Falcon stage one re-entry plume over a Starlink constellation arc, deep dusk

Climate · 2026 · World Cup Carbon

A Tournament Spanning a Continent

The most geographically sprawling World Cup in history is on course to produce the biggest carbon footprint football has ever seen.

Travel accounts for up to 87% of the 2026 tournament's projected emissions, with aviation as the dominant source. The reason is structural: 16 host cities spread across 2,800 miles, from Vancouver to Miami, make low-carbon movement impossible at scale for teams, fans, and media alike.

David Gogishvili (University of Lausanne): 'Increase the number of the teams and then put them in a country where there needs to be significant travel first to get there by air … we're getting rid of one source of negative environmental influence, but then we are increasing it in another.'

The expanded 48-team format adds four first-time participants — Cape Verde, Curacao, Jordan, and Uzbekistan — each requiring ultra-long-haul flights that would not exist in a more compact tournament. Sports ecologist Madeleine Orr welcomed their inclusion, but asked the harder question: 'That's great (for those countries), but at what cost?'

FIFA's Mitigation Measures vs. The Credibility Gap

Existing stadiums only: All 16 venues already built — no new construction emissions
Public transport push: Fan encouragement only; no structural travel reduction
Reduced diesel generators: Marginal gain vs. 87% of emissions from aviation
Waste management programmes: Addresses a fraction of total footprint
Swiss regulator ruling: FIFA made false carbon neutrality claims at Qatar 2022
Unaddressed emissions: 7.8M metric tons CO₂ — no credible offset framework presented

FIFA clearly does not prioritize reduction of its negative environmental influence … there needs to be pressure on them from media, from players, and association countries, from researchers, from the governments, from the public.
— David Gogishvili, Geographer, University of Lausanne

Pressure Points on FIFA

Regulators: Switzerland's advertising watchdog already found FIFA made false carbon-neutrality claims about Qatar 2022 — similar scrutiny is building ahead of 2026.
Sponsors & Broadcasters: Association with a tournament that produces the largest carbon footprint in football history carries reputational climate risk that official sustainability communications cannot adequately address.
ESG Investors: The gap between FIFA's stated commitments and independent emissions estimates (up to 7.8 Mt CO₂) is now quantifiable, widening, and unaccounted for in official disclosures.

There needs to be pressure on them from media, from players, and association countries, from researchers, from the governments, from the public.
— David Gogishvili, University of Lausanne — on what it will take to change FIFA's approach