses the leachate as processwater in its waste treatment. However, 100megalitres of liquid waste represents 100,000 cubicmetres or around 100,000 tonnes of contaminatedwater per year. Given that the total capacity of theplant is just 150,000 tonnes per year, the leachateburden represents a significant reduction in plantcapacity. It is likely that the interim approach ofdiversion of waste to evaporation ponds may play anongoing role as overflow management. Greenpeacebelieves this could pose environmental risksincluding volatilisation and release of pollutantsinto the surrounding environment.

Further, while the NSW Waste Service would likepeople to think otherwise, the LWP usesincineration technology to dispose of material.Incineration is not only a waste of potentialresources, it also significantly contributes to thedegradation of human health and the environment.The proliferation of incineration must be preventedto avoid the creation and dispersal of toxic andpersistent poisons throughout the environment.Dispersal of persistent, bioaccumulative chemicalsfrom incinerators adds to the chemicalcontamination of the air, water, land and ultimatelyour food. For this reason Greenpeace opposes allincineration. Instead, we advocate elimination atsource through clean production and where

stockpiles or contaminated sites do exist, clean-upand destruction of these sites using non-incineration closed loop technology.

Figures obtained on leachate flows from thecurrently operational reticulation systems, showthat in some cases, the leachate drainage systemsare working too well, pulling in uncontaminatedregional ground water flows. While not a problemin itself, it does unnecessarily increase the volumeof leachate requiring treatment. This hasimplications for ongoing treatment andmanagement of the leachate.

The obvious weakness inherent in this leachatedrainage approach is that it requires activemanagement and maintenance for as long as theleachate continues to flow. This is anticipated tocontinue indefinitely. Problems of maintenance,monitoring and repairs/improvements, as well as alack of clarity about which government agency isresponsible for ongoing management and costshave not been clearly addressed.

In 1999, the Olympic site leachate pumps wereshut off for five days causing ground water levels torise to a point where leachate reached the surfaceand flowed into local waterways. This situationapparently arose as a result of a misunderstandingbetween the OCA and the LWP, which receivesthe waste leachate. In the end, no one assumedresponsibility until the leachate reached thesurface1. Problems are likely to occur in thecoming years which means that the escape oflandfill leachate into the environment is likely.This is a major problem with the long-term landfillapproach.

Serious questions over the remaining landfill areason the Olympic site remain. These landfills do notrepresent a permanent solution to the disposal oftoxic waste, although the area is now far lesshazardous than it was and will be safer for Gamesvisitors.

For many years Greenpeace has raised concernsover who will be responsible for the on-goingmaintenance and remediation works after the OCAceases to exist at the end of the Games. To date, noconcrete plans for the post-Games management ofthe site have been forthcoming from the NSWGovernment.

(Details of leachate contamination post-capping areincluded as Appendix A at the end of this chapter.)

AQUATIC CENTRE "BANK VAULT" STRATEGYThe so-called "bank vault" approach taken at theAquatic Centre carpark, in which the waste wasencapsulated in a double flexible liner, pre-datesthe controlled leachate strategy. The term "bankvault" is a misnomer as the containment isnowhere near as secure as the name implies. It is amatter of time before the integrity of the liner fails



and ground water is free to percolate through thewastes. Monitoring is conducted on ground waterfrom bores around the cells to ensure that any suchbreaches are detected. When the liner does failhowever, it will be difficult if not impossible torepair and the costs of further remedial action maybe substantial.

Complete lining of the North Newington site wasalso considered but the OCA decided it was tooexpensive to excavate and store 590,000 cubicmetres already on the site while the liners were tobe installed.

INCINERATION RESIDUESThe treatment process at the LWP concentratesheavy metals in the sludgy residues at the end ofthe de-watering and treatment process. Theconcentration of leachate contaminants is relativelylow in comparison with the usual industrial wastestreated at the LWP. However, the volume ofleachate requiring treatment means that asubstantial heavy metal load finds its way into theLWP residues. These residues are immobilised inone-tonne blocks and disposed of in landfill areas atLucas Heights, south of Sydney. There is noguarantee that the "immobilised" wastes will notslowly leak out of the blocks in the future, leadingto a significant pollution problem.

Previous proposals to turn the LWP waste sludgeinto pellets to be burned in NSW power stationswere suspended after criticism from Greenpeaceand local communities. This approach would havemeant that heavy metals and other pollutantswould have been released into the environmentwhen burned via smokestack emissions. This is acomplete contravention of the ESD principle of"intergenerational equity" or the shifting of toxicityburden from one community to another, inherentin Sydney’s Environmental Guidelines.Greenpeace believes this approach should bestrongly avoided at all cost.

400 TONNES OF TOXIC DIOXIN WASTEFOUND ON THE OLYMPIC SITEIn 1997, during the excavation of the corridorwetlands (Newington East), earthworks beingdriven through old dump sites started to uncoverindustrial waste drum remnants. Initially, theseremnants were treated as isolated occurrences, andunfortunately, the first tonne was buried in theNorth Newington landfill mound being built at thetime.

Further excavation of drum remnants (around 200tonnes) meant that a more appropriate disposalmethod had to be found. Analyses of the drums’contents indicated a high organochlorine content(up to 90 per cent), including dioxin andchlorinated benzenes. According to NSWEnvironment Protection Authority (EPA)regulations, this waste was classified as ScheduledWaste which is not permitted to be landfilled or

incinerated. Despite this, the original wastesdisposed of in the North Newington landfill werenot recovered, and remain buried where they weredumped.

In 1992 Australian State and Federal governmentseffectively banned hazardous waste incinerationand export of these types of substances. This hasfacilitated the development of safer, moreenvironmentally sound waste treatment options.

The waste found on the Olympics site was removedto a drum remnant holding pad at the northern endof the Newington site. Greenpeace believes storageof this waste was totally inadequate and failed tomeet legal standards for the storage of hazardouswastes. In fact, the contaminated soil was coveredonly by plastic sheeting allowing exposure to theelements and contact with the soil of the holdingpad. The subsequent contamination of the holdingpad soil doubled the soil requiring treatment to 400tonnes.

This situation continued until late 1998 when atender was awarded to Australian DefenceIndustries (ADI) for an innovative treatment of thecontaminants from the soil (using indirect thermaldesorption) followed by a base catalysed chemicaldestruction (BCD/ADOX) of the concentratedcontaminants. The second stage of destruction iscurrently underway.

Greenpeace believes that such treatment methodsoffer a far more acceptable alternative toincineration of POPs and other hazardous wastes.Internationally, it is recognised that hundreds ofthousands of tonnes of POP waste stockpilescontinue to pose serious environmental and humanhealth risks. The non-incineration approach used atthe Olympic site to destroy this 400 tonnes of wasteprovides a clear example of effective alternatives toincineration.

MONITORING AND VALIDATION OF THEOLYMPIC SITEGreenpeace is deeply concerned that there is stillno publicly accessible validation documentation onthe bulk of the remediation work undertaken.While the OCA has been at pains to explain whatthey have attempted to do at the Olympic site,there is still no public or accountable scrutiny ofvalidation reports. That is, there is no way thatmembers of the public can satisfy themselves thatthe remediation has actually resulted in animprovement in the environment at the Olympicssite.

It is undeniable that the environment is vastlyimproved visually, and that leachate drains andsystems have been installed. However, withoutseeing independent validation, it is by no meansclear or certain that remediation goals have beenmet, or that they will continue to be met in thefuture. This is an unacceptable lack of

15 |


accountability, and needs to be corrected beforeany claims of environmental improvement can bemade.

Around 40 substances are monitored in leachateevery six months, in addition the OCA, through itsEcology Program, is to undertake a series of one-offbiological tests called bio-assays. These bio-assaysare made up of a range of tests from bacteria toshellfish. This approach assesses the toxicity of theentire cocktail of compounds present and shouldaccurately reflect the overall local biological impactof the leachate. Such an approach has theadvantage of detecting hazardous effects that maybe due to the combined impact of all thechemicals in the water or soil, which mightotherwise not be anticipated or detected.

While a useful tool, a one-off testing regime willnot give any long-term indication of environmentalimpacts. Further, the testing program currentlyproposed will only address the leachate fromlandfills, and will not be used to validate the levelsof toxic contaminants which may remain in thesoils and sediments of the site and surroundingareas. Such tests may also not detect sub-lethal orbehavioural effects on animals and other wildlife,which may be exposed to the pollution.

A strict and regular (ie monthly) monitoring regimewhich includes a wide range of substances as wellas bio-assays should be developed. All resultsshould also be publicly available to clearlydemonstrate that the environment around theOlympic site is protected.

Validation and transparent monitoring of theOlympic site and surrounds has been an on-goingproblem for the OCA. For example, in July 1997the OCA released a review of dioxin contaminationat the Sydney 2000 Olympic Site. The report wasprepared by consultants CH2M Hill and reviewedmuch of the available information about theuncontrolled disposal of dioxin contaminated wasteat landfills at and around Homebush Bay from theearly 1950s to the 1970s, and the clean-up strategyof the 1990s.

The OCA review claimed that the most toxic formof dioxin, 2,3,7,8 TCDD was only detected at lowlevels at 12 locations from the 5000 soil samplesanalysed on the site. Greenpeace investigations ofthe original chemical analyses indicated thatTCDD was in fact detected at low levels in almostevery sample examined. Several otherinconsistencies were also noted and passed on tothe OCA.

The excavation of the dioxin contaminated drumwastes (mentioned previously) also quicklyhighlighted the deficiencies of the review only afew weeks after the report was released. Also, oneOCA official made inaccurate public commentsthat no dioxin had ever been detected on the

Olympic site. The OCA later issued a secondedition of the report and a public apology for theofficial’s comments.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATIONDuring the early stages of Olympic site clean-upand construction, little formal communityconsultation was undertaken by Olympicorganisers. With the formation of a non-governmental watchdog body in 1995 which wasstrongly supported by Greenpeace, Green GamesWatch 2000 (GGW2000) helped establish a moreregular mechanism for community input. TheGGW2000 management committee was made upof representatives from the NSW TotalEnvironment Centre (TEC), NSW National Parksand Wildlife Association (NPWA) and theAustralian National Toxics Network (NTN). Thecommittee employed full and part-time staff.

Given their participation in drafting Sydney’soriginal Environmental Guidelines, these bodiesexpected their concerns about the management oftoxic waste at the Olympic site would be addressed.Unfortunately, this was not the case and therelationship between GGW2000 and the OCA andthe Sydney Organising Committee for the OlympicGames (SOCOG) proved difficult and oftenunproductive. Similarly, Greenpeace's concernsand issues were often ignored.

To some extent these communication problemswere channelled through the formation of theOlympic Environment Forum (OEF) in 1997. TheOEF is made up of members from the OCA,SOCOG, Greenpeace, GGW2000, TEC and theNSW EPA. Meetings have been held fortnightly forthree years allowing a relatively informalatmosphere for information exchange and specificenvironmental questions and issues to be raised.The success of this process has been mixed, largelydepending on the specific issue and the variouspositions of the participating institutions aroundthose issues. The biggest failure is that the OEF isnot a decision making body. Greenpeace believesclearer lines of responsibility and higher levelinvolvement in environmental decision makingwould have ensured greater environmental successfor Sydney’s Games.

A further mechanism for more accessiblecommunity consultation and participation wasestablished in June 1998 through the HomebushBay Environment Reference Group (HBERG).HBERG was established as a communityconsultative forum under the OCA's EcologyProgram. This program endeavours to validate andcommunicate the clean-up processes undertaken atthe Olympic site. Membership includes diverselocal community and environment grouprepresentation, as well as member/observer statusfor key OCA staff and relevant contractors.

HBERG meeting organisers have had a poor and



sometimes erratic response to the many real andsubstantive issues raised over site clean-up and thishas frustrated local participants and environmentalgroups. OCA institutional difficulties meant thatvery little measurable progress was made fromHBERG's inception until late 1999, whenstructural, and apparently attitudinal, changes weremade to facilitate the delivery of some of theprogram's original objectives.

CONTAMINATION & CLEAN-UPISSUES AROUND THE OLYMPICSITE

WILSON PARKWilson Park, just next to the Olympic site, isheavily contaminated from its past use as a "towngas" production site. This resulted in 250,000tonnes of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH)-contaminated soils on-site. The material has notbeen cleaned up but contained and the focus puton leachate/volatile control using bioremediation.

The approach to leachate control encouragesbacteria in the local microflora that have beennaturally selected for their ability to use thesecontaminants as metabolic energy sources to digestthe leachate. By adding additional nutrients, thesebacteria have been able to reduce levels of thesecontaminants in leachate. This area will need to bemonitored closely for years to come to ensure nonegative environmental or human health impactsoccur.

Other ground water controls include ground watercut-off barriers between Kronos Hill and theimmediately adjacent Haslams Creek, between theNorth Newington landfill and the Newingtonwetlands and between Wilson Park and theParramatta River.

TOXIC NEIGHBOUR - THE LEGACY OFHOMEBUSH BAYJust 2.5km from the Olympic site lies HomebushBay, one of the most polluted waterways in theworld. The Bay and the lands adjacent to it(Rhodes Peninsula) contain over half a milliontonnes of dioxin-contaminated soils and sediment,which pose human and environmental threats.

After decades of industrial production anddumping, the site is now heavily contaminated withdioxins, organochlorine pesticides, heavy metalsand other toxic chemicals. This hazardous waste isinadequately contained and has been allowed toenter the wider environment for years.

High levels of dioxins, DDT, phthalates (plasticsofteners) and other chemicals have been found infish in the Bay – the only waterway in Australiawhere fishing is illegal due to dioxincontamination. Fish samples from the Bay showedaverage tissue concentration of 189 ppt (part pertrillion) of dioxin in fish – seven times higher than

US Environmental Protection Agency safety levels.

The toxic chemicals in Homebush Bay are spreaddangerously throughout the environment and cast adark shadow on Sydney’s reputation as host of thefirst ever "Green" Olympic Games. Interestingly,Homebush Bay was included in the original bid forthe Sydney Olympics and was to include a grandgateway to games venue for ferries and other boats.Somewhat expeditiously, Homebush Bay wasquickly removed from the proposed Olympic siteafter Sydney won the bid for the Games.

The multinational chemical companies UnionCarbide and ICI (now called Orica) are largelyresponsible for this toxic mess. From the 1950s tothe 1970s Union Carbide manufacturedorganochlorine pesticides such as DDT and theingredients of the Vietnam War defoliant AgentOrange at Homebush and disposed of the wastes inthe Bay and surrounding lands. ICI was the solemanufacturer of phthalate plasticisers in Australiaalong with a range of other chemicals.

The NSW Government and the Olympicauthorities ignored the extensive contamination foryears. It was only after Greenpeace safely securedan abandoned stockpile of 69 drums of dioxin wasteadjacent to the former Union Carbide factory sitein 1997, that the Government committed A$21million to clean-up the Bay in time for the 2000Olympic Games.

The Government committed to remove all thecontamination and use innovative Australian non-incineration technology to treat the dioxins – acommitment that was widely praised by communitygroups, including Greenpeace. However, the clean-up plans ran into serious problems.

The NSW Government was responsible for theBay’s sediments, the company Bankers Trust ownedthe land adjacent to the former Union Carbidefactory site, and a holding company – LednezAustralia Ltd - owned the factory site itself. UnionCarbide left Australia in the early 1990s leaving thesite in the hands of Lednez, who refused toparticipate in the clean-up.

This is significant, as any proposal that did notaddress the Union Carbide site would have lefttonnes of dioxin contamination in the middle ofany future site development. Negotiations withLednez took far longer than anticipated and it wasonly in early 1999 that the NSW Governmentfinally took control of the toxic site. This clearedthe way for all of the Union Carbide dioxin legacyto be cleaned up.

Despite Government promises, the Bay and RhodesPeninsula will not be cleaned up before theGames. The NSW Government is engaged in atender process to choose a remediation plan forboth before the Games but it may or may not

17 |


occur. Greenpeace has spoken with the potentialremediation companies and the Governmentthroughout the last two years about possible clean-up approaches.

While Greenpeace is concerned about the toxicwaste on the Olympics site, we believe thatcompared with the site, Homebush Bay is a fargreater toxic threat and more urgently pressingenvironmental and human health issue.Greenpeace considers the hazard posed to thecommunity from the Bay to be totally unacceptableand will be holding the NSW Government to itscommitment to clean-up the Bay after the Gamesand to do so to the highest possible safety levels.

At the other end of Homebush Bay the old Orica(formerly ICI Australia) chemical factory has beendemolished. The factory was the only producer ofphthalates in Australia. Phthalates are chemicalsused to soften vinyl plastic and will soon be bannedin many European countries because of the riskthey pose to children's health. The sediment nextto the factory is highly polluted with phthalates andheavy metals, including lead.

STILL MORE WASTE AROUND SYDNEYUnfortunately, Union Carbide’s toxic legacy is notonly confined to Homebush Bay. Reports by theNSW State Pollution Control Commission (theforerunner of the Environment ProtectionAuthority) indicate that between four and 30kilograms of dioxins mixed with charcoal wasdumped in landfills in the Sydney area in the1970s. Under World Health Organizationguidelines four kilograms of dioxins providesmaximum lifetime exposure levels for 560 millionpeople.

WORLD’S BEST PRACTICEIn general, Greenpeace believes that elimination atsource through the adoption of clean production isthe best and most cost-effective way to avoid toxicwaste problems. However, where toxic waste hasbeen dumped or stockpiled and needs to be madesafe, the best approach is to avoid incineration,ensure that any storage of waste is short term, andthat treatment is strictly regulated to ensure itmeets safety standards.

Below is what we believe to be the essentialingredients for addressing toxic waste remediation.These are:

• No dumping or incineration Organochlorinesmust not be allowed, under any circumstances, tobe dispersed into the environment through directdumping or the use of dangerous and inadequatedisposal technologies like incineration.

• Secure storage Secure storage of toxic waste mustbe considered the first step in a comprehensiveprogram to identify and develop suitable and safede-toxification for individual waste streams.

Secure storage is defined as a place wheresegregated waste streams are stored in purposebuilt, above ground facilities, which incorporate:

- high security measures;- the ability to monitor and retrieve chemicals in

storage;- zero emissions to water, soil and atmosphere;- rigorous and routine inspections;- emergency response program.

• Strict regulation Strict precautionary measuresmust be taken to prevent environmental andhuman health damage that could result from anaccident, leak, spill, fire, explosion or naturaldisaster. Storage facilities must be designed with aview to facilitate future methods of detoxification.

• Closed loop destruction Systems andtechnologies for the safe de-toxification ofchemicals must be designed to be 'closed-loop'and avoid the release of toxic chemicals into theenvironment.

• On-site treatment Mobile detoxification systemswhich are taken to a contaminated site must beremoved upon completion of de-toxification andnot remain in-situ where the system could beused to import and dispose of other waste streams.

• Responsibility and accountability Originalproducers of banned chemicals, where they canbe traced, must be liable for the storage,collection and disposal and the full cost of allstages of the de-toxification program.

• Community right to know Full access to recordsand all aspects of the program, including thetechnologies used, alternatives considered,monitoring data at storage and de-toxificationsites, must be made freely and easily available tothe public.

Unfortunately, around the world, the mostcommon approach to hazardous waste isincineration, which transfers toxic waste from oneform – solid waste – into another – airbornepollution. Incineration of POPs and otherhazardous wastes also generates large amounts ofcontaminated ash, which is often toxic and isusually sent to landfill. Greenpeace believes this isnot an answer.

Ironically, Australia is a unique exception to theincineration approach for the treatment of POPswastes. In 1992, Federal and State Governments ofAustralia effectively banned hazardous wasteincineration making the country an excellentbreeding ground for safer, more environmentallysound waste treatment options. This ensured thatthe dioxin waste found on the Olympic site was notincinerated and that more environmentallyresponsible options were pursued. Indirect thermaldesorption to remove the waste from soil followed



by a base catalysed chemical destruction process(BCD/ADOX) of the concentrated contaminantswas used. Other non-incineration treatmenttechnologies have been, and are being developedaround Australia and internationally. Hopefully, theuse of this technology at the Sydney Olympics sitewill help demonstrate that alternatives toincineration are capable of successfully treatinghazardous wastes and provide the impetus for thefurther use of such technologies around the world.

CONCLUSIONSSydney’s controversial decision to use a formerwaste dump site to locate its Olympic venueshighlights a serious issue facing most cities aroundthe world – how to treat and make safe toxic wastedumps and industrial areas created in the pastwhich pose serious current environmental andhuman health threats. The only effectiveenvironmental solution is to stop producing toxicwaste. While Greenpeace continues to pressurecompanies and governments to take up cleanproduction, we still face long-term toxic wasteproblems. The NSW Government and the OCAchose a short-term landfill approach, whichunfortunately, has handed generations to come awaste management issue that is likely to have manyunexpected environmental problems.

While the end result at the Olympic site iscertainly better than it was before – as anuncontained toxic waste dump – Greenpeacebelieves that a more active approach to segregatingand treating all the wastes on the site would havemade the area safe and improved the localenvironment significantly.

The NSW Government still faces the challenge ofcleaning up Homebush Bay. The opportunity existsfor this to be a world leading example. Hopefullythis time they will get it right.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:• A full and technical outline of Greenpeace’s criteria for toxic

waste remediation is available on the Greenpeace Web site:www.greenpeace.org under Toxics. It is also available fromthe International Forum for Chemical Safety website at:www.who.int/ifcs/isg3/d98-17b.htm.

• Reviews of some appropriate Technologies for Treatment ofScheduled Wastes by the Australia Government are availablefrom: www.environment.gov.au/epg/swm/swtt/swtt.html

• Information on Scheduled Wastes and the regulatorystructure in Australia is available atwww.environment.gov.au/epg/swm.html

• Information on contaminated sites legislation in Australia,New Zealand, Canada and US:www.environment.gov.au/epg/control/link.html

Endnotes1. D. Bardwell, personal communication

19 |


BREAKDOWN OF LEACHATE CONTAMINATION, OLYMPIC SITE (ALL FIGURES ARE IN PARTS PER MILLION UNLESS NOTED)



Aquatic Centre Aquatic Centre Haslam's Haslam's Archery Park Golf Driving EPA LimitCar Park (Cell 1) Car Park (Cell 2) Creek North Creek South Range (CWAct, freshwater)

Alkalinity 889 353Ammonia (as N) 474 186 7.44 136 1.6 447 0.5Arsenic (Total) 0.008 0.035 0.003 ND ND ND 0.05Barium 0.141 0.271 0.77 2.26 0.4 2.46 1BOD5 26 31 0.5 7 3.8 25 20Boron 2.35 4.28 1.1 1Cadmium 0.003 0.002 ND ND ND ND 0.01Calcium 2691 1459Carbonate 250 59Chloride 13775 8562 4279 2780 741 6700 250Chromium 0.099 0.003 0.003 ND ND 0.01 0.05Copper 0.091 0.014 0.009 ND 0 0.004 1Cyanide - Total 0.045 3.58 ND 0.3 ND 0.05Dissolved oxygen* 13.82% 18.08%Dissolved Solids 30333 4126Electrical Conductivity* 38475µS/cm 24985µS/cmFluoride 0.45 1.25 0.63 1.83 0.4 0.4 1.5Herbicides ND 0.07 ND 0.1Iron (Filterable) 1.52 0.31 0.1 11.65 0.3Kjedahl Nitrogen 424 159Lead 0.033 0.002 ND ND ND ND 0.05Magnesium 13.81 47.44Manganese 0.006 0.191 2.32 1.52 0.2 0.5 0.05Mercury ND ND ND ND 0.001Methyl Blue Active substances 0.18 1.45 0.1 0.5Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) 1.94 1.25 0.12 0.11 1.8 0.16 10Oil & Grease 4 ND NDOrganic Carbon 96 44.3PAH 0.006 0.042 ND ND ND NDPCB ND ND NDPesticides - Toxaphene ND ND ND 0.001Pesticides - OCs ND ND ND ND 0.01Pesticides - OPs ND ND ND ND 0.05pH* 9.8 8.8 7.6 7.1 8 8.5Phenolics 0.05 0.11 ND ND ND 0.2 0.001Potassium 2223 851Selenium ND ND ND 0.01Silver 0.006 ND ND 0.05Sodium 3791 2249Sulfate 1314 1005 490 253 275 116 250Suspended Solids 685 35606 12 96 13 69 30TPH 1.07 1.32 ND ND ND 3.9Uranyl Ion 0.005 ND 0 5Zinc 0.058 0.0483 0.04 0.11 0.1 0.16 5

APPENDIX ALeachate contamination data post consolidation and capping, as currently pumped to the LWP in the case ofHaslams Creek North and South, the Archery Park landfill, Clay Pit, and Golf Driving Range. NorthNewington and Auburn /Hardies leachate mains are still being constructed and leachate is currently pumpedto evaporation ponds as an interim management strategy. The Aquatic Centre carpark cells (1&2) are enclosedand do not require reticulation of leachate at this stage although they will need to be closely monitored forseepage in future.

