A percentage of tv rights going towards increasing the size of wilderness areas
How can football do more to reduce its carbon footprint?
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
Decommissioning and the likes is currently at least very very inefficient, albeit that’ll be the case whenever the transition is made and we will get better at everything we can out of everything we can from them before scrapping. add in the difficulties with mining the necessary materials, manufacturing and transporting them then over a lifetime that poster is probably completely correct.
These are all factors that will probably only get the focus and improvements necessary when they’re already running so it is a bit of a grin and bear it up to a point.
Hate this comment so much.
Correct answer.
Yes but that’s what you’d expect with the phasing onto a new technology right? Very different to that poster who said it wouldn’t do anything (which is ridiculous) and that it would be redundant tech/scrap in 3-4 years.
Most of the new technology being used now probably would be redundant in 3-4 years, however as I said it’s a something that does have to happen at some point because until the transition starts we’re not going to see the funding necessary in these sectors to fix it.
So basically I don’t think they’re wrong, but also it is a hit that is necessary for long term advancement.
It won’t be redundant what are you taking about? What will be redundant in 3-4 years? We still use tech in cars from decades ago.
You are both very clearly wrong because it seems you don’t understand how setting up a supply chain works. That and the fact 3-4 years is a ridiculous time frame for majority of current EV tech to become ‘redundant’.
They could play all matches on Microsoft Teams
Just sign up here and follow the guidance - UN Sports for Climate Action Framework.
Liverpool, Juve, Southampton and a few others have already signed up meaning they have pledged to meet targets
Liverpool, Juve, Southampton and a few others have already signed up meaning they have pledged to meet targets
We need to go for the nuclear option.... literally. Over the last 10 years Germany has bizarrely shifted from Nuclear power to coal, oil and gas which is not just a disaster for the environment but also helped to facilitate Russia invading Ukraine.
Nuclear is the cleanest fuel there is really and we need to build more nuclear plants, especially in China and India who are the largest polluters. They are both still building huge amounts of coal plants which is a disaster for the environment. No amount of wind turbines and solar panels and taking trains instead of planes etc etc can compensate.
Nuclear is the cleanest fuel there is really and we need to build more nuclear plants, especially in China and India who are the largest polluters. They are both still building huge amounts of coal plants which is a disaster for the environment. No amount of wind turbines and solar panels and taking trains instead of planes etc etc can compensate.
By working on financials for car manufacturing, especially in the electric business, I can easily tell you it's true but I don't want to go in detail about it.
It's a simple calculation in terms of early technology, battery lifespan, imact of weight over reliability, risk, amount of rare metals used, etc. That's how it is in terms of financial prospecting.
The fact it's cheaper to run and it doesn't burn fuel doesn't mean it's green, especially in countries where electrical power still comes from traditional methods.
‘I can easily tell you you’re wrong but I don’t want to go into detail’ ….ok
I look forward to reading your published research article where you can put weight behind this statement regarding carbon emissions and its impact on human health and future prospects. Will you be pubishing in Nature or The Lancet?
This argument has been made quite a lot, but its never been backed by research literature anyone takes seriously. It had a lot of public interest in 2018, primarily fronted by the auto industry who have an extreme vested interest in selling combustion engine vehicles, although several of them are moving away from new engines alltogether and will only manfufacture EVs going forward.
While technology certainly improves and gets updated at a fast paced rate, primarily in regards to driving computers annd self-driving technology, the research data concludes in no uncertain terms, over several studies in several markets with different climates, that gas cars have a significantly larger carbon emission impact than EVs. That takes into account the life cycle of batteries, mining, production and increased load on grid, as well as electric output by coal plants etc.
It should be noted that Europe especially is largely moving towards more sustainable energy sources, and coal plants are becoming rarer and fever. Blips in history such as the Ukrainian conflict and re-dependency on more polluting sources should not be used as an argument for a large picture.
Overall, there is a huge consensus in the literature that EVs greatly reduce overall carbon emission over the vehciles entire lifecycle, which is what we want for the sake of the planet we inhabit.
There are problems regarding solving effeciency for large EV vehicles, but its not very informative to say it does "jack shit" without providing an answer other than calling people idiots.
If you hate it more than the comment I replied to, I'm glad you found it offensive
Dennis Bergkamp was a visionary
I think Blitzes is the answer.
All the teams show up to the same stadium for a weekend. Play a load of matches and the season is over in a few weeks or months. Do the same for the cups.
Champions League would be a weekend job, with teams knocked out early going into the Shield/Vase (Europa League / Conference Leagues).
Do it for international qualification and tournaments too and you could condense 12 months of football into a handful of weekends.
Leaving us the rest of the weekends of the year to spend time our beloved families, who we love more than football. Without the overhanging dread of whether or not you will miss out on the game because some inconsiderate a-hole decided to get married.
All the teams show up to the same stadium for a weekend. Play a load of matches and the season is over in a few weeks or months. Do the same for the cups.
Champions League would be a weekend job, with teams knocked out early going into the Shield/Vase (Europa League / Conference Leagues).
Do it for international qualification and tournaments too and you could condense 12 months of football into a handful of weekends.
Leaving us the rest of the weekends of the year to spend time our beloved families, who we love more than football. Without the overhanging dread of whether or not you will miss out on the game because some inconsiderate a-hole decided to get married.
