The challenge, both for the climate and for the organization’s credibility, lies in whether those strategies will manage to balance the environmental footprint of an unprecedented global-scale event
By Johani Carolina Ponce
An analysis by Scientists for Global Responsibility and the New Weather Institute estimates that the 2026 World Cup could generate around 9 million tons of emissions, nearly double the amount associated with recent World Cups held between 2010 and 2022, including those in South Africa, Brazil, Russia, and Qatar. Put another way, the tournament’s climate impact would be comparable to the annual emissions of about six million cars, according to estimates released in the same analysis. Researchers point to the massive expansion of air travel as the main factor behind this increase.
One key reason is geography. The 2026 tournament will span three countries, the United States, Canada, and Mexico, covering a combined area of approximately 21,782,562 square kilometers. With host cities spread across this vast territory, teams, officials, and fans are expected to rely far more heavily on long-distance air travel between venues than in recent tournaments.
The 2026 World Cup may also be the largest and most watched in the tournament’s history, featuring 48 national teams and 104 matches, compared to 32 teams and 64 games in previous editions. To put its scale into perspective: Super Bowl LIX, the most-watched televised sporting event in the United States, drew an average of 127.7 million viewers in 2025.
By contrast, the 2022 FIFA World Cup reached an estimated cumulative global audience of around 5 billion people, according to official FIFA reports on audience and global engagement. A tournament of this magnitude faces intense scrutiny, not only in sporting terms, but also in climate and media impact.
This unprecedented expansion in size, duration, and international mobility has reignited debate over the climate impact of mega sporting events. Researchers and independent organizations such as Scientists for Global Responsibility, Environmental Defense Fund, Cool Down, the Sport for Climate Action Network, and the New Weather Institute warn that, due to increased air travel, the geographic dispersion of venues across three countries, and the expanded number of matches, the 2026 World Cup could become the most polluting tournament in history.
From Canada, one of the three host countries, the 2026 World Cup inspires a mix of excitement and concern. Alejandro Changeur, a business manager and soccer fan living in Ottawa, follows the tournament with passion but also with growing environmental awareness. “I love soccer, and the World Cup is something you wait years for, but I can’t ignore its impact. I try to do everything within my reach as a citizen to reduce my environmental footprint, and that makes you question to what extent these events are compatible with protecting nature.”
That dilemma becomes personal when he considers the possibility of traveling to watch matches. For Changeur, choosing to follow the tournament on television, while acknowledging it’s not the same, appears to be a way to reduce his environmental impact at an event whose scale forces a reconsideration of the relationship between sports passion and climate responsibility.
FIFA has presented an environmental plan aimed at measuring and mitigating emissions, reducing local impacts, and promoting best practices in infrastructure, transportation, and resource management. The challenge, both for the climate and for the organization’s credibility, lies in whether these strategies will succeed in balancing the environmental footprint of an event of unprecedented global scale.
The contrast between the upcoming World Cup and the previous tournament helps explain why logistics has become a central factor in the climate debate. “We’re coming from a World Cup like Qatar’s, where everything was played in the same city. Everything took place in Doha,” said Sergio Levinsky in a telephone interview from Madrid. Levinsky is a journalist and sociologist with a Ph.D. in Philosophy and Sports Sciences from the University of Barcelona, who writes about international soccer for media outlets in the Americas, Europe, and Australia.
In Doha, that concentration avoided domestic flights between matches: the eight stadiums were located relatively close to each other, connected by metro and buses, including an electric fleet, and in some cases even accessible on foot. This compact model reduced long-distance travel and dependence on air transport, a stark contrast with the 2026 World Cup, which will require constant air travel between distant cities. “This World Cup will be a World Cup of planes, with very long distances and many problems,” Levinsky added.
What FIFA proposes to reduce the environmental impact of the 2026 World Cup
In response to warnings from researchers and independent organizations, FIFA maintains that the 2026 World Cup can reduce and mitigate its environmental impact through a comprehensive sustainability plan. According to the organization, the strategy aims to measure tournament emissions, reduce local impacts, and promote best practices in infrastructure, transportation, and resource management, with the goal of leaving a “positive legacy” in host cities.
“Whether we are talking about climate, human rights, diseases, or disabilities, we are committed to doing our part, recognizing that FIFA has 211 member associations representing the entire world,” said FIFA President Gianni Infantino on the organization’s official website outlining the 2026 sustainability strategy.
Among the plan’s core elements, FIFA proposes promoting more sustainable infrastructure and operations in stadiums and temporary venues, including construction standards, energy efficiency, and the use of renewable energy. It also aims to work with host cities to promote public transportation, the use of low-emission vehicles, and the optimization of air and ground routes to reduce unnecessary travel.
In Houston, for example, the 2026 World Cup host committee has committed to supplying 100% renewable electricity to the tournament’s main official sites and implementing energy efficiency measures, including optimizing temporary energy solutions to reduce emissions. In Atlanta, Mercedes-Benz Stadium, another tournament venue, operates on renewable energy and features more than 4,000 solar panels installed on site as part of its sustainability strategy.
The plan also includes commitments in waste management and circular economy practices, with measures to reduce food waste, reuse construction materials and temporary infrastructure, and improve recycling systems during the tournament. Regarding water use, FIFA says it will promote more efficient irrigation technologies and biodiversity conservation practices, essentially requiring host cities to protect wildlife and plant life in areas that may be affected by the tournament, including proper animal management.
In practice, however, not all host cities have the infrastructure needed to fully meet these commitments.
“Texas does not have good public transportation infrastructure. I would say 90% of the population depends on private vehicles or Uber. I don’t see how FIFA can mitigate this,” said engineer José Manuel Febres in a phone interview from Texas. A soccer fan, he plans to attend several matches in the state.
Others, however, are further along.
Seattle has highlighted environmental initiatives linked to the stadium where World Cup matches will be played. Lumen Field has sustainability programs that divert between 90% and 95% of waste from landfills through recycling and composting, efforts the city plans to expand during the tournament.
Currently, eight of the 16 stadiums, seven in the United States and BC Place in Canada, have artificial turf. For the World Cup, all venues, including the four with roofs, will install hybrid natural grass fields, which can sequester carbon, improve biodiversity, and reduce the urban heat island effect.
From an institutional perspective, FIFA presents these measures as aligned with its climate strategy and with growing pressure for major sporting events to reduce their environmental footprint. However, the central question remains whether this set of initiatives will be enough to offset the impact of the tournament.
Yale Climate Connections requested additional comments from FIFA regarding emission estimates for the 2026 World Cup and how these measures will be implemented in practice, but did not receive a response before publication.
Another perspective comes from Ricardo Setyon, an international soccer journalist with experience covering nine World Cups and a former FIFA advisor. While he acknowledges that environmental issues “are on the table for decision-makers,” he questions the role of host cities in the concrete implementation of these goals. For Setyon, the key point is not only FIFA’s plan, but local leadership: “It does not depend on FIFA or the organizing committee for cities to take initiative.”
This article was originally published in Spanish by Yale Climate Connections