* = measurments other than PPM ND = no data Source: OCA Environment Section, data provided to HBERG meeting, June 2000

INTRODUCTIONGreenpeace has identified global climate change asone of the greatest threats to the planet.Governments and scientists alike have agreed thatthe problem is real and serious. At the climatesummit in Kyoto in late 1997, industrialisedcountries agreed, at least on paper, to reduce theamount of carbon dioxide and other greenhousegases they pump into the atmosphere. However,crucial details, upon which the success or failure ofthe agreement rests, are still under negotiation. Atthe present time little definite action is being takento address the problem.

Greenpeace is lobbying governments to face theirresponsibilities and urgently address the issue ofclimate change. The longer the delay, the moredrastic the action required to avoid dangerousinterference with the planet's climate.

Governments should be leading the way with anew energy direction based on clean renewableenergy, such as wind and solar power. However,many governments use tax payers’ money tosupport companies that spend billions of dollars oncoal, oil or gas - the key climate-damaging fossilfuels.

Scientists estimate that only a limited amount ofcarbon can be released into the atmosphere beforepassing the "safe" limit of climate change. It is atthis point that climate change will occur so fast thatecosystems will be unable to adapt. Greenpeacebelieves that a temperature increase of one degreeCelsius is the absolute maximum that should beallowed. The amount of carbon that can bereleased to keep within this limit is in the range of112.5 to 337.5 billion tonnes over the next 100years.

However, industry already has around four timesthis amount of carbon – more than one thousandbillion tonnes – in existing reserves of oil, coal andgas. This means that three-quarters of the oil, coaland gas cannot be burned if we hope to avoiddangerous climate change.

If we continue to burn fossil fuels at present levels,the "safe" limit of one degree Celsius will bereached in just 40 years. That is why we have tostart reducing carbon dioxide emissionsimmediately and prepare for an orderly phase-outof fossil fuels. Greenpeace calls this approach the"carbon logic".

Despite having enough oil reserves to alter ourglobal climate, oil companies continue to explorefor new sources. Every dollar spent on new oilexploration for fuel which cannot be used due to itsnegative environmental impact is a dollar not spenton the real solutions to climate change: aconversion to renewable energy sources. Oilcompanies, such as Exxon, Shell, Mobil and BPAmoco, continue to explore for oil in ever more

21 |

2 | Energy use atthe OlympicGames

remote, "frontier" areas. Despite the climate threat,governments continue to license these efforts andeven encourage them with favourable tax rates.

Greenpeace is challenging the oil industry to stopexploring for more oil and to switch investmentinto renewable energy. Greenpeace believes it ispossible to completely change the way the worldprovides for its future energy needs. We can nolonger assume that fossil fuels will provide the bulkof our energy. Instead, changes need to be madenow to move towards a future where our energyneeds are met by clean, renewable energy sources.We are therefore campaigning for investment inrenewable energy; and for removal of the barriers tothe development and use of renewable energy.

The focus on saving energy and promotingrenewable energy at Sydney’s Olympic Games wasa key reason Greenpeace became involved in theplanning effort back in 1992. It is one of the mostimportant aspects of Sydney’s EnvironmentalGuidelines and, ultimately, the city’s Olympic site.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES CALL FOR:1

• Passive solar building design whereverappropriate

• Use of insulation and natural ventilation• The widest possible use of renewable sources of

energy• High efficiency lighting systems with maximised

use of natural light• Use of energy efficient appliances• Sophisticated building management and control

systems to assist management of engineeringservices at each venue to minimise energyrequirements

• Mechanical ventilation zoned to allow ventilationflow to be switched off when spaces areunoccupied

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY’SGREEN OLYMPIC EFFORT

ON-SITE ENERGY GENERATIONIn 1996, the Olympic Co-ordination Authority(OCA) commissioned an Energy Options Study of14 possible renewable energy sources for theOlympic site. The "strongly recommended" sourceswere solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity and naturalgas co-generation.

Solar PV has been installed on the 665 roofs ofAthletes’ Village, the roof of the SuperDome, aspart of the water pumping system in MillenniumParklands, and in the 19 lighting towers alongOlympic Boulevard. Australia’s largest singlecentralised solar domestic hot water system, with400 square metres of collectors, provides hot waterto the neighbouring Homebush Bay Novotel Hoteland Ibis Hotel, and is expected to provide 60 percent of the hotels’ hot water needs. (See tables E1-Solar Photovoltaic Electricity Generation atOlympic Park, and E2 - Solar Hot Water Heating atOlympic Park.) Details of the quantities ofrenewable energy sources on site are listed in thechart below. It is expected that thousands of tonnesof carbon dioxide emissions will be reduced at theOlympic site due to these measures.

A natural gas co-generation facility was installed inStadium Australia, which operates when theStadium is in use. Although it uses a non-renewable source of energy, gas co-generationresults in energy savings of 20 to 40 per cent andreduces greenhouse gas emissions by up to 50 percent compared with conventional energy sources.The two 500 kilowatt gas fuelled co-generationengines in Stadium Australia produce heat, hotwater, and power, and reduce the Stadium’sdemand on mains electricity by an estimated 10per cent. The co-generation system will provide


2 | Energy use at the Olympic Games

Olympic venueAthletes’ Village

SuperDome

Public Domain

Northern Water FeatureMillennium Parklands

Ferry Wharf

TABLE E1 - SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC ELECTRICITY GENERATION AT OLYMPIC PARK

Description of system665 permanent houses are fitted with grid-connectedrooftop solar photovoltaic cells (1kW array on eachhouse)1176 solar panels mounted on the roof provideenergy comparable to 10% of the arenas normal dailynon-event demand19 grid-connected solar powered lighting towers(6.8kW array on each tower)Solar powered lights along paths 800 solar panels power a pump system used todrain/refill freshwater wetlands to control mosquitoesand pump leachate from swales and holding areas.Solar lighting will be used in remote areasSolar powered street lights

Peak capacity665kW

70kW

130kW

Annual electricity generation1,000MWh

85MWh This provides power for theGreen Power Program160MWh (6MWh weather-depending during the Games)

97.7 MWh. (Estimated39MWh/p.a. surplus will be fedto grid with 7.MKh/p.a. drawnfrom grid for cloudy days)

23 |


Olympic Park venueAthletes Village

Homebush Bay Hotels(Novotel and Ibis)

Media Villiage

TABLE E2 - SOLAR HOT WATER HEATING AT OLYMPIC PARK

On-site renewable energy systemSolar hot water systems are installed in each singlelot dwelling. Australia’s largest single centralised solar domestichot water system on the roof, reducing totalelectricity consumption by 5%.Solar hot water systems will be provided in each ofthe permanent residential dwellings beingconstructed at the Lidcombe Media Village.

Solar collector area1846.8 m2 (665 houses)

400m2 (With a capacityof 312,746kWh/a)

65 houses

% of hot water needs met by system65%

60%

unknown

power for lighting and for emergency back-upservices. Co-generation at the Stadium saves anestimated 500 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissionsannually.

Outside Olympic Park, some Olympic venues alsoinclude renewable energy and energy conservationmeasures. The most notable of these include thegrid-connected solar panels located on the roof ofthe Entertainment Centre in Darling Harbour(14kW) the finishing tower of the SydneyInternational Regatta Centre in Penrith (1.2kW)and the solar hot water systems at the SydneyInternational Shooting Centre at Cecil Park.

GREEN POWERA green power scheme enables electricitycustomers to buy clean and renewable energy fromtheir electricity provider via existing power lines.The provider commits to supply the equivalentpower needs from approved renewable sources,which can be located in other geographical areasand do not need to be installed on the house itself.Participating in a green power program is an easyand effective way for Olympic venues to reducetheir greenhouse gas emissions, while contributingto the establishment of clean and renewableenergy.

In New South Wales, Energy Australia offers twodifferent green power programs to its commercialmarket. Pure Energy is the provider’s mostexpensive green power option. Pure Energy isderived from four renewable energy sources: solar,wind, hydro, and landfill gas. Green Power isEnergy Australia’s less expensive green powerscheme, made up of hydro and landfill gas only.

All the Sydney Olympic competition venues will betaking 100 per cent green power during the four-week period encompassing the Games.

On an ongoing basis, the only Olympic venues thathave green power commitments are theSuperDome (100 per cent for five years), StadiumAustralia (100 per cent for five years), Novotel andIbis Hotels (100 per cent for 10 years), the OCA

offices (25 per cent for five years), and the SydneyOrganising Committee for the Olympic Games(SOCOG) offices (100 per cent).

It has not been established if green power will beused for non-competition Olympic Park venues.

ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURESIn 1996, an Olympic Energy Panel was establishedto develop a strategy to encourage potential venuedevelopers to propose how they intended to reduceenergy consumption.2 This included a set ofEnergy Guidelines, which were essential readingfor all facility constructors and formed a crucialpart of the documentation against which venuetenderers were evaluated. With information on"good design practice" for passive solar design andlow energy buildings, they were intended not asstrict compliance documents but as a guide towardsexceptional energy efficiency and environmentaloutcomes3. Energy conservation was an importantpart of greenhouse gas abatement measures for thelife of Olympic Park buildings.4

Energy efficient features at Sydney Olympic venuesare estimated to save approximately 10,000 tonnesof greenhouse gases per year. A list of energyconservation and energy efficiency practices atOlympic Park is recorded in the table E4.

TOTAL ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION ATOLYMPIC PARKEnergy Australia estimates that approximately 38.5million kilowatt hoursh of energy will be consumedto deliver the Games.5 This estimate includes onlycompetition venues and accounts for how long thevarious venues will be occupied. Peak site load atthe time of the Olympics will likely be in theregion of 70 megawatts to 80 megawatts.6

WORLD’S BEST PRACTICE

SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS (PV)Global sales of solar photovoltaic cells increased bymore than 40 per cent in 1999 to 200 megawatts,making it one of the world’s fastest-growing energy



Olympic venue

Athletes’ Village

Hockey CentreHomebush Bay Hotels(Novotel and Ibis)

Media VillageOlympic Park Station(rail)Stadium Australia

State Sports CentreSydney InternationalAthletic CentreSydney InternationalAquatic CentreSydney InternationalArchery ParkSydney ShowgroundSuperDome

NSW Tennis CentreOCA Main OfficesSOCOG Main Office

TABLE E3 - GREEN POWER USE AT OLYMPIC PARK VENUES

Green electricity participation pre/post GamesIndividual home owners have option to purchasegreen electricityNone100% green electricity for 5 yrs -10% Pure, 90%Green Power. Saves an estimated 1,200 tonnesCO2 emissions p.a.NoneNone

100% green electricity for 5 yrs -10% Pure, 90%Green Power. Saves an estimated 5,000 tonnesCO2 emissions p.a.NoneNone

None

None

None100% green electricity for 5 yrs - 10% Pure Energy,90% Green PowerNone25% Green Energy100% Green Power

During Games - Pure Energynot known

10%10%

not known

10%

10%not known

10%

10%

10%10%

10%not known10%

During Games - Green Powernot known

90%90%

90%

90%

90%

90%

90%90%

90%not known90%

industries. One of the main uses of solar cells is forintegration onto home rooftops and the roofing orfaçades of any building.10

At the time of the Games, the Athletes’ Village forthe Sydney Olympics is the world's largest solarsuburb (in terms of number of houses). It has 665solar PV-powered houses with a combinedgenerating capacity of 665 kilowatts.

The world’s largest solar community is located inNieuwland (Amersfoort) in the Netherlands. Solarpanels cover the roofs of more than 500 single-family homes, a sports centre, an apartmentbuilding, and a school. The housing complexgenerates a peak output of 1.3 megawatts and anexpected total generating capacity of 1000 kilowatthoursh annually.

Another large solar community has been built inBraedstrup, Denmark, with 300 PV homes giving acombined capacity of 750 kilowatts, orapproximately two-thirds of the total electricity usedper family per year.

The world’s most successful rooftop solar programis in Japan, with the current goal to have 5000

megawatts of solar PV installed by 2010. Some25,000 solar PV houses have already beenconstructed, with 9400 installed in the past year. In1999, Japan produced more solar cells than anyother country (84.1 megawatts), and providedUS$262 million in government support.11

There are already 25,000 solar PV homes inGermany12 and this year an enormous solar marketwas unleashed there. A law was passed ensuringthat homes generating power are paid aboutUS$0.50 per kilowatt hourh for the energyproduced. This is additional to Germany’s national100,000 Roof Program, which has the goal ofadding a solar power capacity of 300 megawatts.The quota for the program was reached in sixmonths, rather than the six years originallyplanned, with demand completely outstrippingsupply of solar panels.

By 1998, about 500,000 homes worldwide weregenerating their own solar power, most of these indeveloping countries.13 PV systems are well suitedto stand-alone applications in remote areas anddeveloping countries, where there is no electricitygrid. In South Africa alone an estimated 50,000 PVsystems are in place on homes, schools, health

25 |


TABLE E4 - ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES AT OLYMPIC PARK

Ener

gy e

ffici

ent l

ight

ing

Phot

ovol

taic

ligh

ting

Pass

ive

sola

r des

ign

Sola

r hot

wat

er

Nat

ural

ligh

ting

Gree

n po

wer

Effic

ient

app

lianc

esIn

sula

tion

& n

atur

al v

entin

gAu

to-o

ff ve

nt if

uno

ccup

ied

Man

agem

ent c

ontro

l sys

tem

Olympic Park venue

Athletes’ Village

Ferry Wharf

Hockey Centre

Homebush Bay Hotels(Novotel and Ibis)

Media Village

Millennium Parklands

Olympic Park Station (Rail)

Stadium Australia

Sydney InternationalAquatic Centre

Sydney InternationalArchery Park

Sydney Showground(see glossary)

Sydney SuperDome

NSW Tennis Centre

Public Domain

• • • • • • • •

• • • •

• • •

• • • • • • • •

• • • •

• • • •

• •

• • • • • •

• • • •

• • •

• • • • •

• • • • • • •

• • • • •

•

Comments

– 90% homes oriented for maximum solar access– 50% less energy needed compared to conventional

dwellings– PVs & energy efficiency to save 7000 tonnes C02 p.a.– Trees/Shrubs selected for passive solar gain or shelter– Ventilating skylights & cross ventilation maximised– Air conditioning optional in permanent houses– All appliances are 5 to 6 efficiency rating– Homes rated 4 stars on NarHERs

– Solar features

– Waste heat recovered from air conditioning system usedin production of domestic hot water via a heat pumpsystem.

– Energy efficiency reduces electricity demand 31.5% or 2,247 MWh/a

– Lighting initiatives account for 3.5% of savings– Natural cross flow ventilation equals electricity demand

savings of 10.5% (less air conditioning needed)– Building insulation has R2

– Green Power program estimated to save 5000 tonnes ofgreen gas emissions

– Solar features

– Non mechanical ventilation systems can even operate inevent of fire within the station

– Passive/natural venting has reduced areas needing airconditioning by approx. 40%

– Estimated stadium will account for 15% of total powerdemand during Sydney Olympics

– Lighting system reduces energy needs by 20%

– Spectator seating area cooled by directional air flow– Green electricity during Games only

– Green electricity during Games only

– Air conditioning minimised by ground level cool airinlets and roof outlets

– ‘Chilled beam’ in Exhibition Hall 1 cools only first 4.5metres above floor

– Such measures save 20% on energy demand– Equal to saving 1750 tonnes of C02 emissions p.a.– Green electricity during Games only

– Grid-connected PV to offset approx. 10% of power used.– 100% green power for 5 years– Energy efficient lighting– Energy efficient heating/cooling system

– Green electricity during Games only

– Photovoltaic lighting on Boulevard

Phot

ovol

taic

s

Note: Environmental failures of the airconditioning system are detailed in chapter 3.

clinics, and water pumping systems.14 In Kenya,more than 80,000 PV systems have been installed.

Aside from residential installations, large solar PVroof arrays for trade or recreation use have alsobeen developed (see table E6).

SOLAR WATER HEATINGSolar water heating does more to reduce a family’sgreenhouse gas contributions than any otherhousehold appliance. With a solar water heater,energy from the sun can provide 70 to 80 per centof the average Australian household’s hot waterneeds. Solar water heating systems are used forhospitals, apartment buildings, schools, jails, carwashes, nursing homes, health clubs, restaurants,and hotels.

• Up to 30 million square metres of solar collectorsworldwide are estimated to deliver as much as16.7 TWh of energy per year.18

• Four per cent of homes in the Australian state ofNew South Wales use solar water heaters.

• The council of Leichhardt in Sydney’s inner westrequires solar hot water collectors for all newhousing.

• A solar water heater on Australian houses canreduce greenhouse gas emissions by four tonnesper household, per year.

• During the 1990s, the solar water heating marketin Europe grew by 18 per cent per annum.

• Europe now has about 10 million square metresof solar collectors or about 5000 megawatts ofthermal power.

• All new buildings in Israel must, by law, have asolar hot water system,19 providing 80 per cent ofthe country’s hot water annually with a three percent saving in primary energy.

• During the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, theGeorgia Tech Aquatic Center not onlyincorporated solar photovoltaic panels on theroof, but also featured rooftop solar collectors toheat the pool water. (Sydney’s Aquatic Centre has

neither solar hot water collection for the pool nora pool cover to retain heat.)

SOLAR THERMAL ELECTRICITY GENERATIONSolar thermal electricity (STE) generation (alsocalled concentrating solar power) is another meansof harnessing energy from the sun. STE powerplants generate heat by using lenses and reflectorsto concentrate the sun’s energy. The heat can beused to generate steam and/or electricity. There area few different types of STE generatingtechnologies. Some STE technologies are bestsuited to small applications of 25-100 kilowatts andothers are better suited for larger applications of 30-80 megawatts

The world’s largest solar thermal energy (STE)generating system was built in the 1980s in theUS’s Mojave Desert. The system provides a total of354 megawatts to the California grid.20 STEsystems operating in the US today meet the needsof over 350,000 people and displace the equivalentof 2.3 million barrels of oil annually.21

Sydney indicated that it was seriously consideringthe use of solar-thermal electricity generation22 forthe Olympic Games but the plans did notmaterialise. The plant initially proposed forOlympic Park is now being constructed as anAustralian Greenhouse Office Renewable EnergyShowcase Project in Queensland, and will be theworld’s second largest solar thermal project of itskind. The 17,000 square metres array will be thelargest array in Australia, producing a peak of 13megawatts of thermal energy.23

CO-GENERATIONCo-generation is where heat produced in theproduction of electricty, heat and/or mechanicalpower is used for secondary purposes such as hotwater systems. Because "Cogen" plants are on site,transmission and distribution losses are mostlyeliminated. "Cogen" is also called Combined Heat



Olympic Park venueHockey CentreHomebush Bay Hotels (Novotel and Ibis)Stadium AustraliaSydney International Aquatic Centre andAthletic CentreSydney International Archery ParkSuperDomeNSW Tennis CentreSydney Showground (see glossary)Other Venues

TABLE E5 - ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION AT OLYMPIC PARK VENUES 7 8 9

Annual electricity consumption (MWh)~307.7MWh~5862 MWh

~67,440 MWh

~10-13MWh ~8612MWh ~783MWh~9006 MWh (May 99-April 00)*Data not available

Electricity consumption during Games (MWh)

~533 MWh (2 weeks)~2300 MWh

Data unavailbleData not available

‘~ ‘ approximately(* Source: Julie Burns, Asset Management, RAS of NSW, 6 July 2000)

and Power or CHP. Whereas conventional powergeneration typically wastes about two-thirds of theenergy used as heat, co-generation systems can useor recover the majority of this waste heat resultingin energy savings of between 20 and 40 per cent.Co-generation is considered to be an importantintermediate technology because it plays a role inreducing greenhouse gas emissions. In comparisonto conventional power generation, co-generationresults in a reduction of CO2 emissions by one-halfto two-thirds.24

The co-generation system at Stadium Australia isfuelled by natural gas – which is the least climatepolluting fossil fuel. Co-generation equipment canalso run on fuels such as wood, agricultural waste,peat moss, and a wide variety of other fuels,depending on local availability.

Co-generation accounts for around seven per centof total global power production, and up to 50 percent of power production in European countries.In the UK, there are 1376 installations totalling39,286 megawatts (21,104GWh). Some 340 ofthese are in the leisure sector alone, totalling 46.4megawatts.25 Such leisure sector use is oftenbecause swimming pools require a large heat load.

Co-generation accounts for well over half of allnew power plant capacity built in North Americain the past decade.26 In the United States, there are52,800 megawatts of installed co-generation.27

In Australia, there are 133 co-generation plantswith a combined electricity generation capacity of2084 megawatts, or approximately 5.6 per cent ofinstalled generation capacity. Some 1728

megawatts of these systems are grid-connected.28

Denmark and The Netherlands are world leadersin co-generation where it provides 50 and 40 percent respectively of their total electricityrequirements.

The largest co-generation plant in Australia is the180 megawatts Osborne plant in South Australia.The sugar industry is the leading sector for co-generation use in Australia, followed by the healthsector, the recreation sector, and the foodproduction sector. The Australian Institute of Sport(AIS) has a 125 kilowatt gas co-generation plantproviding water heating and electricity for its pooland campus. Companies using co-generationinclude Alcoa, AMP, Australian Paper, BHP Steel,Boral Energy, BP Refining, Bridgestone, CadburySchweppes, Crown Casino, Esso-BHP, Kodak, SanRemo Macaroni, Shell Refining, Visy Paper andWestern Mining Corporation. A number ofhospitals, educational institutions and officecomplexes also use co-generation.29

GREEN POWERGreen power schemes enable households andbusinesses to buy clean and renewable energy viathe existing power lines without the need to convertto a self-contained renewable energy system. Greenpower customers typically pay a slightly higher rateto receive non-polluting electricity from their powercompany. However the international definition ofgreen power is not yet standardised, and there are avariety of schemes in operation worldwide. Greenpower should stipulate, for example, that renewableenergy must come from sources such asgeothermal, wind, solar PV, small hydro, and mustbe 100 per cent nuclear free. Wherever possible,

27 |


BuildingSydney Olympic SuperDome,AustraliaGeorgia Tech Aquatic Centre (1996Atlanta Olympic Games), USAAcademy of Further Education(Mont-Cenis), GermanyMunich Trade Fair Centre,Germany

TABLE E6 - SIZE COMPARISON OF FOUR SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC ROOFTOPS 15 16 17

Peak Generation kW70

340

1000

1000

Annual Generation MWh85

564

1000

No. of modules1176

2856

3184

7812

% of Power RequirementsProvides power for hegreen energy program20-40%

>100%

4% during events50% when no event

LocationOlympic ParkAustraliaUKUSA

TABLE E7 – CO-GENERATION INSTALLATIONS IN SELECTED LOCATIONS

Number of installations2 (both at Stadium Australia13313762167

Total capacity1MW>2084MW39,285MW52,800MW

‘>’ greater than

green power should be sourced from newlyconstructed facilities.

