--- title: "AI Datacenters More Than 600 Percent Worse for Environment Than Tech Companies Claimed" description: "Tech companies have been obfuscating the emissions of their AI data centers by using dodgy energy certificates in their calculations." date: "2024-09-17" modified: "2024-09-17" authors: - name: "Frank Landymore" job_title: "Contributing Writer" link: "https://futurism.com/authors/flandymore" url: "https://futurism.com/the-byte/ai-datacenters-worse" categories: - "Environment" - "Science & Energy" tags: - "generative ai" - "Google" - "microsoft" - "the digest" --- # AI Datacenters More Than 600 Percent Worse for Environment Than Tech Companies Claimed ![Tech companies have been obfuscating the emissions of their AI data centers by using dodgy energy certificates in their calculations.]() *ASHBURN, VIRGINIA - JULY 17: In an aerial view, the IAD71 Amazon Web Services data center is shown on July 17, 2024 in Ashburn, Virginia. Northern Virginia is the largest data center market in the world, according to a report this year cited in published accounts, but is facing headwinds from availability of land and electric power. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images) \Image: Nathan Howard/Getty Images\* ## No Accountability What tech companies have claimed so far about the [energy costs of building enormous AI models]() may have been incredibly misleading. Or, depending on your perspective, they lied to you. *The Guardian* [reports that]() the actual emissions made by data centers owned by AI leaders including Microsoft, Google, Meta, and Apple, are about 662 percent higher than what they've officially reported. And this may just be the tip of the iceberg: the newspaper's analysis was limited to emissions made between 2020 and 2022, a window that captures the cusp of the AI boom but not the staggering heights that it's reached now. According to the analysis, Amazon was overall the largest emitter by far, but couldn't be included in the above figure because data center-specific emissions weren't available. Still, it's just as guilty as all the rest for obfuscating its environmental impact. All five of the tech companies, *The Guardian* notes, have at various points claimed — [laughably]() — to be carbon neutral. "It's down to creative accounting," a representative from the advocacy group Amazon Employees for Climate Justice told the newspaper. ## Parks and Recs When a tech company reports its emissions, what they're showing you are "market-based" emissions, which are tamped down by purchasing energy certificates, or "Recs," which they then factor into their calculations. These supposedly certify that a company is offsetting its dirty energy consumption with an equivalent amount of renewable energy. You'll want to note that the renewable efforts don't have to be undertaken by the company getting the certificates. Some third party that they pay can handle doing the work of producing the renewables on their behalf — convenient, right? Any of these tech companies can buy Recs, and in practice little is done to verify how much is actually being "offset." Basically, it's like money laundering except for an energy bill. And as the report shows, even if the offsetting is taking place, the ulterior motive almost certainly isn't to save trees, but to shave off a few zeroes on a carbon balance sheet, all so we can go on pretending this stuff isn't [gutting the environment](). ## Location, Location, Location Instead, a truer reflection of the actual toll would be "location-based emissions." No nonsense here: it's the amount emitted by each data center, straight up. Bear in mind that all the firms don't report specific data center related emissions the same way. But using the location-based emissions that are available, the biggest liar of the bunch appears to be Meta. In 2022, Meta's official emissions from in-house data centers was just 273 metric tons of CO2. But using location-based data, that soars to 3.8 million metric tons — a 19,000 times increase, in case you were wondering. Microsoft is likely more representative of a big AI company's environmental toll today. Officially, it claimed its data center-related emissions for that year was 280,782 metric tons. The location-based figure? 6.1 million. We'd like to say there's a silver lining, but there probably isn't. By all accounts, AI's energy demand [is going to keep growing](). "The trend in those emissions is worrying," the report reads. "If these five companies were one country, the sum of their 'location-based' emissions in 2022 would rank them as the 33rd highest-emitting country, behind the Philippines and above Algeria." **More on AI:** *[Microsoft Secretly Selling AI to Fossil Fuel Companies While Bragging About Environmental Progress]()* ## Author At Futurism, my work has often centered on bringing a sense of clarity and insight to complex topics ranging from the regulation of emerging technologies to the esoteric ideologies of Silicon Valley executives, while striving not to lose the poetic sense of awe inspired by often-obscure fields like astrophysics and quantum computing. I broke the story of CNET using AI to produce articles that turned out to be riddled with factual errors and plagiarism — a dam-breaking inflection point, as I've reported, that's inspired copycats and endless discourse while beguiling stakeholders ranging from tech giants to purveyors of spam around the web. My work at Futurism has been cited by publications including CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, Vice, Gizmodo, Engadget, the Verge, and Vanity Fair. I grew up in locales ranging from India to China, and now live in the exotic suburbs of Virginia. In my free time, I'm an avid reader of weird sci-fi literature, an aficionado of East Asian cinema, and, regrettably, a relapsed gamer. Allegedly, I’m working on a debut novel, currently untitled. ### Author social links [Bluesky]()