The upcoming World Cup in North America will not only be remembered as the largest in history in terms of participation, but also for the enormous challenge it poses to the planet's sustainability. With 48 teams competing in three different countries, the logistics required to move millions of people across an entire continent have set off alarm bells. This event is shaping up to be a litmus test for the sustainability promises of sports institutions, which must grapple with a climate emergency that no longer allows for half measures nor empty marketing strategies.
The staging of 104 matches across Mexico, the United States, and Canada presents a clear paradox: while the aim is to break viewership records, the pressure on local ecosystems and the atmosphere skyrockets. Scientists warn that emissions from air travel, the main driver of this sporting extravaganza, could reach levels never seen before in a competitionThis calls into question the viability of continuing to organize tournaments of such magnitude without a radically more ambitious decarbonization plan.
The ecological footprint of a large-scale tournament
The projected environmental impact of this edition is, quite simply, overwhelming. According to various estimates from global responsibility experts, the total carbon footprint could reach around nine million tons of CO2, which is practically double what was generated in the last world from Qatar. This figure is equivalent to the circulation of more than six million cars for a whole year, a comparison that gives a clear idea of ​​the magnitude of the problem we face.
The tournament's expansion has multiplied emissions from what experts call reach 3, which are indirect sources linked to the travel of fans and delegations. With venues as far apart as Vancouver and Miami, domestic flights will be constant, making the transportation is responsible for 85% of the tournament's overall pollution. Although the organizers have boasted about using existing stadiums to avoid the massive use of concrete, the expansion to 48 teams negates any energy savings achieved by the infrastructure.
Health risks: playing at the limit of exhaustion
One of the issues that most concerns the medical staff of national teams, including Spain's, is the effect of extreme heat on the players' bodies. It is estimated that a quarter of the matches will be played under conditions that exceed the recommended limits for exercise of high intensity. The key indicator in this regard is not the usual dry-bulb temperature, but the wet-bulb temperature, which combines heat, humidity, and solar radiation to measure actual heat stress.
Venues like Dallas, Houston, and Monterrey will experience temperature spikes that can drastically impair performance. Above 28 degrees Celsius (82 degrees Fahrenheit) wet-bulb temperature, the body's ability to cool itself through sweat becomes less effective, which It exponentially increases the risk of heat stroke and chronic fatigue. For Spanish fans, this will be especially relevant in the match against Uruguay scheduled in Guadalajara, where the likelihood of suffering from this stifling heat is extremely high due to recent weather anomalies.
The influence of television and European timetables
Despite the obvious health risks for athletes, match scheduling seems to prioritize economic interests over physical well-being. FIFA typically schedules major matches during prime time in the most lucrative markets. This means many matches will be played at 3 p.m. on the US East Coast so that coincide with night in Europe, forcing footballers to take to the pitch at the time of greatest solar radiation.
This decision has been heavily criticized by players and coaches, who see it as a repetition of past mistakes. Previous editions have already seen dramatic scenes of fainting spells and urgent medical attention in the stands. The fact that only four of the sixteen stadiums have air conditioning and retractable roofs is another concern. leaves most of the participants at the mercy of a sun that, due to climate change, is now much more intense than it was three decades ago.
Fossil sponsorships and the shadow of greenwashing
Another point of contention is the contradiction of talking about a green World Cup while signing multi-million dollar deals with oil and gas companies. The alliance with Middle Eastern energy giants has been described by various groups as a blatant case of eco-deception. It is estimated that the advertising boost from these brands during the event could to encourage an increase in sales of fossil fuels equivalent to an additional 30 million tons of CO2, exacerbating the impact of fossil fuels on climate change.
Pressure is mounting on FIFA to establish mandatory environmental standards and sever its ties with major polluters. Many scientists suggest that if emissions are not mitigated immediately, football as we know it will not survive. will have to change its rules of the game, modifying schedules towards the winter months or limiting the geographical dispersion of venues to avoid logistical and environmental collapse.
Climate change has become another player on the field, influencing everything from coaches' tactics to the safety of the thousands of fans who will travel to support their teams. The balance between the commercial spectacle and the protection of the physical integrity of the protagonists It is more fragile than ever, which forces us to rethink whether the unlimited growth model of sports tournaments is compatible with the limits of a planet that already shows clear signs of thermal and environmental exhaustion.
