Virada, Green Football, an amendment and more
Round-up #47
Hello again all,
As we hurtle head-long into the business end of the season, its also been a busy fortnight on the football and climate agenda. And with the Green Football Great Save campaign now in full swing expect much more to be kicking-off in the coming weeks.
Before we dive in, the previous newsletter started with a special message that I’d like to repeat: Please donate if you can and you would like to see this newsletter continue in its free and open-to-all form. Your support can make the difference to its future. You can donate here.
Fran
Quick links: Virada; Green Football’s Great Save; Football Governance Bill - An amendment; Football and Floods - Argentina; Club focus; In other news; Disclosures - Liverpool and Manchester City; Liverpool and Direct Air Capture; FIFA; The Premier League Environmental Sustainability Strategy.
Virada
In a letter to the United Nations and countries of the world, Brazil’s incoming President for the international climate talks in November (COP30), André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, has said …
“Together, we can make COP30 the kickstart of a new decade of inflection in the global climate fight. As the nation of football, Brazil believes we can win by “virada.” This means fighting back to turn the game around when defeat seems almost certain. Together, we can make COP30 the moment we turn the game around”
Green Football’s Great Save
This year’s Green Football campaign has kicked-off with a bang, and is running from 11th March to 2nd April. Fans, clubs, footballers and more are helping save football kits from ending up in landfill. There’s more happening than you can shake a stick at, and plenty of ways to get involved.
Looking at just a few kit suppliers we get a sense of the enormous scale of the emissions impacts from new kit. Adidas put their annual emissions at 5.4 million tCO2e, Nike put theirs at 9.5 million tCO2e and Puma put their scope 3 emissions at 1.4 million tCO2e. The proportion of these companies emissions that are due to football kit is not stated, but football is clearly a big part of their businesses, and these are just a few of the kit manufacturers.
For Green Football’s Great Save there are too many different actions from clubs, players and more to round-up all of them. But some of those taking action so far include:
Clubs: Bolton, Bristol City, Dundee United, Forest Green Rovers, Lewes, Northampton Town, Oxford United, Preston North End, Queens Park Rangers, Spurs Women, Watford, Wycombe Wanderers
Players: Ethan Ampadu of Leeds United; Josie Green of Crystal Palace Women; Emma Ilijoski and Kerry Beattie of Aberdeen Women; Ben Mee of Brentford; Demi Stokes of Newcastle United Women
Community Sports Trusts: Manchester United, Millwall, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Wigan Athletic
Others also include:
Professional Footballers Australia taking the campaign across the world
Former footballers Jamie Carragher and Kris Boyd joining in.
Several grassroots County Football Associations including Birmingham County, Middlesex, and more.
Football Governance Bill - An amendment
In the UK, the plans to create an Independent Football Regulator, through a Football Governance Bill are continuing to proceed through the UK Parliament.
At the ‘Report Stage’ in the House of Lords this week, several proposed amendments were debated. This included one calling for environmental sustainability to be included in the remit of the regulator. It was put forward by Baroness Jones of the Green Party and supported by Conservative Peer, Lord Gascoigne and The Lord Bishop of Sheffield. The amendment was supported by a number of organisations and this newsletter.
In debate in the House of Lords, Baroness Jones said the amendment acknowledges “the link between environmental and financial sustainability” and that “although some clubs are doing commendable work in this area, progress is inconsistent, erratic and lacks enforcement. Without regulation, football will have fragmented, inadequate responses to climate threats”.
The Lord Bishop of Sheffield said that “We know that climate change impacts sport; we therefore need to equip clubs, especially those in the lower leagues, to mitigate the vagaries of extreme weather, whether in the form of droughts or torrential rain. Incorporating a duty to monitor and reduce the climate impacts of English football would only enhance its value to our nation and local communities.
Lord Gascoigne talked about the soft power and hard power of football saying “throughout the ages football has pushed and campaigned on many important issues, so it is right that the many things that clubs promote at home and abroad should include the environment, nature and broader sustainability”.
In response Baroness Twycross, speaking for the Government, said “the regulator’s focus should be on the problems that football has clearly shown itself to be unable to properly address through self-regulation. By contrast, football has demonstrated the ability to take action on the environment … [and also] … This Amendment would also constitute scope creep”.
Labour Party peers voted against the amendment. Conservative peers and Liberal Democrat peers largely did not vote one way or another. The amendment was therefore defeated by 168 votes to 8. Following this, the Bill will shortly move on to the House of Commons for further scrutiny.
Football and Floods: Argentina
Following flash flooding at least 16 people have died in the Argentinian city of Bahia Blanca. 3 days of mourning were declared across Argentina and $400 million in infrastructure damage estimated.
Local clubs, Club Villa Mitre and Club Olimpo, who play in the third tier of Argentinian football, have been extensively involved in the response efforts. This has included collecting and delivering donations, relaying official municipal communications, and suspending football activities.
