Ed Sheeran Caught The Train To Melbourne To Protect The Climate. But What About His Thousands Of Fans?

(MENAFN- The Conversation) This week, images on social media showed global superstar Ed Sheeran alighting from the overnight train from Sydney into the decidedly utilitarian surrounds of Southern Cross Station in Melbourne.

In Australia for an international tour, the $700 million star chose to travel 11 hours overnight by train, rather than take a one-hour flight. Media stories speculating at his motive noted Sheeran's wife, Cherry Seaborn, is a consultant in sustainability and encourages him to travel on public transport to save emissions.

Sheeran has also been open about his plan to buy land and“rewild” as much of the United Kingdom as he can, saying:“I love my county and I love wildlife and the environment.”

In a live touring industry built around tight schedules and frequent air travel, Sheeran's decision may be a symbolic gesture, driven by a desire to reduce his carbon footprint.

Australia hosts hundreds of live events such as concerts and music festivals each year. In 2024 alone, the live entertainment sector drew more than 31 million attendances, including more than 14 million concertgoers. Across the country, more than 160 music festivals are staged each year.

Sell-out concerts at a huge scale, such as Sheeran's, inevitably come with a major environmental footprint.

How large is the carbon footprint of major concerts and events? Where do those emissions come from? Is anything being done to reduce them; and why should the event industry care in the first place?

The emission impact of concerts and major events

Event footprints vary widely depending on their scale. This ranges from hundreds or thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions for conferences, to tens of thousands for large festivals and concerts, and hundreds of thousands or more for global mega-events such as the Olympic Games.

Estimates suggest emissions average around 5kg of CO2 per attendee per day, though impacts vary considerably depending on travel patterns and the way events are designed.

There is no agreed global estimate of the total carbon footprint of concerts or major events globally. Most impacts are calculated on an event-by-event basis.

Music festivals in the UK, for example, are estimated to collectively generate more than 400,000 tonnes of carbon emissions each year.

That level of emissions is broadly comparable to the annual carbon footprint of more than 230,000 average passenger cars.

An event's carbon footprint reflects the activities required to bring together and service the crowds. Carbon audits typically account for how audiences travel to the venue, where they stay, what they eat and drink, how the site is powered, and how waste is managed.

The key emission contributors

While public attention often focuses on artist travel and sound systems, evidence shows these are rarely the main drivers of emissions.

The largest contributor is audience travel. Multi-city concert analyses covering multiple large-scale international tours found transport by attendees creates 38 times more emissions than artist and crew travel, hotel stays and gear transportation combined.

Accommodation for major events typically contributes a secondary share of emissions, particularly when concerts attract interstate or international visitors requiring overnight stays.

Other emissions sources include food and beverage services, venue energy use and production, freight and touring logistics, and waste management. Each of those typically account for a much smaller share of total event emissions.

How are organisers and bands responding?

There is growing environmental awareness across the live music industry. In recent years, artists, promoters and venues have begun experimenting with ways to reduce the environmental footprint of their live events.

Much of this has focused on energy use and touring operations.

British band Coldplay, for example, reported that its Music of the Spheres world tour reduced direct touring emissions by about 60%, compared with its 2016–17 stadium tour. This was based on a show-by-show comparison, and verified by independent audits. Coldplay achieved this mainly by replacing diesel generators with battery-powered systems, using renewable energy, and redesigning freight and touring logistics, or even incorporating kinetic energy systems such as power-generating dance floors and bicycles.

Their tour also funded a large-scale tree-planting initiative; one tree for every ticket sold. The program has so far supported the planting of millions of trees worldwide.

Massive Attack also made headlines last year after staging the ACT 1.5 concert in Bristol, described as one of the lowest-carbon live music events ever held. It used battery-powered energy systems instead of diesel generators, plant-based catering, reduced freight logistics and offered incentives for low-carbon audience travel.

Where to now? The audience needs to change

While these efforts are encouraging, evidence consistently shows that even low-emissions concerts might achieve limited overall reductions unless audience travel behaviour also changes.

Industry guidance from Green Music Australia identifies fan transport as one of the largest remaining emission sources, and prompts organisers to experiment with public-transport incentives, venue selection and travel partnerships.

Technological improvements on stage are becoming increasingly achievable. But influencing how tens of thousands of people travel to events remains the hard bit.

Gestures such as Sheeran choosing the train over flying may appear symbolic, but symbols matter. They help make lower-carbon choices seem normal, and reinforce environmental values across an industry already confronting the impacts of climate change on live events.

A recent global analysis of more than 2,000 mass gatherings disrupted by extreme weather between 2004 and 2024 across several high-income countries around the world found that arts, cultural and entertainment events – particularly festivals and concerts – were among those most frequently affected by climate change.

Storms, heat and other climate-related disruptions are already altering event timing and financial viability across countries including Australia, the UK and the United States.

In other words, the live events industry is not only contributing to climate emissions; it is increasingly exposed to their consequences.

Efforts to reduce the emissions footprint of large events and concerts should become an core part of the broader adaptation challenges facing the events industry. Its very existence depends on stable environmental and climate conditions.

MENAFN27022026000199003603ID1110797211