The environmental damage of FIFA world cup 2022 in Qatar

Abstract

Before the beginning of the FIFA world cup 2022 in November, FIFA announced that the upcoming world cup would be “carbon neutral”. This study assessed environmental damage caused by the FIFA world cup 2022, including preventive measures. This world cup is expected to emit 3.6 million tonnes of CO2e, about 1.6 million tonnes higher than the 2014 and 2018 world cups. Although this emission is one-tenth of the emission generated by China or a quarter of the emission generated by the USA in a single day, one should not ignore that this emission is higher than what 70 individual countries generate yearly. Moreover, Qatar, a desert country with lots of scarcity of fresh water, is under pressure to supply the water required to maintain the field and consumption of visitors, which requires at least a 10% increase of desalinated water with an energy consumption of 3.0 kWh/m3. At the same time, the independent environmental group finds a lack of clarity on reporting of the carbon emission and effectivity of the preventive measure from FIFA. However, Qatar, a small country lacking infrastructure, seems to have successfully arranged such a mega event with lots of positivity.

Keywords: FIFA world cup 2022, environment, CO2 emission, carbon neutral, GHG mitigations

1.????Introduction

Qatar is hosting the FIFA world cup (FWC) 2022, the first FIFA world cup to be held in the Middle East, and it will act as a catalyst for the fulfilment of Qatar’s and the region’s long-term development goals. Qatar qualified to organise the FIFA world cup 2022 event in December 2010. FIFA owns 51% of Q22, and the “Qatar 2022 Local Organising Committee LLC” owns the other 49% [1]. Qatar is a little nation with a population of only 2.9 million and more than 2.5 million foreign workers; the country is roughly the same size as the Metropolitan Area of Melbourne in terms of area [2]. The Middle Eastern nation has received more than a million visitors since the event’s start on November 20th. One recent study found that the number of sports, athletes, journalists, spectators and business people in the world cup and Olympic attendance increased by about 60 times between 1964 and 2018 [3]. At the peak of group stage attendance, up to 200,000 spectators per day are present to watch the matches.

With a total budget of $8 billion on tournament infrastructure, 32 teams will compete in 64 matches over the course of 28 days in eight venues, playing up to four matches per day during the group stage. At their busiest, the tournament sites employed about 30,000 people to construct six new permanent stadiums and one temporary stadium and reconstruct one existing stadium [4]. There are some concerning news on human right abuse [5], especially accidental fatality of migrant workers, with an estimated 6,500 from the report of Reuters [6], but those numbers are believed to be misleading [7], and not all are linked to the world cup related work, rather FIFA and Qataris authorities downgraded the number at 400 to 500 [8]. However, the analysis of those issues requires a separate discussion and is beyond the scope of this article. While fans and followers worldwide are insane with lots of fun supporting their favourite teams (sometimes turning to violence and fatality, though [9]), we must not ignore the flip side of this tournament, which is environmental damage. Therefore, this article is believed to be the first of its kind to report the environmental impact of the FIFA world cup and preventive measures from the organisers. Finally, some recommendations are made to make such future mega-events environmentally friendly.

2.????Discussion on Environmental Impact

The world cup 2022 is expected to emit 3.63 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) [10], which is 1.5 million tonnes higher than in Russia in 2018 [2], while one million tonnes less compared to the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio [11]. The emission generated in the world cup 2022 is insignificant in terms of global emissions of 37 billion tonnes [12] but cannot be ignored as it is higher than the yearly consumption of individual 71 countries [2].

As shown in Figure 1, the vast majority-nearly 97%, of 3.63 MtCO2e emissions come from indirect sources like housing, infrastructure development and transportation [1]. However, a study conducted by Carbon Market Watch - CMW reveals that this does not correctly depict the tournament’s actual footprint, possibly due to the choice of accounting method [1]. During the World Cup, Qatar anticipates a staggering 1,300 daily flights to and from the country [3].?According to Figure 1, transportation accounts for about 52% (1.88 MtCO2e) of emissions, followed by the construction of stadiums, training sites and temporary facilities at 25% (0.90 MtCO2e) and accommodation at 20% (0.728 MtCO2e).

The second highest emission of 25% for infrastructure development includes permanent structures, temporary structures, and facilities of the venues. Beside travel and accommodation, the allocation from scope 3 is shown in Figure 2. As seen, the allocation for permanent venue construction was 0.655 MtCO2e, while the temporary infrastructure of the stadiums was 0.163 MtCO2e[10]. The rest of the emission was distributed to Intra-city ground travel, Logistics, Food and beverage, international ground travel, Production of energy carriers, Materials and merchandise, Waste, Water, Leased facilities, Waste, water, Printed matter and online media with a share of 91.69, 39.21, 26.56, 23.38, 23.05, 19.21, 10.94, 7.71, 6.92, 0.94, 0.45 ktCO2e.

