This post will be a cheat sheet for answering every environmental objection to using ChatGPT. I’ve broken it up so you can skip around and only read sections relevant or interesting to you. If you think I’m getting anything wrong I’d be excited to update this with the most accurate numbers. Please let me know in the comments or at AndyMasley@gmail.com.The question this post is trying to answer is “Should I boycott ChatGPT or limit how much I use it for the sake of the climate?” and the answer is a resounding and conclusive “No.” The numbers are completely clear and final, and anyone telling you otherwise is deeply mistaken. All counter-points fail for simple obvious reasons.You can use ChatGPT as much as you like without worrying that you’re doing any harm to the planet. Worrying about your personal use of ChatGPT is wasted time that you could spend on the serious problems of climate change instead. This post is not about the broader climate impacts of AI beyond chatbots1, or about whether AI is bad for other reasons (copyright, hallucinations, job loss, risks from advanced AI, etc.). I’m not especially “pro” or “anti” AI. I’m writing this because people who care about the climate and want to help the environment are getting distracted by a non-issue.I’m not an authority on AI and energy use. I cite all my sources and claims and defer to what seems like the expert consensus where it exists. I’m a fan of linking citations with hypertext instead of footnotes, so my sources are all in the writing itself instead of at the bottom. I have a physics degree and taught physics for seven years, so I do know a lot about where and how energy is used. We can divide concerns about ChatGPT’s environmental impact into two categories:Personal use: How much ChatGPT increases your personal environmental footprint.Global use: How much ChatGPT is harming the planet as a whole.I’ll write a bunch of responses to the most common objections in each category.Throughout this post I’ll assume