The 25th Winter Olympic Games are upon us, with Italy set to host the Games for the fourth time. The schedule at the 2026 Milano Cortina Winter Olympics is set to look similar to previous iterations of the event: a mix of snow and ice sports held on what is meant to be mountainous, wintry terrain.
Except the snowy cold winter that comes to mind when you picture the Olympic Games may not be tenable for much longer. Climate change is reshaping winter sport worldwide. In the Northern Hemisphere, the winter season has shortened over the last 50 years, with low elevation regions warming at twice the rate of global warming, leading to widespread declines in snowpack.
Snow sport athletes are experiencing these changes firsthand. In recent years, several International Ski and Snowboard Federation World Cup events have been cancelled due to poor snow and unsafe conditions.
In 2023, nearly 300 concerned athletes sent a letter to the federation demanding more action on climate change and a “geographically reasonable” race schedule aligned with evolving weather realities.
A 2021 survey of 339 professional and Olympic winter athletes and coaches from 20 countries found 90 per cent were concerned about how climate change will affect the future of winter sports.
For the Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, climate change could fundamentally impact where the Games can be held in the future. In 2022, the International Olympic Committee delayed the selection of the 2030 host city so that it could obtain a clearer understanding of the climate risk of potential future host locations.
Our 2024 study of 93 potential host locations — those with the necessary infrastructure in place to host such a spectacle — found that even with advanced snowmaking, a significant number would no longer have reliable snow in future. By the 2050s, the pool of potential Olympic hosts halved, and worryingly, few (17 to 31) had viable conditions to host the Paralympics.
Olympic and Paralympic peril
Our recent study explores a wide range of strategies to mitigate the risks posed by climate change to the Winter Olympics and Paralympics. Each strategy requires careful evaluation by Olympic and Paralympic committees, host cities and sport federations. Many involve trade-offs that can impact the ability of communities to host the games, the athlete and spectator experience, and potentially, the sustainability of the Games.
For example, the location of snow sports venues further away from the main host city where the indoor events are held could enhance climate reliability. However, that would increase travel times and emissions, as well as reduce the ability of spectators to see some competitions.
At this year’s Milano Cortina Games, venues are dispersed between sites across northern Italy. That will make it more challenging for athletes and fans to mingle, a setback to team unity and spirit. Several more athletes than usual won’t be able to attend the opening or closing ceremonies because they’ll be competing several hundred kilometres away.
Changing the schedule
Given that the Paralympics are held after the Olympics, they are especially at risk due to climate change. The “one bid, one city” agreement, which requires a host city to stage both Games at the same venues, may need to be reconsidered.
This agreement has elevated para sport to new levels of visibility and excellence. However, our research suggests that it cannot survive climate change, and losing the Paralympics would be a devastating setback for winter sport.
The solution? Adjust the schedule so the the Paralympics can be held earlier.
Our analysis revealed that holding the Winter Olympics and Paralympics three weeks earlier in the year has tremendous potential to increase the number of climate reliable hosts.
Moving the Olympics so the Games begin in late January or the first week of February, and the Paralympics in late February or the first week of March, nearly doubled the number of climate-reliable host locations for the Paralympics. That would help safeguard the “one bid, one city” arrangement through the mid-century and into the late century, if the Paris Climate Agreement’s goals are achieved.
Other options that ensure snow reliability include having the two events overlap, alternating the years the Games are hosted or putting the events in two separate locations in the same year. But each of these introduces political and logistics challenges.
What about snowmaking?
The increased reliance on snow-making has drawn criticism, particularly after the 2022 Beijing Games used nearly 100 per cent machine-made snow. Snow-making has been used at every Winter Olympics since 1980 in Lake Placid, and will be increasingly integral in the future.
Our analysis found that without snow-making, the snow sports program of the Winter Games as we currently know it is simply not possible. In the absence of snow-making, the number of climate-reliable potential hosts for the Olympic Games declines to four or less by 2050.
There are important sustainability concerns that must be addressed when it comes to snow-making, like how to reduce the energy and water demands of the practice and how to reduce the impacts on local biodiversity. Snow-makers are putting effort into improving the technology to reduce negative environmental impact, but more work is needed to make the practice more efficient.
While it has its drawbacks, without snow-making, the Games would increasingly become unfair and unsafe for athletes. Events and competitions would need to be cancelled, and eventually, it would become impossible to include snow sports in the Winter Games.
While no outdoor sport will escape the consequences of accelerating climate change, snow sports are the canary in the coal mine. The global sports community must work together to advocate for strong climate action to achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement, protect the safety of future Olympians and Paralympians and preserve the cultural heritage of this global celebration of sport for generations to come.
Madeleine Orr receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Daniel Scott and Robert Steiger do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