Green power is available in a number of countriesincluding the US, Canada, the UK, TheNetherlands, Australia and Sweden. In Australia,the New South Wales Government’s SustainableEnergy Development Authority (SEDA) manages agreen power accreditation program nationally.Green power accredited programs are available to88 per cent of the Australian population, making itone of the largest programs of its type in the worldin terms of population access. Over 70,000Australian homes and 2000 businesses andgovernment agencies have signed up to SEDAaccredited green power schemes.

In The Netherlands, 140,000 households or abouttwo per cent of total grid connections use greenpower.30 Between September 1999 and January2000, 44,000 new green energy customers signedup, increasing the total number of customers by 38per cent. Dutch energy users in 1999 bought morethan 350 million kilowatt hoursh of green energy.31

In Germany, Greenpeace Germany offers its owngreen electricity cooperative, Greenpeace Energy.The program was launched in January 2000 andhas 5500 customers.

Green power programs are offered in 33 states inthe US and there are roughly 300,000 residentialcustomers buying green power.32 There are morethan 80 utilities and 60 small rural electriccooperatives offering green power programs in the

US.33 California has the largest number of greenpower customers with over 95,000. Pennsylvaniafollows with 85,000. This corresponds toapproximately 1.5-2 per cent of electricityconnections.34 Local government purchasesaccount for about half of all green power being soldcompetitively in California.35 The NationalRenewable Energy Laboratories (NREL) estimatesthat nearly 115 megawatts of additional, new,renewable capacity has already been installed inthe US as a direct result of green pricing programsand green power marketing, with a further 105megawatts either already under construction orplanned.36

Ordinarily, green power is sold at a slightly higherprice rate than conventional power. However, inGermany and California, some power utilities willcontinue to supply at the same price as fossil fuelgenerated power.37 38

As well as households, numerous companies andinstitutions around the world have committed to100 per cent green power.39 For example, the Cityof Santa Monica, California, is the first in the USto switch all of its facilities to 100 per cent greenpower.40 In the UK, the Millennium Dome istaking 100 per cent green power. Media giantTime Warner has converted all of its Los Angelesdivision accounts to 100 per cent green power.

ENERGY EFFICIENCYBuilding energy efficiency is extremely difficult tobenchmark internationally because the potentialfor energy efficiency is so site specific. The site’s



Country

AustraliaGermanyNetherlandsUnited KingdomUnited States

TABLE E8 - GREEN POWER PARTICIPATION IN SELECTED COUNTRIES

% of Total Population withAccess to Green Power88%100%>95%100%~33%

Number of HouseholdsTaking Green Power~65.0000~230,000 (end 99)>140,00010,800 (Dec 99)~300,000

Co-operative Bank (UK) Corporation of London (UK)Ecological market gardener (Netherlands)Episcopal Churches (USA)Essent Energie Limburg (Netherlands)Fetzer Vineyards (USA)RABOBANK (NETHERLANDS)75 Kinkos stores (USA)Machine & Steel Construct Christian Bhle (Germany)

TABLE E9 - A SMALL SELECTION OF COMPANIES, GOVERNMENTS & ORGANISATIONS TAKING 100% GREEN POWER 41 42

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Netherlands)Municipality of Apeldoorn (Netherlands)Patagonia Inc (USA)SEDA (Australia)Thames Water (UK) Toyota Motor Sales (USA)1,000 United States Postal Service Facilities (USA)Wilkens Furniture Ltd & Co (Germany)

‘~ ‘ approximately‘>’ greater than

location and climate governs a building’s ability toachieve a comfortable internal environment. Eventhe criterion for comfort varies between culturesand individuals. Moreover, local topography andvegetation can create sun and wind shadows, whichlimit the energy efficient options available tobuilding designers. The availability of buildingmaterials and skill base of local tradespeople canalso impinge on the potential for energy efficiency.

Energy efficiency standards and energy efficiencyrating programs vary from country to country andeven from state to state. With respect to applianceefficiency, there is a variation in electricity supplyvoltage and frequency in different parts of theworld, making a direct comparison increasinglycomplicated. However, energy efficiency is wellestablished globally, with international researchbeing adapted to local conditions.

World’s best practice for energy efficiency in largesporting venues such as those found at OlympicPark is especially difficult to assess. This is primarilydue to the fact that sporting venues are far morespecialised than housing or office accommodation.No two sporting venues are the same – each variesin design, social environment, climate, and usagepatterns. Furthermore, relatively few of thesestructures are built during any particular decademaking comparison difficult.

The Energy Efficiency Best Practice Programme ofthe Department of the Environment, Transport andthe Regions in the UK has developed a series ofguides for energy efficiency in sports andrecreational buildings. The guide, "Drawing aWinner: Energy Efficient Design of SportsCentres", lists energy efficiency measures to beconsidered in the design of new sporting facilities.

In Australia, the Nationwide House Energy RatingScheme (NatHERS) provides a national approachto comparing the energy efficiency of houses acrossthe different climate zones within Australia. Agraded five-star rating system is used, with the mostenergy efficient dwellings receiving the highestnumber of stars. An average Australian home ranksabout one to two stars. The Australian CapitalTerritory (ACT) has a requirement that all newhouses achieve at least a four-star rating.

A four-star house, such as the average SydneyOlympic Athletes’ Village home, is considered quiteenergy efficient but it is not best practice forAustralia. Some Australian-built homes have farexceeded the requirements of an excellent five-starrating. However, when combined with othersubstantial energy initiatives such as solar waterheating and solar photovoltaic electricity, theAthletes’ Village can be considered Australian bestpractice for energy. The Energy Efficiency Team ofthe Australian Greenhouse Office is not aware of anyresidential development of similar size that equalsthe energy achievements of the Athletes’ Village.

FURTHER INFORMATION ON BEST PRACTICEIN ENERGY:• www.eren.doe.gov• www.its-canada.com/reed/reed.htm• www.weea.org

CONCLUSIONSAt Sydney’s Olympic site, renewable energythrough a mix of green power, energy conservationand design and on-site renewable energy generatorshas virtually substituted conventional pollutingfossil fuel sources. This renewable energy willsuccessfully satisfy the huge energy demand that amodern Olympics requires.

In Australia, more than 90 per cent of the country’senergy is generated from greenhouse gas, intensive,coal-fired power stations.43 In New South Wales,there is about 2 megawatts of grid -connected solarPV, compared to 15,000 megawatts from otherpower sources. Nearly half of the state’s grid-connected solar PV is installed at the OlympicPark.

The use of solar power on roofs (both PV and waterheating) is proof that an average home can bedirectly powered by the sun's energy.

The widespread use of green power demonstratesthat electricity use for homes, offices and otherbuildings can be powered by 100 per centrenewable energy sources.

A wide array of design tools and energy efficienttechnologies can cut typical energy consumptionby a minimum of 50 per cent.

Worldwide, renewable energy is capable ofproviding the energy requirements traditionallydelivered by fossil fuels, particularly for buildingelectricity use.

It is hoped that the impact of Sydney’s Olympiccommitment to showcasing renewable energy usewill not stop after the Games. Australia and therest of the world have much to learn about whatcan be achieved in switching from greenhouse gas,intensive energy sources to clean, renewableenergy. The race to prevent climate change is onand Sydney’s renewable energy Games show thatthe race can be won.

29 |


ENDNOTES

1 Sydney Olympics 2000 Bid Ltd, Environmental GuidelinesFor The Summer Olympic Games, September 1993, p.6

2 Olympic Greenhouse Challenge, Sydney OrganisingCommittee of the Olympic Games, p12

3 Notes from a presentation given by Martin Thomas, memberof the Olympic Energy Panel

4 A Review of the Environmental Performance of the OCA,Third Earth Council Review Report, February 2000

5 Peter Ottesen, letter to Greenpeace Australia Pacific, June 2,2000

6 Martin Thomas, op cit.7 Energy Australia consumer leaflet, 2000 8 Greg Hopper, SIAC, correspondence with Greenpeace

Australia Pacific9 Richard Polkinghorne, ABI Group, correspondence with

Greenpeace Australia Pacific, June 200010 State of the World 2000, Worldwatch Institute, 200011 Photon International, Report number 03/00, UK, p.2512 Personal communication with Sven Teske, Greenpeace

Germany, July 200013 State of the World 2000, op cit.14 Op cit.15 Photon International, op cit, p.1016 Siemens Solar Online,

http://www.solarpv.com/arch_util_app_4.html.17 Photon International, op cit, p.1118 Olympic Report: 1400 Days To The Sydney 2000 Olympics,

Greenpeace Australia Pacific, November 15, 1996, p.619 Photon International, op cit, p.9220 The Evolving Renewable Energy Market, International

Energy Association, 199821 Solar Energy Industries Association, Solar Fact Sheet on

website: seia.org/SolarEnergy/SolarFactSheets/sfstelec.htm22 Sydney Olympics 2000 Bid Ltd, op cit, p.1823 David Mills and Christopher Dey, Stanwell Solar Power

Station Project, Department of Applied Physics, University ofSydney

24 Australian Co-generation Association website:www.cogen.com.au/welcome.htm

25 Combined Heat and Power Association, UK, website:www.chpa.co.uk/

26 Independent Power Producers' Society of Ontario website:www.newenergy.org/co-generation.html

27 ONSITE SYCOM Energy Corporation (1999) 28 Complete Plant Register Australian Co-generation

Association, August 1, 1999, website:www.cogen.com.au/projects.htm

29 Complete Plant Register Australian Co-generationAssociation, March 31, 2000, website: www.cogen.com.au/

30 Personal communication with Sander van Egmond, June 7,2000

31 Green Prices, European website:www.greenprices.nl/nl/greencountry.asp?lid=en

32 Personal communication with Lori Bird, National RenewableEnergy Laboratories, USA, June 8, 2000

33 Lori Bird, ibid, June 7, 200034 Green Prices website:

www.greenprices.com/de/newsitem.asp?nid=2735 US Department of Energy website:

www.eren.doe.gov/greenpower/ca_news.html36 US Department of Energy website:

www.eren.doe.gov/greenpwer/new_gp_cap.shtml

37 The Financial Times, Renewable Energy Report, 0399, UK,p.15



40 "Dome Plugs Into Ecotricity", The British Wind EnergyAssociation, UK, December 6, 1999.

41 Green Prices website: www.greenprices.com42 Green Prices website: www.greenprices.com43 NSW Sustainable Energy Development Authority website:

www.seda.nsw.gov.au/renewable.asp



INTRODUCTIONWhen scientists discovered a hole in the ozonelayer in the early 1980s, the world responded bybanning the group of chlorinated gases deemedmost responsible for the damage –chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

The global refrigeration sector, as one of the largestusers of CFC gases, needed an alternative.Chemical companies which manufactured CFCsoffered more polluting gases as alternatives –hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), a lessdamaging ozone-depleting gas, andhydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a potent climatechange gas. These "alternatives" were promoteddespite the fact that a range of commercially andtechnically proven natural alternatives alreadyexisted including hydrocarbons (HC).

In 1997, the United Nations (UN) Kyoto Protocolon Climate Change was extended to includeHFCs, identifying them as potent greenhouse gaseswhose emissions had to be reduced byindustrialised countries. HFCs are among the mostpotent manufactured global warming gases. Onaverage over a 20-year period, one tonne of HFCcauses 3300 times more climate change destructionthan one tonne of carbon dioxide.

Levels of HFC pollution exploded in the 1990s. Ananalysis for the European Union noted that therewere "rapidly increasing accumulation rates [ofHFCs] observed in the atmosphere". Australian andBritish scientists have been measuring HFCpollution in the atmosphere over Tasmania andIreland. Between 1992 and 1995 the concentrationof HFC 134a -- the most common HFC gas – grewexponentially at 200 per cent per year.

HFCs are mainly used by the refrigeration andairconditioning industry. The major growth sectorfor HFC 134a (the most commonly used HFC,accounting for 80 per cent of all HFC gases used)is the refrigeration and airconditioning industry. Inthe next 15 years, the UN predicts thatconsumption of HFC 134a could increase by 250per cent.

Greenpeace is campaigning for the use ofGreenfreeze or environmentally friendlyrefrigeration technologies that avoid the use ofHFCs and HCFCs. This is essential for the long-term protection of the earth’s climate and theozone layer.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES STATE:"Olympic host cities should commit themselves touse of CFC-, HFC- and HCFC-free refrigerantsand processes."

31 |

3 | Refrigeration &airconditioningat the OlympicGames

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY'S GREENOLYMPIC EFFORT

The choice of refrigeration and airconditioning(RAC) systems is one of the biggest and mostsystematic environmental failures of the SydneyOlympic Games. A significant amount of RACequipment is used in Olympic venues by corporatesponsors and all over the site as temporary 'overlay'equipment for catering and air conditioning.Unfortunately, no Olympic venue usingairconditioning meets the EnvironmentalGuidelines criteria for non-CFC, -HCFC and–HFC coolant chemicals.

The following list (Table R1) demonstrates theextent to which the Olympic Co-ordinationAuthority (OCA) has failed to comply with theEnvironmental Guidelines in the use ofrefrigerants at Olympic Park and off-site Olympicvenues. It also provides an overview ofenvironmentally friendlier alternatives that couldhave been installed in order to comply with theGuidelines.

In 1998, Greenpeace began raising the question ofwhether the OCA and SOCOG would meet theEnvironmental Guidelines in airconditioning andrefrigeration. In particular, we were concerned thata number of key Olympic venues like theSuperDome, the largest indoor arena, were nearingcompletion and airconditioning choices were aboutto be made. Greenpeace campaigners wrote lettersto Olympic organisers and raised concerns in ourregular bi-weekly meetings on environmentalissues, the Olympic Environment Forum (OEF).We specifically requested information about whatrefrigeration gases and types of equipment werebeing considered. Clearly Olympic organisers werenot considering the natural alternative coolantchemicals that would have met the Guidelines.

In December 1998, Greenpeace filed aninjunction in the Federal Court of Australia to stopthe OCA from making what we believed were falseclaims that its choice for the SuperDomeairconditioning system was the best environmentaloption. The OCA and its environmental consultanthad stated that "in order to avoid the use of ozonedepleting substances and greenhouse gas emissionsat the [SuperDome] … ‘green friendly’ productswould be purchased".

As its system of choice uses ozone-depletingHCFCs and the potent greenhouse gas HFC, thiswas a clear misrepresentation of the facts. Aftereight months of delaying tactics by the OCA andmounting legal fees, Greenpeace decided not tocontinue with the case because we believed theissue was never likely to be heard in court on itstrue merits.

Greenpeace filed a Freedom of Information requestin July 1999 that found that not a single Olympic

venue met the Guidelines and that allairconditioning systems would use ozone-depletingand/or potent greenhouse gas chemicals.

The use of natural cooling chemicals in one ormore of Sydney's Olympic venues would haveprovided an ideal showcase for this technologynationally. Also, it would have given the buildingindustry a much needed push away fromenvironmentally destructive airconditioningchemicals.

While alternative technology is being used in agrowing number of large venues internationally, usein Australia lags well behind. Greenpeace believesAustralia has missed an important opportunity touse the Environmental Guidelines for Sydney’sOlympic Games to push its airconditioning andrefrigeration industry towards clean alternativessuch as ammonia and hydrocarbons.

As the country with the highest skin cancer rate inthe world, Australia must own its contribution tothe ozone hole, expected to become twice the sizeof Europe in 2000. Unfortunately, the GreenGames effort does nothing to help.

SPONSORS’ EQUIPMENTSponsors have installed a significant amount ofrefrigeration equipment for the sale anddistribution of their chilled products during theGames. Most of it violates Sydney’s EnvironmentalGuidelines.

Whereas the OCA is responsible for installing therefrigeration equipment in Olympic- and non-Olympic Park venues, Olympic sponsors haveinstalled their own equipment at Olympic Park. Anassessment of sponsor refrigeration installationsfollows.

COCA-COLACoca-Cola is the official soft drink of the Sydney2000 Olympic Games. Coca-Cola expects to sellmore than 11 million drinks during the Olympicand Paralympic Games. Of the 1800 units of Coca-Cola refrigeration equipment at the Games, only100 will comply with the Guidelines. These aresingle-door, Greenfreeze Vestfrost fridges that runon hydrocarbons. This means that 94 per cent or10.34 million of Coca-Cola’s drinks at the SydneyOlympics will be cooled by greenhouse gas HFCrefrigeration.

After a Greenpeace campaign that began with aseries of meetings in Australia and internationally,the launching of a global interactive web site –www.cokespotlight.org – and a series ofGreenpeace protests at Coca-Cola facilities, thecompany made a dramatic policy change.

Coca-Cola International’s chairman and CEODoug Daft announced his company’s new globalpolicy on June 28, 2000. It stated that:


3 | Refrigeration & airconditioning at the Olympic Games

33 |


VenueOlympic Stadium

Archery CentreSydney Showground

Entertainment Centre &Convention CentreRegatta Centre & WhiteWater StadiumVelodromeEquestrian CentreBondi Beach VolleyballStadiumSuperDome

Shooting Centre

Tennis CentreAquatic Centre

Athletes’ Village

Media Village (LidcombeHospital)Multi-storey carpark,Homebush BayRail/Loop StationNovotel Hotel

Ibis Hotel

TABLE R1: REFRIGERANTS USE AND ALTERNATIVES (BY OLYMPIC VENUE)

RefrigerantHFC-134a and HCFCs for airconditioning systems

Naturally ventilatedNatural ventilation supported by small HCFC-22package airconditioning unitsCFC-11 and HCFC-22 in chillers, HCFC-22 inairconditioning & cold roomsHCFC-22 in the airconditioning in tower, pavilion andboatshed officeHFC-407c proposedNaturally ventilatedSmall package units to be installed in the Pavilion,contract not let, however, contract specifies HFC-407cHCFC-123 and HFC-134a in airconditioning

HCFC-22 unit with the ability to be converted to HFC-407c was installedHFC-407c installedHCFC-123 chillers, HCFC-22 chiller, Package units withHCFC-22, coolrooms HCFC-22 & HFC-404a, Icemachines CFC-12, compressor air drier CFC-12

The homes have been designed not to requireairconditioning. HCFC-22 airconditioning in showhouses, HFC-407c in food hall. 1000+ bar fridgessupplied by Samsung using HFCsNo new airconditioning system installed by OCA.

HCFC-22 package units

HCFC-22 package unitsKelvinator M142D 140L fridges in rooms (177) usingisobutane, and CFC, HCFC free insulation, 4 star energyrating. HFC-134a in airconditioning systems, however,windows when opened cut off air conditioning toroomsElectrolux 56L fridges (150 rooms) using Ammonia/HC.

Environmental alternativeAmmonia chillers and HC airconditioningNot ApplicableNatural ventilation supportedby HC package unitsBuilt in 1993 prior toEnvironmental GuidelinesSmall HC package units

HC airconditioning units Not applicableSmall packaged HC units

Ammonia airconditioningsystemAmmonia chillers & HCpackage unitsHC package unitsAmmonia chillers, HC packageunits, HC cold room, icemachine and compressor airdrierHC package units, Ammonia orHC airconditioningHC domestic fridges

HC package units

HC package unitsHC A/C units

1. By the Athens Olympic Games in 2004, Coca-Cola will no longer purchase new cold drinkequipment using HFCs where cost efficientalternatives are commercially available. Thisinitiative applies to refrigerant gases andinsulation.

2. Between now and 2004, Coca-Cola will expandits research and development program toidentify and field-test a variety of promisingalternative refrigeration technologies.

3. Coca-Cola suppliers will be required toannounce specific time schedules to use onlyHFC-free foam insulation and refrigeration inall new cold drink equipment by 2004.

4. In concert with the international KyotoAgreement on Climate Change, Coca-Cola isrequiring its suppliers to develop newequipment that is 40 to 50 per cent moreenergy efficient than today's equipment.

As one of the largest users of refrigerationchemicals and one of the world’s best knownbrands, Coca-Cola’s policy shift, if followedthrough, will have repercussions throughout therefrigeration industry worldwide.

As Coca-Cola is an Olympic sponsor company, itspolicy shift can be seen as one of the best

environmental legacies of Sydney’s EnvironmentalGuidelines of the Summer Olympic Games.

MCDONALD’SDuring the Games, McDonald’s will operate sevenmain restaurants located in the Olympic Athletes’Village, the Main Press Centre, the InternationalBroadcast Centre and Sydney Olympic Park. Theseven restaurants will employ 1100 staff and themain 5000-seater restaurant is expected to sell up to25,000 hamburgers a day.

McDonald’s said it hopes to break world salesrecords during the Sydney Games which would be"the biggest single project by the company". Basedon previous Olympics, it is estimated thatMcDonald’s will serve close to one million fooditems at the Games in Sydney.1 McDonald’s saysthat it has "organised for nine hydrocarbonrefrigeration units (which are CFC/HCFC/HFC-free) to be delivered from overseas and willimplement trials of these units during the 2000Sydney Games. The rest of its equipment will useHFCs. This is despite the fact that McDonald’soperates two 100 per cent Greenfreeze restaurantsin the Millennium Dome in London, UK.

SAMSUNGSamsung originally planned to supply only HFCrefrigerators, even though since the EnvironmentalGuidelines were written, more than 45 milliondomestic Greenfreeze refrigerators have been builtworldwide. Indeed, Samsung was alreadymanufacturing two types of refrigerators using HCfor the European market. After constant lobbyingfrom Greenpeace, Samsung agreed to provide 324large Greenfreeze refrigerators. However, the 1500bar refrigerators supplied will run on HFCs and notcomply with the Environmental Guidelines.

STREETS (UNILEVER)Streets will install only 50 Greenfreeze ice creamfreezers that meet Sydney’s EnvironmentalGuidelines. This represents just 14 per cent of theirtotal freezer cabinets. Unilever’s cooling units atOlympic Park will be made up of:

• 370 new HFC 134a cabinets withenvironmentally safe HC foam

• 120 rebranded used Nestlé cabinets with HFC134a gas and foam

• 276 insulated mobile selling carts with norefrigerant chemicals, and

• 200 vending trays with no refrigerant chemicalsand environmentally safe HC foam.

In 1997, Unilever collaborated with Greenpeace toannounce a large-scale trial and deployment ofGreenfreeze HC refrigerants for the company’s icecream freezer cabinets. These trials involverefrigeration equipment across a range of differentcountries and operating conditions.

Unilever has made a sufficient policy shift toward

developing Greenfreeze technology and away fromHFCs, but it has failed to publicly announce thispolicy shift as Coca-Cola has done.2

FOSTER’S BREWING GROUPDespite its commitment to using ammonia as itspreferred refrigerant for large capacity installations,Foster’s will install 200 two-door fridges at theOlympic Park using greenhouse gas HFC-134a.

However, following meetings with Greenpeace thecompany agreed to alter its refrigeration policy tospecifically ban the purchase of greenhouse-polluting and ozone-destroying refrigerationequipment.

The new policy states: "It is Foster’s Brewing Grouppolicy to minimise the impact upon stratosphericozone depletion by complying with all relevantregulations with respect to ozone depletingsubstances and where practicable, to eliminatetheir use. In addition, it is Company Policy tominimise the greenhouse impact of its operations toall practicable extent.

In order to fulfil this policy commitment thefollowing shall be adopted:

1. Each site shall create a register of allequipment utilising CFC, HCFC, HFC orhalon synthetic gases. The equipment shall beclearly labeled with the name of the substance.

2. No new equipment containing the above gasesshall be purchased for use on the company’ssites without a full health, safety andenvironmental risk assessment of alternativesand written approval of Vice President HSE -FBG."

HOLDENCar manufacturer, Holden, will provide more than3000 cars for the Games. Detailed information wasnot given to Greenpeace, however we believe thatall vehicles will have airconditioning that usesHFC134A.

OTHER SPONSORSNo other sponsors provided data on their use ofGreenfreeze equipment. It is therefore highly likelythat any equipment installed, hired or used insponsor infrastructure will contain HFCs orHCFCs. (CFC-based equipment is now rare inAustralia and likely to be found only in oldequipment).

GAMES-TIME EQUIPMENTSince February 2000, the OCA has beenresponsible for more than 60 different contracts fortemporary 'overlay'. This is equipment installed forGames time only and includes temporaryairconditioning and a variety of cateringequipment. Greenpeace has been advised inOlympic Environment Forum meetings that all of



these contracts will use fluorocarbons, and nonewill use the more acceptable Greenfreezeequipment.

OCA REFRIGERATION POLICYThe OCA changed its own policy to allow it tocontravene the Guidelines. The 1998 OCAEnvironmental Report stated that "OCA'sHomebush Bay Development Guidelines - Volume1 Environmental Strategy (September 1995)provides a practical interpretation of theEnvironmental Guidelines and states that CFCsand HCFCs will not be used whereverpracticable".


TECHNOLOGIESGreenpeace uses the term Greenfreeze to refer torefrigeration and airconditioning technologies thatavoid the use of HFCs, HCFCs and CFCs. Thereare five all-natural refrigerant solutions incommercial use on the market today – water, air,carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrocarbons. Todaythere are new applications in the form ofsophisticated evaporative airconditioning (EAC)and solutions based on the "air cycle". Of the fivealternatives, hydrocarbon and ammonia are themost commonly used refrigerants for commercialand industrial purposes.

HYDROCARBONSHCs provide alternative options to a number ofCFC and HCFC refrigerants. As they don't containchloride or fluoride molecules, they cannotundergo reaction with water and so do not formcorresponding strong acids.

Generally, HCs give a superior coefficient ofperformance (COP) – the measure of refrigerationsystem efficiency – because of specificcharacteristics.3 Noting the thermodynamic andtransport properties of various refrigerants,properties like viscosity rate lower for HCs thanfluorocarbons and specific heat and thermalconductivity are significantly higher for HCs.These properties are fundamental to theperformance of refrigerating systems in terms ofheat transfer, pressure loss and compressionprocesses, and as such lead to improved overallperformance, particularly when the equipment isoptimised to the properties of the refrigerant.Improvements greater than five per cent can beachieved with the use of HCs over fluorocarbonrefrigerants. Improvements of up to 20 per cent arenot uncommon in this context.

While HCs are flammable, this can be mitigatedthrough adequate safety measures in productionand product design, safe deployment of equipment,responsible training and appropriate standards.

HC refrigeration is already safely used in tens ofmillions of fridges by a wide number of companies

like Iceland and Ikea, demonstrating that safetyissues can be addressed today. Agreed safetystandards for flammable refrigerants are already inplace. The global refrigeration standard IEC 60335-2 - 24 allows the use of up to 150 grams offlammable refrigerant.

In addition to the international standard, Australia,New Zealand and the UK have comprehensiveregulatory standards of their own which allow forHCs to be used in different refrigeration systems.4

The European standard EN378 allows up to 1.5kgof flammable refrigerant to be used in publicspaces for airconditioning, commercial cabinetsand freezers. This guides national standards. TheUK (BS4434) and Australia New Zealand (AS/NZS1677) are comprehensive standards that cover theuse of several kilograms of flammable refrigerantsin a wide range of commercial uses.

AMMONIAAmmonia has become the most effective andcommonly used refrigerant both in compressortechnology and absorption systems(water/ammonia.) Ammonia has been used as arefrigerant for more than 100 years. Currently, it isthe most important refrigerant for industrialpurposes, with a market share above 80 per cent insome countries. Ammonia has excellent heattransfer properties and, due to its low molecularweight and high critical temperature, also has avery favorable cycle performance. As a result, coldstorage and food processing systems with ammoniaare known to be more efficient than similar systemswith CFCs or HCFC-22.

CARBON DIOXIDECarbon dioxide (CO2) is a promising long-termenvironmentally sound refrigerant. The mostpromising CO2 heat pump applications are heatpump water heaters and dryers. Heat pump waterheaters are expected to enter the market in thecourse of the next decade.

Several pilot systems have been developed with CO2

used as heat-transfer fluid. Renewed CO2 technologyfor low temperatures, eg food freezing, have reachedthe stage of practical application. Cascade systemswith CO2 in the lower stage (ammonia in the upper)have proved to be economically viable for mediumsized food processing systems (300-400 kilowatts.)For large systems (2 MW cooling effect), 15 per centsaving in investment may be obtained with thecascade system.

End Uses of Greenfreeze TechnologiesGreenfreeze is the term used by Greenpeace torefer to refrigeration and airconditioningtechnologies that don't use HFCs, HCFCs andCFCs. There is a varied range of global suppliers ofGreenfreeze equipment.

UK company Earthcare has a catalogue with morethan 200 items of HC and other commercially

35 |


available green refrigeration systems forcommercial use. It includes wall-mounted andceiling-mounted air conditioners, dehumidifiers,mobile airconditioning, sliding door display coolers,bottle chillers, wine cooler dispensers, glass doormerchandisers, mini bars, deli display cabinets,chest chill cabinets, defrost type freezer chillers,multi-deck display cabinets, freezers, ice creamconservators and water coolers.

Throughout the world, supermarkets, departmentstores, offices, banks, shops, hotels, restaurants andcomputer rooms have installed these products. The selection of products covers:

• domestic refrigeration• commercial refrigeration• cold storage and food processing • industrial refrigeration • airconditioning • heat pumps (air-cooled systems) • airconditioning (water chillers) • transport refrigeration • mobile airconditioning

On average, ammonia is believed to cover 50 to 60per cent of the European industrial refrigerationmarket. Ammonia systems are typically 0 to 15 percent more energy efficient than similar systemswith CFCs and HCFCs, depending on systemtypes and temperature levels. In the United States,ammonia has approximately 90 per cent marketshare for systems of 100 kilowatts cooling capacityand above in custom engineered process. Most ofthese systems are found within the food industryand cold storage where ammonia is the dominantrefrigerant. In Australia and New Zealand, 30 to 40per cent of new installations are believed to useammonia.

Evaporative water coolers are among the severalalternatives to current models of refrigerators andairconditioners. In the United States, more than 70companies manufacture evaporative airconditionersfor residential, automotive, commercial andindustrial markets.

Direct or single-stage, evaporative coolers are usedin tens of thousands of homes in the western US, aswell as thousands of commercial establishmentssuch as shops, restaurants, dry cleaners, offices,warehouses and factories. Indirect, direct or two-stage evaporative air conditioning systems are alsoused in schools, office buildings, commercialbuildings and homes.

DOMESTIC REFRIGERATIONIn 1992, Greenpeace brought together scientistsresearching the use of HC as refrigerants and anEast German domestic refrigerator manufacturer. Itwas a meeting that was to create a revolution inrefrigeration technology.Formerly East Germany’s leading householdappliance manufacturer, DKK Scharfenstein was

suffering severe economic problems in thereunified Germany when Greenpeacecommissioned the company to produce the world’sfirst ozone and climate benign refrigerators runningon HC. The company was within days of beingclosed down.

These Greenfreeze HC fridges used a mixture ofpropane and butane for the refrigerant, replacingthe ozone-destroying and global warmingchemicals otherwise used. At first, majorrefrigerator manufacturers rejected the idea ofGreenfreeze, launching an anti-HC scarecampaign. But Greenpeace launched its ownGreenfreeze marketing campaign and within a fewmonths had gathered 70,000 pre-orders forGreenfreeze refrigerators. This overwhelmingpublic support for Greenfreeze secured theinvestment needed to get the new fridges rolling offthe production line, salvaging DKK Scharfensteinand the jobs of its workers in the process.

Soon the manufacturers that had claimedGreenfreeze was unsafe, were forced to recognisethe market value of a truly environmentally friendlyrefrigerator and abandoned the use of HFCs. In1993 the four biggest German fridge producers,Bosch, Siemens, Liebherr and Miele switched toGreenfreeze, producing about four millionGreenfreeze fridges a year. By 1996, 90 per cent ofthe domestic refrigerators produced in Germanywere HC. Greenpeace also catalysed theintroduction of Greenfreeze production in LatinAmerica, Indonesia, India and China where morethan half of the 10 to 12 million domestic fridgessold are now Greenfreeze.

All major European domestic fridge companies, egBosch, Siemens, Electrolux, Liebherr, Miele, AEG,Whirlpool, Candy, Thompson, Vestfrost – nowmanufacture Greenfreeze refrigerators as standard,with a huge variety of sizes and models. Worldwidethere are about 20 Greenfreeze manufacturers andsince 1992 about 45 million Greenfreezerefrigerators have been manufactured.5

INDUSTRIAL REFRIGERATIONIndustrial refrigeration covers a very wide range ofcooling and freezing applications, including thechemical and pharmaceutical industries, thepetrochemical and the oil and gas industries, themetallurgical industry, plastic moulding, civilengineering, sports and leisure facilities, industrialice making and other miscellaneous uses.

Refrigeration capacity ranges from 20 kilowatts toseveral megawatts, while temperatures may varyfrom below 100 degrees celsius to well abovefreezing point. The systems are, to a large extent,custom engineered and erected at site. Unit systems("chillers") are used for process cooling.

• A number of European manufacturers are nowmarketing heat pumps using HC refrigerants.



Heat pumps can reduce energy consumption by50 per cent against electric heating

• A Swedish manufacturer of water chillers hasdeveloped a range of units using HCs. These areavailable across a range of capacities and usedifferent configurations of compressors

• A large refrigeration equipment manufacturer inDerbyshire, UK produces commercial drinkscabinets including wine coolers using HCs.Energy efficiencies increased by between 15 and20 per cent and the weight of cabinets dropped.Demand for the company’s product more thandoubled since moving to HCs.

COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATIONThe commercial refrigeration category includes arange of equipment. While the refrigerationcapacity of centralised systems in supermarketsvaries typically from 20 kilowatts to 1000 kilowatts,stand-alone equipment capacities are comparablewith domestic equipment.

Commercial HC equipment has been supplied tocorporate consumers including: British Airways,McDonald’s, Aroma Coffee, Sainsbury’s, Tesco,IKEA, TipTop Bread, Esso, AG Favor, The BodyShop and Backhammars Bank. The large UK foodretailer, Iceland and Swedish furniture chain IKEAhave announced their corporate conversion to HCinstead of HFCs.

Coca-Cola is the biggest user of commercialrefrigeration equipment in the world and its policyshift to abandon the use of HFCs for all newequipment by 2004 will create significant changein the global refrigeration industry and thecommercial availability of Greenfreeze equipment.

COLD STORAGE AND FOOD PROCESSINGRefrigeration for cold storage and food processingincludes equipment for dairy products, meatprocessing, confectionary, bread and breweries.

Most refrigeration systems for cold storage and foodprocessing are of direct type, with the refrigerantdistributed to heat exchangers in the space orapparatus to be refrigerated. Indirect systems withliquid chillers or ice banks are used to a lesserextent, primarily for cooling purposes.

Ammonia has strengthened its position as theleading refrigerant in many European countries,especially in the north. There has been someexpansion into less traditional use areas forammonia such as centralised systems for coolingand/or heating. In Argentina, ammonia coversabout 90 per cent of the food industry.

Developments include:

• Earthcare Products was appointed as specialisedsub-contractor to Blighline, Holmes Catering andIce Cool Services to convert integral refrigerationunits from HFC134a and HFC404a to CARE30

and CARE50 respectively.6

• McDonald’s has two 100 per cent HCGreenfreeze stores in the Millennium Dome inLondon, UK.7

• AG Favor, a Swedish supermarket chain, installeda new system working on glycol for mediumtemperature equipment and with CO2 as thesecondary refrigerant for the freezers. The totalrefrigerant savings are more than 475 kilogramseven though the cooling capacity has increasedby 30 kilowatts and the freezing capacity by 10kilowatts.

• A specialist grocery store chain was the first in theUK to use an HC refrigerant (CARE 50) in bothits refrigeration and airconditioning systems. Thisdemonstrates the flexibility of HCs in general andespecially the blends as the same refrigerant isable to produce air at 50 degrees celsius forheating the shop and at minus 30 degrees celsiusfor cooling the freezer cabinets.8

AIRCONDITIONINGIn commercial buildings airconditioning isprovided by unitary airconditioners or waterchillers, coupled with an air handling anddistribution system. Unitary airconditioners cooland dehumidify by having air pass directly througha coil containing an evaporating refrigerant. Waterchillers cool or heat water, or a water/antifreezemixture, which is then pumped through a heatexchanger in an air handler or fan-coil unit forcooling and dehumidifying or heating air.

The world market for centrifugal chillers was $US4billion in 1997 with the US accounting for 43 percent. The world market for absorption chillers ismore concentrated with four countries – Japan,China, Korea, and the US – accounting for 90 percent.

Water chillers using the vapour-compression cycleare manufactured in capacities from about 7.0kilowatts to over 35,000 kilowatts. Two types ofcompressors are used: positive displacement andcentrifugal. Water chillers are offered in both aircooled and water cooled versions up through about1500 kilowatts in single units. Above this range,water-cooled systems are available.

• More than 100,000 De’Longhi portableairconditioning units are in use across Europeusing R290 refrigerant. The same manufacturerhas extended its use of R290 to dehumidifiers,which it is now marketing in Japan.

• Systems containing HCs have been installed inshops, offices and hospital waiting rooms. OneUK manufacturer, IMI Air Conditioning, nowhas a range of electronic units available.

• Earthcare Products has installed VEF splitsystems using CARE40 in the UK Department ofTrade, Environment, Transport and Regionsoffices as well as both split systems and computerroom chillers.

• Packaged units: These are now available in the

37 |


UK for cellar cooling applications. • HC chillers have been installed across Europe to

provide comfort cooling to offices andsupermarkets.

• Earthcare Products has installed airconditioningfor the whole of a Middlesex University campus.The contract was worth over £400,000 (~A$1million).9

• The UK Chartered Society of Physiotherapyneeded comfort airconditioning as a result of anincrease in IT equipment. Purchasingrequirements included minimum first cost,energy running costs, maintenance costs and riskof premature obsolescence due to environmentalrefrigerant legislation. Two air-cooled waterchillers using an HC (CARE 50) refrigerant wereselected.10

CAR AIRCONDITIONINGAll new vehicles produced since 1995 have beenequipped with HFC-134a airconditioning systems(with the exception of very limited production ofCFC-12 systems in China, India, and Korea.) 50per cent of all HFC-134a production is forautomobile airconditioning.

Car manufacturers already have prototypes for HCand CO2 mobile airconditioners.

• In Australia, more than 300,000 cars have beenconverted from CFCs and HFCs to HCs.

• TransAdelaide Bus Company has installed HCairconditioning in the drivers’ compartment,while passengers are cooled with a desiccantcooling system.

• The Denver Regional Transit Department in theUS has equipped buses with roof mountedevaporative airconditioning systems, saving up to2000 gallons of diesel fuel per bus per year.

• The German company Konvecta uses CO2 forbus airconditioning.

FURTHER INFORMATION ON WORLD’S BESTPRACTICE :• www.greenchill.org• www.care-refrigerants.co.uk• www.teknologisk.dk

CONCLUSIONThe use of environmentally destructive CFCs,HCFCs and HFCs in refrigeration andairconditioning is one of the biggest and mostsystematic environmental failures of the SydneyGames.

In almost a decade since the EnvironmentGuidelines were developed, Greenpeace hascampaigned for Greenfreeze alternatives andsuccessfully brought into commercial use morethan 45 million Greenfreeze fridges - whereasSydney was barely able to find a few hundredGreenfreeze systems.

The most significant environmental legacy of the

Sydney Games will be Coca-Cola’s policy change.After a series of meetings and the launch of aglobal Greenpeace protest campaign, the companyannounced that it would ban HFCs in all newrefrigeration equipment by the Athens 2004Games. As one of the world’s largest users ofrefrigeration equipment and one of the best knownbrand names, Coke’s decision, when implemented,will have a global impact on the refrigerationindustry. It demonstrates that HFCs, like CFCs,must and can be eliminated by the refrigerationand airconditioning industries.

ENDNOTES1. Green Olympics, Dirty Sponsors, Greenpeace 20002. ibid.3. I.L., Maclaine-Cross, and E. Leonardi – Why Hydrocarbons

Save Energy, AIRAH Journal, Vol. 51 No. 6, June 1997 pp.33-37http://ctan.unsw.edu.au/pub/archive/HC/papers/airah97.pdf

4. Green Olympics, Dirty Sponsors, op cit. 5. Ibid.6. Earthcare Products, Business Plan, April 20007. Ibid.8. Paul Blacklock, et al, "Experience of using hydrocarbons in

refrigeration and air conditioning applications in Europe"1998

9. Earthcare Products, op cit.10. Paul Blacklock, et al, op cit



INTRODUCTIONGreenpeace believes the plastic poly vinyl chloride(PVC) is an environmental poison which releasesdangerous toxic chemicals at every point of its lifecycle. These toxins include:

• Dioxin A substance considered to be a humancarcinogen by the IARC and hormone disrupterthat bioaccumlates in the food chain where it canbe ingested by humans. Dioxin is a by-product ofPVC production and incineration.

• Phthalates Linked to cancer and kidney damageand may interfere with the reproductive systemand development.

• Heavy metals Toxic metals such as mercury, leadand cadmium as used in PVC production, ifemitted as pollutants can also bioaccumulate inanimals and humans.

• Vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) Variouscancers, tumours, angiosarcoma and reproductivedisturbances have been linked to VCM which isa building block of PVC.

• Hydrogen chlorine gas This gas emitted byburning PVC (e.g. cabling) reacts with moistureto form corrosive hydrochloric acid.1

Greenpeace has been campaigning for the phase-out of organochlorines, the class of chemicals thatincludes PVC, since 1987 because ofenvironmental and human health concerns withtheir production, use and disposal. Themanufacture of PVC plastic uses the largestproportion (30 per cent) of chlorine producedwithin the chlorine industry. Greenpeace hasfocussed on PVC since the early 1990s and iscalling for its material substitution with cleaneralternatives.

Greenpeace believes the building and developmentindustries should be concerned about these issuesconsidering that in Europe alone, building andconstruction account for 53 per cent of all PVCuse (by market share) while wire cable andelectrical uses amount to nine per cent. Besidespackaging which accounts for 16 per cent of theEuropean PVC market, these are the two largestapplications of PVC.2

The Royal Australian Institute of Architect’s (RAIA)Environmental Design Guide concludes two majorpapers on the subject by saying: "...PVC productsand processes are going to have to get better.Maintaining the pressure on manufacturers bylooking to alternative products and additives forexample, is essential if this is going to happen."3

As PVC is a commonly used toxic buildingmaterial, the effort to minimise its use was animportant part of Sydney’s effort to hold anenvironmental Olympic Games.

39 |

4 | Alternatives toPVC at theOlympic Games

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES CALL FOR:“...minimising and ideally avoiding the use ofchlorine-based products (organochlorines) such asPCBs, PVC and chlorine-bleached paper.”

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY’SGREEN OLYMPIC EFFORTPVC use is pervasive in the building andconstruction industry. The low cost and multi-purpose nature of this plastic along with stronglobbying by the chemical industry responsible forproducing PVC has encouraged a move from moreconventional, less toxic building materials to PVCin a short space of time. The choice to attempt tominimise PVC use for Olympic constructionpresented many challenges to the architects,designers, builders and suppliers who worked onthe project. While alternatives were found formany areas of use, PVC alternatives for others areaswere more difficult to find and source.

In attempting to evaluate how Sydney performed inits effort to minimise PVC, the biggest challengewas obtaining information on quantities used inOlympic venues due to the number of contractorsinvolved. With many sites complete at the time ofresearch, many developers’ records had beenarchived and were inaccessible. The lack of athorough OCA records system on the sourcing ofOlympic building materials meant that anyresearch to identify source information had to bedone on a venue by venue basis. Where possible,we have identified areas were solid informationexisted and noted where we were unable to obtainenough information to evaluate success or failure.

WATER PIPING (HYDRAULICS)The building materials used in the movement ofliquids, or hydraulics, is probably the mostsignificant area where PVC-free alternatives areused in Sydney Olympic venues.

In general in Australia, cold ‘mains’ water is oftensupplied to buildings via unplasticised PVC pipes(uPVC). When uPVC is not used, high-densitypolyethylene (HDPE) is often the alternative ofchoice. Once potable water enters a building,Australian Standard AS3500 stipulates that PVC isnot to be used. For in-building cold and hot water,alternatives to PVC include copper,polypropylenes, cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE)and polybutylene (PB).4

Similarly, for the removal of drainage wastewaterand sewage in general building use, uPVC is mostcommonly used. It is also used for in-groundsewerage and drainage pipes, which can bereplaced by vitreous clay pipes (VCP). A range ofmaterials including concrete pipes and fibre-reinforced concrete pipes (FRC) are used forstormwater drainpipe material but uPVC is mostcommonly used due to its low cost.

OLYMPIC SITEThe main supplier of PE pipe for hydraulics to theOlympic site and venues (up to 95 per cent)estimated that an impressive 200,000 metres of PEpipe were supplied rather than PVC. Another30,000 metres of nylon pipe for gas services wereused. These figures relate to the SydneyShowground, Archery Centre, Regatta Centre,Athletes’ Village, Aquilina Reserve, LidcombeMedia Village and the Homebush perimeter (forgrey water).5 Some 1620 metres of PVC-freepiping were used for various applications in thecycling Velodrome.6

At the Olympic site, ductile iron and cast iron arealso used for water and fire mains in some areas. Recycled HDPE was specified for sub-soil drainageand was used in the transfer pipes for reticulated orrecycled water.

ATHLETES’ VILLAGEBuilders of the Athletes’ Village, Mirvac LendLease Village Consortium (MLLVC) claim thatthey saved some 345,000 metres of PVC pipe frombeing used by specifying VCP for sewers, FRC forstormwater, ductile iron for water, PE for sub-soildrainage and PP for waste lines. MLLVC equatethis to the length of piping running from Sydney toCanberra.7 The PP pipes used for waste lines alonewas 35,250 metres.8 The only place where PVCwas not avoided in the Athletes’ Village was in theconcrete slab foundation of the permanenthousing, and sewer and stormwater applicationswhere about 133 kilograms of PVC per standardresidence was used.9

SUPERDOMEAccording to the senior designer of SuperDome’sowner/occupiers, no PVC was used for hydraulics.Between 2000 and 3000 metres of abovegroundpipe at the SuperDome was made from cast iron orcopper pipe. The in-ground stormwater drainpipeswere 1000 metres of VCP10 and an estimated 2000metres of HDPE were used for the roof drainageand downpipes11. The in-ground mains hydraulicswere supplied in HDPE. Hot trade waste pipesused for cooking waste at the SuperDome werespecified to be cast iron of which about 88,028kilograms was installed.12

SYDNEY SHOWGROUNDWith over 95 separate projects and a multitude ofsubcontractors, it was difficult to gather informationfor the section of the Olympics site used annuallyfor the Royal Easter Show (Media Centre, Multi-Use Arena and a number of other venues) referredto as the Sydney Showground. However, the OCAmaintains that about 14,000 metres of PE pipe wasused for main trunk services (to and from the site,carrying water) and about 5000 metres of FRC wasused for sub-surface bulk water reticulation (waterfor recycling carried underground).13 Aboveground pipes were made from copper andgalvanised steel was used for fire services.


4 | Alternatives to PVC at the Olympic Games

OLYMPIC HOTELSHydraulic engineers for the Novotel and Ibis hotelssaid no PVC was used in the ground on-site.Alternatives to PVC were used for moving potablewater (copper piping and XLPE), non-potablewater (PB), sewage beyond the building’sperimeters (VCP) and stormwater beyond thebuilding’s perimeters (FRC). For sewerage andstormwater within the building’s perimeters,suspended pipe of uPVC was used.14

OLYMPIC STADIUMFrom a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) prepared forthe Stadium Australia developers, it seems thatsignificant quantities of PVC-alternative materialswere used (see table PVC1). If PVC was used itwould have fallen into the category of ‘VariousPlastics’ group. This group accounts for only threetonnes of materials used for hydraulic works.15

Within plastics, PE was used for wastewater andpotable water. One tonne of PVC is being usedwithin the cooling towers (airconditioning system).From a total of 2767 tonnes of pipe work allocatedto hydraulics, cooling towers and stormwater withinthe Stadium, this is quite small. It seems reasonabletherefore to assume that, from a hydraulicsstandpoint, Stadium Australia is largely PVC-free.

