2010 Review of Waste and Resource Management
Recommendation 2 of 9

Recommendation

That the London 2012 Sustainability Group set out how the management of waste and resources in the post-Games bump-out/breakdown phase and subsequent transformation phase will be co-ordinated and where responsibility will lie. This encompasses the operations of City Operations, HMG, LOCOG and the ODA and how they will all maximise reuse of materials. This needs to: (i) include how responsibility for the end use of temporary materials, demolition and construction materials will be coordinated; (ii) have as its main objective the sale and reuse of these materials, including setting a specific target for reuse, then the recycling and recovery of materials, according to the optimal option in carbon terms for the specific item or material; (iii) take reasonable endeavours to reuse or recycle at least 90 per cent, by weight, of the material arising from the installation and deconstruction of temporary venues, equipment and overlay; (iv) be set out as soon as possible in order to be able to influence decisions relating to all operational aspects, including logistics, transport, regulatory compliance, security, and health and safety; (v) report on progress and present a final report to the Olympic Board or relevant responsible body at the end of the entire operation.

History

Status at 31 Mar 2013

Complete

We saw significant progress with the London 2012 Sustainability Group picking this up and the individual bodies taking responsibility for specific areas. Whilst we did observe one contractor attempting to pass its waste off to another contractor the process has worked and high reuse and recycling rates have been achieved. The installation and deconstruction of venues achieved 45% Reuse and 54% recycling, giving a combined total of 99%. In addition much of the temporary venues and overlay was hired and returned to the owner after the event. LLDC is now managing the transformation of the site and we are advised that it has included a separate reuse target for transformation of specific venues. Complete

Status at 01 Oct 2012

Progress Made

Status at 31 Mar 2012

Progress Made

The Commission has observed progress being made around roles and responsibilities for transformation, including dealing with waste. There is an intention to ensure that as much material can be reused or recycled as possible and comprehensive asset registers are being developed. However, there is still no specific target for reuse as we have recommended. Without a reuse target there is a significant risk that materials which could be reused will be recycled or downcycled instead, which is likely to have a higher environmental impact. LOCOG are very focussed on hiring V+I and equipment and having buy back agreements where possible. This is taking a lot of material out of the waste stream. They will not have a reuse target but this is driving materials being reused. The Commission has accepted that a specific reuse target is not necessary for LOCOG. LLDC's sustainability strategy does not include a waste reuse target. However, we are advised that LLDC has included a separate reuse target for transformation of specific venues. Progress Made

Status at 31 Dec 2011

Significant Risk

Status at 30 Sep 2011

Significant Risk

Status at 30 Jun 2011

Significant Risk

Status at 31 Dec 2010

Significant Risk

During the course of the 2010 Annual Review we have seen progress being made around roles and responsibilities for transformation, including dealing with waste. There is an intention to ensure that as much material can be reused or recycled as possible and comprehensive asset registers are being developed. However, there is still no specific target for reuse as we recommended. Without a reuse target there is a significant risk that materials which could be reused will be recycled or downcycled instead, which is likely to have a higher environmental impact. Significant Risk

Status at 30 Sep 2010

No Evidence Yet

Status at 30 Jun 2010

No Evidence Yet

Status at 31 Dec 2009

This review was published in March 2010. A statement on progress will be provided in the 2010 Annual Review.

Website archived by CRIS at RHUL