OpenAI’s colossal AI data center targets would consume as much electricity as entire nation of India — 250GW target would require 30 million GPUs annually to ensure continuous operation, emit twice as much carbon dioxide as ExxonMobil
How much more artificial intelligence can the planet take?
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman released an internal memo last September 2025, stating that he plans to build up to 250 gigawatts of compute capacity by 2033. According to Truthdig, this is equivalent to the electricity required to power the entire nation of India and its 1.5 billion citizens. It would also emit twice the carbon dioxide that ExxonMobil produces, which the report says is the current “largest non-state carbon emitter” in the world.
Aside from carbon emissions from its data centers, the writer, Alistair Alexander, estimates that the 250 GW capacity is enough to support 60 million Nvidia GB300 GPUs. This means that OpenAI would have to order 30 million GPUs annually to ensure continuous operation. While Alexander claims this is because the cards are run 24/7, 365 days a year, and therefore have a short lifespan, the two-year life cycle of a GPU actually refers to its economic value, which drops with the release of newer generations of products. Either way, the number of GPUs required to power OpenAI's ambition will be staggering.
This estimate is for just one company: other tech giants are also planning their own massive AI data centers — for example, Elon Musk’s xAI wants to have 50 million H100-equivalent AI GPUs by 2030, which will require around 5GW of power. This massive build-out, which is happening all over the globe, is squeezing power supply, causing a spike in electricity prices, and reducing power quality for households. There’s also the question of its impact on the water supply, especially as the massive compute capacity requires astronomical amounts of cooling.
Alexander also looked upstream and investigated the impact of chip manufacturing on the environment. The massive demand for AI processors and the billions of dollars companies are willing to spend on them has led to an explosion of new fabs. In the past two years, construction on 97 new fabs has started all over the globe, with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and Samsung among them. Much like the data centers, these chip factories also require metric tons of water and massive amounts of electricity to operate. More than that, the processes for making the most advanced chips also often require toxic chemicals.
For example, the report says that TSMC’s Fab 25 would require at least 1GW of power — enough power for 750,000 households in Taiwan. Environmental Rights Foundation deputy CEO Po-Jen Hsu also said that Fab 25 would also use 100,000 metric tons of water daily, or about the same amount that 196,000 Taichung residents would use in a day. SHARPS, the semiconductor labor organization in South Korea, has also said that some workers in Samsung factories were suffering from various forms of cancer, all of which were linked with the chemicals used in their workplaces.
The race for AI supremacy is putting a lot of demand on the limited resources we have on Earth. The issues aren’t just limited to data centers, too. Instead, it goes all the way up the supply chain — from manufacturing the most advanced chips to the mining operations needed to extract the rare earths and other materials needed to make these GPUs. Tech companies are pouring billions of dollars into hardware and infrastructure to extend their capabilities, while nations are engaging in a trade war to limit the advance of their rivals.
The report concludes: “As Silicon Valley CEOs anxiously figure how much computing it will take to propel artificial intelligence forward, the real question we should be asking is how much more artificial intelligence the planet can take.”
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.
-
Greg7579 I thought the huge data centers were going to have micro nuclear plants about the size of a large house sitting next to them and would be off the normal grid....Reply -
shady28 Funny. All this really tells me is that "global warming" which was reworded to "climate change" has never been about anything other than money. The moment they have a more lucrative investment opportunity, climate change is gone and big CO2 emitting data centers are in.Reply
Meanwhile Altman expect big oil, which is to say the fuel consuming consumer, to pay for CO2 emissions. He even participates in the 'legislative process'.
https://www.advicescout.com/sam-altman-environmental-advocacy/
An unbiased source to be sure, nevermind his CO2 into the ground startups:
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/startup-to-inject-100-tons-of-co2-into-earth
Here's a thought.
In the 1800s when corporations were first allowed, in exchange for their special 'Limited liability' protections (where owners can't be sued for crimes/liability created by the corporations actions), states required a few things of the corporations.