OLYMPIC RAIL STATIONAt Homebush Bay railway station 10,300 metres ofrecycled HDPE were used for sub-soil and stripdrainage.

OTHER VENUESThe Archery Centre used medium densitypolyethylene (MDPE) and copper for conduits andpipe instead of PVC with HDPE for sewers. SomePVC was used in small lengths for a sewer.Earthenware pipes for in-ground wastewaterreticulation displaced PVC at the Hockey Centrewith PVC use minimised in plumbing. Likewiseductile iron and 3,000 metres of PE were used atthe Media Centre. However at the Showgroundssome PVC was used for temporary water main andfire services. While FPC and PE have been used insome applications at the Tennis Centre, recycledwater mains and sewers use PVC. Off-site theWhite Water Stadium used PVC pipes for stages

one and two as did temporary structures at theSailing Shore Base. Similarly pipes and drains atAquilina Reserve used PVC.16

A 1999 OCA review of PVC use showed that effortswere made at all sites to avoid PVC for hydraulicuse. It has been difficult to obtain information onquantities for other major venues due to thenumber of contractors involved but Greenpeacebelieves the overall results are a mixed bag of somevery good successes as well as some missedopportunities.17

CABLINGIn the area of electrical cabling, efforts to replacePVC were not as effective as for piping. However,cabling in the permanent housing at the Athletes’Village is largely PVC free. The Australian-madecable Envirolex made by the company Olex Cableswas used in all permanent houses and units forpower and lighting wiring. It is unclear if Envirolexwas also used on all the demountable housingthough the developers did specify it. There are1112 permanent houses and apartments in theVillage and18 Olex believes that 1170 metres ofEnvirolex were used per fixed house. Greenpeacecalculates that an estimated 1.3 million metres(151,454 kilograms) of PVC has been avoided inthe Athletes’ Village permanent housing.

Co-developers for the Athletes’ Village, LendLease, also specified Envirolex cabling for theOlympic hotels, Novotel and Ibis.19 OCApublications give conflicting information aboutthis, stating on one hand that PVC had beeneliminated from all electrical services, generalcommunications and computer cabling while inanother document claiming it was only"minimised".20

The VIP suites in Stadium Australia apparently usePVC-free cabling for lighting and power sub-circuits. Olex note that 40,000 metres of theirXLPE sheathed Envirolex was supplied to theStadium indicating that XLPE sheathing was usedfor sub-mains cabling.21 OCA information shows alarge percentage of PVC-free cabling in theStadium (See Table PVC2). While the raw figures

41 |


Pipe typeConcrete pipes, pits and tanksCast iron paperwork and fittingsCopper and brass pipe and fittingsVCP and fittingsCeramicsStainless steelVarious plastics

TABLE PVC1: HYDRAULICS MATERIALS AT STADIUM AUSTRALIA

Tonnes1590239160149136413

seem impressive, no data has been provided onhow these figures were determined or why PVCalternatives were not used more widely. A LifeCycle Assessment of the Stadium indicates fourtonnes of plastic used for energy cabling but notype is specified. It does specify however that threetonnes of PVC conduit was used.22 There is anindication that more than 60 per cent of theconduit and cabling has non-PVC content.23

When broadcast sponsor NBC noted that the largepower pylons on the skyline behind the Stadiumwould detract from the visual aesthetics of theGames they were removed in 1997. This resultedin about 8400 metres of PVC-free cabling beingused for the 132 kilovolts (KV) lines along 9kilometres of trench. At the crossing of HaslamsCreek, 60 metres of continuous PE conduit wereused to protect the cabling.24

In the SuperDome a system of metal cable traysinstead of plastic PVC conduits was mostly usedthroughout although standard PVC cabling wasalso installed for other purposes.25

The interior fit-out of the SOCOG cityheadquarters is said to have used 60,000 metres ofPVC-free Envirolex cabling.26

Unfortunately, PVC-sheathed electrical andtelecommunication cable was used at the ArcheryCentre, Equestrian Centre, Hockey Centre,Shooting Centre, Regatta Centre, Aquilina Reserveand Sailing Shore Base. For these venues PVCtelecommunication conduit was used because of arequirement of the national telecommunicationssupplier Austel/Telstra.27 Greenpeace protested theuse of PVC cabling on site in front of OCAheadquarters in 1996 by laying its own PVC-freecabling at the site.

RESILIENT FLOORINGResilient flooring has a smooth, flat surface that iseasy to clean and maintain. PVC-sheet and PVC-composite tiles are the dominant material for thisapplication, known commonly as vinyl flooring.

Where vinyl might normally have been specifiedfor Olympic venues, natural linoleum was the

environmentally preferred alternative most oftenselected. Unfortunately, PVC was used fortemporary structures (or ‘Overlays’) based on cost.28

About 2000 square metres of studded vinyl flooringwas used for the food court area at the MediaCentre in Lidcombe.

The largest single installation of natural linoleumseems to have been the Media Village where some5100 square metres were used.29 There are onlythree main suppliers of natural linoleum inAustralia including Forbo Floor Coverings andArmstrong World Industries.

Natural linoleum was laid in the Novotel and IbisHotels instead of vinyl flooring. This was usedmainly for ‘back of house’ rooms such as tea rooms,phone equipment rooms, first aid office andadministration rooms. Vinyl was laid on wet areafloors such as bars and bistros.30

Ceramic tiles and timber were used for flooring atthe Athletes’ Village to avoid vinyl. The Stadiumalso opted for tiled floors instead of vinyl.

SEATINGThere appears to be no PVC seating at the majorOlympic sites. The two key seating suppliersclaimed PVC-based stadium seating had not beenmade for over 10 years in Australia. The companySebel supplied over 137,000 seats amounting toapproximately 244,710 kilograms of PP-basedseating to the Showgrounds; Stadium Australia;Aquatic, Athletics, Shooting, Baseball, Softball andHockey centres and the Velodrome. Seating for theSuperDome was supplied by Camatic who devisedeight seating styles in PP with nylon (PA) arms andmountings.31 The plastic elements of the 21,000seats are estimated to weigh about 147,000kilograms.32

TENSILE ROOFINGPVC is commonly used for large canopy, umbrellaor tent style structures. There are several of these inplace at the Olympic venues. But PVC has beenlargely avoided in their design and construction.

Situated on the public boulevard areas, theAmenities Buildings have translucent roof



Stadium Australia Cabling type MechanicalFireEWIS*ElectricalLifts/escalators

TABLE PVC2: PVC CABLING AT STADIUM AUSTRALIA

% not using PVC59.5606050.590

*Emergency Warning and Intercommunication System (EWIS)

structures. The product selected was Flontex, aGerman teflon sandwich laminate over a glass fibrecore material. About 1500 square metres of Flontexwas used to make the roof and upper walls. PVCwas not suitable because the UV-resistant additivesturn the fabric opaque.33

Various other tensile structures include theShowgrounds amphitheatre (1500 square metres),Bicentennial Park shade structures (about 40 squaremetres in total), Hockey Centre canopy (25 squaremetres) and various large Showgrounds umbrellastructures (about 192 square metres in total). These‘sails’ are a PVC alternative using polyolefin.34 TheAustralian distributor of this material said they hadsupplied between 2000 and 3000 square metres ofpolyolefin, an alternative to PVC, for umbrellas,awnings and a sound shell. Polyolefin is the nearestin price to PVC so it is potentially the best PVCreplacement.35

PVC awnings are being used for temporarystructures (eg sponsor and media related shelters)all over the Olympic Site. In one eating area in theHomebush Commons, one such structure willinclude about 1700 square metres of PVCmaterial.36 The OCA said the main arch shadingmembrane at Stadium Australia was teflon-coatedglass fibre while another source said the only largetensile application for the site was at the entry tothe members area and this was of PVCconstruction.


Water Piping (Hydraulics)In many instances Olympic Park has demonstratedbest practice alternatives to PVC. However the baris always being raised. For example, the water andsewerage system of a new urban development inLeidsche Rijn in the Netherlands with more than30,000 new houses and 700,000 square metres ofoffice space, will be entirely PVC-free. The UK’sAnglian Water specifies polyethylene or ductileiron pipes in their mains renovation program anddoes not allow developers to use PVC pipe in newsewerage schemes. HDPE is regarded as moreflexible and shock resistant.

CABLINGBecause the developers of the Athletes’ Village,MLLVC, were prepared to commit to PVC-freecabling for lighting and electricity, Olex couldjustify two years of research and development tocreate its PVC-free alternative Envirolex, theAustralian made XLPE sheathed cable. Envirolexhas been specified for eco-villages and nationalpark developments around Australia.

Another Australian-made PVC-free product,Pyrolex, has a higher fire rating as it is halogen-free,creating less smoke when burned. It is also usedwhere PVC cable smoke may damage valuableproperty, as in museums. The Berlin Museum of

Jewish Culture, for example, is PVC-free. Demandin Australia has been steadily increasing over thepast five years and now, some buildings contain 50per cent Pyrolex cable.37

In an effort to avoid the use of PVC in high-gradeaudio cables, European manufacturer, Vandenhulhas developed an alternative jacket insulationmaterial, Hulliflex. Compared to PVC, Hulliflex isbelieved to have greater durability, mechanicalstrength, lower surface friction and higher thermalendurance.38

RESILIENT FLOORINGLinoleum, the natural alternative to vinyl makes up5 per cent of the resilient flooring marketworldwide with the market share growing rapidly.39

In the past three years natural linoleum salesglobally have shown a growth rate of an estimated71 per cent while vinyl sales are believed to bestable at about three to five per cent. The USmarket for natural linoleum in 1998 was $US20million to $US25 million or 1 per cent.40 TheAustralian market for natural linoleum is believedto be about 400,000 square metres annually.41

Natural linoleum is made from linseed oil, naturalresins, wood, cork and limestone and usually hasjute backing. The product has natural anti-bacterialcharacteristics, is fire resistant, long-lasting, anti-static and biodegradable. After an incident duringthe Falklands War in which a number of BritishNavy personnel died as a result of inhaling smokefrom a burning vinyl floor, the Navy has nowreturned to specifying natural linoleum.42 It hasalso been specified for projects as diverse as theAuckland Airport in New Zealand and the SonyMetronome entertainment centre in SanFrancisco.43 Being high in ‘wood type’ content,Natural linoleum is not however suited for use inwet areas, such as bathrooms.44

A new US product, Solenium by floor coveringcompany Interface, is a resilient flooring madefrom polytimethylene terephthalate (PTT) which isbonded to a urethane foam and a PP scrimbacking. All the elements were designed to beseparated and recycled back into themanufacturing process. A biodegradable cornstarch based version of Solenium was launchedrecently in the USA. Four of the looms at theInterface Solenium production plant are poweredby photovoltaic (PV) cells. A US$1.8 billioncompany, Interface has 40 per cent of the globalflooring market and aims to become the world’sfirst sustainable and then first restorative company.45

TENSILE ROOFINGThe UK's Millennium Dome is the world's largestsingle dome structure – larger than the GeorgiaDome and the New Denver International Airport.The dome has a diameter of 320 metres, covers80,000 square metres of floor space and 25,000square metres of buildings. It is PVC-free usingpolytetrafluoroethylene(PTFE)-coated woven

43 |


fibreglass membrane panels (188,000 square metresof outer and liner fabric) for its roof surface.46

Aside from PTFE, the tensile structure market isopen to a serious competitor to PVC. Canvas isoften suggested as an alternative and may besuitable for short-term projects while industrialhemp could also be a contender. Considered to bethe strongest and most readily harvestable ofnatural fibres, hemp was once the material ofchoice for sailcloth.47 The Chinese Academy ofSciences says hemp is also highly UV resistant.48

PVC PHASE-OUTSSince 1986, 274 German communities and sixfederal States have introduced PVC restrictionpolicies. In the early 1990s, many local authoritiesin Austria, The Netherlands and the Nordiccountries also restricted PVC. In Spain, 52 citieshave become PVC-free while the UK, US, Japan,Sweden and Denmark have national restrictions onPVC use. Meanwhile, three European studiesreleased in April 2000 predict that PVC wastevolumes will almost double over the next 20 years.49

Considering the highly toxic content of PVC waste,its continued use for building materials must becalled into question.

More information on PVC alternatives and world’sbest practice can be found on the Greenpeacewebsite: www.greenpeace.org/~toxics/ and in thepublication, Building the Future: A guide tobuilding without PVC, Greenpeace, 1996.

CONCLUSIONSThis evaluation is limited because much of thedetailed information necessary to evaluate Sydney’sPVC-free minimisation effort was either notavailable from the OCA or had been archived bymultiple contractors. Many of the larger developersmentioned confidentiality agreements with theOCA that prevented them from releasing data.Much of the information eventually obtained fromOCA was useful but did not allow detailed analysis.

Tracing the data through the labyrinth of Olympiccontractors and suppliers resulted in someincomplete figures. A more comprehensive andpublicly transparent tracking system should havebeen put in place by the OCA so the constructionindustry could learn from the use of PVCalternatives through the development of Sydney’sOlympic venues and site.

From the data collated, it seems that Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines were met in a limitedway in that PVC use was "minimised" or "avoided".This happened in varying degrees depending on thevenue and the final application of PVC. Piping andflooring were the clear winners although there wasroom for improvement. Telecommunicationscabling was an area of outright failure and very littleeffort was made to replace PVC in power andlighting cabling, except in those venues noted above.

One of the key successes of the Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines was the introduction ofa locally manufactured PVC cabling calledEnvirolex, an Olex product developed for MLLVC.

The Athletes’ Village co-developer Lend Leaseaimed to reduce PVC use by 40 per cent across theproject. On completion they calculated thereduction in PVC by weight, against standardindustry practice, to be closer to 70 per cent with a100 per cent reduction in the ‘infrastructure’category (sewer, stormwater and water mains.)50

Their dedication to achieving this, given the lack ofenthusiasm from fellow developers and within theconstruction industry, is to be highly commended.

Sydney’s Olympics have shown that PVC-freealternatives are viable replacements across a rangeof building materials. Anecdotal informationindicates that PVC use would have been muchmore prevalent in Olympic construction hadGreenpeace not kept up its pressure at variousbuilding sites and on Olympic organisers. Inresearching this chapter, developers, contractorsand builders were very aware of the GreenpeacePVC campaign.

While the Sydney Olympic Games has shown thatPVC can be avoided in many instances, furthertake up of alternatives off-site in developmentsaround Australia is necessary to reduce cost andensure experience in the use of alternativescontinues to rise. Internationally, regulation hasbeen a key component of the move away from PVCand into environmentally-safer alternatives.Australia would also benefit from regulations thatrestrict PVC use to hasten the move to thesealternatives.

ENDNOTES1. Phone conversation with Bryce Christian, Aquatherm

Australia, 28 June 20002. Phone conversation with Steve King, industrial Pipe Systems

(IPS) 9 June 2000 / Email Steve King Industrial Pipe Systems(IPS) 15 June 2000

3. OCA document, Steps taken to minimise the use of PVC,working draft, 21 April 1999

4. Calculations provided by Maria Atkinson, EnvironmentalManager, Bovis Lend Lease, 15 June 2000

5. Fax from Susanne Cowen, COES Australia, AdministrationManager, 24 May 2000

6. Calculations provided by Maria Atkinson, EnvironmentalManager, Bovis Lend Lease, 15 June 2000

7. Phone conversations with Stuart Morris and Craig Gilbert,Nisbett and Durney, May 2000

8. Phone conversations with Andrew Powis, Syphon, 20 June 20009. Fax from Vaughan Mackay, Manager NSW Building

Services, Crevett Pipelines, 10. OCA, Compendium of ESD Initiatives and Outcomes,

Edition 2 , 1999, p.9111. Phone conversation with Simon Matthews, Donnelly

Simpson Cleary Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd, 9 June 200012. ERM/Multiplex/DPWS, Stadium Australia life cycle

assessment (inventory results), Appendix C.2-3, December 1998



13. OCA document, op cit 14. ibid15. Phone conversation with Brian Falls, Environment Manager,

Bovis Lend Lease, 20 June 200016. Note from Maria Atkinson, Environment Manager, Bovis

Lend Lease, 15 June 200017. OCA Compendium states PVC has been eliminated from all

electrical services and general communications andcomputer cabling. The OCA Hotel Fact Sheet is moremodest and notes that PVC has been minimised in electricalservices. OCA Olympic Hotel Development Fact Sheet,October 1998

18. Olex News Release 12 February 199819. ERM/Multiplex/DPWS, Stadium Australia life cycle

assessment (inventory results), Appendix C.3, December 199820. ERM/Multiplex/DPWS, Stadium Australia life cycle

assessment (inventory results), Appendix A.2, December 199821. Olex editorial story "The Downfall of Sydney Olympic

Transmission Lines", undated22. Phone conversation with Richard Polkinghorn, Senior

Design Manager for SuperDome, Abrigroup, 31 May 200023. Olex News Release 12 February 199824. OCA, op cit25. Phone conversation with Peter Dean NSW State Manager,

Tarket Sommer, 21 June 200026. Fax from Peter McCormack, Forbo Floor coverings, 21 June

200027. Phone conversation with John Jefferies, Travis McEwen

Group, June 200028. Phone conversation with Richard Polkinghorn, Abigroup,

Senior Design Manager for the SuperDome, May 200029. Phone conversation with Simon Hodgson, Camatic,

Operations Manager, 5 June 200030. Phone conversation with David Jaggers, Durbach Neil

Architects, 14 June 200031. Phone conversation with Richard MacDonald, NSW State

Manager, Shade Structures Pacific Pty Ltd, 15 June 200032. Phone conversation with Brian O’Flaherty, Indtex Australia,

23 June 200033. Phone conversation with Richard MacDonald, NSW State

Manager, Shade Structures Pacific Pty Ltd, 15 June 200034. Phone discussion with Tony Kiernan, Market Manager,

Power & Industrial Division, Olex Cables, 24 May 200035. www.vandenhul.nl/artpap/pvchflex.htm36. Phone conversation with Allan Fricke, Forbo Floorcovering,

26 May 200037. Environmental Building News, Vol 7, No. 9 October 1998, p.138. Phone conversation with Greg Wilson, National Sales and

Marketing Manager Armstrong World Industries, 21 June2000

39. Team Talk briefing on Linoleum, internal document,Armstrong World Industries, 28 March 2000

40. ibid41. Environmental Building News, Vol 7, No. 9 October 1998 p

1, 8-1342. Environmental Building News, Vol 8, No. 5 May 1999 p 8-943. www.birdair.com/feature/milldome/index.html44. Jack Herer, The Emperor Wears no Clothes, Hemp

Publishing, Van Nuys, California, 1985 revised 1993, p.545. John Roulac, Industrial Hemp, Hemptech, Ojai, California,

June 199546. http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr2000/2000L-04-14-03.html47. Calculations provided by Maria Atkinson, Environmental

Manager, Bovis Lend Lease. 15 June 2000

45 |



INTRODUCTIONAncient forests are the greatest example of threebillion years of evolutionary life on earth. Theycontain literally millions of different types of floraand fauna. Even more species are yet to bediscovered. However, many species will not survivewithout large intact areas of ancient forests.

Greenpeace campaigns to protect the earth’s lastremaining tracts of ancient forest from destruction– through a moratorium on industrialdevelopments and logging in ancient forests untilappropriately large areas of ancient forest reserveshave been established.

Greenpeace also campaigns internationally toensure governments increase their efforts to stopillegal logging and the funding or approving ofprojects that expand logging into ancient forests orthat convert or degrade ancient forests.Greenpeace supports forest use by communitiesand businesses that sustain the natural dynamicsand biodiversity of ancient forest ecosystems.

Greenpeace Believes the world's best practice fortimber harvesting is:• timber from rare, old growth, or threatened

forests should not be harvested or used and• use of recycled timber or timber sourced through

a sustainable verification system knowninternationally as Forest Stewardship Council(FSC) certified timber should be given highestpriority.

As a new development heavily dependent ontimber for construction, forest protection was a keyissue to be addressed as part of Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES CALL FOR:• Preservation and protection of the integrity of

natural ecosystems including native bushland,forest and waterways

• Building material selection being subject toconsideration of environmental participation inthe planning, eg timber should be sourced fromsustainably managed sources

• Use of recycled and recyclable building materials

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY’SGREEN OLYMPIC EFFORTObtaining detailed information on the use of timberpresented a major problem in evaluating howSydney performed in sustainable timber use. Therewas little practical, formal verification carried outeither on the source or end use and the interveningchain-of-custody for timber supplies. Therefore anyconclusions about Sydney’s success or failure in thisarea can only be indicative, not comprehensive. Akey problem here and across a range of other keyissues was the lack of uniform verification of thesourcing of timber products themselves.From the representative analysis by venue and

47 |

5 | Timber use atthe OlympicGames

volume of wood products used, most timbersupplied for the 2000 Olympics was not fromverified sustainably managed sources.

The degree to which the wood product sourcing forOlympic venues met Sydney’s EnvironmentalGuidelines depends to a large degree on aninterpretation on the term "sustainable forestry".There are more than 100 definitions of sustainableforest management worldwide and a similarnumber for what actually constitutes a forest. Byand large, most attempts at defining sustainableforestry are simply a standard on which to evaluateforest management performance rather thansomething definitive.

The only international forest managementperformance standards that have widespreadstakeholder support and recognition are those ofthe FSC.

In Australia, where most of the timber for Sydney’sGames was to come from, defining sustainableforest harvesting is far from clear. According to thenational 1996 State of the Environment Report: "InAustralia, forestry is not practised on the basis ofeven flow sustainable yield. There is no clearanswer to whether our current use of the forest issustainable. Past practices have not been. All forestmanagement agencies have implemented policiesdesigned to meet sustainability criteria."1

The amount of timber used on various Olympicprojects was immense. Even the TimberDevelopment Association (TDA) of Australia foundits use difficult to track. The following does notcapture all applications but represents the fourdifferent timber types: native forest, plantation,certified and recycled.

NATIVE FOREST TIMBERSOne of the Sydney Olympic’s biggest challenges incommitting to sustainable timber use was the lackof regulations to verify sustainable timber sourcesand to access such products in Australia. Tocomplicate matters, there are no agreed criteria forsustainable timber between Australianenvironmental groups and the forest industry.

Regulation of native or original forests in Australiafalls between the Australian Federal Governmentand State Governments. There is no consistent oreffective approach across this regulatory division.The latest attempt to achieve consensus betweenthe various stakeholders is the Regional ForestAgreement (RFA), part of the 1992 AustralianNational Forest Policy. The RFA was to permitlogging only "in an ecologically sustainablemanner". However, this has not quelled the debateon use of Australian forestry resources.

Federal government ministers with portfolios forforestry and conservation, environment andheritage co-signed a Statement on Sustainable

Forest Management in Tasmania in 1999. It statedthat: "Australia's processes for assessing andclarifying that forests are sustainably managed areequivalent to, or better than, any other assuranceavailable for forest products."2 This illustrates therecalcitrance and defensive stance taken by theFederal Government and industry leaders whenfaced with overwhelming market demand forindependently certified wood products such asthose approved by the FSC.

Most project managers and contractors interviewedfor this report believed that timber sourced fromNew South Wales (NSW) State Forest managedregions was automatically "sustainable". Thecommonly held view was that the NSW StateGovernment had, on entering office, locked up all"old growth" and rainforest areas inside sacrosanct,untouchable reserves. Everybody was confident thattheir timber did not originate from such forests.

While Greenpeace believes the NSW Governmenthas gone farther than most Australian states toprevent native forests being used for commerciallogging, without independent verification, it isimpossible to guarantee that this is the case.

The Olympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA) hasindicated that a chain-of-custody has been collatedfor the supply of timber at the Sydney InternationalEquestrian Centre, Sydney International ShootingCentre and the NSW Tennis Centre. Timbersupply to other venues occurred before the OCAEnvironment Branch required a chain-of-custodyand is therefore not able to be sourced. The OCA’schain-of-custody process involved asking suppliersto provide a management plan for the forest, forestmaps and locations of the timber source, harvestingplans describing the nature of the forest, approvalsfrom relevant authorities for logging, deliverydockets and any inspection certificates.3

While information regarding the thoroughness ofthis process is unavailable, anecdotal evidence fromthe suppliers of recycled timber (see below)suggests the OCA was as diligent as possible giventheir inexperience in this new and unresolved fieldof forest monitoring.

OLD GROWTH FAILURE AND SUCCESSA chain-of-custody does exist for the TasmanianOak used as veneer in the dining andentertainment rooms of Stadium Australia. It showsthat some of the timber came from re-growthforests while some was sourced from clear-felledold growth trees of about 200 years vintage incoupes near the Huon River, Tasmania.4 5

One logging coupe in particular, PC71, in thePicton Valley, is of particular concern. TheTasmanian Department of Parks, Wildlife andHeritage (DPWH) had endorsed inclusion ofcoupe PC71A into the Tasmanian WildernessWorld Heritage Area because it would contribute


5 | Timber use at the Olympic Games

significantly to its value and represent a verysignificant improvement in its biological integrity.6

However the specification from the Stadium’sdevelopers was that timber be "supplied fromsustainably managed forests, from an area coveredby a Regional Forest Agreement".7

A trial project to supply timber for the Athletes’Village from a low-impact forestry operation did notproceed. Due to time constraints, the hardwoodused came from a salvaging operation in NorthernNSW. The North East Forest Alliance (NEFA)agreed that this was the next best available option.The resulting timber has been promoted as "featuregrade" which is said to utilise up to 80 per cent ofthe log, resulting in less waste. The standardspecification would have been "select grade" whereonly 20 per cent might be used to obtain a moreuniform appearance. Parquetry flooring was the enduse. There was a specific stipulation that timbershould not be sourced from high conservation valueforest, rare and inadequately reserved forest types,old growth forest and habitat for endangeredspecies.8 A chain-of-custody was established toconfirm that timber used met these criteria.

External cladding used on the modular, ortemporary homes in the Athletes’ Village, isunderstood to be reconstituted eucalypt hardwoodand was sourced from NSW State Forest regions as"silviculture thinnings". These are smaller trees thatdo not grow into mature trees and are normally lefton the forest floor after harvesting. The plant wherethe timber was produced is an EnvironmentAustralia’s Cleaner Production demonstrationproject.9

While recycled turpentine wood was originallyspecified for the International Regatta Centre,milled hardwood turpentine was eventually usedfor timber decking and structural timbers despite aGreenpeace protest at the site. This timber wassourced from aforementioned "managed forests".The recycled timber was said to have exhibitedflaws rendering the timber structurally unsound.While alternatives were apparently sought for atimber that could be submerged in a floodplain,none were found in time. Turpentine was used.10

The TDA however believes that turpentine’s waterresistance abilities are best when used with the barkintact as large piers in marine applications.Greenpeace believes that for thin, milled timber infresh water situations the benefits no longer applyand recycled or other timber species could havebeen employed in keeping with Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines. Informed sources toldGreenpeace that recycled timber was available andperfectly suitable for use at the Regatta Centre butthe company that supplied timber to the venuepersuaded the OCA to accept native forest timber.

While the Carlton Clydesdale Pavilion at theOlympic site was built from recycled timber tomuch acclaim, the railings at the Sydney

International Equestrian Centre are state forestblackbutt hardwood with hardwood plywoodpartitions. The hardwood used is believed to beblackbutt and flooded gum Armourply from re-growth forests in northern NSW. This and theRegatta Centre were considered opportunities tofurther expand the profile of recycled timbers anddisplace wood needed from Australian nativehardwood forests.

Other venues using native timbers include theWhitewater Stadium (for underwater stair treads)and the Ryde Water Polo venue,11 where importedNorth American native forest timber, western redcedar, was used. In the Showgrounds, thewoodchop area has 140 square metres of spottedgum poles for the deck structure and 100 squaremetres of tasmanian oak and alpine ash for thehorse and pony pavilion.12 The entry halls to themain pavilion have about 1200 square metres oftasmanian oak veneer in the ceilings. This wasapparently sourced from regrowth forest for which achain-of-custody was sought.13 Reservations abouttasmanian oak being sourced from old growthforests as noted for the Stadium apply here.

CERTIFIED WOOD PRODUCTSForest management certification is a relativelyrecent market-based mechanism to verifyenvironmental, social and economic performance,and pass on this guarantee to consumers. There aremany certification initiatives worldwide butGreenpeace believes the only credible andsuccessful system is the FSC program.

The FSC acts as an umbrella organisation that setsoverarching rules and processes for sustainabletimber and accredits certifiers such as SmartWoodand SGS to offer third party assessment of forestmanagement. This is coupled with a chain-of-custody that tracks the forest product from forest toend consumer. The FSC supports environmentallyappropriate, socially beneficial and economicallyviable management of the world’s forests.

A competitive forest management verificationsystem is the Pan European Forest Certification(PEFC) scheme, which was developed because thetimber industry in Europe felt the FSCperformance rules were too stringent. PEFChowever has no environmental non-governmentalorganisation (NGO) support and little marketcredibility. The Australian Federal Department forForestry and Conservation is believed to beconsidering aligning itself with this group becauseit could mean fast track certification for Australia’sforests. Most astute forest industry players recognisethe need for a certification system that hascredibility in key markets. For example, mostplantation companies in New Zealand are pursuingFSC certification. New Zealand already sells FSCcertified timber to the Australian market.Although there are more than 17 million hectaresof FSC-certified forests and plantations worldwide,

49 |


none are in Australia. As a result, it was impossiblefor Olympic projects to source Australian certifiedtimber. A very limited amount of imported FSCtimber was used at the Olympic site.

It has been noted in other Greenpeace publicationsthat the rail station was to have used FSC timberfrom Papua New Guinea (PNG). According to TheWoodage, the key FSC timber merchant inAustralia, that timber did not materialise. However,The Woodage did supply PNG Kwila hardwood foroutdoor furniture at the Athletes’ Village. Whilenot rated FSC-certified, it was classed as"transitional" (and from an old growth forest). Theforestry operation that provided the timber wasundergoing assessment for certification.Greenpeace Australia Pacific supplied a letter to saythis was acceptable.

Approximately several hundred linear metres ofimported FSC-certified rock maple hardwoodtimber from the US were used for hand railings inthe Athletes’ Village.14 FSC-certified rock mapleveneer was supplied for timber finishes overparticle board on kitchen cabinets in quantitiesestimated at around 600 square metres.15 MoreFSC-certified timber might have been used in theVillage but the design-imposed colour restraintsdisqualified FSC options.

No other venues are believed to have used certifiedtimbers.

PLANTATION WOOD PRODUCTSExtensive use of plantation timber (from Australia’snearly one million hectares of softwoodplantations)16 was used throughout Olympicvenues. This was predominantly the exotic speciesradiata pine. Some local softwood can be found inthe application of hoop pine, which is consideredto be structurally stronger than radiata.17 Solidradiata was used for framing timbers with mostparticle board, medium density fibreboard (MDF)and plywood being derived from this species aswell. Plantation timber stock was apparently usedfor all such engineered timber, with no "oldgrowth" or native hardwoods finding their way intosuch products.

Other "engineered" products include Glulam (gluelaminated) structural timbers, and LVL (laminatedveneer lumber). The specifying of such engineeredstructural timbers can reduce demand for largesingle-piece structural hardwoods that can onlyotherwise be sourced from mature "old growth" orregrowth forests.

Plantation timber is not without its environmentaldownsides. Plantations are traditionallymonocultures lacking the biodiversity of maturenative forests. Binders and adhesives used inengineered timber products are often carcinogens,eg formaldehyde. Plantation softwoods may requireprotection from termite attack, commonly with a

treatment of chromated copper arsenate (CCA).This presents treatment site pollution risks, landfillproblems and human health risks associated withphysical contact with the treated wood.

Within the Athletes’ Village, 288,000 linear metresof Hybeam "I" joists and solid Hyspans wereinstalled in about 960 houses to create the firstfloor supports.18 No CCA was used. Light organicsolvent preservative (LOSP) was used to treatabove-ground timber while alkaline copperquaternary (ACQ) or kopper azole was specified forin-ground applications.19 Environment statementsfor each engineered timber product indicated thatthey were classified low formaldehyde emitting(LFE).20 For engineered or manufactured woodproducts, such as MDF and plywood, non-toxicformaldehyde-free adhesives are available (see the1999 Greenpeace report Re-Source). Unfortunately,the New Zealand and Australian industries havebeen resistant to using them.

With the removal of the overhead powerlines(mentioned in the PVC chapter), nine kilometresof trenches were dug for underground cabling. Thetrenches were lined with around 3000 to 4000plywood sheets but the exact type of wood isunknown.

The Sydney Showgrounds Multi-Use Arena (MUA)uses 1000 tonnes of plantation glue laminate(Glulam) for the internal timber structural web.New Zealand suppliers initiated this project but atthe eleventh hour, an Australian consortiumcompleted the work. Tasmanian oak, which can besourced from clear-felled, old growth forests, isbelieved to have been used in the engineered webtrusses. No chain-of-custody exists for sawn timberin Tasmania.21 Between 1000 and 1500 19millimetre sheets (2400mm x 1200mm) of marinegrade hoop pine line the ceiling. This wasconsidered a gross over-specification of material,which the supplier questioned at the time. It isunderstood that about 40,000 square metres ofplywood were laid in the pavilions over existingasphalt for temporary media facilities for the Games.

In the SuperDome, 3500 sheets of plywood weresupplied for use in the acoustic ceiling and wallpanelling.22 It was estimated that more than 200cubic metres of plywood went into the ceiling.23

Off-site, at the cycling Velodrome, plantation hooppine and radiata were used for panelling, whileradiata was used for the 250 metres x 7 metre tracksupports. For the track itself, imported baltic pinewas used. Developers were required to provide achain-of-custody back to a plantation in Finland,Sweden or Russia. Approximately 3000 squaremetres of perforated hoop pine plywood were usedin the ceiling of the International Shooting Centrefor acoustic purposes.



RECYCLED TIMBERSUse of recycled (or reclaimed) timber wasconsidered for several Olympic venues.

The Carlton Clydesdale Pavilion architectsdesigned the building around recycled timberbecause of its aesthetics. The fully timber-framedPavilion was constructed using 100 cubic metres ofrecycled hardwood timber.24 See Table T1 forapplications and species.

The timber for the exterior balcony decking of theSuperDome was recycled from three locations,Kempsey, Oberon and Sydney, which caused anumber of logistical problems for developers.26

The recycled timber for the more than 1000 benchseats scattered around the Homebush Bay site wasobtained mainly from 50 to 60-year-old railwaysleepers. Other sources included stockyards and awharf in Queensland, which amounted toapproximately 22,000 linear metres of timber,mostly Ironbark.27 The bench slats were specifiedas recycled but could have no cosmetic defects.This created problems as nail and bolt holes had tobe cut around. Recycled floorboards could havebeen sourced but the project specifiers consideredtimber defects to be cosmetically unacceptable.28

Some 330 cubic metres of recycled timber isbelieved to have been used at the InternationalShooting Centre, mainly as bullet containmentprotection baffles over the steel trusses. Some 360tonnes of recycled mixed hardwoods, much of itfrom a woolshed in Brisbane, made it into the totalsite, of which 66,000 linear metres was for thebaffles and 18,000 linear metres (or 56 tonnes) forvisual ceiling battens.

The OCA visited the mill that provided recycledtimber to the Shooting Centre. The chain-of-custody requirement was strict, requiring streetnumbers for each de-constructed house or buildingused for sourcing timber. In supplying brushbox,now considered endangered, the mill was requiredto explain if any arrived without the usual recycledimperfections, such as nail holes.

Recycled timber was used in the shared receptionand bistro/bar areas of the Novotel and Ibis hotels.The main timber used was satinay from ademolished pier at Hervey Bay in Queensland.Originally from a unique heritage-listed forest onFraser Island, satinay will never be cut for timberuse again. Recycled timber sources like redstringybark were specified for the beer garden barsand the stair treads at the hotels and some spottedgum and ironbark formed the cladding at theshared bar. Timber suppliers estimate thatapproximately five to six tonnes of recycled timberwere used at the hotels.29

Timber for the Archery Centre was recycled from aSydney warehouse. Final usage of the timber wascalculated to be about 12 cubic metres, with300mm x 300mm girders machined into thin slatsfor cladding panels. The recycled timber was screw-fixed for easy reuse.30 Recycled telephone polesbecame the "virtual forest" art piece on-site.

Haslams Pier within the Olympic site has 600planks retrieved from tallowood wideboard thatwere once purloins in a factory building. Thesupplier was asked to provide defect-free timberwhere possible but the OCA did allow the suppliersto repair timbers with epoxy adhesives.31

SUSTAINABLE TIMBER AND UNIONSThe Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union(CFMEU) placed a blanket ban on the use ofplywood coming from countries like Malaysiawhich exported rainforest timber. This bancovered timber use for all Olympic projects from1996 to 2000. The union stipulated that onlyplywood from plantation timber could be used.Invoices and receipts were stringently checked atsite union offices during construction. The unionbelieves they controlled the labour on all Olympicconstruction sites and had 100 per centmembership for the duration of the project. Theban is believed to have resulted in no timbercoming from rainforest sources.32

51 |


SpeciesIronbarkIronbarkBlue gumBlue gum & brushboxBlackbutt, blue gum & brushboxBlackbutt & tallowoodBlackbutt & blue gumSilky oakBlackbutt, blue gum & brushbox

ApplicationColumnsBearersJoistsRafters/trussesStable sidingFlooringStairsUpstairs serveryEntrance doors

TABLE T1 - RECYCLED TIMBER AT CARLTON CLYDESDALE PAVILION 25

Sourced from:Birkenhead warehousePyrmont WharfGrace Bros. On BroadwayBotany Custom Bond StoreMusswellbrook coal minePyrmont loading dockPyrmont loading dockn/an/a


NATIVE FOREST TIMBERSGreenpeace believes that the earth’s last ancientforests33 should remain intact, allowing them tofulfil their essential biological, environmental,social and non-timber economic functions.Australia has already cleared or degraded morethan three-quarters of its ancient native forests andmuch of the remainder is at risk.34

The only Australian native forest timbers that couldbe considered world’s best practice are thosesourced outside ancient forest areas that have beenindependently certified under the FSC. Endingdestructive logging practices in ancient foreststhroughout the world will be an important part ofmoving toward a sustainable environmental future.

CERTIFIED TIMBERSThe FSC certification system has now certified17.5 million hectares worldwide in more than 180forests through 33 countries. More than 20,000FSC labelled products are now available across theglobe.35 This represents a six-fold increase in fouryears.36 The FSC system is the best certificationsystem in the world and is now a mainstreamdemand in many key markets. FSC-certifiedtimbers are considered world’s best practice.

In some western European countries such as theUK, FSC-certified wood is reaching over 20 percent of the market.37 An FSC-based trade networkin the UK represents 91 companies trading morethan 8.5 million cubic metres of 57 certified timberspecies from 21 countries.38 39 B&Q, the numberone home improvement retailer in Europe andnumber three in the world, has committed topurchasing only FSC-certified timber products.Some 22 per cent of B&Q’s products are timberproducts. Although the problems of independentcertification and the FSC have been intenselycomplex with many issues still to be resolved, B&Qbelieves it is the way forward for retailers andcustomers alike.40

In the US, Home Depot and Lowes, the world'sfirst and second largest home improvementretailers, have joined 240 leading wood productbuyers and sellers from the Certified ForestProducts Council (CFPC) to choose the FSCsystem.41 42 IKEA, the world’s largest furnitureretailer, has set itself the goal of ensuring all woodproducts originate from verified, well managedforests and encourages suppliers to source fromFSC-certified forestry operations.43

Two of the largest homebuilders in the US (whobuild over 40,000 new homes each year) recentlyannounced plans to source certified timber. One ofthese, Centex Homes, which nets $US5 billion inannual sales said they would "by the end of 2002,eliminate from our product mix wood fromendangered forests".44

The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is themain NGO promoting the FSC in Australia. Itreports that an FSC certifier has been in Australiaon a scoping evaluation for a large US-ownedplantation forest concern in the southern state ofVictoria. WWF believes FSC certification inAustralia is not proceeding quickly because greengroups are focused on contentious native forestlogging of high conservation value forests. TheAustralian timber and forestry industries alsoremain unconvinced of market interest in FSC-certified timber.45

PLANTATION WOOD PRODUCTSPlantations are on the increase in Australia andworldwide. They are generally intensive tree-farming operations often involving exoticmonocultures. However, many indigenous speciesare viable for plantations such as hoop pine andmany eucalypt species in Australia, and it ispossible to manage plantation to include broadecological and social goals. The FSC has dedicatedcriteria for plantation management and over 10 percent of its certified forests are plantations.Therefore an FSC-certified plantation could beconsidered ‘best practice’.

The engineered timber market continues to expandas new technologies allow room for innovation. Forexample, trusses and panels can save 250 hours onthe job site and save more than $US3300 per housewhile using 26 per cent less wood. Stressed-skinpanels can save between 25 per cent and 50 percent of the framing timber used in a typical house.Efficient practices and materials can typicallyreduce the wood used in building a home by 15per cent to 30 per cent. They can therefore helpalleviate the growing pressure on natural forests.46

Recycling of plantation-based MDF and particleboard timber is not yet possible in Australia but ispractised in Germany where 50,000 tonnes areprocessed annually.47

RECYCLED/RECLAIMED TIMBERSRecycling of timber is receiving a great deal ofinterest throughout the world although directivessuch as the new European CommissionConstruction Products state that if reclaimedmaterials cannot be proven to comply with Europeanstandards then they are substandard and thereforeillegal. This is difficult for materials up to 75 yearsold.48 In Australia however it is possible to visuallystress grade recycled timbers using trained people.

The work undertaken on the Carlton ClydesdalePavilion is considered in line with world’s bestpractice. Other examples include the MonartoZoological Park, 70 kilometres east of Adelaide,South Australia. Recycled timber was usedextensively throughout the new Visitor Centre.More than seven kilometres of recycled jarrahflooring from the wool-store was used at the VisitorCentre for external decking, the Cafe floor andskirting timber trim throughout the project.49



Wood recycling is part of an internationalmovement to improve efficiencies in the buildingconstruction sector.

Another timber efficient building technique is toavoid the use of timber for applications wheresuitable alternatives exist. Engineered products likeparticle board are being made from non-woodsources. These include: hemp, straw, wheat,almond shells, rice husks, blends of soy flour andrecycled newspapers and even foil-lined milk orjuice cartons. Bamboo, a very fast growing andstrong grass, is available in tongue and grooveflooring, architraves, benchtops and doors.

Rammed earth, poured earth, adobe, straw baleconstruction, cob, sandbags, glazed earth andrecycled tyres have all been used for creating theshells of buildings while limiting the use of timber(as well as steel and concrete).

CONCLUSIONSThere is no independently verified evidence thatcurrent Australian forestry practices are sustainableand therefore sourcing timber from State managedforests cannot be called sustainable. Similarly theexisting monocrop system of plantations has noindependently verified evidence of its sustainability.Nor will recycled timber always be available inappropriate quantity and specification for growingbuilding needs in Australia or worldwide.

The certification of timber and wood products isless than 10 years old, too early to indicate whetherit will prove to be successful in encouragingsustainable timber use. The FSC has, however,shown the greatest success, market and consumersupport and has the strongest mix of supportersfrom both industry and environment organisations.

It is difficult therefore to state with clarity the fullimpact of Sydney’s Environmental Guidelines ontimber construction projects for the Olympics andhow this might be carried forward. At best it can besaid that, by-and-large, strong efforts were made inthe initial stages of Olympic site development tocomply with the intent of the Guidelines.

Timber from old growth orhigh conservation valueforests was generally not sought and was seriouslydiscouraged. Timber from domestic orinternational rainforests was not considered unlessit was FSC-certified and the appropriatealternatives were considered for use. However, fromthe representative analysis by venue and volume ofwood products used, most supplied for the 2000Olympics were not from verified, sustainablymanaged sources.

The lack of accessible and transparent reportingfrom the OCA on compliance with the Guidelinescreated a need for a great deal of external research.Consequently, this assessment is not complete.

Given the intent of the Guidelines and that achain-of-custody process did exist, it is a tragicfailure that Tasmanian old growth forests and worldheritage area-nominated forests appear to havebeen felled to provide veneer for the dining andentertainment room of the Olympic Stadium.

Also disappointing is that, due to a lack ofleadership in industry and government on this issuein Australia, Sydney’s Environmental Guidelinesdid not move the nation closer to joining the globaltimber market in adopting independent timbercertification as a measure of forestry best practice.

Credit must go to Mirvac Lend Lease VillageConsortium however for the first commercial use of(imported) FSC timbers in Australia for use in theAthletes’ Village. This could be viewed as a directresult of the Environmental Guidelines even if thequantity of timber was insignificant compared withthe other sources with no ‘best practice’ credentials.It has at least exposed the Australian market to itsfirst FSC timber supply.

The importation of FSC-certified timber fromPNG to Australia is expected to continue.Greenpeace believes that this relationship is one ofthe most positive, enduring legacies to come out ofthe timber use Guidelines.50

Australian timber producers lag well behind therest of the world when it comes to independentverification of the environmental credentials oftheir products. Influential sectors of the industryand government try to insist that the country’s forestindustry is already sustainable obviating the needfor independent verification from the FSC. Theresult is that it is impossible to make a judgementabout the environmental impact of one piece ofAustralian hardwood timber and the country isquickly falling out of step with moreenvironmentally responsible markets.

Overall, Greenpeace believes that Sydney Olympictimber sourcing did fairly well within the extremelylimited context of the market. With theunfortunate exception of Stadium Australia, stepswere taken by Olympic organisers, builders andsuppliers to try to minimise the environmentalimpact of timber use for the Sydney Games.

Further details of alternatives can be found in Re-Source: Market Alternatives to Ancient ForestDestruction (Greenpeace International, Nov 1999,ISBN 90-73361-58-3 / www.greenpeace.org).

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT THEFOLLOWING WEBSITES:• Greenpeace Forest Campaign

www.greenpeace.org/~forests• One Stop Timber Shop

http://timbershop.wilderness.org.au• Disseminates information on and promotes the use of,

environmentally preferable timbers and alternatives.

53 |


• Certified Forest Products Councilwww.certifiedwood.org Established in 1997 to use market forces to promotebest forest management practices.

• Coastal Rainforest Coalitionwww.coastalrainforrest.org/ Promotes ecologically sound alternatives to forestproducts sources from old-growth forests.

• Co-op America's Woodwise Consumer Initiativewww.coopamerica.org/woodwise/index.html Practical tips and resources to help individualconsumers and businesses to protect forests

• Natural Resources Defense Council Forest Initiativewww.nrdc.org Promotes wood-use efficiency, especially within thehome construction industry.

• Rainforest Action Network www.ran.org Encouraging companies to reduce use, purchasealternatives, and adopt ‘no-old-growth’ purchasing policies.

• Forest Stewardship Councilwww.fscus.org – US sitewww.fscoax.org – international siteInternational, independent non-profit organisation tosupport responsible forest management practices.

