Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Problem:Organizers of the London 2012 Olympic Games dropped a plan to cut carbon emissions during the sporting showcase, abandoning a pledge made when it defeated eight other cities to host the event. 
  
 Games administrators will “no longer pursue formal offsetting procedures” to mitigate Olympics-related emissions, documents posted on the London Olympics website said. 
  
 David Stubbs, the head of sustainability at the London Organizing Committee of the Olympic and Paralympics Games, or LOCOG, said in an interview that going ahead with the plan would have shifted the focus away from Britain. 
  
 Scrapping the plan, which would have involved offsetting the emissions generated by the Games by investing in clean- energy projects in poor countries, underlines how carbon-saving measures are being overlooked to save money as the U.K. cuts spending and increases taxes amid an economic slowdown. By ditching the program, LOCOG may avoid spending as much as 2.7 million pounds ($4.4 million), according to prices quoted by brokers MF Global. 
  
 “Officially, if you want to go down certified carbon- offsetting all projects have to be overseas, so if we plant a lot of trees in Essex that just doesn’t count,” said Stubbs, referring to the English county. “Because the Games are in the U.K., we wanted to maximize the Games locally. Doing formal offsetting would be diverting things.” 
  
 3.4 Million Tons 
  
 LOCOG estimated the construction of facilities, the staging of the Games and transportation of staff and athletes, dating back to the day when the Games were awarded to London, would collectively generate more than 3.4 million metric tons of greenhouse-gas emissions, including 438,000 tons from the staging of the event. 
  
 Organizers of the Games had intended to compensate for some of the greenhouse-gas emissions generated by the construction and staging of the Olympics by purchasing so-called carbon offsets, or credits, which are created by funding clean- technology projects in developing countries. Greenhouse-gas emissions are blamed for climate change. Offset projects generate carbon credits when they reduce pollution versus a business-as-usual scenario. 
  
 Dropping the plan is “not fair,” said Darren Johnson, a Green Party member of the London Assembly, the governing authority for the capital. “Obviously we want the Olympics to benefit London, but environmentally they should be a green Olympics to benefit the whole world as well.” 
  
 ‘Behavior Change’ 
  
 According to LOCOG’s 2011 sustainability report, ways of reducing emissions at source range from using “design to reduce or eliminate emissions at source” to “promoting behavior change.” 
  
 “We’re not doing an offsetting program for the totality of the Games,” Stubbs said. “We never said we would have a total offsetting program. It’s a wider approach to compensate for residual emissions.” 
  
 Instead of buying carbon credits itself, LOCOG appointed BP Plc’s Target Neutral unit to offset the expected 34,000 tons of CO2 generated through travelling to and visiting the Games. 
  
 BP Target Neutral is a not-for-profit company that works to “reduce, replace or neutralize carbon emissions from transport,” according to its website. Target Neutral will also offset the pollution from 5,000 official Games vehicles, and advise and support Games visitors on how to reduce their carbon footprint, the website said. 
  
 ‘Direct Impacts’ 
  
 BP will source offsets from one project from each of the continents taking part in the sports event, Sheila Williams, a BP Target Neutral spokeswoman in London, said in an e-mail. 
  
 “We did look at offsetting but as the program progressed and we better understood our carbon footprint, we felt our effort and resources should be focused on managing direct impacts within our control, avoiding and reducing emissions,” Adrian Bassett, a LOCOG spokesman, said in an e-mail. 
  
 Olympics chiefs made additional green commitments including supplying 20 percent of electricity to the Park via local renewable energy sources. 
  
 In June 2010, the Olympic Delivery Authority, the public organization responsible for developing and constructing new Games’ venues and infrastructure, was forced to abandon plans for a 2-megawatt wind turbine in the Olympic Park because it contravened health and safety regulations embedded in an EU Machinery Directive. Ecotricity, a U.K. green energy company, had won the contract to supply the turbine. 
  
 The cancellation trimmed the organizers’ 20 percent renewable energy target to 9 percent, which will be met by a combination of seven 5-kilowatt small-scale wind turbines in the north of the Olympic Park, a biomass energy center in the Park, and photovoltaic panels to be built on the roof of the media center. The ODA has also submitted an application to install solar cells on the media center’s car park after the Games. 
  
 With assistance from: Catherine Airlie, Mathew Carr, Alex Morales, Lananh Nguyen, Alessandro Vitelli, Steve Voss. Editors: Alessandro Vitelli, Randall Hackley. 
  
 To contact the reporter on this story: Sarah Halls at Shalls@bloomberg.net 
  
 To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephen Voss at sev@bloomberg.net ||||| Costs for the provision of security within Olympic venues are set to increase beyond the £282m provided to London organisers by the government last year, with thousands more staff required than originally estimated. 
  
 Last year, the government reviewed 2012 security requirements and announced that security outside the venues could be delivered for £475m by the police, though an overall budget envelope of £600m remains in place. A further £282m was allocated to the London organising committee to pay for security inside the venues. 
  
 Whitehall sources admitted that the overall number of staff required to screen spectators as they entered the venues, as well as providing security in training venues and other locations, was now likely to be closer to 20,000 than 10,000 figure given as recently as March, when G4S was handed the contract to provide security within the games venues. 
  
 However, Locog insiders also pointed out that those additional staff could be drawn from a number of areas, including potentially using volunteers for some tasks. They are likely to be augmented with newly trained security staff currently undertaking qualifications as part of a programme called Bridging the Gap, volunteers, and members of the armed forces. Wimbledon is seen as a possible model for the involvement of armed forces personnel. 
  
 It was always envisaged that army and navy involvement would be required in certain specialist areas, such as off the coast at Weymouth, where the sailing will take place, but it now appears the forces will have more of a general role. 
  
 "We are committed to delivering a safe and secure games which includes robust security of venues delivered by the right people with the right skills," said a Home Office spokesman. 
  
 "Government, Locog and G4S are working together to finalise the requirements for Olympic venue security. As is common with all major sporting events, we will make the best and most appropriate use of all available resources." 
  
 While the funding provided to Locog by government for security is almost certain to rise above the £282m currently allocated, there is enough contingency remaining within the overall £9.3bn public funding envelope to ensure it can be found from other allocations. Locog said that no overall numbers to determine the exact requirements at every venue across the country could be confirmed until ongoing work, reflecting on recent test events, was completed. 
  
 "Security for the games is the responsibility of government, as detailed in the bid in 2005. They determine the threat level, and work with us on the appropriate response to that threat level. Locog has worked in close collaboration with all security agencies across government on a day to day basis," said a spokeswoman. 
  
 "Government has been involved in our planning, have validated our man guarding approach, provided the standards we have applied and approved expenditure." |||||
Solution:
As part of London’s bid to host the 2012 Summer Olympics, organizers offered a plan to keep the Games green—but they’ve changed their minds. The committee will “no longer pursue formal offsetting procedures,” it said, dropping its pledge to balance carbon emissions from the Games with clean-energy investments in developing countries. Such offsetting would have “diverted” attention from Britain, says the Games’ sustainability chief. The decision also saves the organizing committee up to $4.4 million, Bloomberg reports. “If you want to go down certified carbon-offsetting, all projects have to be overseas, so if we plant a lot of trees in Essex that just doesn’t count,” says the official. “Because the Games are in the UK, we wanted to maximize the Games locally.” A British Green Party rep wasn’t happy with the shift. “Obviously we want the Olympics to benefit London, but environmentally they should be a green Olympics to benefit the whole world as well.” The move comes amid reports of mounting costs, according to the Guardian.