Lionel Scaloni, the Argentina national manager and his coaching staff posted a video showing support for those affected and encouraging Red Cross donations. Leading clubs across Argentina have joined donation efforts including Boca Juniors, River Plate, and Independiente and Racing Club working together.
River Plate have also agreed to play a friendly match in Club Olimpo’s stadium to benefit the victims of the floods. Players showing support included Lionel Messi.
Club focus
Bohemians have launched the development process for their climate transition plan.
Bristol City is the first EFL team to join the UN-backed 'Sports for Nature' framework.
Chester has installed new LED lights after receiving a sustainability grant to do so. It will see a two thirds reduction in energy bills from usage of the lights.
Manchester United say their plans for a new stadium will see it at the “heart of a new sustainable district.”
Newark And Sherwood United have revealed their plans for a new stadium built from reused shipping containers and, separately, are hosting a People, Planet, Pint and Football event at their existing stadium.
Real Betis Balompié is the first LaLiga team to join the UN-backed 'Sports for Nature' framework.
FC St. Pauli has published its first sustainability report. There’s lots of interesting stuff in there including an analysis on whether to introduce a match-and-public transport combination ticket (though I wasn’t clear if any changes are planned on the basis of it?). Another first - they have also published an easy-read version of the report alongside it.
Villarreal had their game with Espanyol postponed at the last minute due to flooding risk.
Wrexham are flying from Chester to Oxford for the game against Wycombe Wanderers.
A Carbon Boot award went to Southampton and Aston Villa for their short flights to games. The team responsible for Carbon Boot also take a look at Arsenal’s travels to and from Manchester United last weekend.
Community Sports Trusts in action included: Charlton Athletic and Spurs
In other news
EFL
The EFL announced Bristol City and Plymouth as the first two EFL Green Clubs to receive Gold awards for improvement to their environmental practices and operations.
Supporter groups, Spirit of Shankly and the Newcastle United Supporters Trust have written a joint-letter to the CEO of the EFL about the upcoming Carabao Cup Final. On the late Sunday kick-off time they say: “Travel on public transport is difficult later on Sunday evenings with direct trains not always available, and it shows disdain for ‘green football’ campaigns as many will be forced into using their own vehicles instead of public transport.”
Long-distance travels
Italian Serie A commercial director Michele Ciccarese, has stated an ambition for the Italian top-flight to play regular season games in the United States in “one to three years.”
Details of the second pre-season Premier League Summer Series in the US have been announced. I’m not clear on who the emissions from these matches should be attributed to - the Premier League? the clubs? or the US event organisers? If you have any insights, please share.
Grassroots
The Birmingham County FA, signatories to the UN Sport for Nature Framework, has launched a Football for Nature Fund.
The Berkshire and Buckinghamshire FA has launched an eco club pledge to inspire their local amateur clubs towards more action.
Also
Sky Sports speaks to Plymouth players and staff, and Katie Cross of Pledgeball, about sustainable travel. Pledgeball are also hiring a new project manager.
As part of the Free Kicks project, co-funded by the EU, there’s a webinar on 26th March on Engaging Fans With Sustainability on Match Day and Beyond
Congratulations to all the nominees in the sustainability category for the Football Business Awards.
Look out for the decision on the next International Olympic Committee. President which will be taken between the 18th and 21st March. Reuters reports on Olympians make climate plea to IOC presidential candidates.
Disclosures - Liverpool and Manchester City
In the UK the biggest companies are required to make climate-related financial disclosures (CFDs) in their annual accounts. I looked at Arsenal’s in the last newsletter. We now have two more. Here are a few points I took away from both.
Liverpool
This is Liverpool’s second year of including a CFD in their annual accounts. This year it’s on pages 3-5 with further information on energy and emissions also reported on page 10.
Most of the CFD restates what was said last year with a slightly extended ‘metrics and targets’ section. That section now includes some further narrative, though to my eyes it seemed light on actual metrics and targets.
The top risks identified are unchanged: increased storms causing cancellation or abandonment of matches or damage to facilities, and also the impacts of sustained temperature increases on players, coaches, staff, and fans.
Scope 1 and 2 emissions, the intensity ratio, and energy consumption are all up this season. Emissions are up 16.5% and energy consumption by 11%. No reasons for these figures are given.
The scope 1 and scope 2 emissions set out here do not cover all of Liverpool’s emissions reporting. Details on their scope 3 emissions, which are the lion’s share of their overall emissions, will be in their ‘The Red Way’ annual update, which is referred to here several times. That update is usually published later in Spring.
Manchester City
This is also Manchester City’s second year of including a CFD in their annual accounts. This year, it’s on pages 7-12 with further information on energy and emissions also reported on page 15.
The information in this CFD appears to be a summary of information published in October 2024 in Manchester City’s annual ‘Game Plan’ Report, with several references made to it. But that report is 97 pages so it's hard to be sure.