ENDNOTES1. Robin Taylor, editor, Australia: State of the Environment

1996, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, 1996, p6-192. www.tastimber.tas.gov.au/sustainability.htm3. From a table of responses from the OCA to questions asked

by Greenpeace Australia Pacific, 26 May 20004. Phone conversation with Colin Wylllie, Mill Manager,

Boyer, Gunns Veneers, 11 July 20005. Phone conversation with Dave Robson, Geeveston office,

Forestry Tasmania, 28 July 20006. Point 18, Impact of logging operations on the current World

Heritage Area in Southern Tasmania, Department of theEnvironment

7. Anne-Marie Willis and Cameron Tonkin, Timber in Context,Construction Information Systems Australia, Milsons Point,1998, p.92

8. MLLVC Timber Procurement Strategy document,10February 1999

9. Fax: Environmental Statement for the Olympic VillageProject, to MLLVC from Roger Croome CSR TimberProducts, 23 Oct 1999

10. From a table of responses from the OCA to questions askedby Greenpeace Australia, 26 May 2000

11. OCA document, Types of Timber in Olympic venues andfacilities, 26 June 2000

12. OCA State of the Environment 1997, p.4913. Phone conversation with Jim Murray, Workshop Manager,

Fairbrothers (TAS), June 200014. Phone conversation with Peter Mussett,The Woodage, 5 June 200015. Phone conversation with Rob Mayo, NSW Sales, George

Fethers P/L, 23 June 200016. Fax: Environmental Statement for the Olympic Village

Project, to MLLVC from Roger Croome CSR TimberProducts, 23 Oct 1999

17. Phone conversation with Andrew Dunn, Technical Director,Timber Development Association, 29 May 2000

18. Phone conversation with Andrew McNaughton Dindas LewAustralia, June 2000

19. MLLVC Timber Procurement Strategy document,10

February 199920. Fax: Environmental Statement for the Olympic Village

Project, to MLLVC from Roger Croome CSR TimberProducts, 23 Oct 1999

21. Phone conversation with Peter Bennet, Tasmanian Forestsand Forest Industry Council, 17 July 2000

22. Phone conversation with Mark Willy, Timbermark, June 200023. Phone conversation with Greg Holden, State Manager,

Carter Holt Harvey, June 200024. www.oca.nsw.gov.au/RAS_Facilities_Clydesdale.htm25. http://ariadne.mel.dbce.csiro.au/inno-

web/0698/clydesdale.htm26. Phone conversation with Richard Polkinghorn, Senior

Design Manager for SuperDome, Abrigroup, June 200027. Phone discussion with Greg Taylor, Ironbark Recyclers, 27

June 200028. Phone Conversation with David Shaw, Street and Garden, 6

June 200029. Phone discussion with Greg Taylor, Ironbark Recyclers, 27

June 200030. Phone Conversation with Andrew Brody, Australian

Architectural Hardwoods, 14 June 200031. ibid32. Email 14 June 2000 and phone conversation 19 June 2000

with Phil Davey, CFMEU33. Ancient forests are defined as the world’s remaining forests

that are shaped largely by natural events and are littleimpacted by human activities.

34. World Resources Institute 1997, The last frontier forests:ecosystems and economies on the edge. WRI New York.

35. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Press Release ,"Growing network to save the world's forests," 6 June 2000,www.panda.org/news/press/news.cfm?id=1968

36. ibid37. WWF press release , Environmental News Service,

http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr2000/2000L-04-14-03.html, April2000

38. WWF 95+ Newsletter Issue 6 Autumn 199939. WWF press release, "Growing network to save the world's

forests," 6 June 2000,www.panda.org/news/press/news.cfm?id=1968

40. www.bandq.co.uk and www.diy.com41. Green Dream, NZ Forest Industries Magazine, July 2000, pp. 16-1742. www.homedepot.com43. AID Environment and Phil Aikman, Re-source, Market

Alternatives to Ancient Forest Destruction, GreenpeaceInternational Publications, 1999, p.1.

44. News Report from Sustainable Business,www.sustainablebusiness.com/html/insider/may00/newsbriefs.cfm#8835

45. Phone conversation with Andrew Rouse, Program Manager,Resource Conservation, WWF, 5 June 2000

46. National Resources Defence Fund,www.nrdc.org/cities/building/rwoodus.asp

47. John Gertsakis, Case Studies on Product Take Back, CentreDesign at RMIT for Western Sydney Waste Board, March2000, p.12

48. A Reclamation Protocol by Thornton Kay of Salvo fromwww.salvo.co.uk

49. Adelaide Zoo press release www.adelaide-zoo.com.au/monarto.htm

50. Collection of email correspondence regarding the Olympictimber sent by Darren Gladman to Greenpeace AustraliaPacific, 16 June 2000



INTRODUCTIONMore than 70 per cent of the earth's surface iscovered with water yet just three per cent is freshwater. Two-thirds of that can't be used because it'sfrozen in polar ice caps or contaminated withwastes. This means that only one per cent theentire supply of water on Earth is available forhuman use.

Fresh water is critical for our survival and, as such,is a precious resource we must use carefully. Takingwater from rivers for agricultural and personal useis already having an impact on the immediateenvironment.

Many of our water demands, such as irrigation andtoilet use, don’t require the same quality of water asthat needed for human consumption. In manycases, alternatives to water-intensive processes cangreatly reduce our water usage. Sustainable waterpractices not only conserve water (and, so, energy);they also recognise that establishing different waterquality levels for different purposes conserves ourlimited fresh water resources. Recycling water fordomestic use is one of the best ways to begin thisprocess. As a key part of Sydney’s environmentalcommitment to the 2000 Olympics, waterconservation and recycling are a focus of the city’sEnvironmental Guidelines.

Greenpeace believes that we must protect ourwater resources from pollution and substantiallyreduce our dependence on our precious fresh watersupply. This not only ensures enough fresh waterfor us in the future but for all the biodiversity thatdepends on water for survival.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES STATESThe Sydney Olympic Games EnvironmentalGuidelines call for:• the encouragement of sound, sustainable water

resource management through public andindustry education programs;

• water conservation and recycling practices;• the protection of recycled water’s useability by

minimising the use of pesticides in landscapemaintenance;

• recycling of treated storm water and sewageeffluent;

• landscape design that decreases waterrequirements in parks, gardens and otherrecreational areas, with an emphasis on theselection of plants suited to the climate;

• the use of water conservation devices such as dualflush toilet systems, root-fed water tanks, water-saving shower roses and appropriate irrigationdevices;

• the selection of low water-use appliances,including dishwashers and washing machines;

• the introduction of pricing policies that reflectthe real cost of supplying water.

55 |

6 | Water use atthe OlympicGames

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY’SGREEN OLYMPIC EFFORTThe long-term water management strategy of theOlympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA) at theOlympic site consists of a Water Reclamation andManagement Scheme (WRAMS) and a "water-wise" approach to fittings in buildings andlandscaping. The strategy's aim is to minimise thedemand for drinking water from Sydney's mainssupply and, at the same time, maximise the use ofrecycled water to conserve Sydney's waterresources. For this purpose, stormwater, sewage andswimming pool backwash are collected and treatedon-site for reuse.

The OCA has chosen not to use recycling forpotable water needs because it anticipated a highlevel of public resistance to the idea. This is why acompletely closed-loop water management systemhas not been implemented at the Sydney Olympicssite.

The maximum volume of recycled water availablethrough the Olympics WRAMS system is estimatedat about 50 per cent of the total non-potable waterdemand. The OCA estimates that, with ongoinguse of the site post-Olympics, this corresponds toabout 850 million litres of water a year, or betweentwo and 11 million litres a day, depending onchanging irrigation needs. The WRAMS isexpected to cover this demand entirely withreclaimed water.

THE WRAMS COMPONENTSThe WRAMS provides facilities to "mine" and treatsewage, collect and treat stormwater and deliver thetreated water from these two sources back todesignated areas on site.1

WATER RECLAMATIONSewage is mined from two pumping stations, onecollecting sewage solely from the Olympic site, theother collecting from the surrounding region. Themined sewage is then pumped to the WastewaterReclamation Plant.

STORMWATER COLLECTIONAll stormwater on-site is collected and drained intoone of several water quality control ponds. Theseponds have upstream litter traps to remove gross

pollutants and are clay lined to reduce infiltrationloss. They have been landscaped with plants thatnaturally remove nutrients from the water and alsoprovide some habitat for water birds. The water inthese ponds is pumped to a disused brickpit on thesite, referred to as the Brickpit Water Storage Area.

WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRStormwater from the water quality control ponds isstored in the Brickpit Water Storage Area andpumped to the Water Treatment Plant to be treatedfor reuse on-site. The brickpit has been designed tohold up to 300 megalitres of stormwater and thevolume pumped out can vary to meet changingrequirements of the Water Treatment Plant.

The brickpit is notable as the location of apopulation of endangered green and golden bellfrogs. In the early days of site construction,Olympic organisers discovered the frog using thesite as a breeding ground. It is one of only 12known breeding colonies of this frog species. Toprotect the frog’s habitat, the OCA altered itsdesign plan to turn the pit into the Olympic tenniscentre. The brickpit was instead designated part ofthe WRAMS and placed under the protection ofthe new Millennium Park on-site.

Significant areas of new and enhanced frog habitatwere created next to the brickpit to allow the pit tobe used for stormwater collection. Creation offreshwater ponds, the planting of grasses and reedsand the construction of boulder shelters haveencouraged more frogs from the pit to the areassurrounding it. Today, the frog population atHomebush is one of the largest in the country andsightings of the frog elsewhere on the Olympic siteindicate the population is flourishing. The frog’shabitat will need to be monitored for many yearsafter the brickpit is flooded to ensure its populationis not negatively impacted.

SEWAGE AND STORMWATERTREATMENT

WASTEWATER RECLAMATION PLANTThe Wastewater Reclamation Plant (WRP) is asmall-scale sewage treatment plant which can treatup to 2.2 megalitres of sewage per day. On-site andmined sewage is treated through a series of


6 | Water use at the Olympic Games

Non-potable water (recycled from site)Used for:Landscape irrigationWash downOrnamental water featuresIndustrial useToilet flushing

TABLE W1: DISTRIBUTION OF WATER USE AT OLYMPIC PARK

Drinking water (from Sydney water mains)Used for:DrinkingCookingShoweringClothes washingFire fighting

processes. Large objects are screened out and, eachday, approximately 140 litres of this waste aredisposed of at a sanitary landfill. Microorganisms inthe Sequenced Batch Reactor (SBR) break downthe organic material biologically and reducenitrogen and phosphorus concentrations. Excessbiomass is removed (with possible reuse optionsincluding agricultural fertiliser), followed by theeffluent which is decanted and disinfected usingultraviolet light.

As no similar systems have been used during anevent such as the Olympics, operators are unsurewhether WRP will be able to cope with all sewagegenerated during the Games. Any sewage in excessof 2.2 megalitres will be delivered to Sydney Watersewers for treatment.

WATER TREATMENT PLANTThe Water Treatment Plant (WTP) treats all watercollected on-site for non-potable reuse. Methodsinclude screening, microfiltration, reverse osmosisand, finally, chlorine disinfection.

The quality of the recycled water at the OlympicPark exceeds current national and state guidelinesfor urban/residential reuse and the NSW RecycledWater Committee Guidelines for non-potablewater.2

The WRAMS is intended as a demonstrationproject. The Water Treatment Plant has facilities toeducate the general public and expert visitors on

the treatment process and on the values andbenefits of reusing waste water.

WATER-SAVING DEVICES ANDTECHNOLOGIES AT OLYMPICPARKAll facilities at the Olympic Park, including theAthletes’ Village at Newington, use water-savingdevices and techniques, saving an estimated 30 percent of total water needs. Half the remainingtypical water demand (ie, all non-potable waterneeds) is met by WRAMS recycled water.

Water-saving devices installed in all venues at theOlympic Park include dual flush toilets and lowwater-flow devices (such as water-saving showerroses). To minimise irrigation needs, drought-tolerant native plants have been favoured at allOlympic sites. Mulch is used extensively to reducewater loss, improve soil fertility and minimisefertiliser use. Specific soils have been chosen toincrease infiltration. A central computer willcontrol irrigation to enable automatic nightoperation, eliminate overwatering and haltirrigation during rainy periods.

WATER MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS ATOLYMPIC PARKThe main aim of sustainable water management(as with solid waste) are reduce, reuse, recycle.

Reduction in water demand can be achievedthrough water saving devices such as low-flow

57 |


VenueAthletes Village

SuperDome

Media Centre

State Hockey Centre

Stadium AustraliaSydney Showgrounds

Aquatic Centre

TABLE W2: WATER-SAVING PRACTICES AT OLYMPIC PARK VENUES 3

Water saving practicesWater flow reduction fittings or valves at major watersupply outletsDrip type irrigation systems with automatic shut-offduring rainy periodsDrought-resistant plants & water-conserving landscapingHighly water efficient fittings, appliances & devices Flush control on all urinalsFlow control water systems reducing annual waterdemand by 30 per centLow or dual flush toilets, low flow taps & shower roses Low water-use appliancesLow flow taps and dual flush toilets Sprinkler layout and directional sprays improve waterefficiencyFive-litre flush toiletsRoof-harvested water irrigation, saving 50 per cent ofwater needed Rainwater collected in subsoil drainage to irrigate arenaBelow-ground automated irrigation for lawns & shrubsPool filtration to reduce backwash and lessen need fortop-up of pool water

toilets, however it is preferable to consider thewater management systems at a macro level, thebuilding, the building complex, the wholecommunity. This enables analysis of water systemsand their relationships with the built environmentso that measures can be incorporated into all areasof design, not just end-of-pipe solutions.

Many efforts have been made within Olympic Parkto reduce water demand. Olympic Park has beenspecifically designed to reduce the demand forwater; many water-saving devices have beeninstalled; separate potable and non-potable waterdelivery systems are used.

However, there is no separate collection system forblack water (from toilets) and grey water (frombasins, sink and showers) or use of other water-saving devices, such as vacuum toilets.

Reuse can be achieved by diverting for reuse thewater that would otherwise go to the sewer system.Sources of this water include stormwater and wastewater. Water with low levels of contaminations canbe used, for example, in toilet flushing andirrigation, as it will at the Olympic site.

Stormwater collected from roofs of several Olympicsite buildings could be reused directly. However,after analysis of stormwater from other parts of thesite, it was concluded that treatment would berequired prior to its reuse and it will, therefore, beput through the WRAMS.

Recycling is achieved through collecting andtreating water, with the level of treatmentdependent on contamination levels and proposedend uses. Hence it is possible to treat water, forexample, to non-potable levels and return thiswater in a separate distribution system for use intoilet flushing and irrigation, as is being done on-site. Stormwater and waste water are separatelycollected and treated for non-potable use. Furtherwaste water from the surrounding area can bemined to meet on-site water needs.

As mentioned, separate black and grey watercollection systems would have enabled moreappropriate individual and sustainable watertreatment. Also, chlorine disinfection processes areused being used for treatment and, while thechlorine is recycled, chlorine itself is polluting inits production use and disposal. Its use for watertreatment is being questioned internationallybecause of its environmentally damaging impact.

THE FAILURESWith a separate collection system, waste water frombasins, sink and showers (grey water) andparticularly from toilets (black water) could havebeen diverted to an anaerobic digester to producebiogas and nutrient-rich fertiliser, as suggested byGreenpeace back in 1993.4 An on-site combinedheat and power plant could have been incorporated

into the overall design of the Olympic Park as ashowcase of biogas generation.

There are several alternatives to chlorinedisinfection that should have been considered.Ozone, successfully used for treating pool water atthe Aquatic Centre, is a chemical oxidiser whichworks in a similar manner to chlorine but producesfewer byproducts. While ozone is able todecompose halogenated compounds (an addedbenefit over chlorine), the production of this gasconsumes a large amount of energy. Disinfectionwith UV radiation is a better tried-and-testedtechnology with no byproducts. According to theOCA, UV sterilisation is used for the disinfection ofeffluent from the Water Reclamation Plant.

Given that, currently, all recycled water is intendedfor non-potable and the relatively small deliverydistances for treated water within the OlympicPark, the use of chlorine disinfection could andshould have been avoided. Innovative newtechnologies include special filtration methods andhighly efficient membranes are able to removemicroorganisms, pathogenes and viruses fromwater. These technologies seem to be an excellentalternative to chemical treatment.

The OCA is still investigating uses for the sludgegenerated from the treatment waste water.Greenpeace advocates approaches that lead to thesafe return of the nutrients to the land, helpingclose the nutrient loop. The OCA has still toconfirm what will be done with other wastesgenerated in the treatment process, such as spentfilters.

The issue of potable waste water recycling needsfurther investigation. However, one of the key waterconservation criteria, set out in Sydney’sEnvironmental Guidelines,5 is the "encouragementof sustainable water resource management throughpublic and industry education programs". Clearlythe OCA has an explicit requirement to educateand reassure the public about sustainabletechnology. The Olympic site would have been anideal showcase for potable waste water recyclingand (as recommended in Green Games Watch2000's 1996 report6) this could have beenintroduced to the site in a staged fashion to allaypublic concerns.

WORLD'S BEST PRACTICEThe use of recycled water for potable supply wasrejected by Olympic organisers because of healthconcerns.7 However, it is technically andeconomically possible to treat waste water topotable water standards.

A potable reuse plant has been operatingsuccessfully in Windhoek, Namibia, for manyyears. A recent financial analysis of a reuse schemeat Rouse Hill, New South Wales, estimated thedifference in cost between a dual non-potable


6 | Water use at the Olympic Games

supply and scheme to provide potable water at lessthan seven per cent.8

Within a few kilometres of the Sydney centralbusiness district, a family in a narrow terrace houserecycles their own grey and black water for toiletflushing and clothes washing. A book about theirhome, Sustainable House9 is the publishers' best-seller – an indication that the public is prepared toconsider such environmental and money-savingoptions.

MORE INFORMATION ON BEST PRACTICE CANBE FOUND AT:• International Water Association

www.iawq.org.uk• USA Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water

www.epa.gov/owm/genwave.htm • Water Demand Management Research Network

www.idrc.ca/waterdemand/index_e.html

CONCLUSIONSThe OCA has taken some major steps towards amore sustainable water management system at theOlympic site. Key features, such as site and venuedesign to maximise collection of stormwater andminimise on-site demand for water, are importantelements in creating a more ecologically sensitivedevelopment.

The collection and recycling of waste water for on-site treatment and the provision of a separatepotable and non-potable supply to reduce thedemand on Sydney's main supply are essentialrequirements of the Olympic EnvironmentalGuidelines. They are also a significant step forwardfor water management in Australia.

However, the OCA has consistently missedopportunities to make the water managementsystem a true showcase of sustainable technology.Reliance on traditional technologies for waste watercollection and treatment have meant that moresustainable options have been overlooked.

At the least, the Water Management System at theOlympic site should have included a separate greyand black water collection system, an anaerobicdigester and a combined heat and power station inaddition to the sustainable features that have beenincorporated. These technologies were advocatedby both Greenpeace and Green Games Watch2000 throughout the feasibility, design andconstruction stages of the Olympic sitedevelopment but, unfortunately, none of them hasbeen incorporated.

The Olympic site has had the potential toinfluence environmental design well beyond theOlympics. The OCA has failed to use its uniqueposition to fully integrate modern ecological watermanagement technologies into its water and sewagetreatment systems. While the OCA and theWRAMS designers are to be commended for the

steps they have taken, Greenpeace hopes that otherAustralian state governments and communities willpush beyond the current level of commitment toan even greater ecological approach.

ENDNOTES1. Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Water Reclamation and

Management Scheme and Frog Habitat Works at HomebushBay: Statement of Environmental Effects, final draft forconsultation, April 1999.

2. Meeting with Andrzej Listowski, OCA, 6 April 20003. Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Compendium of ESD

Initiatives and Outcomes, 2nd edition, 1999.4. Greenpeace, "Water Use in the Sustainable Urban Village",

Greenpeace Report to the Sydney Olympic Bid 2000Committee, 1993.

5. Sydney Olympics 2000 Bid Limited, EnvironmentalGuidelines for the Summer Olympic Games, 1993.

6. Green Games Watch 2000 Inc, Water Cycle Infrastructure forthe Sydney Olympics 2000, 1996.

7. Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Homebush Bay WaterCycle Infrastructure, Recycled Water Concept Design Study,1996.

8. CSIRO, Water Re-use, Stormwater Management and theNational Water Reform Agenda, 1997.

9. Michael Mobbs, Sustainable House, Choice Books, Sydney,1998

59 |



INTRODUCTIONIn 1990, the United Nations Advisory Group onGreenhouse Gases calculated that an averageglobal temperature increase of just one degreeCelsius could result in "rapid, unpredictable andnon-linear responses that would lead to extensiveecosystem damage". A two degrees Celsius increasewould be the "upper limit " the environment couldtake before risking "grave damage to ecosystems".

Governments and scientists alike agree that theproblem is real and serious. At the climate summitin Kyoto in late 1997, industrialised countriesagreed, at least on paper, to reduce the amount ofcarbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases theypump into the atmosphere. However, crucialdetails, upon which the success or failure of theagreement rests, are still under negotiation. At thepresent time, little definite action is being taken toaddress the problem.

Cars are a significant source of pollutinggreenhouse gases. For this reason, Greenpeacecampaigns internationally for better publictransport and a reduction in the impact of fossilfuel-burning vehicles on the environment. It isimperative that we reduce the number of cars onthe road. One of the best ways to achieve this is toimprove public transport and further encourage itsuse.

Greenpeace is lobbying governments to face theirresponsibilities and urgently address the issue oftransport contributing to the build-up ofgreenhouse gases. The longer the delay, the moredrastic the action required to avoid dangerousinterference with the planet's climate.

Transport is a recurring problem with an event thesize of the Olympics Games. At the 1996 AtlantaSummer Olympics, traffic congestion andproblematic public transport systems were cited assome of the biggest logistical problems by officials,athletes, the media and spectators. Sydney is knownto have limited road traffic capacity in normalcircumstances and the city realised that, without acomprehensive public transport plan for spectators,its Olympic Games would face similar problems tothose of Atlanta. It is this practical challenge thatensured the transport issue was included inSydney’s Environmental Guidelines.

SYDNEY’S ENVIRONMENTALGUIDELINES STATE:"The provision of transport is an integral part ofsustainable urban planning. The future viability ofmodern cities requires a shift in the balance fromprivate to public transport and the adoption oftransport technologies that maximise energyefficiency, minimise pollution and ensure ‘user-friendly’ public transport options.

61 |

7 | Transport atthe OlympicGames

“Sydney as an Olympic host city should commititself to:• Location of Games facilities close to public

transport systems;• Provision of satellite car-parking sites to facilitate

use of public transport;• Provision of cycle ways and pedestrian walk ways

at Olympic sites."

EVALUATION OF SYDNEY’SGREEN OLYMPIC EFFORTThe Sydney 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Gameswill create the highest continuous demand forpassenger transport ever experienced in Australia.Good transport operations are vital to the smoothrunning of the Games and to ensure minimaldisruption to daily life in Sydney.1

• 200,000 daily visitors are expected in Sydney overthe 17 days of the Olympic Games.

• At the same time, 3.5 million Sydney residentswill continue to travel to and from work andaround the city.2

• An estimated 500,000 spectators and workers areexpected to travel to Sydney Olympic Park on thebusiest days of the Olympic Games.

• An additional 100,000 people are expected totravel to Darling Harbour, the second biggestGames venue.3 More than 1.2 million trips areexpected on peak days, excluding travel byathletes, officials and spectators to Olympicvenues.

• Sydney residents are being encouraged to workflexible hours and to take holidays during theGames.4

PUBLIC TRANSPORTAccess by public transport was a key factor in thesite selection of Sydney Olympic Park and all otherOlympic venues.5 The overwhelming majority ofpassengers travelling on Olympic Primary Routeswill be carried in trains and buses coordinated bythe Olympic Roads and Traffic Authority (ORTA),which has been specifically established to organisetransport for the Games.6

The New South Wales (NSW) Government hasdeveloped and built an extensive public transport

network which comprises rail, bus and ferryservices. Of the three, rail moves the most peoplequickly and efficiently and is recognised as themain mode of transport for access to the OlympicPark site for major events. Rail and bus systemshave been improved to manage the expected 80 percent increase in passenger numbers.