-Cannot lobby or even advocate (publicly or privately) for any kind of legislation
-Cannot endorse or contribute to any political campaign
-Must be involved in activities that broadly benefit the public (at the time things like building a telegraph, road, railroad, some mining operations, etc).
How about we go back to that? -
j1mm4 Reply
Once upon a time OpenAI actually pretended they were gonna be open source and nonprofit too. Watching this garbage company progress through every stage of "well... We won't do this!" only to turn around months later and do that exact thing is infuriating.Greg7579 said:I thought the huge data centers were going to have micro nuclear plants about the size of a large house sitting next to them and would be off the normal grid.... -
aberkae Reply
According to Nvidia it's okay to use up significant resources to help us getting closer to Fusion. Nvidia puts the green in being earth friendly . Nvidia super green not enough greed! 🤪shady28 said:Funny. All this really tells me is that "global warming" which was reworded to "climate change" has never been about anything other than money. The moment they have a more lucrative investment opportunity, climate change is gone and big CO2 emitting data centers are in.
Meanwhile Altman expect big oil, which is to say the fuel consuming consumer, to pay for CO2 emissions. He even participates in the 'legislative process'.
https://www.advicescout.com/sam-altman-environmental-advocacy/
An unbiased source to be sure, nevermind his CO2 into the ground startups:
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/startup-to-inject-100-tons-of-co2-into-earth
Here's a thought.
In the 1800s when corporations were first allowed, in exchange for their special 'Limited liability' protections (where owners can't be sued for crimes/liability created by the corporations actions), states required a few things of the corporations.
-Cannot lobby or even advocate (publicly or privately) for any kind of legislation
-Cannot endorse or contribute to any political campaign
-Must be involved in activities that broadly benefit the public (at the time things like building a telegraph, road, railroad, some mining operations, etc).
How about we go back to that? -
hollywoodrose Reply
That would be great, but the people in power will never let it happen. Deregulation and the destruction of our checks and balances (along with the removal of civics and government education in our schools) have made possible the destruction of freedom, liberty and democracy. The political elite has merged with the corporations to each do what the other can’t. The abolishment of the Fairness Act by Reagan (reportedly at the personal request of Rupert Murdoch, which prior to that made channels like Fox News illegal) did a lot of damage. But I still believe the single most destructive piece of legislation was the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It removed all limits on media ownership and within a year or two over 90% of the media was controlled by six conglomerates. That was the end of our media. It’s hard to fight back though when much of the population has no idea how their government works.shady28 said:Funny. All this really tells me is that "global warming" which was reworded to "climate change" has never been about anything other than money. The moment they have a more lucrative investment opportunity, climate change is gone and big CO2 emitting data centers are in.
Meanwhile Altman expect big oil, which is to say the fuel consuming consumer, to pay for CO2 emissions. He even participates in the 'legislative process'.
https://www.advicescout.com/sam-altman-environmental-advocacy/
An unbiased source to be sure, nevermind his CO2 into the ground startups:
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/startup-to-inject-100-tons-of-co2-into-earth
Here's a thought.
In the 1800s when corporations were first allowed, in exchange for their special 'Limited liability' protections (where owners can't be sued for crimes/liability created by the corporations actions), states required a few things of the corporations.
-Cannot lobby or even advocate (publicly or privately) for any kind of legislation
-Cannot endorse or contribute to any political campaign
-Must be involved in activities that broadly benefit the public (at the time things like building a telegraph, road, railroad, some mining operations, etc).
How about we go back to that? -
bit_user Reply
Nuclear plants take a long time to build. I expect they will still happen. Presently, everyone is scrambling to find power wherever they can. Fossil fuel-based power sources are faster to bring online, up to a point.Greg7579 said:I thought the huge data centers were going to have micro nuclear plants about the size of a large house sitting next to them and would be off the normal grid....
