A new environmental report reveals that Nvidia's supply chain emissions have skyrocketed 725% since 2020, with the company's chips now producing carbon emissions comparable to a major Russian coal producer. The analysis, conducted by eight climate and corporate accountability groups including Greenpeace International and Friends of the Earth, challenges Nvidia's public claims that artificial intelligence (AI) will reduce global emissions overall.

How Much Has Nvidia's Carbon Footprint Really Grown?

The numbers paint a stark picture of the AI boom's environmental cost. Nvidia's Scope 3 emissions, which measure indirect pollution from its supply chain and product use, climbed from approximately 1.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2020 to 10.7 million tonnes in 2026, according to figures compiled from the company's own sustainability reports. That represents an increase of roughly 9.4 million tonnes in just six years.

The report estimates that operating Nvidia chips sold since 2022 could have generated between four and 21 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2025 alone, depending on the electricity sources powering the data centers where these chips run. To put that in perspective, researchers compared this output to the emissions from burning coal sold by Russian state-owned company Russian Coal.

Where Do These Emissions Actually Come From?

The explosion in Nvidia's carbon footprint stems primarily from upstream manufacturing, not just the electricity consumed when chips operate. According to Greenpeace East Asia, one of the organizations behind the report, the increase was driven largely by emissions from producing components, materials, and manufacturing services required for Nvidia's graphics processing units (GPUs) and AI systems. Advanced semiconductor production is extraordinarily energy-intensive, requiring significant power and resources to extract raw materials, fabricate chips, and assemble finished products.

Once installed in data centers, these chips continue consuming electricity around the clock to run AI models and process data. This dual impact, both in manufacturing and operation, explains why Nvidia's environmental footprint has grown so dramatically alongside the explosive expansion of AI infrastructure worldwide.

What Are the Key Sources of Nvidia's Emissions?

• Manufacturing and Production: Raw material extraction and semiconductor fabrication account for the largest share of Nvidia's Scope 3 emissions, with much of this work outsourced to suppliers in East Asia.
• Chip Operation: Once deployed in data centers, Nvidia chips consume electricity continuously to power AI models, training, and inference tasks, with emissions varying based on grid electricity sources.
• Supply Chain Complexity: Nvidia's reliance on a global network of component suppliers and manufacturing partners creates additional indirect emissions across multiple countries and production stages.

The report's authors argue that Nvidia has obscured the true scale of its climate impact by not disclosing emissions from the actual use of its sold chips. Instead, the company reports only Scope 3 supply chain emissions, leaving a significant portion of its environmental footprint invisible to regulators and the public.

Is Nvidia's "Green AI" Claim Credible?

Nvidia has publicly argued that AI will ultimately reduce global emissions by improving efficiency across other industries. Josh Parker, Nvidia's head of sustainability, told climate news outlet Heatmap in May that a rapidly growing consensus supports AI's potential to deliver net emissions reductions, citing organizations including the International Energy Agency, World Economic Forum, Boston Consulting Group, and Grantham Institute.

"The very rapidly growing consensus is that AI is most likely to lead to net emissions reductions, especially if it's deployed broadly," said Josh Parker, Nvidia's head of sustainability.

Josh Parker, Head of Sustainability at Nvidia

However, the environmental groups behind the report reject this framing as greenwashing. They argue that efficiency gains in other sectors may not offset the massive year-round increase in electricity demand as more data centers come online globally. Ketan Joshi, lead author of the report and an Oslo-based climate and energy analyst, stated bluntly that Nvidia's environmental claims mask the reality of ballooning pollution.

"The biggest AI profiteer also has one of the world's most obscured and opaque climate footprints. NVIDIA's claims that AI has a 'net climate benefit' are a greenwashing tactic used by the industry to mask ballooning pollution," said Ketan Joshi.

Ketan Joshi, Lead Author and Climate and Energy Analyst

The report also challenges Nvidia's claim about "demand response," a practice where data centers temporarily reduce electricity use during peak demand periods. While Nvidia has presented this flexibility as supporting the energy transition, researchers citing Princeton University research argue that demand response covers less than 1% of the year in scenarios with high data center growth, making it insufficient to offset the overall surge in electricity consumption.

What Changes Are Experts Calling For?

The eight organizations behind the report, which include Beyond Fossil Fuels and Stand.earth, are demanding greater transparency and accountability from Nvidia. Their recommendations focus on several concrete steps the company should take to address its environmental impact and provide clearer information to policymakers and the public.

• Emissions Disclosure: Nvidia should publicly disclose emissions from the use of its sold chips, not just supply chain emissions, giving stakeholders a complete picture of the technology's true environmental cost.
• Supply Chain Reduction Targets: The company should set clearer, more ambitious targets to cut supply chain emissions and increase investment in renewable energy sources powering its manufacturing partners.
• Data Center Impact Accounting: Nvidia must account for the wider emissions impact of data center growth driven by AI demand, rather than relying on narrow efficiency arguments to justify expansion.
• Evidence for Climate Claims: The company should provide stronger, peer-reviewed evidence supporting its assertions that AI can deliver a net climate benefit, rather than citing general consensus from organizations with financial interests in AI growth.

Jill McArdle, an international corporate campaigner at Beyond Fossil Fuels, emphasized that Europe is being sold a false narrative about AI's environmental benefits. She warned that Big Tech's massive buildout of data centers and fossil fuel infrastructure contradicts the "green AI" marketing message, and called on decision-makers to deprioritize data centers controlled by large technology companies.

"Europe is being sold a fantasy of 'green' AI while Big Tech drives a massive build-out of emission-pumping data centres and fossil-fuel infrastructure. Calling this a climate-friendly technology revolution doesn't make it one, it's greenwashing designed to secure Big Tech's profits while locking Europe into more gas and energy dependence," said Jill McArdle.

Jill McArdle, International Corporate Campaigner at Beyond Fossil Fuels

The report represents one of the most detailed environmental critiques of Nvidia's role in the AI boom to date. As governments worldwide grapple with balancing AI innovation against climate commitments, the pressure on Nvidia to demonstrate genuine environmental responsibility, rather than rely on efficiency promises, is likely to intensify.