A new analysis has accused major technology companies of “greenwashing” their artificial intelligence climate benefits, arguing that many of the industry’s environmental promises are unsubstantiated or misleading. The report, conducted by climate advocacy groups and energy analysts, found that only about 26 % of AI-related climate claims from big tech firms cited published academic research, while roughly 36 % offered no evidence at all, raising doubts about the credibility of industry messaging on AI’s environmental impact.
According to the report, many corporate statements blur the distinction between traditional AI applications — such as predictive analytics and optimisation models — and energy-intensive generative AI systems like ChatGPT or Gemini, which require vast computing resources and data-centre capacity. By conflating these different types of AI, critics say firms create the impression that all AI inherently delivers climate benefits, even as the infrastructure that supports generative tools drives up emissions.
The analysis did not identify any clear examples where widely used generative AI services have led to “material, verifiable and substantial” reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, underscoring the lack of real-world evidence for such claims. At the same time, data centre expansion driven by AI workloads is contributing to rising energy demand, raising concerns that the industry’s environmental footprint could grow substantially in the coming years unless offset by robust mitigation strategies.
Advocates behind the report argue that transparency and accountability are urgently needed, calling on tech companies to provide rigorous evidence of AI’s climate benefits, disclose energy consumption and emissions associated with AI services, and avoid vague sustainability claims that could mask significant environmental harm. Regulators, consumers, and climate campaigners are increasingly scrutinising the sector’s messaging as part of broader debates over the true environmental costs of the AI boom.