I do have to wonder how much some of these companies are bluffing and basically just trying to get their competitors to over-extend themselves, or just stuff they're telling investors, to make it seem like they're on track to keep pace with what their competitors are saying. -
shady28 Replyhollywoodrose said:That would be great, but the people in power will never let it happen. Deregulation and the destruction of our checks and balances (along with the removal of civics and government education in our schools) have made possible the destruction of freedom, liberty and democracy. The political elite has merged with the corporations to each do what the other can’t. The abolishment of the Fairness Act by Reagan (reportedly at the personal request of Rupert Murdoch, which prior to that made channels like Fox News illegal) did a lot of damage. But I still believe the single most destructive piece of legislation was the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It removed all limits on media ownership and within a year or two over 90% of the media was controlled by six conglomerates. That was the end of our media. It’s hard to fight back though when much of the population has no idea how their government works.
In point of fact, corporations were allowed to form via regulation (passage of laws).
Before that, you could start a business, but the owners were personally liable for the business' actions.
These same laws specifically muzzled them from involvement in politics and policy, as the framers at the time feared large corporations would get too much power and grow to control politics and policy... That was not new to them, remember the East India Trade Company.
Edit: What's that saying? Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.
It was activist judges in the later 1800s that unmuzzled and empowered corporations, disempowering states and citizens over corporations by treating corporations as 'people' - a process that reached its natural conclusion with 'Citizens United'.
This means they have constitutional rights just like a person, can't be silenced, have a right to association, to advance their political agendas, etc. etc. etc.
"Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions...
Attempts were made to keep strong charter laws in place, but with the courts applying legal doctrines that made protection of corporations and corporate property the center of constitutional law, citizen sovereignty was undermined. As corporations grew stronger, government and the courts became easier prey. They freely reinterpreted the U.S. Constitution and transformed common law doctrines...
One of the most severe blows to citizen authority arose out of the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. ...
From that point on, the 14th Amendment, enacted to protect rights of freed slaves, was used routinely to grant corporations constitutional “personhood.” Justices have since struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws enacted to protect people from corporate harm based on this illegitimate premise. Armed with these “rights,” corporations increased control over resources, jobs, commerce, politicians, judges, and the law."
https://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/ -
hollywoodrose That’s great info. I knew the general story, but not many of the details and court cases. Thanks for sharing all the info. This problem has been a very long time coming. The problem with secret societies, both here and in Europe, has also never been dealt with. That’s at the root of a lot of this. On a side note, my understanding is that the masons in particular had been infiltrated by another group and turned towards a darker, path. Have you read anything about this?Reply -
shady28 Replyhollywoodrose said:That’s great info. I knew the general story, but not many of the details and court cases. Thanks for sharing all the info. This problem has been a very long time coming. The problem with secret societies, both here and in Europe, has also never been dealt with. That’s at the root of a lot of this. On a side note, my understanding is that the masons in particular had been infiltrated by another group and turned towards a darker, path. Have you read anything about this?
I haven't read anything credible on it.
Corporate history is actually quite old and has its roots in the concept of a Charter issued by monarchies in Europe. There are many nuances but charters were very similar to the requirements for a corporation in the late 1700s/early 1800s. Corporations had to be formed under legislative acts originally, abide by specific rules, and generally be doing something the government was interested in seeing done.
This is not to say corporations are inherently evil, but they are innately self-interested.
The East India Co. brought massive wealth to England, and modernization with improved living standards for most people (not all) where it operated (mainly India). I saw where if it were valued today, it would be worth around $12T. And it was not the only large chartered company.
It fell after a rebellion in India, whose roots were complex with many factions both in support and opposed to their rule. But the straw that broke the back was one very bad business decision - we'd call it tone-deaf today.
They had new guns with paper cartridges that used pig fat or cow fat to seal them, and about 200-300K Indian soldiers. When you loaded the gun, you had to bite down on the cap.
Imagine, asking your army of Hindus and Muslims to bite into pig fat and cow fat.🤦♂️
This led to British regulars having to bail them out, the revoking of their charter.