• 13 hours Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 13 hours Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 14 hours China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 15 hours UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 15 hours Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 16 hours VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 17 hours Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 18 hours Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 19 hours OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 1 day U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 2 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 2 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 2 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 2 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 2 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
  • 4 days Trump Passes Iran Nuclear Deal Back to Congress
  • 4 days Texas Shutters More Coal-Fired Plants
  • 5 days Oil Trading Firm Expects Unprecedented U.S. Crude Exports
  • 5 days UK’s FCA Met With Aramco Prior To Proposing Listing Rule Change
  • 5 days Chevron Quits Australian Deepwater Oil Exploration
  • 5 days Europe Braces For End Of Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 5 days Renewable Energy Startup Powering Native American Protest Camp
  • 5 days Husky Energy Set To Restart Pipeline
  • 5 days Russia, Morocco Sign String Of Energy And Military Deals
  • 6 days Norway Looks To Cut Some Of Its Generous Tax Breaks For EVs
  • 6 days China Set To Continue Crude Oil Buying Spree, IEA Says
  • 6 days India Needs Help To Boost Oil Production
  • 6 days Shell Buys One Of Europe’s Largest EV Charging Networks
  • 6 days Oil Throwback: BP Is Bringing Back The Amoco Brand
  • 6 days Libyan Oil Output Covers 25% Of 2017 Budget Needs
  • 6 days District Judge Rules Dakota Access Can Continue Operating
  • 7 days Surprise Oil Inventory Build Shocks Markets
  • 7 days France’s Biggest Listed Bank To Stop Funding Shale, Oil Sands Projects
  • 7 days Syria’s Kurds Aim To Control Oil-Rich Areas
  • 7 days Chinese Teapots Create $5B JV To Compete With State Firms
  • 7 days Oil M&A Deals Set To Rise
  • 7 days South Sudan Tightens Oil Industry Security
  • 7 days Over 1 Million Bpd Remain Offline In Gulf Of Mexico
  • 7 days Turkmenistan To Spend $93-Billion On Oil And Gas Sector
  • 8 days Indian Hydrocarbon Projects Get $300 Billion Boost Over 10 Years
Alt Text

Oil Markets Brace For Another Hurricane

Oil prices drew back this…

Alt Text

The Energy War That Erdogan Is Winning

The Turkish Republic of Northern…

Alt Text

Aggressive OPEC Pushes Oil Prices Up

Oil prices are once again…

How Much Energy Will the 2014 World Cup Consume?

Along with 3 billion other viewers around the world, I plan to tune in for the month-long World Cup to see whether the 22-year old Neymar can withstand the colossal pressure that has been put upon his shoulders to deliver a win for team Brazil.

Every time I turn on my television set, I’m using World Cup-related energy. And that’s just the start. Flying in teams, trainers, equipment, World Cup personnel and the estimated 500,000-plus fans will use enormous volumes of jet fuel.

Add to that powering the stadiums on game days, moving millions of spectators around host-country Brazil, and transmitting the event to billions of viewers worldwide, and you end up with millions of tons of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere.

So while the 2014 World Cup is going to be bigger than ever -- it’s shaping up to be the most watched, most lucrative and expensive tournament in soccer history -- it’s also going to be one of the biggest energy-consuming, greenhouse gas-spewing World Cups in history.

Think about this as the music blasts through the stadium and the fans cheer and scream and the players race up and down the field chasing the ball: The 2014 World Cup tournament will burn through enough energy before it’s over to fuel almost every one of the 260 million cars and trucks in the United States for an entire day, or the equivalent of what 560,000 cars use in a year.

Related Article: The Top 5 Non-Energy Sources of Climate Change

Estimating the total energy required to mount such a massive operation with any precision is a fool’s errand, but let’s take a look at some numbers to get a sense of scale.

World Cup Energy
Image source: Oilprice.com

FIFA did its own fascinating study of the carbon footprint that will be created by setting up and running its broadcast television operation. It found that the biggest contributor – 60 percent – is international flights for staff members. The other 40 percent comes from all the trucks needed to transport cables, cameras and furniture, and the energy required to operate all of the electronics.

All told, FIFA’s TV operations will contribute 24,670 tons of CO2 to the atmosphere – the same impact of burning 2.8 million gallons of gas, or 13,250 tons of coal.

