We have estimated that the footprint of football is approximately 64-66 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.
Football is the world’s most popular sport: about five billion people – or 60 per cent of the population – engaged with the men’s World Cup finals in 2022. Annual attendance at matches played in the world’s top domestic leagues is around 220 million.
READ: Dirty Tackle: the growing carbon footprint of football
But the sport now faces a huge threat from climate breakdown. Los Angeles is set to host multiple games at the 2026 FIFA men’s World Cup - and was recently was scorched by record wildfires. Players' health is threatened by the likelihood of extreme heat at 14 out of 16 of the World Cup venues.
Yet football’s own role in fuelling the climate crisis is largely overlooked. Estimates of the global carbon footprint of the sport have been virtually non-existent – until now. Even more disturbing is that efforts to reduce football-related emissions have barely started.
Sponsorship
We have estimated that the footprint of football is approximately 64-66 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e), in a new study for Scientists for Global Responsibility and the New Weather Institute. This is similar to annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the whole nation of Austria.
Included are emissions ranging from the energy in stadium use, construction and renovation; merchandise; fan and team travel to matches, and sponsorship deals with corporations who are major polluters.
These in turn raise emissions by promoting high carbon lifestyles and increasing consumption of heavily polluting products and services. Our estimate concludes that sponsorship deals represent by far the largest source of emissions, making up about 75 per cent of the total.
High carbon corporations use sponsorship deals with sport and other cultural activities to promote their brand and, crucially, increase sales. This practice was pioneered by the tobacco industry which, for decades, used sport as a billboard to promote its lethal products.
Commercial secrecy around high carbon sponsorship deals makes the precise relationship between them and the emissions from the increased sales difficult to determine.
Bank-rolled
However, a recently developed new methodology from a group of European researchers based on corporate investment norms means that we have for the first time been able to include a category of ‘sponsored emissions’ in our totals.
We have estimated that the footprint of football is approximately 64-66 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.
The prominence of sponsored emissions is not surprising. Elite football teams and the sports' governing bodies have been ramping up lucrative sponsorship deals with high carbon sectors, including oil and gas corporations, airlines, car manufacturers, and fast food chains.
Most disturbingly, the global governing body FIFA has recently negotiated a deal with Aramco, the world’s largest oil and gas company, based in Saudi Arabia. This deal includes exposure at the next men’s World Cup Finals in North America during 2026. And the hosting of the 2034 World Cup Finals has just been awarded to – Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, the English Football Association is sponsored by Emirates, an airline based in the United Arab Emirates. This deal includes the men’s FA Cup, the world’s oldest national football competition. Then there’s the current champions of the English Premier League, Manchester City – who are sponsored by Etihad, another Middle-Eastern airline.
Looking further afield within Europe, we see that the current European champions, Real Madrid, are also sponsored by Emirates. The largest club sponsorship deal we were able to identify from our research was Paris St Germain’s hook-up with Qatar Airways, worth about $80 million per year. Suitably bank-rolled, Paris St Germain are current French champions.
Elite
All this high carbon finance pouring into football is helping to further normalise behaviours and lifestyles which are destabilising the climate system, threatening our society and natural ecosystems. Efforts to curb air travel, gas-guzzling SUVs, consumption of animal products, and numerous other high pollution activities are being undermined by this ‘colonisation’ of the cultural space.
Our new study also looked at the other main sources of emissions within football. This data was drawn from a range of sources including sustainability reports of football clubs and governing bodies (where they exist), academic papers, and other research reports.
Although there were large data gaps, and much that did exist was of poor quality, we were able to discover that two other sources of emissions are particularly important: fan travel to matches, especially by car and plane; and new stadium construction, especially for major tournaments.
We estimated that the average match in a men’s domestic elite league – such as the English Premier League – led to about 1,700 tCO2e. About half of this was due to fan travel, mainly by car. For an international club match – for example, in the UEFA Champions League – this rises by about 50 per cent due to air travel by visiting ‘away’ fans, and even more if it’s a semi-final or final.
