At a major media briefing convened by climate charity Pledgeball, experts warned that the expanded 48-team, 104-match FIFA World Cup across the United States, Canada and Mexico could expose players, officials and millions of supporters to unprecedented levels of heat stress, extreme weather and climate-related disruption.

What emerged from the discussion was not simply concern about one tournament, but a much broader debate about the future of sport in a warming world — and whether global sport’s governing bodies are moving fast enough to protect both participants and the integrity of competition itself.

Football Meets Climate Reality

The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be unlike any tournament before it. Expanded from 32 to 48 teams, staged across three nations and spread over vast travel distances, it is expected to generate record emissions while simultaneously taking place against a backdrop of escalating climate volatility.

Speaking during the briefing, Katie Cross, founder of Pledgeball, framed the tournament as a defining moment for football and climate accountability.

“This is not just about one tournament,” Cross explained during the discussion. “It is about recognising that climate change is already reshaping sport — from the way football is played to the experience fans have in the stadiums and the future sustainability of the game itself.”

Cross repeatedly returned to the idea that the World Cup represents a collision between sport’s commercial expansion and the growing realities of climate science. The timing of the briefing coincided with the publication of the UK Climate Change Committee’s latest assessment on climate impacts, further underlining the wider societal context surrounding the tournament.

The Heat Threat

Central to the discussion was the growing risk posed by extreme heat.

Meteorologist and BBC Weather presenter Simon King warned that traditional air temperature measurements fail to capture the true physiological danger posed to athletes and supporters. Instead, experts increasingly use Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT), which incorporates humidity, solar radiation, wind speed and other environmental factors to assess heat stress risk.

A WBGT reading of 28°C is widely regarded as the threshold where heat becomes a major concern for elite athletes. Yet modelling discussed during the briefing suggests that 14 of the 16 host cities are likely to experience conditions at or above that level during the tournament. Six cities — Miami, Houston, Dallas, Monterrey, Kansas City and Atlanta — were identified as particularly high-risk locations.

King also stressed that these projections represent average conditions rather than worst-case scenarios.

“We know that heatwaves are becoming more frequent, more intense and more prolonged,” he explained. “So while these figures are already concerning, the real danger comes if a major heatwave coincides with the tournament itself.”

The discussion repeatedly returned to comparisons with the 1994 World Cup in the United States, when players struggled through brutal daytime conditions. Experts warned that climate change has since made such extremes significantly more likely.

Changing the Game Itself

Professor Mike Tipton from the University of Portsmouth’s Extreme Environments Laboratory explained that heat does not simply threaten health — it changes the sport itself.

Research already shows that players cover less distance, perform fewer sprints and adopt slower tactical approaches during matches played in extreme conditions.

“The evidence that we’ve seen from people playing matches in the heat is you see less distance covered, less sprint activity,” Tipton explained. “The game has to be played in a different way.”

He warned that while elite athletes are trained to push through physical discomfort, that competitive instinct can override the body’s natural protective mechanisms, potentially increasing the risk of heat exhaustion and heatstroke during the latter stages of the tournament.

The briefing also questioned whether FIFA’s current heat protocols are sufficient. Several panellists highlighted that FIFA’s WBGT threshold of 32°C sits above guidance used by a number of other international sports organisations and above levels recommended by FIFPRO, the global players’ union.

Fans at Risk

While players benefit from elite medical support and controlled preparation, speakers repeatedly stressed that millions of travelling supporters may face even greater risks.

The Football Supporters’ Association and fan representatives have already raised concerns around long walks to stadiums, limited public transport, extended security queues and prolonged exposure to extreme heat.

Documentary filmmakers Lawrence McKenna and Alex Moneypenny — who have been travelling through several host cities examining fan conditions — described a culture in which heat risks are often normalised rather than properly addressed.

After attempting to play football in extreme temperatures themselves, both described how rapidly the conditions became physically overwhelming.

“I could not believe that people will be playing in that heat,” Montany explained during the discussion. “It felt impossible to separate football from the conditions people are going to experience.”

Professor Tipton also warned that many supporters — particularly older fans or those with underlying health conditions — may be especially vulnerable to dehydration and cardiovascular stress.

Beyond Heat: Storms, Flooding and Food

The briefing also widened the conversation beyond temperature alone.

Simon King highlighted the increasing risk of severe storms, lightning disruption and flash flooding, noting that warmer atmospheric conditions intensify rainfall events. Climate modelling discussed during the briefing suggested that several host venues could face significant flood risks during extreme weather events.

At the same time, Professor Paul Behrens from the University of Oxford connected climate impacts in sport with growing pressures on global food systems. Heatwaves and droughts across agricultural regions surrounding several host cities are already affecting crop yields and driving food inflation.

The broader message was clear: the World Cup is becoming a visible symbol of a much wider climate crisis already affecting infrastructure, supply chains, public health and daily life.

Governance, Sponsorship and the Future of Sport

Perhaps the strongest criticism during the discussion centred on governance and commercial priorities.

Former BBC Sport sustainability editor Dave Lockwood argued that the expansion of the tournament reflects football’s continued pursuit of growth despite mounting environmental concerns.

“The organisation charged with the custodianship of the global game is neglecting any long-term view of what is best for football,” Lockwood said.

Panellists also questioned the optics of major sponsorship agreements with fossil fuel companies at a time when climate impacts are increasingly visible within sport itself.

Yet despite the criticism, the discussion was not framed as anti-football. Instead, speakers repeatedly stressed that football — as the world’s most popular sport — also has the power to become a major platform for climate awareness, behavioural change and sustainable innovation.

What the briefing ultimately highlighted was that climate change is no longer a future issue for sport. It is already influencing scheduling, athlete welfare, infrastructure planning, supporter safety and even the style and quality of competition itself.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup may still deliver unforgettable football moments. But it may also become the clearest warning yet that the future of global sport will increasingly be shaped not just by talent and tactics — but by climate resilience.