The Verge56%

Microsoft’s carbon emissions went up 25 percent last year 0%

By Stevie Bonifield47%

7/9/2026, 5:04:13 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Appeal to Authority, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 33.1% saturation with 159 hits. Analysis detected 1,301 faulty-reasoning hits from 480 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (21,881 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

Microsoft’s carbon emissions went up 25 percent last year 
The company’s annual sustainability report also says sustainability solutions aren’t keeping up with AI demands. 
Jul 10, 2026, 12:04 AM UTC 
Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge, Getty Images 
Stevie Bonifield is a news writer covering all things consumer tech. 
Stevie started out at Laptop Mag writing news and reviews on hardware, gaming, and AI. 
Microsoft may once again be struggling to keep up with its own climate goals, according to its 2026 sustainability report . 
As reported by GeekWire , the report states that Microsoft’s carbon emissions increased 25 percent in 2025, totalling 34 million metric tons “without select interventions.” 
Microsoft says this was “driven primarily by the expansion of our datacenter infrastructure,” as well as the company’s decision last February to stop purchasing “non-additional, unbundled renewable energy certificates.” 
Several years ago, Microsoft set itself a goal to be carbon negative by 2030 , meaning it will need to remove more carbon emissions than it produces. 
This isn’t the first time Microsoft has faced setbacks toward accomplishing that goal, as its 2024 sustainability report showed a similar rise in climate pollution. 
This year’s report admits that, “While AI infrastructure is driving demand for energy, water, land, and materials, sustainability solutions are not scaling fast enough to meet demand.” 
Google similarly reported a 25 percent spike in its supply chain emissions in its 2026 sustainability report , with Amazon reporting a slightly lower 16 percent increase. 
In June, Amazon also reported that its data centers used 2.5 billion gallons of water in 2025, which it claims is less than Microsoft used. 
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates. 
ICE agents are making house calls for online critics 
Say hello to Claude Wrapped 
If Microsoft sold off Xbox, who would even buy it? 
OpenAI rolls out GPT-5.6 after government green light  and announces ‘ChatGPT Work’ 
The robotaxi law that could ban Tesla 
Advertiser Content From 
This is the title for the native ad 
Google will now tell you if an ad was made with AI 
Google’s Nest Thermostat has hit its best price of the year 
Microsoft’s patch Tuesdays are about to get bigger 
Schlage’s Sense Pro unlocks the door so I don’t have to 
The PocketMage resurrects the PDA with an e-paper screen 
Meta says its new AI model is ready to compete on coding 
Stevie Bonifield Jul 9 
Jennifer Pattison Tuohy Jul 9 
Andrew Liszewski Jul 9 
Dominic Preston and Hayden Field Jul 9 
If you criticize ICE online, agents might just show up at your house 
Fidji Simo steps down from leading OpenAI’s AGI work due to illness 
Comcast is breaking up with NBCU. 
Why did it ever buy it in the first place? 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 3.6%Confirmation Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 1.5%The Verge: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.4%Stevie Bonifield: 9.4%The Verge: 3.8%Availability Heuristic15.4%This article: 5.6%Stevie Bonifield: 1.3%The Verge: 1.3%Representativeness Heuristic5.6%This article: 2.1%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.7%Hindsight Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.9%Stevie Bonifield: 1.1%The Verge: 6.2%Framing Effect17.9%This article: 2.3%Stevie Bonifield: 1.6%The Verge: 0.9%Loss Aversion2.3%This article: 5.6%Stevie Bonifield: 2.0%The Verge: 0.5%Status Quo Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.4%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 4.0%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 13.8%Stevie Bonifield: 4.8%The Verge: 2.4%Pessimism Bias13.8%This article: 33.1%Stevie Bonifield: 13.3%The Verge: 9.7%Negativity Bias33.1%This article: 5.2%Stevie Bonifield: 5.2%The Verge: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 2.0%The Verge: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.3%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 2.8%Halo Effect7.3%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.6%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.8%Recency Bias10.6%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 1.5%The Verge: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 29.6%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 4.0%Appeal to Authority29.6%This article: 2.1%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.6%False Dilemma2.1%This article: 1.5%Stevie Bonifield: 1.6%The Verge: 1.2%Slippery Slope1.5%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 12.5%Stevie Bonifield: 11.1%The Verge: 6.8%Hasty Generalization12.5%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 1.5%The Verge: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 1.8%The Verge: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.9%Stevie Bonifield: 1.1%The Verge: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion12.9%This article: 2.1%Stevie Bonifield: 2.0%The Verge: 1.1%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 2.1%Stevie Bonifield: 3.6%The Verge: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.1%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.7%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.8%Burden of Proof2.7%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 11.3%Stevie Bonifield: 2.6%The Verge: 0.3%Composition/Division11.3%This article: 2.3%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 3.6%Anecdotal2.3%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.3%Stevie Bonifield: 2.0%The Verge: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.3%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 2.1%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Personal Incredulity2.1%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 1.6%The Verge: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 32.1%Stevie Bonifield: 5.7%The Verge: 2.6%Unattributed Quote32.1%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.1%Stevie Bonifield: 9.6%The Verge: 10.8%Biased Writer Voice3.1%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 1.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 23.8%Stevie Bonifield: 0.0%The Verge: 4.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…23.8%

480 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers13%attributed speech417writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageOpenAI • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageMeta • 12 words • 100.0% coverageStevie Bonifield • 4 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Pattison Tuohy • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Liszewski • 4 words • 0.0% coverageDominic Preston • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageFidji Simo • 12 words • 0.0% coverageComcast • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Meta

100%flagged-word coverage
12 attributed words19% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +78.7 ptsWriter: 21.3%Meta: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+65.9 ptsWriter: 34.1%Meta: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Meta: 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.