The world’s biggest sporting event is about to break a record, but not the kind FIFA wants to celebrate. The 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup, set to be hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, will generate more planet-heating emissions than any tournament in the event’s 95-year history. Scientists say it will pump over nine million tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, nearly double the average of the past four editions.
A bigger tournament. More teams. More matches. More flights. And much more pollution.
World Cup 2026’s Climate Cost
The 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup will be the largest in the tournament’s history. It will also be the most polluting. That’s the conclusion of a new study by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Sport for Climate Action Network.
Their report warns that the expanded tournament, hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, is expected to generate more than 9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). That’s nearly double the carbon emissions of the last four World Cups.
Lead author Dr. Stuart Parkinson didn’t hold back. “FIFA must take responsibility for its growing role in the climate crisis,” he said. “With the climate crisis rapidly deepening, the only sensible response is for FIFA to take immediate action to markedly reduce tournament emissions.”
One major driver is air travel. With 48 teams and 104 matches played across three countries, the need for flights, by fans, players, officials, and media, is much higher than ever before. The last World Cup in Qatar involved 64 matches and far less travel. FIFA originally estimated 3.6 million tonnes of emissions. But that was based on plans for just 80 matches.
The new report, titled FIFA’s Climate Blind Spot, breaks down the sources of emissions. It points to three main problems: too many matches, too many flights, and too many high-carbon sponsors.
One of the biggest red flags is FIFA’s new partnership with Aramco, the Saudi state-owned oil company. Researchers say this sponsorship could indirectly lead to an additional 30 million tonnes of emissions in 2026 due to increased fossil fuel promotion and sales.
“Football’s custodians are currently betraying fans, players, and the sport’s future,” said Andrew Simms from Cool Down, one of the report’s partners. “FIFA has found a sponsor worse than tobacco, one responsible for massive oil emissions.”
Heat Risks at Stadium Sites
Aside from emissions, there are also immediate health risks. Eight of the 16 stadiums are located in areas facing extreme heat or climate-related stress. Dallas’s AT&T Stadium, for instance, sees over 35°C (95°F) temperatures for more than a month each year. The stadium’s wet bulb globe temperature, used to measure heat stress, exceeds FIFA safety guidelines.
Houston’s NRG Stadium poses a “triple threat” with extreme heat, flood risks, and wildfire exposure. Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium faces hurricane dangers during peak storm season. Los Angeles’ SoFi Stadium will have to cope with high heat and wildfire smoke.
The 2026 World Cup isn’t an isolated case. The next two tournaments, 2030 and 2034, are set to be highly polluting as well. The 2030 tournament will be hosted across Spain, Portugal, Morocco, Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay. The 2034 edition will be held entirely in Saudi Arabia. Both are expected to exceed six million tonnes of CO2e.
“From rising temperatures to stronger storms, the impact of these emissions is not abstract,” said Samran Ali of the Environmental Defense Fund. “It’s already being felt by communities on the frontlines of climate change.”
How FIFA Can Still Act
The researchers offer several solutions. They call on FIFA to stop partnering with fossil fuel companies, reduce the number of matches, limit air travel, and enforce real environmental standards, not just voluntary pledges.
They also suggest lowering stadium capacity requirements to avoid unnecessary construction. Many of the newer or expanded stadiums won’t be used again at the same scale, meaning large carbon footprints for short-term use.
FIFA had earlier promised to make the 2026 tournament a model of sustainability. The original bid documents from the host countries pledged to “deliver measurable environmental benefits.” That now seems unlikely.
Instead of leading by example, FIFA is accelerating the climate damage linked to major sports events. Unless it changes course, the World Cup may become a symbol of environmental failure rather than unity and celebration.
The authors of the study argue that football still has time to become a force for climate action. But only if its governing bodies stop treating environmental responsibility as an afterthought. As Simms put it, “Football can inspire global change, but only if it stops acting as a billboard for polluters.”
Support us to keep independent environmental journalism alive in India.
Keep Reading
Indore Startup Swaaha takes the lead in making Amarnath Yatra eco-friendly
Amarnath Yatra: Tackling rising death toll from extreme weather events
Amarnath yatra pilgrims urinating in Sindh river: A threat to environment
Stay connected with Ground Report for underreported environmental stories.
Follow us on X, Instagram, and Facebook; share your thoughts at greport2018@gmail.com; subscribe to our weekly newsletter for deep dives from the margins; join our WhatsApp community for real-time updates; and catch our video reports on YouTube.
Your support amplifies voices too often overlooked—thank you for being part of the movement.
