David Gogishvili, a geographer at the University of Lausanne (Unil), stated to AFP, “Unlike the Olympic Games, where carbon footprints have been decreasing over recent editions, the FIFA men’s World Cup is experiencing the opposite trend.”
For the first time, this summer’s tournament will feature 48 teams and will take place across three nations—Mexico, Canada, and the United States.
While it will produce record revenues, Unil’s research indicates it will also “create the largest carbon footprint in the history of international sport.”
According to Unil’s estimates, CO2 emissions will range from five to nine million tonnes, compared to “approximately 1.75 million tonnes” for the 2024 Paris Olympics, Gogishvili added.
This figure significantly exceeds the estimated 2.17 million tonnes of CO2 produced during the 2018 World Cup in Russia, which had 40 fewer matches, and the 3.17 million tonnes generated in Qatar in 2022, a tightly packed event criticized for its swiftly built oversized and air-conditioned stadiums.
All 16 venues for this summer’s tournament were already in existence when the Games were awarded, as noted by the “United 2026” bid in 2018.
The primary challenge lies in the extensive distances between the stadiums.
The gap between Miami and Vancouver is over 4,500 kilometers, significantly increasing the principal source of CO2 emissions for international events: air travel for teams, officials, media, and especially the “more than five million fans” FIFA aims to attract.
For instance, Bosnia and Herzegovina will travel 5,040 kilometers to participate in group matches in Toronto, Los Angeles, and finally Seattle.
‘FIFA’s environmental denial’
FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who expressed a strong commitment to fighting climate change at COP26 in Glasgow, has promised to “measure, reduce, and offset” emissions associated with its World Cups.
However, after being reprimanded in June 2023 by the Swiss Fairness Commission (CSL) for misleadingly promoting the “climate neutrality” of the 2022 World Cup, FIFA has not made any commitments regarding 2026.
Environmental analysts suggest that minimizing the scale of mega-events is the most effective way to lower their impact, as the International Olympic Committee has done with a cap of 10,500 athletes for the Summer Games, according to Gogishvili.
FIFA, by expanding its flagship tournament from 32 to 48 teams just a year after increasing its World Club Cup from seven to 32, is doing the opposite.
The climate cost of any international match is “26 to 42 times greater than an elite match” at the national level, as reported by the New Weather Institute think tank in 2025.
“A single match in the final stages of the men’s World Cup generates between 44,000 and 72,000 tonnes of CO2,” noted the writers from the British-based Scientists for Global Responsibility, equating that to the emissions produced by 31,500 to 51,500 British cars in a year.
Gogishvili remarked that FIFA’s “insatiable appetite for growth” results in an increased number of matches and, consequently, “more athletes, more fans, more hotel infrastructure, more flights; it’s a never-ending cycle.”
The 2030 World Cup is set to span six countries across three continents, beginning with matches in Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay, before transitioning to Morocco, Spain, and Portugal for the remaining 101 matches.
In 2034, the World Cup will take place in Saudi Arabia, in a climate similar to Qatar’s, but with an additional 40 matches in a much larger country. Notably, Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, became a significant sponsor of FIFA in 2024.
“It appears that FIFA’s environmental denial will persist,” wrote Gilles Pache, a professor at Aix-Marseille University, in the Journal of Management Research in 2024.
