Fifa has confirmed Saudi Arabia as the host of the 2034 men’s World Cup, meaning the biggest football event on the planet will return to the Middle East.
Throughout the bidding process concerns were raised over issues such as human rights abuses, workers’ rights and LGBTQ+ laws. However, another issue is the environmental implications of hosting a football tournament in a desert petrostate which will need to build new stadiums and airports and has a strong incentive to greenwash its image.
The Saudi bid made environmental sustainability “a central theme”, yet states the country is “remaking its landscape” with protecting the environment at the heart of the bid. Sounds good in theory – but at what cost?
The World Cup will be played across five cities: Riyadh, Jeddah, Al Khobar, Abha and the sprawling and still-to-be-built megaproject of Neom. Of the 15 stadiums, 11 are either under construction or yet to be built. The plans for these stadiums look and seem impressive, yet there are significant environmental issues that go unnoticed.
One of the new venues set to be created in the capital city of Riyadh, the Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Stadium, will contain iridescent glass, LED glass and screens, solar panels and “perforated shimmering metal”. This, the Saudis claim, will “contribute to a futuristic aesthetic”.
Meanwhile the Neom stadium “will be run, like the rest of the city, entirely on renewable energy generated primarily from wind and solar sources”. This is a large undertaking that, in theory, will be part of a national plan for renewables to provide 50% of Saudi energy by 2030. Yet renewables currently provide less than 1% of the country’s electricity. Such a rapid switch is not feasible.
The new Aramco Stadium in Al Khobar takes its name from the Saudi state-owned oil company, the biggest oil producer in the world. Aramco controversially sponsors Fifa and has been the focus of recent campaigns. In October, more than 100 professional women’s footballers urged Fifa to drop Aramco as a sponsor, calling it a “punch in the stomach”.
The close links between big oil and football perhaps contradict the claim that sustainability is a central theme Fifa, and Saudi Arabia’s goal of “environmental stewardship”.
Saudi Arabia already boasts 16 international airports, 13 domestic airports and private jet space across the host cities. However, much of this is being expanded for the event.
For instance, the main airport serving Jeddah is increasing its annual capacity from 43 million to 90 million passengers, while the one in Abha will go from 1 million to 10 million. The brand new Neom International Airport will have a capacity for 20 million passengers.
This expansion will significantly increase carbon emissions, raising questions about the necessity of such growth for sporting events. Do we really need all these new airports for sporting tournaments every few years? That’s especially true when other countries already have most of the required infrastructure, as is the case for the US, Canada and Mexico who host the next tournament in 2026.
These new stadiums could turn into white elephants. Many have planned capacities of over 45,000 – considerably more than any team in the Saudi Pro League has averaged in the 2024-25 season.
There are some promising signs that the Saudis will develop better public transport in the host cities. That includes electric or hydrogen bus and rail systems.
The World Cup bid also promises to create pedestrian walkways and encourage bike and e-scooter rentals around the stadiums. All the “fan festivals” where supporters are encouraged to gather are described as being in walking distance of hotels.
But past research indicates that Saudis are less likely to cycle and walk than people in other countries. This raises questions about the legacy of such projects. If few people use these walkways or cycleways after the tournament, the ecological impact of developing such infrastructure may not be worthwhile.
As part of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 development plan, the country wants to use the World Cup to assist the transition to renewable energy sources.
Various stadiums are expected to be designed and constructed using locally produced materials and sustainable energy technologies. For example, the South Riyadh Stadium will integrate native plants and rainwater harvesting systems.
But there is limited detail in the bid documents on how these still unbuilt transport services and venue infrastructure will actually use renewable energy, or how this will ultimately move the country away from its reliance on oil and gas.
In recent times, the Saudi government has looked to diversify away from oil to other activities such as mining. Yet the country still doesn’t seem serious abound pursuing key investments in renewable technologies. Saudi Arabia’s actions at the recent Cop29 climate summit, where it was one of the key countries obstructing efforts to transition away from fossil fuels, means we should remain sceptical.
Also, past World Cups (most recently Qatar 2022) made bold claims that stadiums would be properly repurposed and supported on an ongoing basis by active energy efficiency features. But that has often not happened.
Hosting the World Cup in Saudi Arabia in an ever-warming climate will mean significant environmental threats from stadium construction, travel extensions and increased energy consumption. These have not been fully addressed in the Saudi plans. Concerns over sponsors and greenwashing might stall their aspirations to be a global leader in environmental sustainability.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
