When I moved to London in 2004 I lived half a mile from the Arsenal stadium. They had just finished the season unbeaten and it was impossible not to get swept up in it all. (Almost literally so – if you left the house at the wrong time on a match day, the crowd was dense enough to carry you away on its red tide.) Although I grew up overseas and was always pretty neutral when it came to football teams, I do harbour a certain affection for North London’s finest.
Even without that personal connection, there would be a good reason for a climate journalist to take an interest in Arsenal: they are the greenest club in the Premier League, and recently became the only football club in the world with a science-based net zero target.
It’s easy to pluck a figure from the air when setting a climate target. The Science Based Target Initiative aims to raise ambitions and ensure that targets are actually useful. They do this by assessing the emissions of corporations and other groups, and setting decarbonisation pathways that are in line with the Paris Agreement and a commitment to keeping warming below 1.5 degrees.
SBTI approval is a guarantee that a climate target is meaningful and it brings some accountability to the process. Arsenal had their climate goals approved in November. They are working towards a 90% reduction in scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2040, which are the areas within their control. Separate targets apply for scope 3 emissions, which are the ones from the supply chain.
The first priority is to reduce energy use at the stadium and at their training ground and academy. They’ve already switched to 100% renewable electricity, courtesy of Octopus Energy. Uniquely, the stadium makes the most of this with a giant battery storage unit in the basement. This allows them to bank clean energy during the week – at cheaper off-peak prices – and discharge it on match days when demand is at its highest. The battery can power the entire stadium for 90 minutes.
This is, incidentally, what I do with my own house. I also have a variable electricity tariff from Octopus and a storage battery. What I don’t have is 60,000 fans watching elite football on my lawn.
Like any sports venue, spectator travel is a big source of emissions. Arsenal has certain advantages here. Despite their global recognition, they remain a local club with their home in the middle of their Islington fanbase. As I learned recently while taking the kids on the stadium tour, the majority of match-goers live within walking distance of the ground. Add those coming in by bus or subway and 95% of home fans are travelling sustainably already.
That good practice in sustainable transport is somewhat undermined by the choice of shirt sponsorships, which encourage the club’s global audiences to fly Emirates and visit Rwanda. We appear to be stuck with the Emirates connection until at least 2028.
Sponsors aside, one thing I rather like about Arsenal’s climate plans is how they communicate it. Their community foundation talks about sustainability in local schools. Players are involved in communicating to fans, and it is presented without jargon on the website and in matchday programmes. In fact, the matchday programmes have their own offsetting scheme, sponsoring a forest in Kenya. Sustainability is visible without being preachy, and it’s presented as something that fans should take pride in.
Football can be a powerful tool for including everyone in the journey to a low carbon future, and including audiences who are often told that the climate isn’t something they need to worry about. Other clubs might want to borrow a few ideas from the Arsenal.
The Earthbound Report 