Environmental groups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are accusing major AI companies like Copilot, Gemini, and ChatGPT of "climate hoaxing" and concealing the environmental impact of their services.
Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and OpenAI often justify the massive energy consumption of their new data centers by citing AI as a critical tool for solving climate change.
However, in a study published Monday, several NGOs argue that these claims are based on weak evidence. The study's authors accuse the industry of "greenwashing" and concealing the environmental damage it causes with misleading information.
The study's main shortcoming is the lack of differentiation in its use of the term "artificial intelligence." The study shows that the positive climate impact promoted by companies like Google and Microsoft applies almost exclusively to "traditional" AI applications—for example, weather forecasting models.
The current boom and the associated massive expansion of data centers is driven primarily by so-called "generative" artificial intelligence for end users—systems like ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini that generate text, images, and video.
The study's authors could not find a single example demonstrating measurable and significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in these resource-intensive applications.
The authors describe linking the climate benefits of traditional AI with the expansion of generative models as a new form of "greenwashing"—a strategy of creating a more climate-friendly image through misleading, vague, or unsubstantiated claims about supposed environmental benefits, thereby diverting attention from real environmental harm.
To conduct the analysis, NGOs including AlgorithmWatch and Beyond Fossil Fuels analyzed 154 high-profile claims from tech companies and institutions about the positive impact of AI on climate.
The results reveal a clear gap between promises and scientific evidence. Only 26% of the claims reviewed were based on published scientific studies. In 36% cases, no evidence was provided, and most of the remaining claims cited only their own websites or company reports.
The authors conclude that even for traditional AI, the estimated climate benefits are often significantly exaggerated, while the negative consequences of AI development are measurable.
Julian Bote, senior policy manager at AlgorithmWatch, said that if AI does provide benefits for sustainable development, they come from traditional, low-resource AI applications.
He said ChatGPT and other large-scale language and image generation models at the center of the current AI hype consume massive amounts of electricity and water, produce CO2 emissions comparable to entire countries, and provide no positive environmental benefits.