Score a goal for climate: Assessing the carbon footprint of travel patterns of the English Premier League clubs

Football is the most popular sport, globally and in the United Kingdom. However it generates a range of negative environmental impacts, such as climate change, due to an extensive amount of travel involved. The growing contribution of football clubs to the global carbon footprint has been recognised, but never consistently assessed. This study assesses the carbon footprint of the English Premier League (EPL)clubs, using the patterns of their domestic travel in the 2016/2017 season as a proxy for analysis. The study shows that, within the 2016/17 season, the EPL clubs produced circa 1134 tonnes of CO 2- eq. as a result of their travel, where transportation accounts for 61% of the carbon footprint. To reduce this carbon footprint, a careful review of the current corporate travel and procurement practices in the EPL clubs is necessary. This is in order to optimise the travel itineraries, prioritise more climate-benign modes of transport and contract budget accommodation providers with the ‘green’ credentials

Normalizing economic loss from natural disasters: a global analysis

Climate change is likely to lead to an increase in the frequency and/or intensity of certain types of natural hazards, if not globally, then at least in certain regions. All other things equal, this should lead to an increase in the economic toll from natural disasters over time. Yet, all other things are not equal since affected areas become wealthier over time and rational individuals and governments undertake defensive mitigation measures, which requires normalizing economic losses if one wishes to analyze trends in economic loss from natural disasters for detecting a potential climate change signal. In this article, we argue that the conventional methodology for normalizing economic loss is problematic since it normalizes for changes in wealth over time, but fails to normalize for differences in wealth across space at any given point of time. We introduce an alternative methodology that overcomes this problem in theory, but facesmanymore problems in its empirical application. Applying, therefore, bothmethods to the most comprehensive existing global dataset of natural disaster loss, in general we find no significant upward trends in normalized disaster damage over the period 1980–2009 globally, regionally, for specific disasters or for specific disasters in specific regions. Due to our inability to control for defensive mitigation measures, one cannot infer from our analysis that there have definitely not been more frequent and/or more intensive weather-related natural hazards over the study period already. Moreover, it may still be far too early to detect a trend if human-induced climate change has only just started and will gain momentum over time