FOE Accuses Big Tech of Lying about the Climate Benefits of AI

Essay by Eric Worrall

But who is the real target audience of big tech climate propaganda?

Report Exposes Big Tech’s AI Climate Hoax: 74% of Industry’s Claims About AI’s Climate Benefits are Unproven

February 17, 2026

First critical analysis of industry’s statements on AI and climate impact

BERLIN – The big tech industry’s claims about the climate benefits of artificial intelligence (AI) are a hoax, according to a new report released today. A staggering 74% of claims about AI’s climate benefits are unproven, serving the profits of tech and fossil fuel industries, while downplaying the major climate harms of generative AI.

The research looks at 154 statements claiming AI will serve as a net climate benefit – including from companies like Google and Microsoft, and from institutions such as the International Energy Agency – and, for the first time, critically analysed the assertion that AI will be a net benefit to climate action, making up for the increased fossil fuel demand by AI-driven data centres. 

According to the findings, only 26% of the claims cited published academic papers and 36% did not cite any evidence at all. Overall, these claims tend to rely on weak forms of evidence rather than robust, peer-reviewed academic papers.

The report was commissioned and published by a consortium of environmental organisations including Beyond Fossil Fuels, Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD), Friends of the Earth U.S., Green Screen Coalition, Green Web Foundation, and Stand.earth, and was authored by climate and energy analyst Ketan Joshi. It is released ahead of the AI Impact Summit 2026 (19-20 February, New Delhi, India).[2]

The study examines the types of AI underpinning these claims, and the strength of the evidence put forth alongside them. The analysis did not uncover a single example where consumer generative systems such as ChatGPT, Gemini, or Copilot were leading to a material, verifiable, and substantial level of emissions reductions. It finds that claims about “AI sustainability” blur the differences between generative AI – which carries major environmental costs, with the much lower energy and environmental footprint of “traditional” AI, used for instance for machine learning to forecast wind patterns. This deceptive bait-and-switch is a new form of greenwashing used by the tech industry.

Ketan Joshi, Independent climate and energy analyst, said: “It appears tech companies are using vagueness about what happens within energy-hogging data centres to greenwash a planet-wrecking expansion. This has bled through into organisations like the International Energy Agency. The promises of planet-saving tech remain hollow, while AI data centres breathe life into coal and gas every day. These claims of climate benefit are unjustified and overhyped, and could  cover up irreversible damage being done to communities and society.”

Jill McArdle, International Corporate Campaigner, Beyond Fossil Fuels, said: “Big Tech’s AI hype is distracting users from the rapid and dangerous expansion of giant, energy and water-intensive data centres, while the tech industry’s huge energy demands are throwing the fossil fuel industry a lifeline. There is simply no evidence that AI will help the climate more than it will harm it. Rather than relying on credible and substantiated data, Big Tech companies are writing themselves a blank cheque to pollute on the empty promise of future salvation. We cannot bet the climate on these baseless claims.”

Michael Khoo, Policy co-chair, Climate Action Against Disinformation, Program Director, Friends of the Earth U.S., said: “Any climate benefits are far outweighed by how much energy generative AI is using. By lumping traditional and generative AI together, possible climate solutions are bundled with extreme pollution, and presented as a package deal. Governments must require basic transparency from the AI industry so communities and scientists can know how much energy is being exploited for this technology.”

In short, the evidence that AI will lead to large-scale climate benefits is weak, whilst the evidence of immediate and substantial climate and environmental harm is strong.

Exaggerating AI’s climate potential distracts from the real costs of massive, energy- and water-hungry data centres imposed on communities worldwide.

Nathan Taft, Senior Campaigner Stand.earth, said: “The sheer scale of these AI data center buildouts could have global implications for the climate, and it also comes with serious impacts for local communities. The least these corporations can do is ensure that demand isn’t met with fossil fuels that pollute local communities. Hyperscalers can’t hand-wave away community concerns with sleight-of-hand promises of future clean energy, or greenwash its ongoing love affair with fossil fuels — these new data centers must be backed by new, locally sourced, 24/7 renewable energy before they go online, or not go online at all.”

