World Cup 2026… Football faces mounting fears due to a global crisis
The 2026 World Cup… Football faces mounting fears due to a global crisis
At a time when the enthusiasm of the people of the world is increasing with the approach of the largest football event, the 2026 World Cup, it seems that this time football will not only score goals inside the stadiums, but also in carbon emissions records. Growing concerns are being raised about the major environmental impact of the tournament, in light of the unprecedented expansion in the number of teams and the distances traveled by air.
This edition of the World Cup is the first in history to be held in three neighboring countries, namely the United States, Canada, and Mexico, with the tournament activities starting in June 2026. The International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) has adopted a new system that includes the participation of 48 teams instead of 32; Which means organizing 80 matches distributed in 16 cities on two continents, an expansion that some describe as a global celebration of football, but its environmental repercussions raise increasing concern.
Although this edition is promoted as a historic event in terms of size, diversity, and record number of matches, the environmental reality does not look as bright. Estimates indicate that the tournament’s carbon footprint will be the largest in the history of the World Cup, and this puts FIFA before a real test regarding the extent of its actual commitment to the environmental promises it has made in recent years, especially in light of previous failures that have not escaped the minds of observers.
From this standpoint,Earth Guardsin this article sheds light on the most prominent environmental aspects related to the 2026 World Cup, reviewing the challenges and risks, tracking FIFA’s promises and the extent of their agreement with reality, and also presenting alternative sports models that have proven that it is possible to combine public passion with the requirements of protecting the planet, without losing the game. Its brilliance.
FIFA strategy is ink on paper
In 2021, FIFA launchedits climate strategy from the platform of the United Nations Climate Conference (COP26), and pledged at the time to reduce its emissions by 50% by 2030, and reach full carbon neutrality in 2040. The promises were ambitious, and included plans to build sustainable infrastructure, improve energy efficiency, And encouraging renewable energy.
However, one of FIFA’s most prominent tools in that plan was “carbon offsetting”, that is, purchasing environmental credits to cover emissions resulting from events, a method that many experts see as non-transparent and sometimes misleading, especially when it is used as a cover to avoid reducing actual emissions.
During the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, FIFA announced that it had succeeded in achieving carbon neutrality, but the Swiss Integrity Commission cast doubt on these claims, stressing that they were not based on sufficient evidence, nor was a clear plan presented to compensate for the emissions resulting from the event, and this failure harmed the credibility of FIFA before environmental circles. As the 2026 World Cup approaches, doubts are returning again, in light of expectations of an increase in the volume of emissions and the complexity of the challenges, which prompts questions about the seriousness of transforming these environmental promises into concrete steps on the ground.
Shocking forecasts for World Cup 2026 emissions
Estimations of the joint candidacy file of the United States, Canada and Mexico indicate that the 2026 World Cup will produce about 3.7 million tons of carbon dioxide; Which makes it the highest carbon footprint in the history of the tournament. Then the largest percentage of these emissions (85%) will be due to travel, including 51% for international travel, and 34% for movement between cities within the three countries.
This number slightly exceeds the emissions of theQatar 2022 World Cup, which amounted to 3.6 million tons, even though the Qatar version required building new stadiums and operating huge cooling systems to overcome the desert climate. In 2026, the main challenge lies in the vast distances and unsustainable means of transportation.
It is expected that 80 matches will be held during the 2026 World Cup, distributed over a wide geographical area that includes 16 cities in three countries, which will lead to a significant increase in air traffic between cities, whether for teams, fans or media, and this mode of transportation, which relies mainly on flights, clearly contradicts the environmental goals announced by FIFA.
Although the tournament will be held in existing stadiums, this does not eliminate the scale of the challenges, as many host cities, especially in the United States, lack effective and sustainable public transportation systems, which complicates the opportunities to reduce emissions resulting from internal transportation.
Does FIFA learn from the experience of Europe 2024?
In light of this worrying picture, there is an increasing need to draw inspiration from successful experiences in organizing major tournaments in a more environmentally friendly manner, as happened in the UEFA Euro 2024, which provided a role model, as it relied on previously existing stadiums, applied energy efficiency technologies, and encouraged the use of public transportation for fans and teams.
These measures resulted in a 21% reduction in emissions compared to initial expectations, in addition to the establishment of a climate fund worth 7 million euros to finance environmental projects related to sports infrastructure, which gave the tournament a positive legacy that goes beyond the borders of the green rectangle.
This huge difference between what happened at the European Championship and what is expected at the 2026 World Cup reveals two very different paths, one that takes the environment into account, and the other that does not seem to give it a real priority. This prompts the question: Couldn’t FIFA have chosen a way to organize the tournament in a more responsible way towards the planet?!
Although geographical conditions differ between Germany and North America, the issue in the end is not related to distances alone, but rather to will and decisions. If there is serious intention, any organized party can then take real steps to protect the environment, even if that means giving up some gains or facilities.
Conflict of interest is the cause of the crisis
One of the striking ironies in the 2026 World Cup scene is that FIFA, which affirms its environmental commitment at every opportunity, enters into partnerships with companies that are among the most prominent sources of pollution in the world, such as Qatar Airways and Saudi Aramco, which are two companies closely linked to the fossil fuel industry, which is responsible for a large part of global carbon emissions. This contradiction raises fundamental questions about FIFA’s seriousness in implementing the sustainability standards it promotes. It is unreasonable for the institution to talk about carbon neutrality when it is financially dependent on entities that represent an essential part of the climate crisis.
The controversy does not stop only at the borders of sponsors, but also extends to the lack of transparency in announcing environmental data, as FIFA has not yet presented a detailed plan for how to address expected emissions, especially after criticism was directed at it regarding its failure to prove the claims of carbon neutrality in the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.
Hence, it becomes necessary for FIFA to reconsider its commercial relationships and strategic priorities, and to put sustainability at the heart of its decisions, if it is truly serious about preserving its image in front of a global audience that has become more aware and attentive to what is happening outside the boundaries of the stadium.
The fans demand an environmentally friendly World Cup
Environmental pressure is not limited to institutions, but extends to fans of the game itself, as a recent study conducted by the Environmental Foundation (Pledgeball) in cooperation with (Mastercard) revealed that 81% of football fans are concerned about the climate crisis, while 82% of them called on their clubs to take bolder steps towards reducing emissions.
With the start of the 2026 edition approaching,Earth Guards believes that the FIFA administration is facing a strict test regarding the credibility of its climate promises; Either these promises turn into an actual reality that everyone can touch, or they continue to provide mere green words that quickly fade in the face of scrutiny and accountability. The international media scene no longer ignores the details, and every step will be subject to scrutiny, and every environmental report will be analyzed by aware audiences and oversight bodies that do not tolerate contradictions.