Public transport is being encouraged through aticketing system – each Olympic event ticket coversevent entry and public transport fare on anominated transport system. Parking for private carswill not be provided at any competition venues.Spectators who do not catch a taxi, ride a bike orwalk will have to use public transport. There isprovision for "park and ride", allowing passengers todrive to shuttle bus stops or train stations, park theircars and catch buses or trains to Olympic events.

• Twenty-one of the 25 sports will be staged in twocompact zones, Sydney Olympic Park and theSydney Harbour Zone.

• The two zones are 14 kilometres apart and linkedby a network of road, rail and water-basedservices.

• The rail system provides access to all Olympicsites and will be augmented by buses.

• Ferries will transfer VIPs, athletes and mediabetween Sydney Olympic Park and the SydneyHarbour Zone.

• Satellite parking areas will be established atmajor bus and rail interchanges.

• All venues and most training venues are within 30minutes’ travel of the Olympic Village.

• Cycleways and pedestrian walkways will be linkedto public transport interchanges but only 130bicycle racks or lockable bicycle storage units areprovided for public use at Olympic Park.

TRAIN LINE EXTENSIONSThe extension of Sydney’s rail system to theOlympic site was vital as part of the city’scommitment to holding the first "public transportonly" Olympic Games in modern times. A$94million was spent expanding rail lines to the site. In1998, an additional A$12.5 million was spent onrailway infrastructure to boost public transportcapacity for Games use. This will allow an


7 | Transport at the Olympic Games

Primary travel optionRail station on-siteCity rail & bus networkRail & shuttle busRail & shuttle busRail & shuttle busRail & shuttle busShuttle bus from cityShuttle bus from city & Bondi Junction

VenueOlympic Park (Homebush Bay)Darling Harbour (City)Velodrome (Bankstown)Softball/baseball (Aqualina Reserve)International Regatta Centre (Penrith)Water polo (Ryde Leisure Centre)Sydney Football StadiumBeach volleyball (Bondi)

TABLE M1: TRAVEL OPTIONS (BY OLYMPIC VENUE)

Additional travel Nine regional bus routesMonorail & light rail at standard fares

1.6km walkway from rail

Walk from city

additional 6000 passengers an hour to travel to thesite. Greenpeace lobbied strongly for theseadditions and has supported train access to theGames throughout its seven-year Olympicscampaign. It is hoped the NSW Government willcontinue to support rail service as a key to the city’stransport system when the Games are over.

The rail station at Olympic Park can handle 50,000people per hour. During major events, 30 trainswill carry up to 36,000 passengers per hour, with atrain departing Olympic Park Station every twominutes.

AIRPORT RAIL LINKIn May 2000, Sydney launched its first airport raillink in the run-up to hosting the Olympic Games.Australian Transfield and French Bouygues formeda joint venture agreement to contract with theNSW State Rail Authority to build the track andtunnel for a new airport link. The 10-kilometrerailway line links the city with Sydney’s KingsfordSmith Airport and locations beyond. The line isalmost entirely underground and is one of thelargest tunnels to be bored in soft ground in theworld.

The system is a significant addition to Sydney’stransport system, which included no rail access tothe airport prior to this project. It provides fast raillinks to the airport and expands the capacity of thecity’s CityRail network. Passengers from the airportare able to reach City Circle stations aroundcentral Sydney without changing trains. The fournew, privately owned and operated undergroundstations include the domestic and internationalairport terminals.

Trains travelling to the south-west of the city arriveat the airport every seven to 15 minutes. Transferbetween the two airport stations takes threeminutes. The journey between the airport and thecity takes around 10 minutes. The new lineprovides much-needed public transport at SydneyAirport for the Olympics and, afterwards, is anexcellent environmental and transport legacy forresidents.

Sydney Airport and its partners have invested A$2billion in a comprehensive upgrade of airportfacilities, aimed at providing capacity for forecastgrowth during the Olympic/Paralympic Gamesperiod and into the next decade. Around 680,000Olympic passengers are expected to pass throughthe airport between mid-September 2000 and thefirst week of November 2000.

BUS TRANSPORTOnly 24 compressed natural gas buses will operatein the Olympic Village, with 3800 petrol- anddiesel-fuelled buses on the roads. Around 1800buses are being brought to Sydney from countryareas to serve specific Olympic transport routes.

At the Olympic site, there are bus stations at bothends of the Olympic Boulevard. Each of these iscapable of receiving 18 buses at a time. There iscapacity for 500 buses to transport more than25,000 passengers per hour.

SYDNEY OLYMPIC PRIMARY ROUTESThe Olympic Primary Routes, designated by thecity, are the main thoroughfares used for alltransport associated with the Games. The routeswill be used to transport the many groups involvedin staging the Games, including athletes, technicalofficials, accredited media and sponsors. Supportvehicles, including emergency services and thosecarrying Olympic freight, will also use these routes.

Two Olympic Primary Routes – the SydneyOlympic Park Route and the restricted-access Kerb-side Olympic Lane – will facilitate arrivals anddepartures between the city and the Olympic site.Seven routes will provide travel to competitionvenues and one will be used to transport technicalofficials between Sydney Olympic Park and theTechnical Officials Village.

The Sydney Olympic Park Route covers 18kilometres and links the Sydney central businessdistrict (CBD) and Sydney Olympic Park atHomebush Bay. It will also service DarlingHarbour, the second biggest Olympic competitioncentre. The route goes through six suburbs fromthe city via major arterial roads such as the WesternDistributor, Anzac Bridge, Victoria Road, ConcordRoad and Homebush Bay Drive. The Glebe-Homebush Bay Regional Bus Route also runs alongmost of the route.

The restricted-access Kerb-side Olympic Laneconsists of three lanes in each direction. TheOlympic Lane will operate during the Gamesperiod from 5am to midnight. Only publictransport (buses, taxis and cyclists) are entitled touse these lanes.

ROAD EXTENSIONSIn 1993, the NSW Government promised that nomajor road infrastructure developments would berequired for the Olympics. However, in November1997, it allowed the building of the EasternDistributor (a major new freeway link and tunnelfrom the city's north to Sydney Airport), claiming itwas necessary for the Games.

FERRY TRANSPORTFerry travel is a key element of Sydney’s citytransport and there are five classes of ferry in theNSW State Transit Authority fleet. RiverCat ferriesoperate on the Parramatta River from the CBD tothe Olympic site. Unfortunately, during theGames, only athletes and Olympic officials will bepermitted to use ferry transport at the Olympic siteferry terminal.

63 |


THE NEW LIGHT RAILLight rail transport (LRT) is a cross between a tramand a train. It can move through streets, avenuesand roads then leave built-up city areas and reach aspeed of 80 to 90 kilometres per hour on opentrack. For this reason, LRT is an idealurban/interurban public transport mode. LRT trackand wheel design reduces noise and vibration.7

Sydney’s LRT consists of seven vehicles (with fivecars per vehicle) with a carrying capacity of 217passengers per vehicle. It operates between CentralRail Station and Darling Harbour.

CAR TRAVELThere will be no private car parking for spectatorsat Olympic venues during the Games. However,"park and ride" car parks at strategically placedlocations will enable people without direct accessto the Olympic transport system to drive to relevantbus and train stops. A minimal parking fee may bepayable at these "park and ride" sites. Media andVIPs will transported by a selection of cars, solar-powered vehicles and ferries.

Olympic sponsor General Motors Holden willprovide more than 3000 cars for transportation ofmedia, VIPs and athletes. Unfortunately, none ofthese cars will be powered with alternative fuels asoriginally promised. In a letter to Greenpeace inFebruary 2000, Holden promised that eight percent of the car fleet would be liquid petroleum gas(LPG) fuelled vehicles. The company subsequentlyreneged on its promise in favour of more pollutingconventional vehicles.

Greenpeace believes that Holden’s failure toprovide alternative-fuel vehicles and the failure ofOlympic VIPs to use public transport is, in turn, afailure to meet Sydney’s Environmental Guidelinescommitments.

SOLAR AND ELECTRIC VEHICLESA fleet of 400 electric and solar-powered buggieswill transport athletes, officials, spectators andpolice between Olympic Games venues withinOlympic Park. They range from two-seater throughto 19-seater vehicles. With a recharge time of justone hour, the zero-emission carts can run 23 hoursa day. Their four-wheel electronic regenerativebraking system also replenishes the battery. Running at about 95 per cent efficiency (a standardpetrol-powered car is 20 per cent efficient), thebuggies travel up to 70 kilometres per hour but willbe restricted to 20 kilometres per hour around theGames arenas. Electricity for charging the solarbuggies will come from the NSW Green Power orall-renewable energy scheme. While these vehiclesare not currently permitted on the open road, theiruse at the Olympic site is an excellent showcase forthis new, non-polluting technology.

TAXI SERVICEThe existing taxi fleet in Sydney is mostly fuelledby LPG, which has lower emissions than petrol.

CYCLING AND FOOT POWERTo improve access by foot or bicycle in and aroundOlympic venues, cycle paths and footpaths havebeen constructed. Unfortunately, secure bikestorage facilities are extremely limited, with only 70bike racks provided outside Stadium Australia andaround 50 lockable storage racks available outsideSydney Showground.

An old rail bridge was successfully turned into abicycle bridge for access to and from the north.Other cycle links include the Parramatta ValleyCycleway on the north bank of the ParramattaRiver and a cycle crossing on the Elizabeth Streetfootbridge. A key cycleway also runs from BotanyBay to Ryde via Homebush Bay, with 80 per centoff suburban roads. There will be a bicycle path onOlympic Boulevard and the main avenues includekerbside bicycle lanes. Other streets within theurban core do not appear to include specificprovision for bicycles.

WORLD’S BEST PRACTICEThe Australian transport sector accounts for 71million tonnes (or 17 per cent) of Australia's totalnet greenhouse gas emissions. About 87 per cent ofthese emissions come from road transport. TheBureau of Transport Economics projects that,without reduction measures, emissions will rise by38 per cent between 1990 and 2010.8

In New South Wales, the transport sector isresponsible for 28 per cent of all carbon dioxideemissions from human activity. Two-thirds of thiscomes from passenger and light commercialvehicles. The NSW Government is developing aMetropolitan Strategy and an Integrated TransportStrategy to guide the direction and form of thecity’s growth and ensure that transport systems bestserve the city into the future. Another specificprogram is the Building Better Cities Strategiesadopted under this program, which involves urbanrenewal and public transport improvements.

The Australian bus and coach industry is asubstantial contributor to public transport. Over3000 bus and coach operators provide routeservices, school services, and charter and tourservices. In 1999, 16,941 vehicles comprising routebuses, school buses and coaches travelled 640million kilometres.9

COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) Infrastructure Program encourages the use of CNGas an alternative transport fuel. Vehicles running onCNG produce far less pollution than gasoline- anddiesel-fuelled vehicles, reducing greenhouseemissions by up to 50 per cent. CNG is also acompetitively priced alternative to conventionalfuels and is ideal for vehicle fleets, particularly lightcommercial and heavy vehicle fleets. Only four percent of Australia’s bus fleet uses LPG/CNG whilesix per cent uses petrol and the remaining 90 percent uses diesel/distillate.



Cycling is by far the most efficient form oftransport, both in cost and energy consumption.Linked to rail travel, cycling forms a very effective,clean mode of commuting. A shift to bicycle travel,suggested by the Sydney Bike Plan, has beenassessed at providing $5.29 worth of benefit to thecommunity in reduced costs and accidents forevery dollar spent. Bicycle travel has other benefitssuch as improved health and mobility, time savingsand a reduction in noise and pollution.

EFFECTIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN OTHERCOUNTRIESThe examples presented below are indications ofpublic transport initiatives that are reducingenvironmental impact. As each scenario and city isdifferent they cannot be directly compared to theSydney Olympic transport arrangements.

In 1990, California adopted a law that required twoper cent of each car-maker’s sales to come fromzero-emission vehicles by 1998, and 10 per cent by2003. Companies with more than 100 employeesmust act to reduce commuting miles. As a result,carpooling and shortened working weeks have beenintroduced in such companies as 7-Up, Toshiba,and United Airlines. Government agencies mustalso support this initiative.

The Brazilian city of Curitiba has made asubstantial investment in public transport. This cityof 1.6 million people has a unique "surface metro"of fast-running buses, developed over 20 years.Curitiba's public transport system services over 1.3million passengers per day and 28 per cent ofexpress bus users previously travelled by car.Transport fuel consumption has been cut by 25 percent city-wide. Many cycle routes have beenestablished. As a result, Curitiba has one of thelowest air pollution levels of any Brazilian city.

Also in Brazil, Sao Paulo’s "Project Ciclista", hasplanned over 300 kilometres of bikeways on abudget of roughly $30 million. More than 10 percent of the total mileage has been completed and,when it opened in 1995, 4000 cyclists an hour usedthe bike network on a weekend day.

In Quito, Ecuador, a clean, highly efficient systemof electric trolley buses operates on 11.2 kilometresof exclusive right-of-way track. Over 170,000commuters crowd onto the public transport systemdaily, which provides the most "express" option forthe commuter, greatly reducing travel time. Thenew system's operating costs are fully coveredwithout any government subsidies and, withpassenger tickets costing around $0.20, the systemis affordable to most. Construction has also startedon 22.4 kilometres of bike paths.

Japan has three million bicycle-train users and twomillion of these ride an average of 2.3 kilometresper day. Secure parking for bicycles, not cars, isprovided at all rail stations. The bus networks

supplement rail services accordingly. Buses play agreater role in London, where they improve thecover provided by the underground rail in thegreater London area, and in New York, whereexpress lines carry long-distance commuters withpoor local railway and metro services intoManhattan.

Further Information on Best Practicein Transport:• Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development

www.sustainable.doe.gov/transprt/trintro.htm• The Institute for Transportation and Development

Policy www.itdp.org

• The International Association of Public Transport www.uitp.com

• International Bicycle Fund www.ibike.org

• The International Council for Local EnvironmentalInitiatives (ICLEI) www.iclei.org/about.htm

• Sustainable Transport Forumwww.the-commons.org/access/eehome.htm

• Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and theSouth Pacifichttp://malaysiakini.com/sustran

• Victoria Transport Policy Institutewww.vtpi.org

• Carfree citieswww.carfree.com/

Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policywwwistp.murdoch.edu.au• Less Traffic

www.lesstraffic.com• Travelsmart

www.travelsmart.transport.wa.gov.au/• The Australia Institute

www.tai.org.au• Institute for Sustainable Futures (Transport program)

www.isf.uts.edu.au/transport.html• Environmental Transport Association

www.eta.co.uk/index.html• Sustainable Transport: Australian Greenhouse Office

www.greenhouse.gov.au/transport• Sustrans (Sustainable Transport UK)

www.sustrans.org.uk• Bicycle NSW

www.bicyclensw.org.au/• Pedestrian Council of Australia

www.walk.com.au/pedcouncil/homepage.html• Auto Free Ottawa

www.flora.org/afo/links.html• UNSW Transport Research Program

www.emp.unsw.edu.au/Transport/TRPabout.html• Smogbusters and GreenWays

http://nccnsw.org.au/transport/

CONCLUSIONSA major success of the Environmental Guidelinesfor the Sydney 2000 Olympics has been the highdegree of public transport provision for the massmovement of people to Games venues. There is noprovision for spectators to drive their cars to

65 |


Olympic Park during the Games. Strong incentivesto use public transport for other sites have beendeveloped not only through the public transportnetwork but also by building the cost of publictransit into the ticketing arrangement. The use ofelectric and, particularly, solar-powered vehicles atOlympic Park is also to be commended.

Disappointingly, the local automotive industry hasnot seized the opportunity to showcase new,cleaner technologies for personal transportation,such as low-emission fuel or hybrid fuel cars. Also,while spectators will use less polluting modes oftransport, Olympic officials, VIPs and athletes willbe transported by vehicles that produce moregreenhouse gases than their original designs did in1948.10

While the public transport measures adopted weresuccessfully trialed at major sporting and culturalevents running up to the Games, it remains to beseen if the recent spate of mechanical and driverproblems on Sydney’s rail network can be resolvedin time for the Games. If the transport systemcopes, the Environmental Guidelines will haveproven their worth in:

• reducing the greenhouse gas emission load of theSydney Games;

• providing incentives for Sydney to continueimproving its public transport infrastructure, and;

• showing future Olympic host cities a path towardsmore sustainable transportation options.

ENDNOTES1. Olympic Roads and Transport Authority, Sydney 2000

Olympic and Paralympic Games Transport Strategic Plan,1998.

2. Greenpeace, Olympic Transport Fact Sheet, GreenpeaceAustralia Pacific, Sydney, June 1999.

3. ORTA, op cit. 4. Mark Eggleton, Sydney, "Transport will have to go public",

The Australian, 25 May 2000. 5. Sydney Olympics 2000 Bid Ltd, Environmental Guidelines

For The Summer Olympic Games, September 1993, p.6 6. Mark Eggleton, op cit7. Julius Heimen, "How is Sydney going to cope?" p.4

Publication unknown8. The Australian Greenhouse Office, "Sustainable Transport",

company website, www.greenhouse.gov.au/transport/9. "The Bus Industry Challenge", Australian Energy News,

March 2000, p.2810. Geoff Strong, "Blame it on the Australian dream", The Age

website, www.theage.com.au/news/20000715/A7403-2000Jul14.html, July 15 2000.



2,3,7,8 TCDD 2,3,7,8 Tetra Chloro DibenzoDioxin

ACQ Alkaline Copper QuaternaryACT The Australian Capital TerritoryADI Australian Defence IndustriesAIS Australian Institute of SportBio-assays Laboratory tests which use simple living

organisms to assess the toxicity of complex mix-tures

Biogas Gas which results from the (usually) oxygenfree breakdown of organic matter (mostlymethane)

Bioremediation A clean-up of toxic sites whichuses bacteria or other soil organisms to breakdown toxins

Black water Sewage water containing human waste(as opposed to grey water, which is sewage fromdomestic washing and bathing)

CARE30 and CARE50 Natural hydrocarbon refrig-erant

CCA Copper Chrome ArsenateCFC Chlorofluorocarbons (ozone-depleting)CFMEU Construction Forestry Mining and

Energy UnionCFPC Certified Forest Products CouncilCHP Combined Heat and Power – another term

for co-generationClosed Loop Destruction No release of toxic

chemicals into the environmentCNG Compressed Natural Gas CO2 Carbon dioxideCo-generation Where any 'waste heat' that is given

off during the production process of electricityand/or mechanical power is used for secondarypurposes (such as hot water) instead of beingthrown away.

COP Coefficient of performanceDDT Dichloro Diphenyl Trichloroethane - a toxic

and persistent organochlorine insecticideDioxin A substance which is a human carcinogen

and hormone disrupter that bioaccumlates inthe food chain where it can be ingested byhumans. Dioxin is a by-product of PVC pro-duction and incineration.

EPA Environment Protection Authority (NSW)ESD Environmentally Sustainable DevelopmentEWIS Emergency Warning and

Intercommunication SystemFRC Fibre-reinforced concreteFSC Forest Stewardship CouncilGGW2000 Green Games Watch 2000Glulam Glue laminatedGreen power Electricity from clean and renewable

energy sourcesGreen Power Energy Australia’s less expensive

green power scheme, made up of hydro andlandfill gas only

Grey water Sewage from domestic washing andbathing

Halogenated compounds Organic (carbon-based)compounds containing halogens (usually fluo-rine, chlorine, and/or bromine)

HBERG Homebush Bay Environment ReferenceGroup

67 |

Glossary

HC HydrocarbonsHCFCs Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (ozone-deplet-

ing refrigerant)HDPE High-density polyethylene Heavy metals Toxic metals such as mercury, lead

and cadmium as used in PVC production, ifemitted as pollutants can also bioaccumulate inanimals and humans.

HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons (greenhouse-pollutingrefrigerant)

Hydrogen Chlorine Gas This gas is given off whenPVC in a fire reacts with moisture to form cor-rosive hydrochloric acid.

IOC International Olympic CommitteeKV KilovoltsLCA Life Cycle AssessmentLeachate Groundwater that flows through contami-

nated fill dissolves toxic substances and trans-ports them into the wider environment.

LFE Low Formaldehyde EmittingLOSP Light Organic Solvent PreservativeLPG Liquid Petroleum GasLRT Light rail transportLVL Laminated Veneer Lumber.LWP Lidcombe Liquid Waste PlantMDF Medium Density FibreboardMDPE Medium density polyethyleneMLLVC Mirvac Lend Lease Village Consortium

(builders of the Olympic Athletes’ Village atNewington)

MUA Sydney Showgrounds Multi-Use ArenaNatHERS Nationwide House Energy Rating

SchemeNGO Non-governmental organisationNon-potable Water unsuited for human consump-

tionNPWA NSW National Parks and Wildlife

AssociationNRAP Newington Remedial Action Plan (NSW

Waste Service, November 1997)NSW New South WalesNTN Australian National Toxics NetworkOCA Olympic Co-ordination AuthorityOEF Olympic Environment ForumOrganochlorines Carbon-based chemicals with

added chlorine, often toxic, persistent, bioaccu-mulative or ozone depleting/greenhouse sub-stances

ORTA Olympic Roads and Transport AuthorityPAH Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsPathogens Bacteria or other micro-organisms

which may cause diseasePB PolybutylenePCBs Polychlorinated biphenylsPE PolyethylenePEFC Pan European Forest CertificationPET Polyethylene terephthalatePhthalates Chemicals used to soften vinyl (PVC)

plastic. They are linked to cancer and kidneydamage and may interfere with the reproduc-tive system and development

PNG Papua New GuineaPOP Persistent Organic PollutantPTFE Polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon)

PTT Polytrimethylene terephthalatePure Energy The most expensive green power

option. Pure Energy is derived from fourrenewable energy sources: solar, wind, hydroand landfill gas.

PV Photovoltaic PVC Poly Vinyl ChlorideRAC Refrigeration and airconditioningRAIA Royal Australian Institute of ArchitectsRFA Regional Forest AgreementSBR Sequenced Batch ReactorSEDA NSW Sustainable Energy Development

AuthoritySOCOG Sydney Organising Committee for the

Olympic GamesSTE Solar thermal electricitySydney Olympic Park This covers the Stadium,

Archery Centre, SuperDome, Tennis Centre,Aquatic Centre and the Sydney Showground(used for hosting Sydney’s annual Royal EasterShow). Other Olympic Park venues are theAthletes’ Village, Media Village, multi-storeySuperDome car park, Rail loop and station,Novotel and Ibis hotels, 17 technical equip-ment rooms (portable buildings), 15 computerequipment rooms (portable buildings), 33buildings at the Technical Operations Centreand the Main Press Centre.

Sydney Showgrounds Olympic venues used for theRoyal Easter Show including Media Centre,MUA and other venues.

TDA Timber Development AssociationTEC NSW Total Environment Centre UN United NationsUNEP United Nations Environment ProgrammeuPVC unplasticised PVCUV UltravioletVCM Vinyl Chloride Monomer (a building block

of PVC for which various cancers, tumors,angiosarcoma and reproductive disturbanceshave been linked)

WRAMS Water Reclamation and ManagementScheme

WRP Wastewater Reclamation PlantWTP Water Treatment PlantWWF World Wide Fund for NatureXLPE Cross-linked polyethylene


Glossary

GREENPEACE’S ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPICS

Australia Pacificwww.greenpeace.org.au

Sydney Office4/39 Liverpool Street Sydney NSWGPO Box 3307 Sydney NSW 2001Tel: 61 (0)2 9261 4666Freecall 1800 815 151Fax: 61 (0)2 9261 4588

InternationalKeizersgracht 176, 1016 DW Amsterdam, The NetherlandsTel: 31 20 523 62 22 Fax: 31 20 523 62 00www.greenpeace.org

GIVE THEPLANET ASPORTINGCHANCE

Documents

How Green the Games/ne green the Games.pdf · The Sydney 2000 Olympics have produced a mix of wins and losses on the environment front. While the wins are impressive, the losses show