Subscribe
FIFA's 2026 World Cup to lead to over nine million tonnes of CO2 emissions
Expanded matches and multi-continent hosting major concern
Sponsorships, particularly with Aramco, will add to the carbon footprint
Severe heat stress and climate risks at venues demand urgent environmental measures to protect players and spectators
The 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup is expected to be the most environmentally harmful in the tournament’s 95-year history, according to research from Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), Environmental Defence Fund and Cool Down — the Sport for Climate Action Network.
The study titled FIFA’s Climate Blind Spot: The Men’s World Cup in a Warming World assessed the greenhouse gas emissions linked to the 2026 event, including emissions from air travel for fans and teams, as well as other match-related emissions. It also evaluated the emissions caused by sponsorship agreements with high carbon footprints.
The FIFA World Cup 26 will be the 23rd edition of the tournament and will see 104 games, featuring 48 teams played across 16 host cities in three countries: Canada, Mexico and the United States.
Given the tournament’s expansion and the decision to host it across three countries, the tournament will generate over nine million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). This will make it the most polluting World Cup to date.
The study highlighted that the total emissions for 2026 is nearly twice the historical average for World Cup Finals tournaments from 2010 to 2022. This increase is largely due to a heavy dependence on air travel and a substantial rise in the number of matches.
FIFA has announced a major global sponsorship partnership with Aramco, the Saudi Arabian oil company. The research estimated that the FIFA-Aramco sponsorship agreement for the World Cup will result in an extra 30 million tonnes of CO2e emissions in 2026 solely due to sales associated with the company's promotion.
Throughout the tournament, six stadiums for the 2026 World Cup are at risk of severe heat stress, and half of the venues will need urgent environmental measures to safeguard players and spectators.
Four stadiums, in particular, will face life-threatening conditions that could transform FIFA's celebration into a public health emergency. AT&T Stadium in Dallas experiences 37 days annually with temperatures above 95°F (35°C), including a July Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) of 83.54°F (28.63°C). This would lead to extreme energy consumption demands to create a feedback loop of climate impact.
The NRG Stadium in Houston operates under the highest July WBGT alongside a flooding risk and wildfire exposure. This represents a triple threat that exceeds any reasonable safety threshold.
The SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles needs to manage heat stress reaching dangerous levels while facing wildfire risks that can rapidly compromise air quality across the entire region. While, the Hard Rock Stadium, Miami will be facing the threat of extreme flood events combined with heightened hurricane exposure during peak storm season.
Remarkably, the 2030 FIFA World Cup will be co-hosted by three nations spanning two continents: Morocco in Africa, and Portugal and Spain in Europe. This reflects FIFA's ongoing effort to embrace more intricate and widespread hosting setups.
Additionally, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay will also each host a single opening match, bringing the total number of host nations to six. This fragmented, intercontinental format raise concerns about the climate impact of long-distance travel between venues as well as construction of new stadiums.
The 2034 World Cup is to be held in Saudi Arabia. This tournament will be responsible for 8.6 million tCO2e.
“FIFA must take responsibility for its growing role in the climate crisis,” said Stuart Parkinson, scientist for Global Responsibility and lead author of the research. “With the climate crisis rapidly deepening, the only sensible response is for FIFA to take immediate action to markedly reduce tournament emissions.”
Final summary: The 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup is projected to be the most environmentally damaging in the tournament's history, with over nine million tonnes of CO2 emissions expected. The expansion to 104 matches across three countries — Canada, Mexico and the United States — along with sponsorships from high-carbon companies like Aramco, significantly contribute to the carbon footprint. Urgent environmental measures are needed to address severe heat stress and climate risks at venues.
