Why the 2026 World Cup could be football's biggest climate polluter yet, according to new research

This summer, the FIFA Men’s World Cup is coming to the US, Canada, and Mexico, the first time that three countries will co-host the tournament. Fans are electric. Tickets sold out quickly. Cities such as New York and Los Angeles are gearing up for the biggest soccer event ever. But beneath all that excitement, a troubling reality is being made one that researchers say Americans can’t afford to ignore.

Researchers from the University of Manchester, Loughborough University and the University of Bristol have warned in a new study that the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup is on course to become the most polluting World Cup in the tournament's history. And the fact that it is happening in the United States, Canada and Mexico, three countries that lack a high-speed rail network connecting their major cities, makes the emissions problem substantially worse.

Why this World Cup is different from any other
This isn’t your average 32-team tournament. For 2026, FIFA has expanded the format to 48 teams, raising the total number of matches from 64 to 104 in 16 host cities on an enormous continent. 11 of the 16 cities are in the U.S. alone. That means more flights, more fans traveling long distances, and a carbon bill that researchers say dwarfs anything the sport has seen before.


Scientists from the Scientists for Global Responsibility and the New Weather Institute estimate that the 2026 tournament will produce at least 9m tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, almost double the average emissions from World Cup tournaments between 2010 and 2022. According to the same study, the figures could go up to 15 million tons in a broader scenario, making it one of the most polluting sporting events ever held. In US terms, 9 million tons is equivalent to about 2 million additional American cars on the road for an entire year.

According to the research, fan travel is the single biggest driver, accounting for an estimated 87 percent of total emissions. Unlike Europe, there is no viable alternative to intercity travel on the scale of the US rail system. To travel from Seattle to Miami, you need to fly. You have to fly from Boston to get to Dallas. That reliance on flying is precisely what makes this tournament so emissions-heavy, and it was no accident. It was a decision written into the format the moment FIFA agreed to the expansion.

Importantly, while FIFA has its own sustainability strategy for 2026 that includes measures such as energy efficiency and waste management, there is no carbon target for the tournament itself. And on spectator travel, the biggest source of emissions, the strategy simply says it will “encourage relevant entities to set up efficient air travel routes that reduce distances.” That's a glaring gap for an organization that, according to the UN Sports for Climate Action Framework, pledged at COP26 in 2021 to cut emissions 50% by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2040.

The sustainability issue in football is bigger than one tournament
The carbon footprint of football is far deeper than just how fans get to matches, according to research led by the University of Manchester. The study argues that football’s emissions problem is politically produced, built on decades of commercial growth, globalization and expanding ties with fossil-fuel states, driven by governing bodies that the researchers say favor profits over responsibility.

Researchers interviewed sustainability officers at football clubs across Europe as part of the study. Many spoke of deep tensions between their environmental targets and the commercial pressures of the modern game. The report says that sustainability initiatives at clubs are often approved only if they do not affect football’s core product, including the scheduling and broadcasting of games. Although financial risks from flooding, heatwaves and fixture disruption are growing, several interviewees said clubs were far more focused on increasing revenues than on reducing environmental costs.

Lead researcher Dr Mark Doidge, Reader in Sociology of Sport at Loughborough University, said: “Football is the world's most popular sport, and probably the most popular activity. It is for this reason that football authorities, like FIFA, continue to exploit it for commercial profit. Football is also a cultural powerhouse with millions of fans, volunteers, and players trying to make the sport better. Football can, and should, use its influence to mitigate against climate change.”

FIFA has been apathetic to better regulation even after the Qatar World Cup, a preview of what football looks like in a hotter world, says Dr James Jackson, a lecturer at the University of Manchester. Rather than taking proactive steps, the organization has bolstered its ties to fossil fuel interests and adopted what researchers describe as “meager adaptation measures.”

Dr Oscar Berglund, senior lecturer in international public and social policy at the University of Bristol, said that Petrostates have made elite men’s football a prime target for sportswashing. “It has been a key strategy of Petrostates to use football's unrivaled cultural influence globally,” he said. “They don't need to convince us that fossil fuels are good, just that they are inevitable.”
As per the research, the same pattern will be repeated. Saudi Arabia is to host the 2034 World Cup, which will generate more than 8.5 million tons of CO2 equivalent, according to a report by Scientists for Global Responsibility. Meanwhile, the US under President Trump pulled out of the Paris climate pact, leaving the 2026 host country without a national climate accountability system in place during the tournament.

What needs to change
Researchers are urging FIFA to take concrete action to stop awarding tournaments to petrostates, ban fossil fuel sponsorships, halt further expansion of the competition, place restrictions on fossil fuel ownership of clubs, and empower sustainability managers with real decision-making authority rather than sidelined compliance roles.

It’s an uncomfortable but important message for U.S. fans. This World Cup is a celebration of the sport, and it’s happening in your backyard, across 11 US cities. But it’s also a test of whether the world’s most popular game can grapple honestly with what its growth is costing the planet. Right now, the answer isn't encouraging.