creative carbon accounting
Stadium heritage is not the only similarity between Saudi Arabia’s 2034 World Cup and Qatar 2022 when it comes to carbon neutrality claims.
Based on the 2021 Greenhouse Gas Accounting Report prepared by consultants Southpole ahead of the Qatar 2022 World Cup, FIFA says the World Cup will be carbon neutral, with total greenhouse gas emissions of 3.63 million carbon dioxide equivalents. claimed to be estimated at tons.
However, in June 2023, when the Swiss Integrity Commission (SLK) upheld a complaint from five organizations from three countries that challenged FIFA’s commitment to carbon neutrality for the Qatar 2022 tournament, FIFA I was warned not to make such claims.
“SLK advised FIFA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims in the future,” the SLK statement said. “In particular, the claim that the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar was climate change and carbon neutral.”
Experts estimate that Qatar’s carbon dioxide emissions in 2022 could reach 10 million tons, which is why the New Meteorological Institute filed a complaint with SLK in November 2022.
What is the reason for the difference? Carbon Market Watch found that South Pole’s 2021 report only accounted for 70 days’ worth of greenhouse gas emissions from stadium construction.
A similar approach appears to be repeated in the South Pole’s November 2024 report after the 2022 Qatar World Cup.
“Estimated life cycle emissions will be allocated to the Qatar 2022 emissions inventory based on the stadium operating period of 47 days for Qatar 2022 and 32 days for the FIFA Arab Cup 2021,” it reads.
Third voluntary carbon credit auction held privately
Qatar has established a voluntary Global Carbon Council to buy carbon credits to offset emissions from the World Cup. Many of the projects involved suffered from so-called “lack of additionality.” This means that it will be built without any income from carbon credits in any case and will not include any new carbon reductions.
Saudi Arabia did much the same. Play the Game is part of Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund PIF’s attempt to convince the world it is carbon-neutral, as part of its bid to convince the world that it is carbon neutral. He revealed the details of how he established the market company (RVCMC). Fossil fuel companies.
On November 15, 2024, RVCMC held its third auction and broke its own record by auctioning off 2.5 million tons of carbon credits to Saudi companies. The auction was held on the sidelines of the United Nations’ COP29 climate change conference in Baku. 23 companies participated, including Aramco and PIF.
Play the Game’s first two auctions have revealed critical questions about whether cookstove projects and renewable energy schemes can deliver on their carbon emissions reduction promises. According to a report by Bloomberg, RVCMC is currently cutting back on these projects.
Unfortunately, RVCMC does not appear to have published on its website the details of which companies have purchased how many carbon credits. Therefore, we assess not only which companies bought how many credits, but also whether the projects that participated in the third auction suffer from the same lack of additionality problem as the projects that participated in the first two auctions. becomes impossible.
However, in this interview, RVCMC CEO Riham ElGizy explains that RVCMC has clearly solved the problem of lack of additionality. The interviews will be conducted by PIF, which owns RVCMC.
The centrality of football in Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 is illustrated in a screenshot of Saudi Arabia’s home page.
Saudi Arabia’s megaproject will emit as much CO2 as Russia
NEOM is one of many “giga projects” in Saudi Vision 2030, five of which are led by PIF (including NEOM). An evaluation of the project by the European Center for Democracy and Human Rights (ECDHR) estimates that the carbon emissions associated with NEOM construction will be 1.8 billion tonnes, raising concerns about sustainability.
This is only slightly less than the 1.9 billion tons of CO2 that Russia will produce in 2022.
ECDHR is not alone in its concerns about the environmental impact of Saudi Arabia’s plans. The construction of THE LINE reportedly commandeered a fifth of the world’s steel, and US$190 million was spent to manufacture the huge foundations needed for THE LINE and other NEOM projects. A concrete factory has been commissioned.
“The gigantic NEOM project has come under fire for the large amount of raw materials that will need to be transported to the desert for construction,” said a report by Saudi human rights group ALQST.