The accelerated growth of AI is increasing pressure on the climate, and Big Tech must take responsibility for mitigating its environmental impacts. Companies must disclose their energy consumption and emissions, and be transparent about the environmental and social justice impacts of their technologies, and whether data centres are really serving the critical needs of society. 

CONTACTS

Jill McArdle, International Corporate Campaigner, Beyond Fossil Fuels, jill.mcardle@bff.earth, mobile +32 456 723 993 (English)
Pierre Terras, Corporate Programme Lead, Beyond Fossil Fuels, pierre.terras@bff.earth , mobile +33 646 90 21 04 (French, Spanish, English)
Shane Reese, Corporate Campaigns Media Director, Stand.earth, shane.reese@stand.earth , mobile +1 919 339 3785 (English)

Source: https://foe.org/news/report-exposes-big-techs-ai-climate-hoax/

The claim energy guzzling AI is a tool to reduce emissions always was an absurdity. But why would big tech persist with such nonsense?

More than 1,000 Amazon workers warn rapid AI rollout threatens jobs and climate

Workers say the firm’s ‘warp-speed’ approach fuels pressure, layoffs and rising emissions

Varsha Bansal
Sat 29 Nov 2025 00.50 AEDT

More than 1,000 Amazon employees have signed an open letter expressing “serious concerns” about AI development, saying that the company’s “all-costs justified, warp speed” approach to the powerful technology will cause damage to “democracy, to our jobs, and to the earth.”

The letter, published on Wednesday, was signed by the Amazon workers anonymously, and comes a month after Amazon announced mass layoff plans as it increases adoption of AI in its operations.

Among the signatories are staffers in a range of positions, including engineers, product managers and warehouse associates.

Reflecting broader AI concerns across the industry, the letter was also supported by more than 2,400 workers from companies including Meta, Google, Apple and Microsoft.

…

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/28/amazon-ai-climate-change

The open letter makes interesting reading;

Dear Andy Jassy and S-team,

In recent years, tech leaders have accelerated their race to build the most powerful AI first. “Sink or swim,” “AI is not going anywhere,” and “work with it or be replaced” have become mantras in workspaces at Amazon and beyond. 

We, the undersigned Amazon employees, have serious concerns about this aggressive rollout during the global rise of authoritarianism and our most important years to reverse the climate crisis. We believe that the all-costs-justified, warp-speed approach to AI development will do staggering damage to democracy, to our jobs, and to the earth.

We’re the workers who develop, train, and use AI, so we have a responsibility to intervene. Here’s why we’re sounding the alarm:

• Amazon is casting aside its climate goals to build AI. We have just a few years to stop disastrous levels of warming. Yet despite committing to net zero carbon emissions by 2040, Amazon’s annual emissions have grown roughly 35% since 2019. The AI race is widening this gap. The company plans to spend $150 billion building new data centers for AI. Many of these will be in drought-stressed regions, where they will consume scarce water, or in locations where their energy demands will force utility companies to keep coal plants online or build new gas plants. Amazon even killed legislation that would have required its data centers to use clean energy. Meanwhile, AWS is helping oil companies drill for more oil and gas. 
• Amazon is forcing us to use AI while investing in a future where it’s easier to discard us. Andy Jassy promised that soon Amazon will be full of AI tools and “agents,” and that he expects to employ fewer humans. He claims our (remaining) jobs will be “even more exciting and fun,” but here’s what we’re actually experiencing: higher expected output and shorter timelines, mandates to build AI tools for wasteful use cases, and massive investment in AI with little investment in career advancement. Our logistics coworkers have been especially impacted by work speedups, surveillance, injuries and burnout. All this, while Amazon is attempting to declare the National Labor Relations Board, which protects workers’ rights, unconstitutional. 
• Amazon is helping build a more militarized surveillance state with fewer protections for ordinary people. Amazon, alongside Meta, Microsoft and Google lobbied to ban state regulation on AI for the next ten years; Trump financially disincentivized state regulatory action in his AI Action Plan. Trump demanded an end to “wokeness” in AI; Amazon has scaled back its commitments to DEI and offered the administration a 1 billion dollar coupon for AWS, with a DOGE staffer calling the deal “a foundational piece to help implement President Trump’s AI Action Plan.” The military wants AI technologies at top speed; Amazon has announced a collaboration with an autonomous weapons software company. Trump’s ICE Director wants to run mass deportation “like Prime, but with human beings”; Amazon, a major provider of cloud services to DHS and to Palantir, literally does power mass deportation. Amazon is expanding the surveillance state in other ways, too. It’s making Ring AI-first and re-introducing a tool for police to request footage; it’s using AI to surveil warehouse workers, and, of course, its own customers. Finally, Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, and has begun asserting more control over that publication; the other major AI players control mass information ecosystems like Instagram and X. If these collaborations continue, we will be ceding an unbelievable amount of power into the hands of an increasingly authoritarian government and a few companies willing to abandon any principles they claim to have in the race for AI dominance.