I don't find it offensive as such, just such a banal, unimaginative, pompous comment.If you hate it more than the comment I replied to, I'm glad you found it offensive
Think he's referring to the electric vehicle battery which isn't the most eco-friendly. Not to mention all the deep sea mining which is going to be involved in its manufacture.
Great thread though. Footballers should use their platform and more action, less talk. Reduction in fly time, kits - those would be good starting points. Clubs can also invest in renewable energy sources in and around their local community
Make intra-continental league competitions and international tournaments shorter by using knockout formats from earlier. Make peace with upsets and big teams underperforming and buggering off. You'd instantly reduce the travel related carbon footprint at the very least.
There is no need for friendlies or tours in places like the US or Singapore.
Money?
Sure, but it's at a cost to a much wider picture and the revenue gained isn't enough to justify it. Take United for example, though they are offsetting their carbon emissions of 20'000+ miles this tour, they already have a massive global reach and are going to get fans from all over the world investing in merchandise and other things for the club.
The choice of plane over train is to save time and energy of the players and staff, with a very tight game schedule, time is very important. Long train rides, will drain players from physical and mental energy, specially in a week with 2-3 games.
About the new kit every season, the club needs to earn money, and selling kits makes a lot of it.
Something can be done, but it´s not a walk in the park.
About the new kit every season, the club needs to earn money, and selling kits makes a lot of it.
Something can be done, but it´s not a walk in the park.
We’re a tiny island, but we should really do more to have ‘Road game periods’ where teams play 3 away games in the same parts of the country.
Math and planning would be lots tougher, but having Liverpool and Everton play Brighton and Southampton in the same week would be great. City, United and Leeds could play 3 matches in a row in London.
Yes it flies in the face of all police and travel efforts, but it would be really good for the sport and dramatically cut down on emissions.
Additional upside coming from the fact that teams wouldn’t have as long to prepare in their home training grounds so we’d hopefully see more upsets.
Start being better on the pitch, so there will be no planes flying over Old Trafford with messages like “Woodward Out”
Having issues with price and method of production is very different to the technology becoming redundant…
All teams to travel on hydrogen powered coaches made by Wright bus in Ballymena ( Other bus firms are available)
All clubs to build anaerobic digestors for the grass cutting from pitches, training pitches, food waste after matches, training etc
Solar Panels as said earlier
Rainwater collectors at stadiums to be used for watering the pitch, plenty of rain in Manchester
Wind Turbines at Carrington as said earlier
LED lighting throughout the stadium ( there may already be some)
Clubs to line training ground with hedges not fences, helps enviroment and stops nosey photojournalists snooping.
And absolutely only a home and away kit which remains for at least two years (never going to happen due to corporate greed)
All these measures are simple and cheap(for a football club) and should be implemented by all Premier league clubs as a minimum.
All clubs to build anaerobic digestors for the grass cutting from pitches, training pitches, food waste after matches, training etc
Solar Panels as said earlier
Rainwater collectors at stadiums to be used for watering the pitch, plenty of rain in Manchester
Wind Turbines at Carrington as said earlier
LED lighting throughout the stadium ( there may already be some)
Clubs to line training ground with hedges not fences, helps enviroment and stops nosey photojournalists snooping.
And absolutely only a home and away kit which remains for at least two years (never going to happen due to corporate greed)
All these measures are simple and cheap(for a football club) and should be implemented by all Premier league clubs as a minimum.
I don't find it banal, it has actually lots of subcontext.
Change kits to singlets and you’ll save on fabric. Hell, make the away team play topless and just the home team wearing their kit would save even more.
most players love showing themselves topless in social media anyway.
One of the big culprits of carbon emissions is industrial fertiliser production. Instead, they could make their own pitch fertiliser using organic alternatives like Gary Lineker did that time.
Isn't radioactive waste disposal a big issue though?
Agreed with the bolded parts.
But definitely, the technology won't become redundant. If anything, there'll be a push to find alternative metals, means for production provided the legislation exists to prevent the over-mining in the oceans.
Very little of it is produced. The US produces 2k tonnes of it per year, which is not that much considering that they have a lot of nuclear plants. I guess mining uranium produces emissions but still a whole lot less than coal plants.
I've seen studies showing that keeping an old car running as long as you can, is better than purchasing a new EV. I'd hazard a guess that the majority of us actually purchase used cars (though I suppose contributing to a healthy used car market has a knock on effect to increased production of newer models)
https://www.studyfinds.org/keeping-old-cars-help-environment-more-than-new-electric-cars/
Me and my wife sold our cars in January and moved to a single car (I cycle to work). I wanted a Tesla, but in the end we opted for an 7 year old Audi - partly because I wasn't ready to commit to EV yet, but part of it was a study I read that found the carbon footprint on used cars are better than a brand new EV.
Market for used EV needs to improve, but nobody wants 7 year old Tesla's because of the risk attached - and Tesla isn't doing anything to improve that - because their stratergy is to sell brand new cars, not support used models.
Last edited:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/65085346
Football & climate: Which EFL clubs are the most sustainable?
@NicolaSacco sort it out mate
Football & climate: Which EFL clubs are the most sustainable?
@NicolaSacco sort it out mate
Is this still a thing? Thought people knew it's just a big scam to make big companies more money and everyone else poorer.
"it" = reducing carbon footprint?
go on…