Amazon's carbon emissions jumped 16% in 2025. The driver: massive data center buildout ⁠56%

By Monica Nickelsburg⁠0% Stephen Howie⁠0%

7/1/2026, 11:05:37 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 32.9% saturation with 161 hits. Analysis detected 1,483 faulty-reasoning hits from 489 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (9,026 of 20,363 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 55.70% of the article peer group.

Amazon's latest sustainability report shows that carbon emissions from the online retail giant jumped by 16% in 2025, driven in large part by its multi-billion dollar data center buildout. 
Amazon has pledged to have net zero emissions by 2040, but the data center requirements of artificial intelligence have raised questions about the potential for Amazon and other big tech companies to reduce their carbon footprint. 
Amazon said it increased its indirect emissions from purchasing electricity by 34% in 2025, "driven by electricity use in data centers, electrification of our delivery network, and building electrification," the report states. 
RELATED: Big Tech is bankrolling the clean energy transition...while emitting more than ever 
In her introduction to the 2025 report, Chief Sustainability Officer Kara Hurst seemed to acknowledge that AI presents a challenge to reaching the "Climate Pledge" it made in 2019. 
"Sure enough, we've encountered tremendous change in each of the seven years since," Hurst said. 
"Perhaps none bigger than AI, which is both transforming what's possible—accelerating discovery, optimizing systems, and unlocking solutions that weren't within reach before—yet also creating new demands for energy, water, and infrastructure." 
But members of Amazon Employees for Climate Justice criticized Hurst's focus on AI as a way to create opportunities for sustainability when it is in fact increasing Amazon's emissions as the world is in the middle of a climate crisis. 
The group said Amazon's emissions have increased 58% since the climate pledge was announced. 
"Our members have lost trust in Amazon's ability to actually voluntarily do the right thing and choose to do the responsible thing over making short-term profit-driven decisions," said Eliza Pan, a spokesperson for the group. 
RELATED: Seattle banned new data centers. 
Why do companies want them here anyway? 
During an interview with KUOW in June, Brandon Oyer, who develops energy portfolios for Amazon Web Services, said the focus should be on "carbon intensity," which measures how much carbon was emitted compared to each dollar of revenue growth. 
Amazon's carbon intensity has decreased 38% since 2019. 
"If energy goes up because the business grew, but carbon intensity trends down then that shows that we're on the right trajectory," Oyer said. 
But environmentalists say when it comes to global warming and climate change, total emissions are what matters. 
Sarah Tracy, another member of Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, said the 16% emissions increase in 2025 raises questions about Amazon's determination to remain on its current path with AI and data center buildouts. 
"What more tech workers want to see is a real conversation about what we can do differently to build out AI more responsibly, to build it out more sustainably," Tracy said. 
"I think there's a lot of ideas out there about how we could do that and I'd like to see Amazon make a real effort to make this go much more sustainably than it is today." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 2.6%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias5.9%This article: 9.4%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.7%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias9.4%This article: 1.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 4.1%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic1.2%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.0%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.4%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.7%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 32.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 12.0%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect32.9%This article: 7.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.7%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion7.2%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.9%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 4.1%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias4.9%This article: 14.7%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.8%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias14.7%This article: 27.8%Monica Nickelsburg: 9.9%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias27.8%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 3.3%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.1%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error5.9%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 14.5%Monica Nickelsburg: 2.0%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias14.5%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.7%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.9%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias10.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.5%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.1%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.2%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 17.4%Monica Nickelsburg: 5.4%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority17.4%This article: 10.8%Monica Nickelsburg: 2.3%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma10.8%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.7%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.5%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 14.1%Monica Nickelsburg: 4.5%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization14.1%This article: 1.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring1.2%This article: 6.3%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.9%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon6.3%This article: 18.6%Monica Nickelsburg: 4.9%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion18.6%This article: 1.4%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.7%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question1.4%This article: 10.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 4.4%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.0%This article: 8.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque8.2%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 3.6%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal10.2%This article: 8.2%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman8.2%This article: 14.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 2.4%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.9%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground4.9%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 8.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.3%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading8.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.5%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.8%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote6.5%This article: 6.5%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.1%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection6.5%This article: 7.4%Monica Nickelsburg: 3.3%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice7.4%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.6%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 8.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 1.8%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias8.0%This article: 0.0%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Monica Nickelsburg: 0.9%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.9%

489 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers74%attributed speech129writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageAmazon • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageKara Hurst • 29 words • 100.0% coverageKara Hurst • 15 words • 0.0% coverageKara Hurst • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAmazon Employees for Climate Justice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageAmazon Employees for Climate Justice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageEliza Pan • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageBrandon Oyer • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageBrandon Oyer • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Tracy • 34 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Tracy • 31 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Tracy • 36 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
54 attributed words15% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -22.5 ptsWriter: 22.5%Amazon Employees for Climate Justice: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%Amazon Employees for Climate Justice: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.