ChatGPT and Carbon: Why I Still Use It (Responsibly) for Research and Writing

Lately, there’s been a growing conversation around the carbon footprint of AI tools like ChatGPT. You may have even seen the quote from MIT Sloan Management Review:

“A single ChatGPT query can generate 100 times more carbon than a regular Google search.” — Niklas Sundberg

That sounds alarming—and it's meant to be. But like most bold headlines, the truth lives in the nuance.

One brief aside and a counter view: Stop pretending you know what AI does to the economy - Alarmism is everywhere, but a lot of it is just brainworms. - Noah Smith: 

Let’s break it down.

---

💨 How Much CO₂ Are We Talking About, Really?

A typical Google search emits about 0.2 grams of CO₂—that’s the energy equivalent of turning on a lightbulb for 17 seconds or driving a car for one meter. Tiny.

By comparison, a single ChatGPT prompt is estimated to emit between 1 to 4 grams of CO₂, depending on how complex the query is, what model is used (e.g., GPT-3.5 vs. GPT-4), and the efficiency of the data center running it.

That’s 5 to 20 times more energy than a Google search, on average.

Where did the “100 times” come from? That figure reflects worst-case scenarios—like high-load, inefficient systems or unusually long and complex prompts. It’s not a lie, but it’s definitely the high end of the range.

---

🧠 So Why Do I Still Use ChatGPT All the Time?

As someone who writes, researches, and creates constantly, I rely on ChatGPT—not because I’m lazy, but because it’s efficient in other ways that matter too:

✅ Fewer Queries, More Insight

One in-depth ChatGPT session can often replace dozens of Google searches, article reads, and open browser tabs. That might mean less energy used in the big picture.

✅ Faster Drafting, Smarter Thinking

I use it to brainstorm, organize thoughts, summarize complex articles, or reframe my own writing. The time savings and mental clarity it offers helps me produce better work—with fewer rewrites, re-researching, or wasted drafts.

✅ Digital Footprints vs. Physical Waste

Let’s not forget: before tools like this, I was printing articles, buying physical books, and consuming more offline energy and materials. In some cases, ChatGPT actually replaces higher-carbon alternatives.

---

🌱 Sustainability Isn’t Just About One Query

While it’s true that AI tools use more energy, the right way to think about your digital footprint is holistically:

• Are you using the tool thoughtfully?

• Are you reducing redundant searches or wasted effort?

• Are you replacing more carbon-intensive alternatives (like driving to a library or printing pages)?

AI infrastructure is also becoming more efficient. Companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google are greening their data centers, investing in renewable energy, and refining models to require less power per response.

---

🔚 Final Thoughts

Yes, ChatGPT uses more carbon than a Google search. But when used strategically, it can actually lead to fewer total queries, deeper insights, and better outcomes.

Just like any technology, the goal isn’t zero impact—it’s smart impact. And for those of us who live by research, writing, and creation, the trade-off can be worth it—especially if we remain conscious of how and why we use it.

If we’re going to talk about carbon, let’s talk about context too.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT