The report says Infantino has been travelling between venues in the United States, Canada and Mexico aboard a private jet. The exact emissions estimates remain projections, but the underlying concern is clear: private aviation carries a heavy environmental cost.
The expanded World Cup offers a wider geographic reach and makes use of established stadiums, reducing the need for major new construction. Yet the distance between host cities creates a structural dependence on air travel for officials, teams, broadcasters and supporters.
That is the contradiction Gogishvili’s phrase captures. Reusing venues may be presented as a sustainable choice, but the environmental footprint does not end at the stadium gates.
has reportedly defended the travel arrangements, saying its executives choose between commercial and private flights “com base no que for mais eficiente e econômico” - based on what is most efficient and economical.
That may be a practical argument during a demanding tournament schedule. It is less convincing as a public message. Football’s governing body is increasingly expected to show that sustainability is part of its decision-making, not simply a slogan attached to official campaigns.
Infantino’s movements also carry symbolic weight. When the sport’s most senior figures use private aircraft for frequent short-notice travel, supporters are entitled to ask whether convenience is being placed ahead of climate responsibility.
The next challenge is transparency. will need to explain the tournament’s full travel footprint, identify avoidable emissions and demonstrate whether future events can be organised with fewer high-carbon journeys. With similarly dispersed tournaments ahead, football’s environmental debate is only beginning.