Physical Address
23,24,25 & 26, 2nd Floor, Software Technology Park India, Opp: Garware Stadium,MIDC, Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431001 India
When the United States last hosted football’s biggest tournament in 1994, summer heat was an occasional nuisance. Three decades later, the planet that the 2026 World Cup will be played on is measurably different, and the difference is now showing up on the pitch, in the standings, and in the carbon ledger of a tournament that has never been bigger. Running from 11 June to 19 July across the United States, Canada and Mexico, the expanded competition is the first to feature 48 teams and 104 matches, and a cluster of new analyses suggests it may also be the hottest and most polluting in the sport’s history.
Heat that the last US World Cup never saw
A study released in May by World Weather Attribution (WWA) found that dangerous humid heat is now substantially more likely across host venues than it was in 1994, when global mean surface temperatures were roughly 0.7C cooler. The researchers measured conditions using the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT), an index that combines temperature, humidity, radiant heat and air movement to capture the strain the body actually experiences during outdoor exertion.
The thresholds matter. Guidance from the global players’ union, FIFPRO, holds that heat strain becomes a real risk at 26C WBGT, when cooling breaks should be mandatory, and that conditions above 28C are unsafe for play and warrant postponement. FIFA’s own rules are far more permissive, considering postponement only above 32C. Using a statistical model applied to observations, WWA estimated that 26 matches this year would be expected to take place in conditions of at least 26C WBGT, nine of them in stadiums without cooling. In 1994, the equivalent figures were 21 matches and just six uncooled venues. For the 28C threshold deemed unsafe, the number of expected matches rose from three to five.
The venues most exposed include the New York/New Jersey MetLife Stadium that will host the final, alongside Philadelphia, Kansas City and Miami. Even later kickoffs are not insulated: WWA noted that the Netherlands versus Tunisia fixture in Kansas City, kicking off at 18:00 local time, carries roughly a 7 percent chance of breaching the 28C postponement threshold. The authors concluded that the observed increases can be confidently attributed to human-caused climate change, and that without widespread cooling infrastructure, staging football in the northern hemisphere summer will only grow more dangerous as warming continues toward 2C.
A slower, more cautious game
Heat does not only threaten health; it changes how football is played. A separate analysis by Climate Central, found that climate change has increased the likelihood of performance-impairing heat in 97 of the 104 matches. Above 28C, the researchers say, heat directly limits how fast, how far and how often players can run, forcing teams that depend on sprinting and pressing to abandon the very intensity that defines modern football.
Nearly half of all matches carry at least a 50 percent chance of those disruptive temperatures, and in 26 fixtures climate change has raised the risk by 10 percent or more. The worst affected may be Uruguay versus Spain in Guadalajara on 26 June, where warming has lifted the odds of performance-impairing heat by 37 percent, with a 70 percent chance of extreme heat overall. The final in New York faces a 47 percent likelihood of performance-impairing conditions. Norwegian squad member Morten Thorsby, who signed a players’ letter to FIFA on the issue, warned that rising temperatures are not only a health risk but are starting to degrade the quality of the game itself.
FIFA has responded with adaptation rather than rescheduling. The governing body has confirmed mandatory three-minute hydration breaks in each half of every match, regardless of conditions, and is weighing more evening kickoffs toward the hotter host cities. Yet 13 of the 16 stadiums are open-air, leaving players and millions of fans exposed; only Atlanta, Dallas and Houston are fully climate-controlled.
The carbon cost of going continental
If heat is the visible crisis, emissions are the structural one. A report titled FIFA’s Climate Blind Spot, produced by the New Weather Institute estimates that the 2026 tournament will generate at least nine million tonnes of CO2 equivalent, almost double the roughly 4.7 million tonne average of editions held between 2010 and 2022. Under broader scenarios, the figure could reach 15 million tonnes, ranking it among the most polluting sporting events ever staged.
The driver is geography. Spread across 16 cities separated by thousands of kilometres, with no extensive high-speed rail to connect them, the tournament forces teams, journalists and fans onto planes. Air travel alone is projected to account for more than 7.7 million tonnes of CO2, with flight-related emissions rising by between 160 and 325 percent compared with previous tournaments. The 63 percent jump in the number of matches compounds the effect. The report’s authors, working with Scientists for Global Responsibility, the Environmental Defense Fund and the Sport for Climate Action Network, argue that the problem is baked into the format: a competition designed to be ever larger, more global and more dependent on long-haul travel.
FIFA maintains that the tournament will be accompanied by a sustainability strategy promoting low-impact construction, public transport and reduced waste, and that host cities will anchor longer-term climate measures. The report’s authors counter that such pledges are unlikely to offset the structural impact of the expansion, describing a persistent gap between the organisation’s stated commitments and the decisions that shape its events.
A preview of sport’s future
Taken together, the findings sketch a tournament caught in a feedback loop of its own making: an event whose growth fuels the emissions that intensify the heat now threatening its players. Climate Central meteorologist Shel Winkley put it bluntly, saying the World Cups of the past will not return, not because the players have changed but because the planet has. For a sport watched by billions, the 2026 edition may be remembered less for who lifts the trophy in New York than for what it revealed about playing the world’s game on a warming world.
References:
https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-big-player-at-fifa-world-cup-2026
https://media.fifpro.org/media/ltio1czh/heat-guidelines_en-1.pdf
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/world-cup-matches
https://www.carboncopy.info/climate-change-set-to-slow-down-nearly-every-2026-world-cup-match
https://www.newweather.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/FIFAs_climate_blind_spot.pdf
Banner image: AI-Generated
Insert: Photo by jason charters on Unsplash
Sections of this article may have been developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to support research, drafting and language refinement. All information has been reviewed, edited and verified by the author/editor to ensure accuracy, context and editorial integrity. The responsibility for the final content, interpretations and conclusions rests solely with the publisher.
