The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
Is generative AI bad for the environment? A computer scientist explains the carbon footprint of ChatGPT and its cousins
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“While one largescale generative AI model would not cause much environmental damage, if numerous companies developed models with slight di ff erences for various purposes -such as detecting extortion, electoral disinformation, and AI sexual abuse content -each used by millions of users, the high demand for energy could undeniably become unsustainable (Saenko 2023).”
From Generative AI and deepfakes: a human rights approach to tackling harmful content (2024) · cites this paper as Saenko 2023
Citations
Cites
Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP
Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.02243 · Cited by 3,735
Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP
Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1355 · Cited by 3,684
Carbon Emissions and Large Neural Network Training
Patterson, D., Gonzalez, J., Le, Q., Liang, C., Munguia, L.-M., Rothchild, D., So, D., Texier, M., & Dean, J. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.10350 · Cited by 486
Estimating the Carbon Footprint of BLOOM, a 176B Parameter Language Model
Luccioni, A. S., Viguier, S., & Ligozat, A.-L. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.02001 · Cited by 378
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- 10.48550/arxiv.2104.10350 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Generative AI and deepfakes: a human rights approach to tackling harmful content
Romero Moreno, F. (2024) · International Review of Law, Computers & Technology · doi:10.1080/13600869.2024.2324540 · Cited by 117
Huang, J., Bibri, S. E., & Keel, P. E. (2025) · Environmental Science and Ecotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.ese.2025.100526 · Cited by 108
The Future of Research in an Artificial Intelligence-Driven World
Kulkarni, M., Mantere, S., Vaara, E., van den Broek, E., Pachidi, S., Glaser, V. L., Gehman, J., Petriglieri, G., Lindebaum, D., Cameron, L. D., et al. (2024) · Journal of Management Inquiry · doi:10.1177/10564926231219622 · Cited by 80
Bibri, S. E., & Huang, J. (2025) · Environmental Science and Ecotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.ese.2025.100591 · Cited by 75
From E-Waste to Eco-Wonder: Resurrecting Computers for a Sustainable Future
Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Orlando, J. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16083363 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Saenko, K.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Saenko, Kate
- ORCID
- Saenko, Kate
- Publisher
- The Conversation Media Group Ltd
- Published
- 2023-05-23
- OpenAlex
- W4413603376
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Green IT and Sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Energy Efficiency in Computing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- generative AI, carbon footprint, ChatGPT, environmental impact of AI, large language models, energy consumption
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
