July 29, 2025 – It seems like no matter how you’re using technology these days, artificial intelligence (AI) is lurking nearby: in a search result, in a navigation menu, or even popping up as a chatbot with a human name. Tech companies are promising a brighter future fueled by AI and investors are buying the hype, literally: during the first quarter of 2025, 57.9% of global venture capital investments went to AI and machine learning.

But what are users getting in return? As society seemingly jumps into the deep end of the AI pool, we need to understand the harms it’s inflicting on the world.

AI Needs Huge Data Centers to Run, And They Are Major Polluters

The data centers that power AI models and their tools (sometimes called hyperscale data centers) require an immense amount of power because every prompt or task requires supercomputers to complete countless calculations. That’s much different than traditional computing or how a search engine works, for instance. As MIT News reports, “researchers have estimated that a ChatGPT query consumes about five times more electricity than a simple web search.”  

This demand for electricity is rising at four times the rate of the overall rise in consumption and, according to one report, is expected to equal that of the entire country of Japan by next year. The power plants that provide the electricity often burn fossil fuels to create it, emitting lots of harmful pollution along the way. Research by Morgan Stanley projects that data center emissions globally will be 2.5bn metric tons of CO2 equivalent by 2030 – that’s like adding an extra 116 million gasoline cars to the road each year.

Take, for example, the case of Memphis, Tennessee and Elon Musk’s xAI. The Tennessee Lookout reports, “The facility’s behemoth methane gas turbines increase Memphis’s smog by 30-60% as they belch planet-warming nitrogen oxides and poisonous formaldehyde around the clock, pollutants linked to respiratory and cardiovascular disease.” 

Despite touting commitments to reduce the carbon emissions which are baking our planet, major tech companies have actually been increasing their emissions due to their expanding AI programs. Between 2020 and 2023, the emissions of Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Meta, and Microsoft have each increased, on average, by 150%. 

They Strain Our Already-Strained Energy Grid

The Energy Department has reported that AI could suck up 12% of the U.S. energy supply by 2028. Meanwhile, the general rise in consumption has strained much of the world’s energy infrastructure already while we struggle to build out renewable alternatives that protect the planet. Meeting the sudden increased demand of these data centers not only sets back the climate goals of tech companies, it sets back progress around the world. 

“It’s not sustainable to keep building at the rate [Google is] building because they need to scale their compute within planetary limits,” one researcher told The Guardian. “We do not have enough green energy to serve the needs of Google and certainly not the needs of Google and the rest of us.”

Similarly, another researcher told MIT News, “The demand for new data centers cannot be met in a sustainable way. The pace at which companies are building new data centers means the bulk of the electricity to power them must come from fossil fuel-based power plants.”

This surge in growth is already impacting how the rest of us receive energy. A 2024 Bloomberg report found data centers are “distorting the normal flow of electricity for millions of Americans,” which stresses power grids and can damage home appliances and power equipment. The scale of these operations means that when things go wrong, they can go really wrong, putting entire regions at risk of power outages.  

They Soak Up Water Like a Giant Sponge

Energy isn’t the only resource AI depends on. If you’ve ever heard a laptop fan turn on or felt a phone warm up after hours of scrolling, you already understand the basics of why data centers also require immense amounts of water. When supercomputers parse through user prompts and train new models, they heat up. To cool them, many data centers run cold water through pipes. 

When tech companies seek sites for their facilities, “Because electricity is more costly for data centers than water, companies often prioritize building their facilities in places with cheap power, even if the area is drought stricken. That has exacerbated water shortages across the world,” a Stanford hydrologist told The New York Times.

Their water consumption makes these sites particularly bad neighbors. The New York Times also reports that in areas with data centers “local wells have been damaged, the cost of municipal water has soared and the county’s water commission may face a shortage of the vital resource.” This has done so much damage in Newton County, Georgia, for example, that it’s on track to be in a water deficit by 2030. 

Supercomputers Aren’t for “Super Users.” They’re Meeting Our Demand

Make no mistake: this massive energy consumption is not only fueling industrial and commercial-scale AI projects. Every instance of generative AI, including public-facing tools, contribute to this waste. 

The International Energy Agency recently studied the impacts of individual user actions. They estimate that the power required to generate a large amount of text is equivalent to running an LED bulb for an hour, and that the power required to create an eight-second video is equivalent to charging a laptop twice. Another study indicated that text generation (like what ChatGPT does) “used 10 times as much energy compared with simple classification tasks like sorting emails into folders.”

