Industry Tactics Questioned Over AI's Climate Impact
Technology companies are conflating traditional artificial intelligence with generative AI in claims that the energy-intensive technology could help prevent climate breakdown.
An analysis of 154 statements found that most claims referring to AI actually concern machine learning rather than the energy-demanding chatbots and image generation tools that are driving rapid growth in gas-guzzling data centers.
The research, commissioned by nonprofits including Data for Progress and Carbon Tracker, did not identify any instance where popular tools such as Google’s Gemini or Microsoft’s Copilot have led to a "material, verifiable, and substantial" reduction in planet-heating emissions.
Ketan Joshi, an energy analyst and author of the report, described the industry's approach as "diversionary" and based on established methods amounting to "greenwashing."
"These technologies only avoid a minuscule fraction of emissions relative to the massive emissions of their core business," said Joshi. "Big tech took that approach and upgraded and expanded it."
He compared the tactics to fossil fuel companies advertising small investments in solar panels while overstating carbon capture's potential.
Sources and Evidence Behind Climate Claims
Most scrutinized claims originated from an International Energy Agency (IEA) report, which was reviewed by leading tech companies, as well as corporate reports from Google and Microsoft.
The IEA report, dedicating two chapters to the potential climate benefits of traditional AI, showed an approximately even split between claims supported by academic publications or corporate websites and those lacking evidence, according to the analysis. For Google and Microsoft, most claims lacked supporting evidence.
The analysis, released during the AI Impact Summit in Delhi this week, argues that the tech industry has misleadingly presented climate solutions and carbon pollution as a combined package by "muddling" different types of AI.
Sasha Luccioni, AI and climate lead at Hugging Face, an open-source AI platform and community, who was not involved in the report, said it added nuance to a debate that often grouped very different applications together.
"When we talk about AI for the planet, it’s mostly generative AI and large language models," said Luccioni, who has advocated for greater transparency about the industry's carbon footprint.
"When we talk about AI that’s ‘good’ for the planet, it’s often predictive models, extractive models, or old-school AI models."
The analysis found that green claims even for traditional AI often relied on weak evidence that had not been independently verified. Only 26% of the green claims studied cited published academic research, while 36% cited no evidence at all.
Origins of Emission Reduction Estimates
One of the earliest examples identified was a widespread claim that AI could help mitigate 5-10% of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.
This figure, which Google reiterated as recently as April last year, originated from a report it commissioned from Boston Consulting Group (BCG), a consulting firm, which cited a 2021 blog post attributing the figure to its "experience with clients."
Energy Consumption Trends of Data Centers
Data centers consume approximately 1% of the world’s electricity, but their share of US electricity consumption is projected to more than double to 8.6% by 2035, according to BloombergNEF. The IEA predicts data centers will account for at least 20% of the rich world’s growth in electricity demand through the end of the decade.
While the energy consumption of a simple text query to a large language model such as ChatGPT may be as little as running a lightbulb for a minute, partial industry disclosures indicate that energy use rises significantly for complex functions such as video generation and deep research. This rapid growth has concerned some energy researchers.
Responses from Industry Representatives
A Google spokesperson stated:
"Our estimated emissions reductions are based on a robust substantiation process grounded in the best available science, and we have transparently shared the principles and methodology that guide it."
Microsoft declined to comment, and the IEA did not respond to requests for comment.
Call for Realistic Discourse on AI and Climate
Joshi emphasized the need to ground discussions about AI’s climate benefits in reality.
"The false coupling of a big problem and a small solution serves as a distraction from the very preventable harms being done through unrestricted datacentre expansion," he said.