However, the life cycle emission for FWC was allocated to only 4.5 ktCO2e, considering the event's operational period of 58 days, and the emission factors were derived from, such as Eco invent (version 3.6)[13], the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy [14] and the International Energy Agency [15].

According to calculations from the Carbon market watch (CMW), emissions from these six stadiums should be 1.62 MtCO2e, while the overall emissions from building seven new stadiums, including the temporary one, are estimated to be 2.06 megatons [17]. CMW expressed serious concerns regarding FIFA’s calculation procedures. Besides, the impact of using those stadiums would be significant in a nation like Qatar, where 99% of the country’s electricity is produced by fossil fuels [18]. Only about 3% of the emission comes from scope 1 and scope 2, consisting of electricity, stationary combustion, and others.

Besides GHG emissions, a substantial increase in the water supply was required to maintain eight stadium pitches and 136 practice fields, which will likely continue even after the tournament's completion [11]. According to DW sports [11], each pitch needs about 10,000 litres (2,641 gallons) of desalinated water per day in the winter and 50,000 litres (1,000 gallons) per day in the summer. During this time, Qatar is required to raise its water supply by 10% [19] with an energy consumption of about 3.0 kWh/m3 [20]. Moreover, the waste of desalinated water is believed to threaten marine life markedly.

The ability of FIFA’s stated objective of achieving “climate neutrality” by 2040 should be rationalised with the 2022 World Cup’s carbon neutrality ambition, but FIFA’s aim lacks substance and definition [21]. For instance, since 2014, world cup emissions exceeded 2.0 MtCO2e per event, although FIFA declared organisational emissions of 0.77 MtCO2e in 2015 [21].

1.?????Preventive Measures Taken by FIFA and Qatar

According to the event organisers, The 2022 FIFA world cup is “carbon neutral” [1]. However, there is substantial evidence that claiming “carbon neutrality” is an exaggeration commonly termed greenwashing. Such greenwashing generally obscures the truth that major sporting events are revolving capitalist machines that permanently alter communities, ecosystems, and our common beliefs [3]. Despite this, one must accept that Qatar has taken some unprecedented measures- though there is a question about whether those are sufficient or sustainable against the huge emission. In Qatar, internal flights were not required because all the games are in and around Doha, where the state-of-the-art Doha Metro serves as the transportation hub and is complemented by approximately 800 new electric buses. [2]. The newly built 800 Mega Watt solar power plant in a 10 km2 area is supplying sustainable energy for many years to come.

The SC Tree Nursery project is considered the largest tree and turf nursery in the area. 500,000 m2 of turf, about 5,000 trees, and 80,000 shrubs have been planted surrounding stadium complexes and public areas in Doha, which help lowering local temperatures, and cut emissions. As of October 2020, the nursery has produced 1.2 million m2 of turf capable of sustaining the country’s extreme climate [22]. Nevertheless, there is a concern that those tree and turf nurseries will survive in the long run because they have been planted in artificial parks around the stadiums that require heavy watering and maintenance. According to the organiser, 1.8 million tonnes of carbon credits will be purchased for the World cup, though most of them are yet to be issued [11].

Event planners expect to recycle 40% of the waste produced during the event, while the rest 60% is planned to convert into energy [11]. Also, Qatar plans to use treated wastewater for irrigation [23]. Despite criticism, Qatar has also banned the consumption of alcohol in public places, which has proved to deliver tremendous benefits such as avoiding the littering of bottles, decreasing violence and crime and, most importantly safety and security of the general public, especially women [24, 25]. ?

2.????Conclusions and Recommendations

The study finds that Scope 3 emission is the main contributor to the emission in the World cup, accounting for 97%, which includes travel at 52%, infrastructure and construction at 25% and accommodation at 20%. Therefore, it is important to decarbonise these sectors, particularly aviation sectors, to reach the carbon neutrality target by FIFA. However, the independent environmental group expressed serious doubt about the accuracy of FIFA’s reported carbon emission, with an overall discrepancy of about 94% for the construction of the stadiums due to the difference in calculation methods. Hence, organisers need to maintain more transparency without exaggerating the carbon neutrality stunt, popularly known as “greenwashing”. Nonetheless, Qatar has taken some exemplary carbon mitigation strategies such as implementing low-carbon local bus and metro transport, plantation of trees and recycling of waste by 40%. It is suggested that authorities in future take more environmentally friendly actions while organising such mega events. Such actions might include scheduling matches in daylight, using more renewable powers instead of purchasing carbon credit, recycling more waste, lowering the number of matches, incentivising airlines to use biofuels or green hydrogen and limiting visitors. Moreover, there should be an initiative to compare GHG emissions from event to event on a life cycle basis, including consumption of other resources such as land and water.