The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan-Cortina will be a climate crisis waiting to happen, with the event's carbon footprint set to melt away nearly six square kilometers of snowpack and another five million metric tons of glacial ice.
According to a recent report by the New Weather Institute, the games’ three main sponsors – Eni, Stellantis, and ITA Airways - are responsible for significantly larger carbon emissions than the games themselves. The researchers estimate that promoting these corporations at the Games will boost emissions by 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent.
By hosting the event, organizers inadvertently create an environment in which artificially made snow becomes increasingly necessary. Unfortunately, this comes with severe consequences – only 46 out of 93 potential locations have "climate-reliable" infrastructure to support future Winter Olympics. If global emissions continue at current rates by the 2080s, that number drops to just 46.
Furthermore, climate scientists are sounding a warning - winter sports, which were once considered relatively safe from climate change, are becoming increasingly vulnerable due to warming temperatures and glacial melting. The losses of snow cover in Italy, France, and Switzerland are already alarming, with over 265 ski resorts lost in the past five years alone.
However, by switching sponsors away from carbon-intensive companies like Eni and Stellantis, organizers could save millions of metric tons of CO2 equivalent without affecting funding.
According to a recent report by the New Weather Institute, the games’ three main sponsors – Eni, Stellantis, and ITA Airways - are responsible for significantly larger carbon emissions than the games themselves. The researchers estimate that promoting these corporations at the Games will boost emissions by 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent.
By hosting the event, organizers inadvertently create an environment in which artificially made snow becomes increasingly necessary. Unfortunately, this comes with severe consequences – only 46 out of 93 potential locations have "climate-reliable" infrastructure to support future Winter Olympics. If global emissions continue at current rates by the 2080s, that number drops to just 46.
Furthermore, climate scientists are sounding a warning - winter sports, which were once considered relatively safe from climate change, are becoming increasingly vulnerable due to warming temperatures and glacial melting. The losses of snow cover in Italy, France, and Switzerland are already alarming, with over 265 ski resorts lost in the past five years alone.
However, by switching sponsors away from carbon-intensive companies like Eni and Stellantis, organizers could save millions of metric tons of CO2 equivalent without affecting funding.
I'm literally dying thinking about all those tons of extra CO2 that are gonna be released just because some big oil corps want to sponsor the Olympics 
... it's crazy how much more harm they cause than the actual games themselves! And then you mention that only 46 locations have the right infrastructure for future Winter Olympics... what if we lose those places too? 
It makes me wonder, are there any other sponsors out there who actually care about the environment and aren't just profiting off our planet's demise?
. If we could just make them switch sponsors to more sustainable companies... that'd be amazing! 
but seriously, have u seen those numbers? 1.3 MILLION metric tons of CO2 equivalent from just three sponsors?! that's crazy talk 
. i think it's super responsible of these researchers to call out the sponsors and highlight the issue. we need more people like them making a difference! 
. we need to start making some serious changes here, like switching sponsors to more eco-friendly companies, or at least investing in sustainable infrastructure. anything less would be a slap in the face to all the hardworking activists out there fighting for our planet's future 
... like, who thought it was a good idea to have a big event that's basically gonna melt away all the snow? 
It's crazy to think that just by hosting the games, we're already contributing to climate change. And those three sponsors of Eni, Stellantis, and ITA Airways are like, super bad news for the environment 
... and the impact is gonna be huge. And what really gets me is that this isn't even an isolated incident – climate change is affecting winter sports all over the world. Like, have you seen the ski resorts in Italy, France, and Switzerland? They're basically disappearing right before our eyes 
. Let's hope they make the right choice for once!
also can we talk about how artificial snow just makes everything worse? 
glacial ice is literally melting away at an alarming rate
I'm kinda bummed that Milan-Cortina is gonna be a climate crisis waiting to happen 
but I still think there's hope here! I mean, we're talkin' 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent, that's like, super big 
We could save millions of metric tons without even breakin' a sweat 
! Plus, it's not all doom and gloom - we're already seein' some awesome climate-reliable infrastructure poppin' up in other Winter Olympics locations 
. And let's be real, 46 outta 93 potential spots ain't so bad 
. We need to start thinking of a way to make these events sustainable, you know? Like switching to more eco-friendly sponsors or something... that way we can still have fun without killing the planet 
. What's the point of hosting an event that's basically going to accelerate climate change? I mean, who thought it was a good idea to promote companies like Eni and Stellantis, which are basically pouring CO2 into the atmosphere by the ton?! 
I wish they'd think about the consequences of their actions, you know? By switching sponsors to more sustainable companies, they could make a real difference without breaking the bank 
. We can save millions of metric tons of CO2 equivalent without affecting funding? That sounds like a no-brainer to me!
It's like, we've been hearing this for ages and still nothing changes. But maybe if they switch sponsors, that could make a difference? Like, if everyone worked together, we might actually be able to save something.
. And if the Olympics are gonna make artificially made snow so necessary, why not just go all in and build a giant snowman for everyone to enjoy? At least that way we can get some laughs out of it 
. But seriously, what's a little bit of climate damage when it comes to the name of sport and entertainment, right?
It's time for the organizers to think outside the box, you know? Can't we get sponsors who actually care about saving the planet instead? 
.
.
? These Olympics are literally melting the planet's snowballs... I mean, it's sad to think that nearly 6 sq km of snow will just... gone 
. And to make matters worse, our favorite skiing buddies are basically running out of time 
. They're responsible for so much more emissions than the games themselves! And artificially made snow is basically becoming necessary, which means we'll be losing more glaciers 
.
especially since those three sponsors are already polluting way more than the games themselves. it just doesn't make sense to me why they can't switch to carbon-friendly companies or something 
if they change sponsors and start using more eco-friendly methods, i guess the damage could be minimized a bit. still, it's just so frustrating that we even have to worry about this stuff 
their own games are supposed to promote values of fair play and sustainability but they're contributing more pollution than the whole event? need some serious pressure from organizers to make a change 