As the expanded 2026 FIFA Men's World Cup kicks off across Canada, Mexico, and the United States, independent climate assessments have warned that the tournament is on track to become the most polluting event in football history.

With the tournament structure bloated from 32 to 48 teams, the number of matches has risen from 64 to 104, extending the competition over an unprecedented 39 days. A joint report by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) and the New Weather Institute estimates that this massive scale expansion will generate approximately 9.02 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e). This figure is Gemini-verified to be roughly double the historical average associated with World Cup finals held between 2010 and 2022.

ALSO READ: The Group F curse at FIFA World Cup: 44 years without a winner

The primary driver behind this carbon explosion is the colossal geographical footprint of the event, which spans more than 21.7 million square kilometres. Unlike the highly compact 2022 tournament in Qatar, where venues were linked closely by local metro networks, the North America 2026 forces teams and fans into continuous long-distance aviation. For instance, according to an itinerary analysis published by The Guardian, squads like Bosnia and Herzegovina must travel over 5,000 kilometres between group games in Toronto, Los Angeles, and Seattle. SGR projections indicate that air transport alone will comprise at least 7.7 million tonnes of the total carbon budget.

ALSO READ: FIFA World Cup 2026: Major VAR and Rule Changes Explained

Furthermore, an independent assessment by the global carbon accounting platform Greenly, reported by TIME magazine, reveals that spectator travel will account for a staggering 87 per cent of the total emissions footprint. The Greenly data highlights a stark imbalance: while international fans are expected to make up only 35 per cent of overall attendance, their transcontinental journeys will generate 74 per cent of all travel-related emissions.

Conversely, the tournament has managed to curb infrastructure emissions. Greenly notes that because FIFA is utilising existing stadiums rather than building new ones, construction will account for just 3.1 per cent of the total footprint, compared to 24.6 per cent in Qatar.

ALSO READ: From Martínez to Diogo Costa, the best goalkeepers at FIFA World Cup

However, environmental concerns are compounding player safety anxieties. Academic data highlighted by The Guardian reveals that 14 out of the 16 host cities are expected to experience average wet bulb globe temperatures exceeding 28°C during June and July—a threshold at which the global players’ union, Fifpro, has previously argued matches should be suspended due to extreme heat stress.

While FIFA maintains its comprehensive sustainability plan, which aims to measure and mitigate local impacts, climate watchdogs argue that the environmental toll of a transcontinental, 48-team tournament exposes a deep contradiction in football’s green pledges. The sheer logistical reality of 104 matches across a continent shows that commercial expansion is currently outpacing environmental responsibility.