OpenAI, ChatGPT maker, and AMD have signed a multi-year deal for AMD to supply chips that will power OpenAI’s future AI systems. As part of the deal, OpenAI will get warrants that allow it to buy up to 10% of AMD’s shares — about 160 million shares — at a very low price. These shares will only be available if OpenAI meets certain goals in performance and deployment.
OpenAI plans to start using 1 gigawatt of computing power with AMD’s new Instinct MI450 chips by the second half of 2026. Over time, this could grow to as much as 6 gigawatts of AI computing power.
The move shows OpenAI’s plan to reduce its heavy dependence on Nvidia. Nvidia remains an important partner, as it has already agreed to provide up to 10 gigawatts of computing power under its own deal with OpenAI. The AMD agreement is not exclusive, which means OpenAI can still work with other chip makers in the future.
AMD CEO, Lisa Su, noted in an interview that:
“You need partnerships like this that really bring the ecosystem together to ensure that, you know, we can really get the best technologies, you know, out there…So we’re super excited about the opportunities here.”
Numbers That Matter: The $100B Power Play Behind OpenAI’s AI Engine
Experts believe the AMD–OpenAI deal could bring AMD tens of billions of dollars in new yearly revenue. It could also generate over 100 billion dollars in new income for OpenAI and its clients over four years.

After the announcement, AMD’s stock rose sharply by over 30% trading. On the other hand, Nvidia’s shares dropped slightly, as investors worried about new competition in the AI chip market.

AMD currently has about 1.62 billion shares in total. The warrants given to OpenAI will only be valid if AMD meets specific stock price and performance goals — including reaching $600 per share for the final stage. These financial terms show how large this partnership could become and how much confidence investors now have in AMD’s growing role in AI hardware.
Chip Chess: AMD, Nvidia, and OpenAI’s Strategic Power Moves
Nvidia’s earlier deal with ChatGPT’s owner included up to 10 gigawatts of computing systems. The new AMD partnership doesn’t replace Nvidia — it expands OpenAI’s supply options. The rollout is expected over several years, with the first systems planned for 2026.
- READ MORE: NVIDIA Stock Surges on $100B OpenAI and $5B Intel Deals: Driving Sustainable AI Computing
However, there are risks. AMD must prove that its chips can perform as well as Nvidia’s in speed, power efficiency, and reliability. There are also challenges in scaling up production, securing parts, and meeting OpenAI’s demanding timelines.
The warrants are split into parts (“tranches”) tied to both AMD’s stock performance and the rollout of AI systems. That means OpenAI’s potential ownership depends on how well AMD performs.
This deal impacts each of the companies involved:
- OpenAI gains a second major chip supplier, reducing its risk of relying on one company. It also strengthens ties with AMD through possible ownership, helping it expand its AI computing capacity over time.
- AMD earns a major boost in reputation and a long-term client in OpenAI. The deal supports AMD’s AI growth strategy and could help it compete with Nvidia. But it also adds pressure to meet production goals, manage costs, and hit strict performance targets.
- Nvidia faces stronger competition in the AI chip space. This could affect its prices and profit margins over time. To stay ahead, Nvidia will likely focus on improving chip efficiency, system integration, and value-added services while monitoring demand shifts between itself and AMD.
RELATED: TSMC Dominates AI Chip Market with Record Sales—But Can It Tackle Its Rising Emissions?
The Carbon Cost of Intelligence: AI’s Growing Energy Appetite
While this deal is a big step in business and technology, it also raises environmental, social, and governance (ESG) concerns — especially around power use and emissions.
Wired for Power: How 6 Gigawatts Could Change AI’s Footprint
AI data centers use huge amounts of electricity. The International Energy Agency (IEA) says power demand from global data centers could more than double by 2030, reaching around 945 terawatt-hours — about the same as Japan’s total power use today. In developed countries, data centers could drive over 20% of all electricity demand growth.

Deloitte estimates that in 2025, data centers will use around 536 terawatt-hours of power — about 2% of the world’s total. By 2030, this could exceed 1,000 terawatt-hours.
Some studies suggest AI systems alone might take up nearly 50% of all data center energy use by late 2025, using about 23 gigawatts of power — roughly equal to the total electricity demand of small countries.

If global AI hardware demand hits between 5.3 and 9.4 gigawatts in 2025, total energy use could reach 46 to 82 terawatt-hours — similar to what Switzerland or Finland uses each year. That means OpenAI’s 6-gigawatt deployment with AMD could consume a major share of global power, depending on how efficiently it runs.
A single high-end training node with eight GPUs can draw up to 8.4 kilowatts of power when training AI models like ChatGPT. Scaled across thousands of nodes, total power use becomes massive.
- INTERESTING READ: ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek Are on an AI Race – But at What Climate Cost? A Comparison
Silicon and Sustainability: The Hidden Cost of Making AI Chips
AI chips also affect the environment during manufacturing. Producing GPUs requires mining rare minerals, refining metals, and making semiconductors — all of which use a lot of energy and create waste.
Studies show that while power use has the largest climate impact, making the chips themselves also causes issues like mineral depletion, water pollution, and toxic waste. Some estimates say training advanced AI models can use up to 4,600 times more energy than older machine-learning systems.
If AI adoption continues to grow quickly, its total electricity use could increase 24 times by 2030. Because of this, researchers and companies are exploring ways to make AI more energy-efficient.
Smaller and optimized models can cut energy use by nearly 28% without much loss in accuracy. Streamlining data and removing extra model layers can lower energy needs by more than 90% in some cases.
The researchers noted that in the U.S., using more efficient AI models could save about 16.25 terawatt-hours of power in 2025 — the same amount as two nuclear plants produce in a year. By 2028, the savings could reach 41.8 terawatt-hours, equal to seven nuclear plants. These cuts show how choosing better models can greatly reduce the energy use of data centers and make AI more sustainable.
Greening the Grid: Can AMD, Nvidia, and OpenAI Align AI with ESG?
From an ESG standpoint, the AMD–OpenAI deal puts pressure on all three companies — OpenAI, AMD, and Nvidia — to act responsibly as AI expands. They are expected to:
- Disclose how much energy and emissions come from their AI systems.
- Use renewable energy or carbon offsets to power their data centers.
- Build strong governance rules to ensure fairness, privacy, and transparency in AI use.
- Be accountable to investors, regulators, and the public about their environmental and social impacts.
Some experts recommend that companies fully integrate ESG principles into AI projects — assessing environmental and social risks early, applying strong oversight, and aligning goals with long-term sustainability.
The AMD–OpenAI deal marks a new chapter in the AI hardware race. It could reshape how computing power is built, supplied, and shared between tech leaders. But as AI infrastructure grows, so will its energy demands. Balancing performance with sustainability will be one of the biggest challenges for the big tech in the years ahead.
The post AMD Stock Skyrockets with OpenAI Deal, Sparking a New Challenge to Nvidia’s AI Dominance appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
The real cost of 1 tonne of CO2: Translating carbon into hectares
Every business carbon footprint report ends with a number, the amount of carbon emissions produced by the business, less the amount of carbon reduced and offset, given in tonnes of CO₂. Many of the people who sign off on that number, including those who paid for it, cannot picture what it represents on the ground. A tonne is a unit of mass. CO₂ is invisible. The link between the amount offset in the report and a real piece of restored forest somewhere in the world is almost never indicated.
![]()
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测


