The substantial carbon footprint associated with the Super Bowl, one of the most-watched sporting events in the U.S., is not primarily linked to travel or the show’s energy use. Interestingly, it’s largely attributed to the significant environmental impact of the Super Bowl advertising frenzy.
The ads, which last in online promotions before and after the event, raise concerns among environmentally conscious consumers and investors. Unsurprisingly, climate experts emphasize the need to address the massive environmental impact of America’s most-loved and most-viewed sporting event.
Big-Time Sporting Events and Their Giant Environmental Impact
The sport of football or soccer is highly entertaining. But what most fans or spectators don’t know is that the global football industry is responsible for emitting over 30 million tons of carbon dioxide annually. That’s almost equal to Denmark’s annual emissions.
Millions of Americans regularly tune into football games, especially major events like the upcoming Super Bowl LVIII, with last year’s viewership exceeding 99 million. The immense audience underscores the need for organizations to assess the environmental impact of these sporting events.
Major sports leagues, like the NFL and NBA, can have a big influence over viewers. They can play a crucial role in promoting sustainability.
Large-scale sporting events often involve unforeseen environmental consequences. The construction of new infrastructure, sanitation upgrades, increased energy demands, and waste management challenges contribute to the overall impact on the environment.
Watch parties hosted by viewers further add up to waste generation and travel emissions on a national level.
According to an estimate, major sports leagues, including the NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB, generate about 35,000 tons of CO2 annually, which covers fans’ emissions only. Think about the waste by the teams playing during the events.
More notably, A-listers and celebrity fans of the big game also contribute significantly to its CO2 footprint by flying through their private jets. Popstar Taylor Swift is one great example, who has been the subject of intense scrutiny for her sky-high flight emissions.
Additionally, the energy consumption to power stadiums, resource-intensive field maintenance, and the sale of food, beverage, and merchandise at games contribute significantly to the environmental impact of beloved sporting events in the United States.
And that even doesn’t include the biggest source of the Super Bowl’s carbon footprint – buzzy digital advertisements.
Super Bowl Ads Carbon Footprint
When advertisers calculate the expense of Super Bowl advertising, the immediate focus is often on the $7 million fee for a 30-second slot. However, what might be significantly overlooked is the environmental cost of the ads.
Super Bowl Average Ad Cost, 2002-2021 (in million USD)

In 2021, Super Bowl advertising produced as much carbon dioxide as 100,000 Americans or around 2 million tonnes of CO2. This calculation is based on data from iSpot.tv, indicating that 56 advertisers and their 67 spots resulted in over 6.3 billion TV ad impressions, 26 million online views, and 64 billion social impressions.
Some sources further noted that in the lead-up to the Super Bowl, there were a total of about 4 billion digital ad impressions. To put that in perspective, 1 million ad impressions is equal to 1 metric ton of CO2 or its equivalent. Using that data, the 4 billion ad impressions generated 4,000 metric tons of CO2e.

In 2022, the top 15 ads alone generated nearly 470 million views, illustrating the substantial long-tail effect. Last year, the Super Bowl event garnered over 115 million viewers, recording over 3 million increase compared to the previous year.
With all that said, the Super Bowl has been doing its best to make the sporting event “green” and sustainable.
NFL Leading the Way to Sustainability
In 2022, the NFL, the Los Angeles Super Bowl LVI Host Committee, and Verizon collaborated on greening efforts for Super Bowl LVI. They aimed to enhance air quality, establish community gardens, bolster food security, and restore a California kelp forest.
Last year, Super Bowl LVII, featuring the Eagles and Chiefs in Arizona, was one of the NFL’s most sustainable efforts yet. The football league has one of the greatest commitments to make the Super Bowl more sustainable.
The league created the program NFL Green to address the environmental impact of their major sporting events. The initiative leads community projects that restore ecosystems and habitats. These include activities such as tree planting, wildlife habitat restoration, and reforestation projects to plant thousands of trees.
In addition to ecosystem restoration, green energy plays a significant role in NFL Green’s efforts. Annually, the NFL procures Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) matching the total energy consumption at its events. This strategy enables the NFL to offset the energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions associated with its major sporting events.
- RELATED: First NFL Team to Buy Carbon Credits
The NFL, in partnership with Arizonans, aims to achieve 92% waste diversion at the 2023 Super Bowl. Waste management has been a key focus, including recycling, composting, and minimizing landfill disposal.
Super Bowl and the Role of Carbon Credits
Earlier this year, the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), the football governing body in Europe, established a climate fund to address the sport’s massive carbon footprint. The $7.6 million fund will address the UEFA EURO 2024 kicking off in Munich on June 14.
The American Super Bowl LVIII committees and the NFL Green implemented the “Green Initiative” at the Las Vegas Indian Center. The initiative aims to plant trees and create green spaces and seedling restoration projects. Highlighting the impact of these efforts, Susan Groh from NFL Green said:
“The Super Bowl is here and gone, but when we are able to implement these greening projects throughout the community, it leaves a lasting legacy and just an impact that lasts for years to come.”
Apart from implementing sustainable practices to reduce its substantial waste and greening projects, the Super Bowl stakeholders are also using carbon credits to offset a portion of their emissions. For instance, Entergy and the Super Bowl XLVII Host Committee purchased carbon offsets to address flight emissions.
The credits are from various offset projects including a landfill gas collection in Texas, a forest conservation initiative in California, and an effort to capture methane from livestock manure in Michigan. The offsets have been certified to deliver the promised carbon reductions by the Climate Action Reserve. NFL is also doing the same when Houston Texans bought carbon credits to offset their air travel emissions.
Each credit bought represents a tonne of carbon emission reduction from specific offset projects, which can be nature-based or technological.
While the Super Bowl shines with sportsmanship and spectacle, its environmental toll is a wake-up call. From celeb jets to advertisement carbon emissions, sustainability is key. NFL’s strides show promise, but climate action must score big.
The post Beyond Touchdowns and Trophies: Unveiling the Carbon Footprint of Superbowl LVIII appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