“The carbon footprint associated with building megacities could offset the environmental benefits touted in NEOM’s public relations materials.”
According to a recent study by Goldman Sachs, peak oil demand is still 10 years away. This coincides exactly with the date of the 2034 World Cup in Saudi Arabia.
“Aramco has ambitions to be the last in a dying industry,” said Freddie Daly of the University of Sussex and Cool Down Sport, a climate action network.
We are perfectly positioned to achieve this. In 2017, the country had 260.2 billion barrels of oil equivalent, more than Exummobile, Chevron, Shell, BP, and Total combined. At 2020 production rates, Aramco’s reserves could be burnt out until 2077.
PIF says the Saudi “megaproject” is aimed at stimulating the economy and diversifying away from oil. However, the projects that facilitate the construction of this diversion also require continued fossil fuel production. Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan, who is also on the board of Aramco and PIF, recently told reporters that NEOM would not be completed for 50 years.
“NEOM (…) epitomizes a massive and persistent failure of imagination driven by capitalism blinded by fossil fuel ideology, contributing to the climate crisis, widening global inequality, and the perpetuation of war. “We cannot accept the need to confront this. It is genocide,” writes David Murakami Wood of the University of Otwa in The Conversation.
“The time has come for wealthy corporations and nation-states, like Saudi Arabia, which have historical and contemporary responsibilities for causing the climate crisis, to start taking this responsibility seriously. We should be investing in what’s happening on a human scale, not pouring money into speculative, unsustainable, authoritarian urban megaprojects,” Wood continued.
Questionable approach to sustainable event management
Saudi Arabia’s bid document pledges to work with FIFA to “develop and implement a robust sustainability strategy and support FIFA in implementing a sustainable event management (SEM) system for the competition.” There is. The system is ISO 20121 compliant and covers all areas outlined below. FIFA Sustainable Tournament Requirements. ”
You don’t need to do that much. FIFA has classified the tournament as having a low risk of violating the organization’s sustainability commitments.
FIFA’s bid evaluation report ranked Saudi Arabia at low risk of breaching its sustainability commitments.
The United Nations disagrees with FIFA’s assessment. FIFA’s report praised Saudi Arabia’s support for the Paris Agreement on climate change in its evaluation of the bid.
However, as Play the Game previously reported, Saudi Arabia and Aramco did not respond to a letter of concern from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN OHCHR). The letter warned Saudi Arabia and Aramco that they risk violating the Paris Agreement if they continue expanding fossil fuels.
FIFA’s bid evaluation report recognizes that “the scope of construction will have a significant impact on the environment,” but says Saudi Arabia will work with FIFA on sustainable event management and “sustainable building certification.” He added that he is working hard to. Environmental Design (LEED) and Mostadam Green Building Certification.
The LEED system was developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, and the Mostadam system was developed by the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Housing. There is significant overlap between the two. For example, a London-based consultancy provides green certification services using both systems, specifically for construction projects in Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
But most importantly, both systems only evaluate the green credentials of a completed, permanent building, not the environmental impact of construction. Apart from the sentence quoted above, FIFA’s bid evaluation report appears to be lacking in any assessment of the environmental impact of stadium construction.
In addition to stadiums, two new airports and high-speed rail are also planned for the 2034 World Cup. 38 new hotels will be built. This will further increase our already large carbon footprint.
FIFA at a climate crossroads
Ricardo Simmons and Roger Pirque, Jr., in their research handbook on major sporting events, write that sports organizations are at a climate crossroads, that sports organizations are greenwashing, and that fossil companies are They claim that by sponsoring the same sports organizations to improve their image, they are now sportswashing them.
FIFA’s actions regarding Saudi Arabia’s bid to host the 2034 World Cup fit this description. Saudi Arabia bent its own rules to allow the World Cup to be added to a nation-building project that is already fueled by the abuse of migrant workers and causes massive environmental pollution.
FIFA has not only allowed itself to participate in this, but has taken active steps to ensure that FIFA is at the center of the climate crossroads.