All of this is daunting, but none of it is inevitable. A better future is still very much within reach, but it requires us to get real about the costs of AI and the guardrails we need.

We demand Amazon leadership commit to the following:

1. No AI with dirty energy.
   No more vague promises that “AI will solve the climate crisis.” Amazon must implement a public plan that includes: 1) powering all data centers with 100% additional, local renewable energy, 24/7, 2) ending custom AI solutions for oil & gas companies to drill more oil faster, and 3) publishing a detailed, science-backed glidepath for how it will meet its climate commitments.
2. No AI without employee voices.
   We want ethical AI working groups of non-managers across the company that will have significant ownership over org-level goals and how or if AI should be used in their orgs, how or if AI-related layoffs or headcount freezes are implemented, and how to mitigate or minimize the collateral effects of AI use, such as environmental impact. 
3. No AI for violence, surveillance, or mass deportation.
   Amazon sells a huge range of products and services — from physical goods to digital infrastructure to films to medical services. It should not need to be helping surveil civilians in Gaza, collaborating with AI companies that specialize in drone warfare, or supporting a mass deportation machine.

The Amazon employees signing this letter believe in building a better world — not in building bunkers to fall back to. We want the promised gains from AI to give everyone more freedom to play and rest, to spend time with family and friends, to be moved by nature, to create, to feel safe being who we are. 

This is an incredibly consequential moment in history. It’s time for us to step up and spark a conversation about the real benefits and costs of AI. Workers have guided Amazon to a better path before, and we can do it again. The choices we make now, for the planet, for its people and animals, matter more than ever. Let’s make ones we can be proud of.

Signed,

1,235 Amazon employees (and counting!)

Job titles and Amazon organizations listed below. We will update the signatories periodically after verification. Add your signature below.

4,034  people outside of Amazon (and counting!)

…

Read more: https://www.amazonclimatejustice.org/open-letter?ms=nai

The point is it’s not just warehouse staff who are about to lose their jobs, the very people who are developing AI are protesting against AI’s climate footprint. AI developers are demanding AI be low carbon, and not be used in ways which offend their left wing sensibilities.

How can big tech fix this staff rebellion? Because as the CEO of Honeywell recently explained, powering AI with renewables isn’t going to happen.

One possible solution to pacify radical tech giant staff is to reframe AI as an emissions reduction tool. Convincing big tech staff that AI is essential to solving the climate crisis might help keep them obedient and productive.

In summary, I don’t think big tech is serious about trying to convince the public to accept the absurd proposition that their new AI toys will help reduce global CO2 emissions. I believe the real target of big tech’s green propaganda campaign is their own staff. I believe big tech executives are spending billions on propaganda and, let’s say highly speculative energy projects, just to maintain the fiction amongst their own staff that tech leaders remain committed to reducing global CO2 emissions, even when tech giants’ soaring carbon footprints tell the opposite story.