Big Tech On The Path To Net Zero

July 11, 2024 Francis Menton @Manhattan Contrarian

Among the adherents to the cult of climate change, nobody can claim a higher level of sanctimony than the Big Tech behemoths — the likes of Google, Microsoft and Meta. These new economic titans fancy themselves to be totally unlike the dirty and grubby industrial companies of the past, like the steel, automobile or oil producers with their belching smokestacks. Each of these new tech powerhouses loudly proclaims its sacred and unwavering commitment to “net zero” emissions by some early date, typically 2030.

And each of them puts out an annual report documenting its progress toward the rapidly arriving nirvana. Here is Google’s 2024 “Environmental Report”; Microsoft’s “2024 Environmental Sustainability Report”; and Meta’s “2023 Sustainability Report”.

But don’t these companies use vast quantities of energy in their operations, not the least for rapidly expanding data centers? Surely, their “emissions” must be increasing. How are they going to spin that?

The disconnect between the “net zero” fantasies and the rapidly increasing energy usage makes these Reports entertaining reading.

Let’s start with Google. Its Report follows the same strategy as the others — an introduction filled with happy talk about the coming net zero nirvana, and then the bad news minimized and/or buried somewhere deep inside to the extent possible. Here are a few excerpts from the introductory letter from Google’s “Chief Sustainability Officer,” Kate Brandt:

Since our earliest days, we’ve been on an ambitious journey to help build a more sustainable future. . . . To help minimize our environmental footprint, we’ve built world-leading efficient infrastructure for the AI era. . . . We strive to build the world’s most energy-efficient computing infrastructure. . . . In 2017, Google became the first major company to match 100% of our annual electricity consumption on a global basis with renewable energy, which we’ve achieved every year since [what does that mean?]. . . . Building on our first two decades of progress, in 2020 we launched our third decade of climate action—our most ambitious yet.

Etc., etc., etc. But OK guys, are your emissions actually going up or down? To find out the answer, you’ll have to delve into some fine print in a chart on page 7. The chart is headed “Targets and progress summary.” Here is one “target,” plus some information on the “progress”:

• Target: Net-zero carbon. We aim to achieve net-zero emissions across all of our operations and value chain by 2030. Reduce 50% of our combined Scope 1, 2 (market-based), and 3 absolute emissions (compared to our 2019 base year) by 2030.
• Progress: Our total GHG emissions were 14.3 million tCO2e, representing a 13% year-over-year increase and a 48% increase compared to our 2019 target base year—primarily due to increases in data center energy consumption and supply chain emissions.

Oops! It looks like things are going the wrong direction, and rather rapidly.

Robert Bryce got to the Google Report before I did with a July 7 post headlined “Google’s Net Zero Plans Are Going Up In Smoke.” Bryce has used data found in Google’s Report to compile some charts of the company’s soaring energy usage, largely associated with new data centers to support AI. Here is a chart showing Google’s use of electricity from 2013 to 2023:

And are the others any different? Over at Microsoft, they are honest enough to include the gist of the bad news in the introduction. Of course it begins with the usual expression of loyalty to the tenets of the cult; but things go rapidly south from there. Here are relevant excerpts from the introduction (over the signatures of Brad Smith, Vice Chair and President, and Melanie Nakagawa, Chief Sustainability Officer):

Four years ago, Microsoft committed that by 2030 we would become carbon negative, water positive, zero waste, and protect more land than we use. . . . New technologies, including generative AI, hold promise for new innovations that can help address the climate crisis. At the same time, the infrastructure and electricity needed for these technologies create new challenges for meeting sustainability commitments across the tech sector. As we take stock as a company in 2024, we remain resolute in our commitment to meet our climate goals and to empower others with the technology needed to build a more sustainable future.

And, a few paragraphs on, the bad news:

Carbon reduction continues to be an area of focus, especially as we work to address Scope 3 emissions. In 2023, we saw our Scope 1 and 2 emissions decrease by 6.3% from our 2020 baseline. This area remains on track to meet our goals. But our indirect emissions (Scope 3) increased by 30.9%. In aggregate, across all Scopes 1–3, Microsoft’s emissions are up 29.1% from the 2020 baseline.

Oops again! Shall we check in with Meta? From the introductory message of Rachel Peterson, Vice President, Data Center Strategy:

Meta’s net zero in 2030 goal focuses on embedding sustainability into everything we do, whether designing products, commuting, selecting construction materials or working with suppliers to set their own net zero targets. For example, through our Net Zero program, we work closely with suppliers to determine their Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, set reduction targets and promote strategic action. We know that reaching net zero emissions across our value chain will not be an easy task. . . .

Ah, but once again, keep reading:

Right now, our Scope 3 emissions are increasing and will continue to do so as we work to support the global demand for the services we provide.

To get some quantification, you’ll have to make it to page 11:

Path to net zero. Early in this decade, we do not expect decarbonization and business growth to be in harmony. In fact, our emissions increased 46% in 2022 due to Meta employees returning to offices and because our business growth accelerated at a faster pace than we can scale decarbonization measures.

Whew! — 46% increase in emissions in one year!

The fact is that all the talk about “net zero” put out by these companies is pure fantasy. If they really think that emissions reductions are an important goal, they have only one realistic way of attempting to accomplish that, which is to contract for their own sources of nuclear power. Meanwhile, I look forward to somebody in the press holding them accountable.