It’s no secret that generative AI models frequently “hallucinate” by making up information or otherwise answering queries incorrectly. If you do want the right answer, it turns out sustainability is a significant trade-off. One study found that more accurate (and thus more complex) models produced as much as three times more emissions.

And public AI tools are popular. A 2023 study found that 1 in 4 Americans say they use AI several times a day and another 28% say they use it about once a day. ChatGPT has 400 million weekly active users. That is a lot of energy consumption, and a lot of pollution.  

In the end, fighting the climate crisis is a systemic and collective issue requiring systemic and collective solutions. Plus, tech companies are making it harder and harder to opt out of AI. But as with any system, individual choice does play a role and widespread adoption of resource-intensive, polluting products instead of existing, efficient tools is a big part of the problem. 

The “AI revolution” is not inevitable, despite what public figures would like us to think. Any major shift in technology requires public buy-in. It is up to us all to demand a future that allows us to take advantage of progress without compromising the environment.

WYALUSING, Pa. — Late Friday, in response to data requests from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Delaware River Partners and Bradford County Real Estate Partners confirmed that they do not intend to cancel their Wyalusing liquefaction facility and Gibbstown export facility, despite the U.S. Department of Transportation decision last September to suspend authorization to transport LNG by rail car. The Wyalusing and Gibbstown facilities are part of a logistically and financially connected LNG export project contemplated by New Fortress Energy. 

If constructed, the Fortress LNG export project will transport explosive LNG by truck, including through the densely-populated, environmental justice communities in eastern Pennsylvania and western New Jersey between Wyalusing, PA and Gibbstown, NJ for export overseas. The Wyalusing liquefaction facility will emit more than a million tons of climate-polluting greenhouse gases and hundreds of tons of toxic air pollutants each year. 

The Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, and PennFuture successfully sued to halt construction on the Wyalusing facility in March 2022. Later that year, the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council filed a petition for a declaratory order urging FERC to exercise oversight over the Fortress LNG export project.

In response, the Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, and PennFuture issued the following statements: 

“By continuing to pursue this dangerous LNG export project, Delaware River Partners, Bradford County Real Estate Partners, and New Fortress Energy are putting the lives of millions of Pennsylvanians and New Jerseyans at risk,” said Patrick Grenter, Sierra Club Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign director. “The last thing we need is even more dangerous methane gas extracted from Pennsylvania, shipped through our communities by truck, and exported overseas — all while residents face worsening illnesses, higher healthcare costs, and increased energy bills caused by gas exports. This decision is unnecessary and reckless, and the Sierra Club is prepared to continue fighting this project until it is officially canceled.”

“The proposed scheme to make liquified natural gas in Northern Pennsylvania, ship it through our communities for hundreds of miles, and then export it to overseas markets from a facility on the shore of the Delaware River is absurd at best and deadly at worst,” adds Abigail M. Jones, Vice President of Legal and Policy at PennFuture. “Despite continued losses that prove just how unworkable this scheme is, these companies are now doubling down on a plan to deliver highly explosive LNG through some of Pennsylvania’s most vulnerable communities via trucks. Pennsylvanians will not benefit from this plan. We do not need more fossil fuel development; we need to focus our economic development priorities on the future: clean, renewable energy and green, sustainable industries.” 

“The Wyalusing and Gibbstown LNG facilities promise to lock us into dirty air and millions of tons of climate-heating pollution for decades while raising energy prices at home,” said Alex Bomstein, Clean Air Council Executive Director. “This ill-conceived proposal has no place in our Pennsylvania and New Jersey communities. We will never stop fighting these dirty and dangerous LNG facilities.”

HARRISBURG, PA [August 23, 2023] — Today, PennFuture, the Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, Protect Penn-Trafford, and Earthworks filed a joint lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including Governor Josh Shapiro and the General Assembly, challenging the constitutionality of a law that prevents the Commonwealth from protecting communities from the harm caused by abandoned methane wells. 

Thousands of abandoned, unplugged wells in Pennsylvania leak methane and other harmful chemicals into the air and water, harming public health and worsening the climate crisis. They mar communities, reduce property values, and depress the local tax base. They are also at risk of explosion. 

The Commonwealth has the ability to require oil and gas companies to pay a bond to ensure that these wells don’t go abandoned and unplugged. But in 2022, the Pennsylvania legislature passed Act 96, which removed the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB)’s authority to adjust well bonding amounts and capped the amount for conventional wells at just $2,500 per well. 

