For many supporters, attending a World Cup is a once-in-a-lifetime experience. However, the 2026 tournament will require some of the longest journeys ever associated with the competition. With matches spread across a continent and the format expanded to 48 teams, fans could face extensive air travel, leading to significant carbon emissions.
An England supporter travelling from London and following every match through to the final would cover nearly two-thirds of the Earth’s circumference. Group-stage travel alone could exceed 1,760 miles between host cities, but a full run to the final would push total mileage to at least 14,698 miles if England tops their group or 15,385 miles if they finish second.
These journeys come with a heavy environmental cost. The estimated emissions per England fan range from 3.4 to 3.5 tonnes of CO₂e, roughly equivalent to heating an average UK home for 19 months. With more than five million fans expected to attend, the cumulative impact becomes substantial.
Flying remains the most carbon-intensive form of transport, releasing greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. According to analysis cited in the article, one fan’s emissions for the full tournament could match several times the annual carbon output of individuals in lower-income nations.
Scotland and global supporters face similar impacts
Scotland supporters will travel shorter distances during the group stage—around 1,258 miles between venues—but their total mileage increases significantly if the team progresses. A journey to the final after winning the group would exceed 12,420 miles, producing about 2.8 tonnes of CO₂e, while a runner-up route could reach 13,771 miles and 3.3 tonnes.
Fans acknowledge the environmental dilemma. While many feel compelled to support their teams in person, there is growing awareness of the ecological consequences. Efforts are being made by supporter groups to promote more sustainable behaviour and encourage responsibility among travelling fans.
Travel demands vary widely depending on team location and progression. Some European play-off teams could face more than 3,140 miles during the group stage alone. Meanwhile, South African supporters are projected to travel the furthest overall, with group-stage journeys exceeding 21,000 miles and potential totals reaching nearly 27,000 miles if their team advances deep into the tournament.
The emissions linked to such distances are significant. For South African fans, group-stage travel alone could generate 4.7 tonnes of CO₂e, rising to 5.9 tonnes in certain knockout scenarios—figures comparable to the country’s average annual per-person emissions.
FIFA response and sustainability measures
FIFA has acknowledged the environmental challenges linked to the tournament, particularly the role of air travel in driving emissions. The organisation has stated that reducing flight-related impact remains one of the biggest sustainability hurdles for major events.
To address this, several initiatives have been outlined. These include using existing stadiums, adopting a regional hosting model to limit long-distance travel for some attendees, and improving operational efficiency through energy-saving measures, public transport promotion, and electric vehicles.
Additional efforts focus on recycling, cutting food waste, and launching tree-planting programmes across host regions. Despite these measures, critics argue that such actions may not fully offset the environmental cost of a tournament of this scale.
Why 2026 could be the most polluting tournament yet
A report referenced in the article estimates that the 2026 World Cup could generate up to nine million tonnes of CO₂e. This would be almost double the average footprint of the previous four tournaments, making it the most environmentally damaging edition to date.
Aviation is expected to account for the majority of emissions—between 80% and 90%. Experts stress that limiting air travel is one of the most effective ways to reduce overall impact, yet the tournament’s expanded format and multi-country hosting make this difficult.
Comparisons with past events highlight the difference. The 2022 World Cup in Qatar was highly compact, with minimal travel required between venues. Earlier tournaments in countries like Brazil and Russia involved longer distances but were still confined to single nations with fewer teams.
Looking ahead, future editions may continue this trend. The 2030 tournament will span multiple continents, while the 2034 event in Saudi Arabia will involve newly built stadiums, raising further environmental considerations.