Hidden under all the ‘AI’: Big tech companies are missing their climate targets
The AI-fication of everything has a steep price tag. Digging through the latest environmental progress reports published by Alibaba, Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Tencent, the discrepancy between marketing speak and actual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions data is striking — and hugely concerning. Across the industry, emissions are rising rather than decreasing and the language with which alleged wins are celebrated is getting bolder … in how clearly it is misleading.
This might be a good moment to pause and ask: Is this ‘AI’-hype train really worth getting on? Who is benefiting? And who pays?
Compared to my analyses from 2022, 2023, 2024, this year’s assessment was particularly bleak. Details under each company, respectively.
In short
The table with emissions data from 2022–2024 presents the overall reported amounts in million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (mtCO2e), as well as the emissions trajectory in terms of reduction 🟢, stagnation 🟡, or growth 🛑.
In detail
Alibaba
Alibaba’s 2025 ESG progress report puts their overall emissions at 10.26 million mtCO2e. Their progress report generally combines environmental, social, and governance questions, which often means that the introduction that anchors their report conveniently cherry-picks which ‘win’ to emphasise. In 2025, Eddie Wu, CEO of Alibaba Group is quoted:
“ESG is a vital benchmark for measuring and refining the quality of Alibaba’s growth. In FY2025, we advanced our AI capabilities and stayed deeply committed to the principle of technology for good.”
‘AI’ is used as a trump card that allegedly makes everything better. Alibaba’s GHG emissions, however, have not actually decreased. Though their report tries to make you believe otherwise and claims a 5% reduction in scope 1 and 2, and a 2.7% reduction in emissions intensity per revenue in scope 3 (p. 28). The data fact sheet in the Appendix includes the corrected and normalised historical data, however, which puts their overall emissions in 2022 at 9.9 million, in 2023 at 10.3 million, and in 2024 at 10.26 million mtCO2e. The ‘math’ of alleged reductions is hence hard to follow.
Amazon
As of July 8, 2025, Amazon has not yet published their environmental progress report with data for the financial year of 2024.
Reading some of their interim announcements around carbon credits and their bets on ‘AI’ to improve sustainability in their supply chain, leaves me in doubt. I’m prepared for their report to account for an increase in electricity demands, investments in the automation of their logistics infrastructure, and doubling down on the nuclear bandwagon — that are supposed to pay off at some point in the future. But increase emissions in the interim.
Apple
Apple is an interesting outlier, both in terms of the transparency of their reporting and their trajectory in the tech scene. Their 2025 environmental progress report summarises that Apple reduced their overall emissions by 60% since 2015, not including offsets, to 15.3 million mtCO2e in 2024. This keeps them on track for their 75% reduction goal by 2030 — but won’t be enough to reach 90% reduction by 2050 (as would be required under science-based targets) due to fossil structures outside their control. Engagement and advocacy are therefore featuring more prominently (p. 71ff), critically with a continued focus on renewable energy (wind, solar, hydroelectricity).
A significant part of their emissions reduction rests in their dedication to recycle all materials for their products. A feat that is only possible because of their market dominance and the sheer number of products sold to date that can be recycled. Interestingly, this latest report mentions open sourcing software they developed to recover recyclable materials for the first time (p. 46). A commitment to keep track off.
Google (Alphabet)
Google’s 2025 environmental report accounts for 15.19 million mtCO2e in overall GHG emissions, a 6.2% increase compared to the previous year. And a 54% increase since 2019, their baseline year. Note: they calculate a 51% increase by calculating with their ‘ambition-based emissions’, which leave out part of their scope 3. And accounted by location-based emissions in scope 2, yet another 8 million mtCO2e would come on top (p. 105).
In Google’s report, everything is about ‘AI’. In their own words: “We’re proud to release our tenth annual Environmental Report, which details how we’re working to address the increased energy demands of AI to enable this positive impact, while also showcasing how AI can be used to build a more energy-efficient and resilient world.” (p. 4)
Thing is, as much as they pitch and promise, the actual GHG accounting does not reflect progress or a credible strategy to reduce the additional emissions caused by ‘AI’ today and on par with their own science-based targets. For instance, their bet on small modular nuclear reactors won’t pay off before 2030 at the earliest (p. 25), if at all. Blaming a slow transition to clean energy and persistent obstacles to meet energy demand (p. 78), while continuing to widen their profit margin, does not address the question whether there is a way to limit ‘AI’ use to the energy available.
Meta
Meta has not yet released the climate progress report for financial year 2024. Since that was also the case, when I published my last blog, I’ll briefly look at Meta’s environmental data for 2023. In 2023, Meta accounted for 14.07 million mtCO2e. Their declared climate goals target 2031 and include a 42% reduction in scope 1 and 2 emissions as well as to not exceed their scope 3 emissions compared to 2021.
To be clear: Over 99% of Meta’s emissions stem from scope 3 — by pledging not to exceed these in 2031, they are not reducing anything at all and simply maintaining the status quo of their fossil footprint. These are not science-based targets, regardless of what they claim (p. 5).
Quoting their VP, Rachel Petersen: “The challenge of reaching our sustainability goals given the increased demand for energy and resources driven by AI is not unique to Meta. And it will require major shifts in how companies like ours operate.” (p. 3) — A shift they seem to be unwilling to even try and reflect in their climate targets, which do not include credible reductions.
Twisting facts as hearsay or ‘perception’, Meta laments the risk of “stigmatization of the sector due to the perception of GHG impacts of global technology infrastructure” (p. 46), rather than working to tackle their real-world measurable impact.
Microsoft
Microsoft’s 2025 progress report touts steadfast commitments to being carbon-negative by 2030 and Brad Smith, Vice Chair and President, and Melanie Nakagawa, Chief Sustainability Officer, are quoted: “At the heart of our approach is an understanding that sustainability is not simply a set of isolated initiatives, but a fundamental principle that must be integrated into every aspect of our business.” (p. 4)
Only to continue admitting that Microsoft’s “total emissions (Scope 1, 2, and 3) have increased by 23.4% compared to our 2020 baseline due to growth-related factors such as AI and cloud expansion.” (p.5) In 2024, their emissions amounted to 15.54 million mtCO2e. While this is lower than 2023, it is not on the promised reduction trajectory — and their scope 2 location-based emissions add another 9.7 million mtCO2e to their overall accounting (cf. data sheet).
There are a lot of examples around commitments to continue, to attempt, to work with; as well as promises to leverage the potential of ‘AI’ to advance progress. Only that most of these examples are talk about the future, not changes being implemented today. Among their bets for the future are investments in re-opening large-scale nuclear power plants — a move that policymakers should assess rigorously for its public risk potential, and carbon removal tech, which may yield results by 2030 at the earliest (p. 20ff). Uncertain and too late.
Tencent
Tencent’s latest ESG report doubles down on all things ‘AI’, for business, internal management, and the environment — with vague formulations, such as “we implemented cooling efficiency upgrades and applied AI algorithms to optimise energy consumption.” (p. 4) In the meantime, their overall emissions in 2024 amounted to 6.06 million mtCO2e — an increase of 4.5% compared to the previous year.
In contrast to this increase, their official emissions reduction target aims for a 70% reduction of scope 1 and 2 and a 30% reduction of scope 3 by 2030 compared to 2021. Most of this seems to bet on more renewable energy to become available (notably in China) as well as on their investments in carbon capture technologies to come to fruition. To date, this means their targets are merely a promise, not a measurable trajectory.