Risks are identified for eight different clubs globally in the City Group. For Manchester City itself, the separate Game Plan report includes over 50 risks. That said it’s hard to identify in this CFD or from Game Plan what the club believes the top risks for Manchester City are.
The SECR section on page.15 reports the Group UK emissions up by nearly 60% to 6,930 tCO2e. This appears to be in relation to scope 1 and 2 emissions only. Separately, it also refers to the club’s emissions reducing by 16%, equal to 5,840 tCO2, though does not say what from or to. This appears to be in relation to Game Plan figures, but could have been clarified here.
Elsewhere the report says that “'Game Plan' is the club's 20th annual report with continuous annual CO2 reductions exceeding 14%”, which appears to me a mis-statement of plans to try and reduce emissions 14% per annum to 2030.
Understanding the metrics here is difficult and the report says that “From 2024-2030, the Group will establish new metrics to measure.” This will hopefully make things clearer and more consistent.
The purpose of these CFDs is wider than reporting on targets and metrics. That said, looking at what both clubs say in these CFDs on targets and metrics it's difficult to understand what progress is being made towards their net zero commitments.
Elsewhere a recent Financial Reporting Council review of CFDs by companies includes recommendations and examples of how to report on these targets and metrics, as well as many other points for a good CFD. Included in this, the FRC is also clear that companies should not cross-refer to information presented outside the annual report. Hopefully, future reports from both clubs will be easier to read without the extensive and difficult cross-referencing to their separate sustainability strategies.
Liverpool and Direct Air Capture
Liverpool have announced a partnership with a carbon capture, utilisation and sequestration company. This is a first in bringing the role of direct air capture (DAC) into football. The International Energy Agency provides a useful introduction to the technology here. The partnership will launch products for Liverpool supporters and “Each product will have its carbon footprint addressed by removing an equivalent amount of carbon (CO2).” The scale of Liverpool’s investment and the expected amount of emissions to be captured is unclear. DAC, according to a news story in The Times last week, costs “around £600 per tonne of CO₂”, and Liverpool’s emissions last year were reported as 75,133 tCO2e.
FIFA
FIFA’s Annual Report 2024 mentions (on pg.108) that FIFA will invest $10m on sustainability for the FIFA World Cup 2026. This seems small in comparison to the €30.6m investment by UEFA into the EURO 2024 tournament.
FIFA is to consider expanding the Men’s World Cup to 64 teams for the 2030 tournament. There is no indication that environmental impacts will be among the considerations in the mix.
Elsewhere The Guardian reports that Dangerous heat is a real threat for the 2026 World Cup. Are teams ready?
FIFA has kicked-off the bidding process for the Women’s World Cups in 2031 and 2035. The bidding requirements appear unchanged from other recent FIFA World Cup requirements on sustainability requirements .
An updated version of the FIFA Stadium Guidelines includes a section on sustainability.
Premier League Environmental Sustainability Strategy
Just as I was finishing off putting together this newsletter the Premier League published its Environmental Sustainability Strategy, so this section is a bit of a last minute bolt on. I’ve not had a chance to take it all in and hope to return to it in a future post. For now, I’ll just solely focus in on one point in it which is the minimum standard for “All Premier League clubs to have a robust environmental policy by the end of Season 2024/25”.
Taking a look at the policies and statements published by clubs to-date we see a mish-mash of approaches. Aston Villa’s short statement was last updated in 2021 and says a long-term strategy will be published in due course. Bournemouth has a single slide published in 2021. Everton does not seem to have a policy on its website anymore having removed details of its 2019 ‘Everton For Change’ work. Manchester United last updated their short statement in 2017. West Ham have seven bullet points on initiatives that was posted online in 2022. Other clubs have more extensive or up-to-date statements or policies in place, though they all take hugely different approaches.
What constitutes a robust policy for Premier League clubs, and who decides if clubs have met a minimum standard, is not clear. Will clubs be left to mark their own homework? How will fans know if they are robust? Some form of independent assessment would be the best approach along with transparency on what a robust policy for clubs should include. For instance, should it include a club setting a target to cut emissions? Only nine clubs have so far.
In the meantime, based on what we see now it looks like several clubs will not have a robust policy in place by the end of the season. What next steps the Premier League would take if they are not, isn’t clear.
There’s a lot more in this strategy to take in than what I have narrowly focussed on here now, but that’s for a future post. For now, I’d be keen to hear others views on the above point or any aspects of the strategy - either in the comments here, or drop me a line directly if you prefer.
Phew! Busy times. As ever, comments, corrections, content suggestions and offers to write guest posts are welcome at any time. And donations to keep this free and open-to-all are really, really super welcome.
Fran James (he/him)
Football and Climate Change Newsletter
info@footballandclimate.org
LinkedIn | Bluesky | X