FIFA also tried to estimate its carbon footprint for staging the tournament’s matches, which wraps in the electricity needed for stadiums, fan festivals, banquets, concession stands, training sites, travel for ticket holders, and team hotels. That number came to 2.72 million tons of CO2 equivalent. That’s like using up 306 million gallons of gasoline or burning 1.46 million tons of coal.

What’s the point of the study? FIFA says to figure out where it can do better next time. Just a 10 percent decline in international staff, for example, reduces the carbon footprint by 6 percent.

TVs and Tea Kettles

None of these numbers include other sources of Cup-related energy use, like building new transportation infrastructure and stadiums.

Related Article: Here are the World's Five Most Important Oil Fields

And speaking of stadiums, while everyone would probably love to attend the final match in Rio de Janeiro’s famous Maracana stadium, the vast majority of us will be watching at home. Which means we’re contributing to the Cup’s carbon footprint, too.

A spike in energy use is likely to occur in places when millions of people turn on their TVs at the same time to watch a match. For example, in the United Kingdom, the record for an energy surge during a TV program occurred during the 1990 World Cup, when England went to a shootout against West Germany in the semi-final. (Incidentally, West Germany prevailed and went on to win the trophy. West Germany’s title run was led by Jurgen Klinsmann, who is now coaching the U.S. national team.)

During that match, the UK National Grid experienced a spike of 2,800 megawatts of demand, as people across England tuned in to watch the game’s climax. Other significant power surges in the UK occurred during England’s 2002 quarter-final match against Brazil (2,570 MW surge), and the 2011 royal wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton (2,400 MW surge).

In fact, it’s relatively common for the UK to experience a spike in power demand during big soccer matches. National Grid operators have become accustomed to forecasting higher electricity demand during games, according to its operations manager, Jon Fenn. Not only does electricity consumption spike from millions of TV sets, a surge is felt most acutely during halftime or just after the final whistle, when everyone heads to the kitchen to turn on electric tea kettles or grab a snack from the fridge.

“It must be one of the few jobs where watching World Cup matches is essential to your work rather than a distraction, because we need to know to the second when half time and full time occur to be ready for the surges in demand,” Fenn told The Telegraph in an interview before the 2010 World Cup.

The 2014 World Cup will be transmitted to every country in the world and could potentially be the most watched sporting event in history.

Now we know it could set new records in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, too.

By Nick Cunningham and James Stafford of Oilprice.com




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Francisco Almeida ( Brazil ) on June 15 2014 said:
    Several key data are misleading, such as :

    1) - A world leader : power consumption in Brazil is green-friendly for being damn-produced, it's 90% HYDRO-based, not carbon-based.

    2) - (60% consumption) : Int'l flights for staff members simply do NOT exist, because these people do NOT travel in exclusive private flights, they use common regular airliners which fly not because of the staff members, therefore they'd fly anyway, thus one cannot blame FIFA for what she didn't do.

    3) - A world leader : Cars in Brazil are 95% hybrid, consume sugarcane-based ethanol which is renewable energy therefore green-friendly - and it's highly cost-efficient, opposite of Iowa's corn-based ethanol. Furthermore, ethanol itself leaves a carbon footprint that is a tiny fraction of carbon-based fossil fuels.

    4) - Brazil's buses and public transportation are massively on bio-diesel, a seed-based fuel, therefore green-friendly.

    5) - One cannot blame FIFA for TV-viewers consumption, considering that the public is green-conscious, has its own awareness and green education, therefore they themselves are to blame. Should they wish to behave green-friendly they have the sovereign choice, so why blame FIFA for the public's consumption decisions?
  • Pete Priince on June 15 2014 said:
    A serious, broad based discussion regarding the "footprint" of an event such as the world cup. My o my how things have changed! Its about time society became engaged and thus aware of the larger and long term effects of our lifestyles. I do not deride those who enjoy soccer or whatever their particular interest may be as I have my own pursuits and don't appreciate others telling me what to do. I do think it is an improvement to have an educated basis for making those decisions and this article illustrates a step in the right direction. Kudos for all of those who contributed to this process and calculations. Hopefully a significant amount was learned during the effort and the next attempt will be better still.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News