“When it passed Act 96, the Pennsylvania legislature tied the hands of regulators, blocking them from making common-sense changes to bonding requirements that would speed up plugging of these wells,” said Kelsey Krepps, Sierra Club’s Senior Field Organizer. “This lawsuit asks the court to rule Act 96 unconstitutional under the Environmental Rights Amendment, clearing the way for regulators to adopt policies that keep cleanup costs where they belong: with the operators who profit from these wells, not the communities who have to live with ongoing pollution from abandoned wells.”

Well bond amounts — the money drilling companies have to put aside for cleanup and plugging before being allowed to drill a new well — no longer cover the costs of closing a well, which means if an oil or gas company goes out of business and abandons their wells, the cost of plugging those wells falls to Pennsylvania taxpayers. 

“We’d like to see the well bonding amounts reflect the actual cost of well plugging to ensure there is no financial incentive for drillers to abandon their wells and leave taxpayers on the hook,” said PennFuture Senior Attorney Jessica O’Neill. “Sufficient bonding amounts are necessary to protect community and environmental health, as well as local economies, from the pollution that stems from abandoned and uncapped non-producing conventional gas wells.”

The Sierra Club commissioned a report by Dr. Jeremy Weber of the University of Pittsburgh to investigate the bonding amounts for well plugging and the regulatory recommendations that would influence the requests in the two rulemaking petitions. The published 2021 report found that plugging conventional wells costs at least $38,000 per well, 900% more than the General Assembly’s cap.

“If you or I were to dirty someone else’s property, the law would hold us accountable,” said Joseph Minott, Clean Air Council Executive Director and Chief Counsel. “Yet Pennsylvania’s Legislature passed a law to give gas and oil drillers a pass for doing the same thing. That’s not just wrong; it’s unconstitutional.”

“Oil and gas companies will continue to abandon wells recklessly and pollute Pennsylvania communities until our state government requires them to set aside adequate funds to clean up their mess,” said Melissa Ostroff, Earthworks Pennsylvania Policy and Field Advocate. “Current bonding requirements do not protect Pennsylvanians. The rights protected by the Pennsylvania Constitution empower and obligate the Commonwealth to prevent bad operators from walking away from the harmful pollution they leave behind.”

“The Pennsylvania Constitution charges our government with protecting our clean air and water,” said Gillian Graber, Executive Director of Protect PT. “But since they are falling short, we must hold them accountable.”

Carbon Tracker’s Asset Retirement Obligations Portal estimates that it would cost $15 billion to plug all the orphan and abandoned gas wells in Pennsylvania. But the state currently has only 

$47.2 million in bonding available to plug these wells.

Harrisburg, PA (November 3, 2022) This afternoon, Governor Wolf signed 66 bills into law, including House Bill 1059, a roughly $2 billion tax credit package, over 90% of which goes toward supporting additional fracked gas (aka methane) extraction and combustion. A gut-and-replace amendment to HB1059 – a previously unrelated tax code bill – was introduced in the Senate Appropriations Committee on October 26th. The completely revamped legislation passed the PA Senate that afternoon and the PA House that evening. The bill provides up to $50 million annually in tax credits for manufacturing facilities located within a future Regional Hydrogen Hub that purchase and burn either methane or hydrogen (2024-2044). The bill also provides an additional $30 million annually in tax credits for petrochemical or fertilizer facilities that purchase and burn Pennsylvania methane as a feedstock (2024-2050).

Joseph Otis Minott, Esq., Executive Director and Chief Counsel of Clean Air Council, issued the following statement:

“We knew HB1059 would become law once it was presented to Governor Wolf. His administration directly negotiated this package and aggressively pushed for it to be rushed through during the last week of legislative session in Harrisburg. Even so, Clean Air Council remains deeply disappointed and alarmed. The text of this bill was publicly available for less than 12 hours before passing through both chambers in the General Assembly. There’s a reason this was negotiated in the dark.”

“Investing an additional $30 million on methane subsidies every single year through 2050 to support a petrochemical refinery boondoggle in Luzerne County is awful policy for state taxpayers and our climate. And the $1 billion investment in manufacturing facilities that burn methane inside a potential Hydrogen Hub has the potential to drive more methane and carbon pollution. The bill doesn’t even define “clean hydrogen” in a manner consistent with the U.S. Department of Energy’s proposed Clean Hydrogen Production Standard, but rather as any hydrogen that “demonstrably aids achievement” of that standard, a massive loophole. Pennsylvania must join the rest of the country in an all-out mobilization to confront the climate crisis, and billions in additional fossil fuel subsidies are simply unacceptable. The next administration needs to internalize this message and embrace a different path.”