Authors : Fahd Malik

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 8 - August

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/ydwzb72x

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2dswffcy

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25aug585

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : The rapid rise of Generative AI (GenAI) technologies has brought transformative capabilities across industries but has also raised serious concerns about their environmental sustainability. As the computational demands of training and deploying large-scale AI models continue to escalate, so too does their carbon footprint. This paper adopts a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach to evaluate the environmental impact of GenAI models throughout their lifecycle— from hardware manufacturing and data center infrastructure to model training, deployment, and inference. We analyze and compare the energy efficiency and performance of five widely adopted GenAI models: GPT-3, ChatGPT (GPT-4), LLaMA 2, PaLM 2, and DistilBERT. Emissions are modeled using publicly available energy benchmarks, ML CO2 calculators, and estimation methodologies where direct data is unavailable. Beyond analysis, we introduce a Green AI Benchmarking Framework that integrates sustainability metrics, such as energy consumption and carbon emissions, into model evaluation standards, alongside traditional performance metrics. Our findings aim to guide researchers, developers, and policymakers toward more energy-conscious and environmentally responsible AI development practices.

Keywords : Generative AI; Life Cycle Assessment (LCA); Sustainable AI development; Energy-efficiency; Green AI.

References :

1. E. K. Jackson, “The carbon impact of training deep learning models,” Nature Machine Intelligence, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 99–101, 2022.
2. R. Thompson and S. M. Thomas, “AI’s carbon footprint: The blind spot of progress,” AI Ethics Journal, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 22–34, 2023.
3. N. Brooks et al., “Beyond accuracy: Rethinking evaluation in deep learning,” Computing in Science & Engineering, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 45–53, 2023.
4. J. Hart and M. S. Kim, “Green AI: Frameworks and future directions,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 13299–13310, 2023.
5. A. Choi and M. Patel, “Principles of Green AI and eco-conscious ML systems,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 42–51, 2023.
6. S. Ludwig and H. Menzel, “Carbontracker: Monitoring and reducing carbon footprints of AI models,” Journal of Environmental Informatics, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 75–84, 2023.
7. D. Shah et al., “A survey on carbon-aware AI tools,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1–34, 2023.
8. K. Ramesh and T. Gupta, “Transparency in AI energy reporting: The road ahead,” AI & Society, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 409–421, 2024.
9. C. D. Martinez and F. Song, “Small models, big gains: A case for compact architectures,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 88–97, 2024.
10. G. Lin and R. Verma, “Environmental metrics in cloud AI: Current state and gaps,” Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems, vol. 37, pp. 100841, 2024.
11. E. Strubell, A. Ganesh, and A. McCallum, "Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP," Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 3645–3650, 2019.
12. P. Henderson et al., "Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learning," Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 21, no. 248, pp. 1–43, 2020.
13. R. Schwartz, J. Dodge, N. A. Smith, and O. Etzioni, "Green AI," Communications of the ACM, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 54–63, Dec. 2020.
14. A. Lacoste, A. Luccioni, V. Schmidt, and T. Dandres, "Quantifying the Carbon Emissions of Machine Learning,", 2019.
15. E. M. Bender, T. Gebru, A. McMillan-Major, and S. Shmitchell, "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?," Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 610–623, 2021.
16. M. Schneider, P. Zhao, and K. Yan, "Life-Cycle Emissions of AI Hardware: A Cradle-to-Grave Approach and Generational Trends," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Computing, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 102–115, Jan. 2025.
17. X. Wu, J. Huang, and Y. Li, "Sustainable AI: Environmental Benchmarking for Responsible Development," Nature Machine Intelligence, vol. 6, pp. 12–22, Jan. 2024.
18. H. Zhang, S. Nandi, and D. L. Williams, "Emissions and Inequality: Mapping the Global Impact of AI Development," Environmental Research Letters, vol. 18, no. 9, p. 094005, 2023.
19. Y. Qian, L. Lin, and S. Ma, "Energy-Aware Fine-Tuning of Pretrained Language Models," Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 7223–7230, 2022.
20. K. Lee, A. S. Kim, and J. Park, "Understanding the Lifecycle Impact of AI Software: From Training to Deployment," ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2024.
21. D. Patterson, J. Gonzalez, Q. Le, C. Liang, L. Sen, L. Shen, A. Nguyen, T. Chau, E. Davis, D. Dean, M. Isard, J. Lafferty, Y. Li, X. Liu, S. Madden, P. Mohan, R. Puri, D. Song, C. Wang, and L. Zhou, “Carbon Emissions and Large Neural Network Training,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.10350, Apr. 2021.
22. S. G. Smith, “The carbon footprint of GPT-4,” Medium, Mar. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://medium.com/data-science/the-carbon-footprint-of-gpt-4-d6c676eb21ae
23. PlanBe Eco, “The Carbon Footprint of GPT-3,” PlanBe Eco Blog, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://planbe.eco/en/blog/ais-carbon-footprint-how-does-the-popularity-of-artificial-intelligence-affect-the-climate/
24. J. Castaño, A. Corral, and M. Araque, "Exploring the Carbon Footprint of Hugging Face’s ML Models: A Repository Mining Study," Information and Software Technology, vol. 158, p. 107181, 2023.
25. A. Jegham, L. Sharma, and M. T. Nguyen, "How Hungry Is AI? Benchmarking Energy, Water, and Carbon Footprint of LLM Inference," Journal of Sustainable AI Systems, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 21–38, 2025.
26. United Nations, “Sustainable Development Goals,” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://sdgs.un.org/goals