# Using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment **Author:** Andy Masley **Published:** 13 January 2025 **Length:** Long-form essay (Reader reading time unavailable) ## In Summary Andy Masley challenges claims that individual use of ChatGPT is environmentally harmful, arguing that its energy and water consumption should be assessed proportionately and against comparable activities. Drawing on estimates of emissions, data-centre efficiency and water use, he suggests that attention to individual prompts distracts from more consequential systemic climate interventions. He nevertheless acknowledges local infrastructure pressures, uncertainty in consumption estimates and the greater demands of AI video generation. His central argument concerns the environmental significance of individual chatbot use, not the wider impacts of AI infrastructure. **Source:** [https://blog.andymasley.com/p/individual-ai-use-is-not-bad-for](https://blog.andymasley.com/p/individual-ai-use-is-not-bad-for) ## What might this mean for us? Could Electric Dreams distinguish the environmental consequences of individual AI use from those of institutional adoption and infrastructure expansion? Masley's argument invites a more proportionate approach to evaluating technological choices. How might Higher Education assess educational benefits against environmental costs without transferring responsibility to individual students, while retaining scrutiny of suppliers, procurement and aggregate demand? ## Links in this reading - [Summary of the essay's main arguments, Andy Masley](https://andymasley.substack.com/) - [Responses to critiques, Andy Masley](https://andymasley.substack.com/) - [Updated estimates of ChatGPT energy use, Sustainability by Numbers](https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/) - [International Energy Agency, energy and digitalisation research](https://www.iea.org/) - [Environmental impacts of AI data centres, MIT Energy Initiative](https://energy.mit.edu/)