One match at the men’s World Cup finals causes between 44,000 tCO2e and 72,000 tCO2e, we estimated. This is between 26 times and 42 times that for a domestic elite game. The World Cup match’s emissions are equivalent to as many as 51,500 average UK cars being driven for a whole year.
Competitiveness
A critical factor in these calculations is how to allocate the emissions related to building new stadiums for the tournament. We argue that most of the emissions from construction should be allocated to the World Cup, and hence the emissions per match should be towards the higher end of the range above.
Some GHG emissions accounting methodologies, in contrast, allow for a very large proportion of these emissions to be allocated to future (post-World Cup) matches played at these stadiums. However, many of these new venues are under-used, as the demand for 40,000-seater stadiums - the minimum size for stipulated for World Cup finals matches - is rarely required in most nations.
Of the non-sponsorship emissions, we estimated that over 93 per cent of them were caused by elite football – either at a national or club level – demonstrating that it is at this level that climate action needs to be focused.
According to our analysis, the top focus for climate action in the football sector should be on a rapid phaseout of sponsorship deals with fossil fuel corporations, airlines, and other highly polluting companies. This would help at a critical time when a move to low carbon behaviours offers one of the fastest options for reducing emissions in wider society.
It could also improve the ‘beautiful game’: no longer would it be so easy to predict the winners of the elite leagues and cups. Given the way in which these lucrative sponsorship deals have come to dominate and entrench the top clubs and tournaments in the world, there would be a major benefit in terms of the competitiveness of the sport.
Burnout
The next priority is to reduce the number of international matches played in order to reduce air travel – good for player health and well-being, fans’ pockets and the climate.
Again, the elite level is key. The men’s UEFA Champions League has this season increased the number of matches in the competition from 125 to 189 – an increase of more than 50 per cent.
Meanwhile the next men’s World Cup finals is scheduled to include 104 matches – up from 64 in 2022. To make matters worse, the tournament is being played across Canada, the USA, and Mexico – the widest geographical area ever used for the competition.
These increases in the numbers of matches need to be reversed, at minimum. The focus of international matches needs to be on encouraging local fans to attend, not those from thousands of miles away.
There would be multiple benefits for the sport in pursuing these changes. Professional footballers are increasingly being pressured to play more and more matches per season, leading to burnout.
Conversation
Some clubs and governing bodies have signed up to UN Sports for Climate Action Framework, which includes targets to half emissions by 2030 and reach ‘net zero’ by 2040. However, through the use of loopholes such as carbon offsets, organisations can avoid significant near-term action.
There are some initiatives that are starting to turn the tide on the more reckless behaviour of the elite football industry.
A group of more than 100 leading women footballers has called for an end to Aramco’s sponsorship deal with FIFA, while top German club Bayern Munich dropped Qatar Airways as a shirt sponsor following fan protests over human rights concerns.
Some clubs like England’s Forest Green Rovers are pioneering low-carbon sports. Also, measures to improve surface public transport and increase its use by fans have become a feature of some football tournaments such as World Cup finals and the EUROs.
Meanwhile, initiatives such as Pledgeball and Planet League are having some success encouraging football fans to adopt low carbon behaviours through club-based competitions, while other initiatives like the Cool Down Network are making the climate issue a permanent feature of commentary on the game.
However, we urgently need more ambition to win the ultimate cup of a stable climate where sport can have a future. Given the cultural reach of football, strong action in this sector could change the global conversation on climate issues, and help to stem the rising tide of climate disasters like that taking place in Los Angeles.
These Authors
Dr Stuart Parkinson is Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), and holds a PhD in climate science. He is lead author of the report, Dirty Tackle: the growing carbon footprint of football.
Andrew Simms is co-director of the New Weather Institute, co-founder of the Badvertising campaign, coordinator of the Rapid Transition Alliance, and co-author of the original Green New Deal. Follow on BlueSky @andrewsimms.bsky.social.
